Loading...
4220 Resolution - Transportation System Master Plan (TSMP)Transportation System Master Plan JUNE 2022 CITY OF PASCO PROJECT TEAM CITY OF PASCO Dan Ford, City Engineer Jacob Gonzalez, City Planning Manager DKS ASSOCIATES Carl Springer, Project Manager Aaron Berger, Senior Engineer Rochelle Starrett, Engineer Melissa Abadie, Creative Services ANGELO PLANNING GROUP Darci Rudzinski, Principal Andrew Parish, Senior Planner TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS Dan Ford, City of Pasco Jacob Gonzalez, City of Pasco Carl Springer, DKS Aaron Berger, DKS David Beach, Bike Tri-Cities Patrick Pittenger, Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Erin Braich, Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Olivia Meza, Benton-Franklin Council of Governments Keith Hall, Benton Franklin Transit Paul Gonseth, WSDOT John Gruber, WSDOT Eric Snider, WSDOT CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 CHAPTER 2: PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW . . . . . . . 10 CHAPTER 3: RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 CHAPTER 5: IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES . . . . . . . . . . 60 APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. STATE, REGIONAL, AND CITY PLANNING FRAMEWORK ...................................................................................4 FIGURE 2. PERFORMANCE-BASED PLANNING PROCESS ..........................................................................................5 FIGURE 3. TRI-CITIES REGIONAL CONTEXT .....................................................................................................11 FIGURE 4. HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS IN TRI-CITIES ..............................................................................12 FIGURE 5. TRI-CITIES BRIDGE CROSSING TRAFFIC GROWTH TRENDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 FIGURE 6. PASCO RESIDENTIAL DEMOGRAPHICS ...............................................................................................14 FIGURE 7. EMPLOYMENT TRAVEL PATTERNS TO/FROM PASCO (STREETLIGHT DATA, 2019) ..............................................................16 FIGURE 8. FREIGHT ACTIVITY CENTERS WITHIN PASCO (STREETLIGHT DATA, 2019) ....................................................................17 FIGURE 9. EXISTING BEN FRANKLIN TRANSIT SERVICES .........................................................................................19 FIGURE 10. PLANNED BEN FRANKLIN STOP UPGRADES AND ROUTE EXTENSIONS ....................................................................20 FIGURE 11. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CHALLENGES – TODAY ..............................................................................22 FIGURE 12. INTERSECTIONS WITH MAJOR CONGESTION BY 2040 .................................................................................27 FIGURE 13. MOTOR VEHICLE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ..........................................................................................30 FIGURE 14. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS ..............................................................................................40 FIGURE 15. DESIRED FACILITY SPACING ......................................................................................................45 FIGURE 16. RECOMMENDED ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION .............................................................................46 FIGURE 17. FREIGHT SYSTEM ...............................................................................................................52 FIGURE 18. SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. PASCO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN URBAN GROWTH AREA ..................................................................................25 TABLE 2. INTERSECTIONS WITH MAJOR CONGESTION BY 2040 (OPERATING AT LOS E OR F) ...........................................................26 TABLE 3. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS (INT) ................................................................................................31 TABLE 4. NEW ROADWAY EXTENSIONS (EXT) ..................................................................................................33 TABLE 5. TRAFFIC STUDIES AND TRANSIT AMENITIES (TS & TR) ...................................................................................35 TABLE 6. ROADWAY WIDENING PROJECTS (EXP) ...............................................................................................36 TABLE 7. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS (BP) ............................................................................................41 TABLE 8. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS SUMMARY .........................................................................................42 TABLE 9. FACILITY SPACING GUIDELINES .....................................................................................................45 TABLE 10. FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF NEW ROADWAYS ....................................................................................47 TABLE 11. ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION CHANGES ....................................................................................48 TABLE 12. APPLICATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ...................................................................54 TABLE 13. ACCESS MANAGEMENT SPACING STANDARDS ........................................................................................55 TABLE 14. RECOMMENDED STREET CONNECTIVITY STANDARDS ..................................................................................56 TABLE 15. EXISTING MOBILITY TARGETS FOR WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR PERIODS .......................................................................57 TABLE 16. RECOMMENDED MOBILITY TARGETS ................................................................................................58 TABLE 17. FILLING THE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING GAP ........................................................................................61 TABLE 18. RECOMMENDED VEHICLE MOBILITY STANDARDS FOR LOCAL STREETS ....................................................................63 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 1 Introduction CHAPTER 1 For years, Pasco has been among the fastest growing cities in Washington, and it is expected to add over 40,000 new residents by 2040 when Pasco’s population will exceed 120,000, surpassing the neighboring Tri-Cities. Rapid population growth of this scale has a corresponding major impact in transportation demands for a community. As the city’s first transportation system master plan, this represents a foundational study that will establish a host of policies and programs that will guide the City of Pasco to a safer and more vibrant city. The challenge ahead for city leaders is to take steps to address existing system needs identified through this process and to make strategic investments with partner transportation agencies to prepare for substantial growth in the decades to come. THE CITY OF PASCO HAS PREPARED A MASTER PLAN TO GUIDE DECISIONS AND INVESTMENTS IN THEIR TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AND SERVICES. 1 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 2INTRODUCTION The Pasco Transportation System Master Plan (TSMP) is a guide for future transportation investments to ensure that they align with our community’s goals, values, and vision for the future. The TSMP is a key resource for implementing transportation system improvements that address current deficiencies and that serve expected local and regional growth. As the first TSMP in Pasco, this plan represents the first step towards a series of new guidelines and standards that will shape the city as it grows and re-builds. Transportation planning in Washington is required under the Growth Management Act which governs each city’s transportation element of a comprehensive plan. Under the Growth Management Act, each transportation plan must contain: • A set of goals, policies, and evaluation criteria that define a vision for a city’s transportation future • An inventory of a city’s existing, multimodal transportation system and how well this system currently serves users • An assessment of future travel demand and the impact of this growth on the existing transportation system • A review of bicycle and pedestrian needs and opportunities • An understanding of available funding for transportation system improvements The Pasco TSMP documents the operational and safety performance of the City’s existing and future transportation system and provides strategies that will support growth in and around the community through the year 2040. This TSMP will act as a supplement to the transportation element in Pasco’s 2018-2038 Comprehensive Plan to further envision Pasco’s transportation future. ADA COMPLIANCE AND TRANSITION PLAN The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) governs how we serve people with hearing, vision, and ambulatory disabilities. In 2013, the City of Pasco adopted the Sidewalk Transition Plan. The Sidewalk Transition Plan was intended to remove barriers to mobility of people with disabilities and improving safety for all pedestrians in Pasco. The results of that plan highlighted the needs to improve infrastructure based on area needs, including Downtown, West Court Street (between Road 48 and N 4th Avenue), Road 68 and the area around Columbia Basin College and the Tri-Cities Airport. In 2018, the Pasco City Council adopted its first Complete Streets Policy, which is aimed at maximizing the safety of the community and all users of public streets. The implementation of the plan has been left arising opportunities, such as inclusion in the scope of capital projects or repair of sidewalks and non- compliant ADA ramps by city crews. This approach Plan Purpose This transportation system master plan lays out a multimodal transportation system to better serve built parts of the community and provides a framework for growth in undeveloped areas. In addition to the specific capital improvement projects for walking, bicycling, and driving, this plan identifies a more robust street design concept for arterial and collector roadways to better serve all travel modes. The plan also includes a priority network for quality bicycle routes, and safety enhancements for mid-block crossings on arterial roadways. The master plan also recommends new street spacing and accessibility guidelines to be applied for new portions of the community that will be built in the coming years. Significant growth is expected north of Interstate 182 in the Broadmoor Boulevard area, which includes hundreds of acres of developable residential and commercially zoned vacant land. Better street connectivity can balance travel demand across many routes and makes it easier for residents to walk or bike within the neighborhood or to access transit. This approach recognizes that the layout and design of the local transportation system is foundational to neighborhood livability. It better serves the full spectrum of community travel needs which can vary over time based on household size, income, age, physical abilities, and personal preferences. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 3INTRODUCTION has provided certain level of success. Additionally, the City has a designated ADA coordinator, a formal process for notices and grievances. While incremental improvement has been accomplished, a more systematic implementation plan for the ADA transition plan is recommended. This plan would establish clear parameters, schedules, and completion targets on: 1. Documentation of Existing Conditions and Compliance (Catalogue or inventory) 2. Evaluation of Internal Design Standards, Specifications and Details (Scheduled recurrent reviews, as standards and regulations are updated) 3. Implementation Schedule (Targets) 4. Progress Monitoring (Tracking progress and expenditures associated with the formal program) 3PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 4INTRODUCTION The TSMP was developed consistent with the state and regional transportation planning framework as required by the GMA. The chart at right illustrates how the state’s Growth Management Act provides overall policy and regulatory guidance for all governmental agencies within Washington State. In addition to state guidance, the City of Pasco must also coordinate their planning with local Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), which is represented by the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCG). The BFCG develops and maintains the region’s transportation plan (RTP) and they are responsible for oversight on regional population and employment forecasts of local city and county agencies to maintain consistency with statewide planning efforts. Land use growth assumptions are vital inputs to the transportation planning process. As noted previously, the TSMP supplements the transportation element of its Comprehensive Plan, and it provides the basis for Pasco’s on-going six-year transportation improvement plan and the bicycle and pedestrian master plan. By coordinating the city’s TSMP with their regional and statewide partner agencies, the city can strengthen its position to more effectively compete for various state and federal transportation funding opportunities. The city desires to continue its record in securing state and federal grants to expedite local transportation improvement projects. A recent example is the grant that advanced the Lewis Street Overcrossing project in the downtown to began construction in 2021. New federal legislation in 2022 enabled additional grant opportunities such as the RAISE (Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity). Planning and Transportation Funding Framework FIGURE 1. STATE, REGIONAL, AND CITY PLANNING FRAMEWORK WASHINGTON STATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT GMA BENTONFRANKLIN COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL FACILITIES PLANREGIONAL/METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT SIXYEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN BICYCLE / PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN CITY OF PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 5INTRODUCTION The TSMP project team, which included city staff members and the consultant team, worked closely with a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of local partners to develop and review interim work products and address major issues collaboratively. The TAC roster included representatives from Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Franklin County, Ben Franklin Transit (BFT), Benton-Franklin Council of Government (BFCG), and Bike Tri-Cities. The TAC met three times to review how the system works today, expected changes with growth to 2040, and proposed transportation improvements recommended within Pasco. During each meeting, initial technical findings were presented and discussed with TAC members to collect feedback on draft concepts and to align long-range plans among the various partner agencies. In addition, two online public open house events were conducted during the development of the TSMP. Given the restricted conditions of the ongoing COVID pandemic, these events were limited to being conducted online only. • The first event (June 2020) identified community concerns and issues related to walking, bicycling, and driving within Pasco today through an online survey. Refer to Appendix A for a summary of the public responses to the survey. • The second online event (May/June 2021) collected public feedback on the proposed projects and programs that the TSMP process identified to address current and expected future transportation system issues. PERFORMANCE-BASED PLANNING ELEMENTS The Pasco TSMP differs from prior transportation planning processes in that this update applied a performance-based approach. As described below, that begins with the community’s vision for its transportation system, which is distilled into measurable goals and supporting policies. These goals and policies are then used to develop performance measures that are used to identify gaps and challenges in the system today, to evaluate potential projects, and to measure long-term alignment between Pasco’s transportation system and the community’s vision of this system. The plan process is illustrated in Figure 2, along with the key questions that are considered at each stage of the planning work. The advantage of a performance-based planning process is that it demonstrates how strategic investments directly benefit and address essential community goals regarding multimodal transportation services for all of the community’s residents, workers, and visitors. The Planning Process FIGURE 2. PERFORMANCE-BASED PLANNING PROCESS VISION, GOALS, OBJECTIVES, & PERFORMANCE MEASURES TRENDS, TARGETS, & PRIORITIES INVESTMENT PLANS, SYSTEM DESIGN, & STANDARDS What do we value most in our community? How do those values apply to our travel system? How do we measure success? What challenges do we face today? How will growth impact those challenges? What are our strategies to improve our system consistent with our community values? What public investments are our top priority? What guidance is needed for private investments? How will we evaluate and monitor progress? PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 6INTRODUCTION VISION: The City of Pasco’s future transportation system is a safe and balanced multimodal transportation system which equitably serves pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, freight, and drivers. Pasco’s residents should have access to livable neighborhoods through established planning practices which prioritize system connectivity and multimodal street design, including a network of parks, trails, and bikeways which connect all residents to the Columbia River. Pasco’s transportation system also supports regional economic activities, including access to Pasco’s freight facilities for regional agriculture and other industries, and supports regional, multimodal transportation connections in Pasco. The first stage of the planning process involves defining the City’s vision for their transportation system and developing goals and policies to guide it. Pasco’s comprehensive plan defines a vision for Pasco in 2038 which includes their idealized future transportation system; this concept was used to develop the following vision statement to guide the TSMP. Pasco’s Transportation Vision PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 7INTRODUCTION TR-1: COORDINATE WITH REGIONAL PARTNERS ON SHARED TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS TR-1-A: Participate in the metropolitan and regional transportation planning efforts of the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments. TR-1-B: Work with other jurisdictions to plan, fund, and implement multi-jurisdictional projects necessary to meet shared transportation needs including right-of-way acquisition. TR-1-C: Collaborate with Ben Franklin Transit in programming transit routes, transit stops, and supporting facilities that increase user accessibility during the development process. TR-1-D: Require transportation and land use planning efforts and policies that meet the needs of the community and the objectives of this plan. TR-2: PROVIDE SAFE ACCESS TO TRANSPORTATION FOR ALL SYSTEM USERS TR-2-A: Minimize traffic conflicts on the arterial street system by implementing access and corridor management best practices. TR-2-B: Maintain a current local road safety plan to identify and prioritize safety investments. TR-2-C: Reduce frequency of fatal and severe injury crashes particularly for vulnerable road users. TR-2-D: Establish a vision zero plan for transportation safety. TR-3: PRESERVE EXISTING ROADS, SIDEWALKS, TRAILS, AND TRANSIT FACILITIES TR-3-A: Ensure adequate maintenance of the existing facilities. TR-3-B: Encourage retrofit projects that include beautification on major arterial streets. Transportation Goals and Policies The following goals and policies were identified for Pasco’s TSMP based on the existing transportation goals for Pasco’s comprehensive plan and relevant state and regional plan goals. GOAL #1 GOAL #2 GOAL #3 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 8INTRODUCTION TR-4: PRIORITIZE A CONNECTED AND EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FOR DRIVERS TR-4-A: Adopt and maintain a functional street classification system consistent with regional and state guidance. TR-4-B: Maintain level-of-service (LOS) “D” on all arterials and collectors and level-of-service (LOS) “C” during the PM peak-hour. TR-4-C: Provide increased neighborhood travel connections to enhance public safety and provide for transportation disbursement. TR-4-D: Evaluate, plan, and install traffic control devices and intersection designs to improve travel safety and efficiency. TR-5: DEVELOP A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT SUPPORTS AND ACCOMMODATES THE NEEDS OF BUSINESSES AND VISITORS TR-5-A: Promote the safe and efficient movement of freight through the city. TR-5-B: Support the development of facilities that are critical components of the movement of freight. TR-5-C: Maintain the multimodal passenger terminal. TR-5-D: Support rail services for passengers, industries, and commerce within the area. TR-5-E: Support air services for passengers, industries, and commerce within the area in coordination with the Pasco Airport Master Plan. TR-6: SUPPORT HEALTHY AND LIVABLE NEIGHBORHOODS IN PASCO TR-6-A: Develop an interconnected network of streets, trails, and other public ways during the development process to ensure and improve neighborhood accessibility. TR-6-B: Encourage multimodal street design with traffic calming and safety in consideration of surrounding land uses. TR-6-C: Require developments to meet the mission of the Pasco Complete Street Ordinance. TR-6-D: Incorporate aesthetic design and streetscape into all major arterial and collector streets as they are constructed. GOAL #4 GOAL #5 GOAL #6 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 9INTRODUCTION9 TR-7: DEVELOP A COMPLETE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM TR-7-A: Collaborate with Ben Franklin Transit in programming transit routes, transit stops, and supporting facilities that increase user accessibility during the development process. TR-7-B: Encourage the use of public transportation including ride-sharing and Ben Franklin Transit’s Van-Pool program. TR-7-C: Encourage park-and-ride lots for bicycles and/or automobiles. TR-7-D: Encourage bicycle and pedestrian travel by providing safe and purposeful bicycle and pedestrian routes. TR-7-E: Reduce major existing system connectivity gaps for bicyclists and pedestrians to improve multimodal access. TR-7-F: Develop new transportation performance measures for a multimodal system that could include measures like freight delay. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN GOAL #7 Pasco Today and Tomorrow CHAPTER 2 10 Pasco attracts visitors from the entire Columbia Basin, Yakima Valley, Walla Walla and Northeastern Oregon region. It is home to the regional Tri-Cities Airport, Columbia Basin College, expanding regional sports facilities, and our rapidly changing Downtown. One feature that makes Pasco unique compared to its neighboring cities is its dependence on the four bridges over the Columbia and Snake Rivers for inter-city and regional travel (see Figure 3). PASCO IS A RAPIDLY GROWING COMMUNITY IN THE TRI-CITIES REGION. THE RAPID GROWTH IS MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR RESIDENTS TO GET AROUND PASCO AND REQUIRES NEW SOLUTIONS TO MANAGE THE FUTURE GROWTH. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 11PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW 182 395 395 395 12 397 397 240 COURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68RAILROAD AVE4TH AVESYLVESTER ST LEWIS STBROADMOOR BLVDBROADMOOR BLVD10TH AVEOREGON AVE CLARK RD A ST DENT RD KARTCHNERROAD SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420TH AVEWERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERN PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO URBAN GROWTH AREA UGA ACTIVITY CENTERS EXISTING BARRIERS AGRICULTURE AREAS TRICITIESAIRPORT KENNEWICK DOWNTOWNPASCO COLUMBIABASIN COLLEGE HAPO CENTER &PASCO SPORTING COMPLEX RICHLAND HANFORD SITE GLADE RDFIGURE 3. TRI-CITIES REGIONAL CONTEXT PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 12PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW Pasco has experienced a population boom over the last 20 years during which time the population more than doubled, outpacing the rate of growth in neighboring Kennewick and Richland, and in Washington State overall. In recent years, development has been attracted to the lands north of Interstate 182 and west of Road 68, which offered significant vacant lands for development and convenient commuting access to regional work centers, such as the Hanford Site. Since 2010, Pasco’s population has increased by 25 percent (3.1 percent annually), from 60,000 residents to 75,000 residents in 2018 while its Tri-Cities neighbors have grown by 15 percent, as illustrated in Figure 4. By way of comparison. Washington State’s population grew by 12 percent during the same period. About half of the city’s residents use the three Columbia River bridges to commute to work, travel to shopping centers, and reach other regional destinations south or west of the river. This is a major constraint for vehicle traffic among the cities. Providing safe, convenient, and reliable travel across these bridges will be an important consideration in developing the Transportation System Master Plan for the City of Pasco. Growth in Pasco has been rapid over the past 20 years, which has also increased the demand for travel across the river bridges, seen in Figure 5. The bridges with the highest traffic volumes are on Interstate 182 and US 395. They each carry about two to three times the number of cars and trucks as the other two river bridges entering Pasco, which are SR 397 and US 12. As the existing highway facilities become more congested during peak hours of the day, it extends travel times for commuters, freight traffic, and other trips made on these regional highway corridors. Historic Growth FIGURE 4. HISTORICAL POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS IN TRI-CITIES 90,000 KENNEWICK RICHLAND 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 2000 202020152010 YEARTOTAL POPULATION2005 PASCO POPULATION: 75,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 13PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW The population growth in the Tri-Cities region and Pasco closely mirrors traffic trends on the I-182 and US 395 Columbia River bridges where volumes increased between 15 and 22 percent (2.5 to 3.7 percent annually) between 2012 and 2018 (see Figure 5). FIGURE 5. TRI-CITIES BRIDGE CROSSING TRAFFIC GROWTH TRENDS BLUE BRIDGE I182 BRIDGE 70,000 60,000 50,000 2012 2014 2016 2018AVERAGE MONTHLY TRAFFICYEAR 80,000 BRIDGETRAFFICGROWTH:+19% 13PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 14PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW Pasco is a majority-minority community with a large Hispanic and Spanish-speaking population. Relative to Washington State, Pasco has a higher proportion of children under age 18 and a lower median household income; 17 percent of residents live in poverty. Within Pasco, over 40 percent of senior citizens are also living with a disability (see Figure 6). Pasco’s population characteristics indicate a need for reliable alternative transportation modes to accommodate groups that cannot drive or those individuals who cannot afford to drive. This will be a significant consideration for transportation choices around community equity. PASCO HAS A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF CHILDREN UNDER 18 34% THAN THE STATEWIDE AVERAGE 22% AGE OF PASCO RESIDENTS UNDER 18 1865 58% OVER 65 8% 34% 50% 47% ENGLISH SPANISH MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME PASCO WASHINGTON STATE 17%OF PASCO RESIDENTS ARE BELOW THE POVERTY LINE $61,600 $70,100 RACIAL DEMOGRAPHICS LANGUAGE SPOKEN AT HOME 3% LATINO/A NONMEXICAN DESCENT 2% ASIANAMERICAN 2% BLACK/AFRICANAMERICAN 2% OTHER RACIAL GROUPS LATINO/A MEXICAN DESCENT 52% 39% CAUCASIAN OF RESIDENTS 65 YEARS AND OLDER HAVE A DISABILITY42% SENIOR CITIZENS AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES Demographics FIGURE 6. PASCO RESIDENTIAL DEMOGRAPHICS PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 15PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW Based on mobility data1 for the Tri-Cities region, we found that nearly half (48 percent) of Pasco’s employed residents travel to job sites outside of Pasco. Residents that are commuting out of town use one of the four bridges to travel to jobs in Kennewick, Richland, or the Hanford Nuclear Site. As shown in Figure 7, bridge travel patterns mirror these destinations with the highest share (26 percent) on the Lee-Volpentest Bridge (I-182) to access jobs in Richland, Kennewick, or the Hanford site while 16 percent of commute trips use the Pioneer Memorial Bridge (US 395). The other two bridges carry a small share, three percent each. 1 Employment and school travel patterns analysis conducted using StreetLight data for 2019. The other half of the employed Pasco residents work in or near Central and Downtown Pasco, at commercial establishments along US 395, or in the industrial areas of eastern Pasco. Local job destinations are colored to show where the highest concentrations occur in Figure 7. Other major activity generators are the higher level schools including Chiawana High School, Pasco High School, and the Columbia Basin College. Employment and School Travel Patterns The Port of Pasco maintains and operates several key industrial sites for the Tri-Cities region, including the Tri-Cities Airport, the Big Pasco Industrial Center, and a container barge terminal on the Columbia River. Burlington Northern-Santa Fe Railroad also maintains a major switchyard within Pasco. Freight activity is concentrated within eastern Pasco along the existing rail alignment, US 395, and SR 397/Oregon Avenue adjacent to these major industrial centers. The composition of vehicle types using city streets was evaluated in the same StreetLight Data set to show which areas had the highest share of trucks. As shown in Figure 8, higher shares of heavy trucks were found to be concentrated east of US 395, with the highest share of truck traffic east of US 12. Bridge crossings were reviewed as well, and it was discovered that the percent of heavy freight over the Columbia and Snake Rivers ranges from six to 20 percent with the highest percent share being on the Snake River Bridge in eastern Pasco, with 20 percent of its 19,000 daily vehicles being freight trucks. By contrast, the western and northern sectors of the city had relatively light truck traffic. The truck volumes north of I-182 and west of US 395 were much lower, typically less than five percent of the total vehicle traffic, while the river bridge shares were between eight and nine percent. Freight Transportation 15 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 16PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW TRICITIES AIRPORT 397 240 COURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68GLADE RDRAILROAD AVE4TH AVE LEWIS ST 10TH AVEOREGON AVEBROADMOOR BLVDBROADMOOR BLVDDENT RD KARTCHNERROAD CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVD ROAD 8420TH AVEWERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVER3% 1 1%11% 182 395 395 12 1% 10% 11% 3% 1% 5% INDUSTRIALBUSINESSES IN EAST PASCO HIGH SCHOOL DOWNTOWNPASCO COMMERCIALBUSINESSESALONG US 395 26% 16%WA397 BRIDGE:3% 3% 395 HIGH SCHOOL I182 BRIDGES: BLUE BRIDGE/US 395: US 12 BRIDGE: 397 PERCENTAGES OF WORK DESTINATIONS FOR ALL COMMUTE TRIPS OF PASCO'S RESIDENTS LESS THAN 5% 510% 1015% 1520% MORE THAN 20% N TOP EMPLOYMENT DESTINATIONS FIGURE 7. EMPLOYMENT TRAVEL PATTERNS TO/FROM PASCO (STREETLIGHT DATA, 2019) PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 17PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW 182 395 395 395 12 397 397 240 COURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68GLADE RDRAILROAD AVE4TH AVE SYLVESTER ST LEWIS ST 10TH AVEOREGON AVEBROADMOOR BLVDBROADMOOR BLVDDENT RD KARTCHNERROAD CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420TH AVEWERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT ESTIMATEDPERCENTAGEOF HEAVYVEHICLES ONROADWAYS 2018 LESS THAN 5% 510% 1015% 1520% MORE THAN 20% N I182 BRIDGES:2018 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC: 69,0008% HEAVY VEHICLES BLUE BRIDGE/US 395:2018 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC: 67,0009% HEAVY VEHICLES US 12 BRIDGE:2018 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC: 19,00020% HEAVY VEHICLES WA397 BRIDGE:2018 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC: 20,5006% HEAVY VEHICLES FIGURE 8. FREIGHT ACTIVITY CENTERS WITHIN PASCO (STREETLIGHT DATA, 2019) PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 18PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW The City of Pasco is served by Ben Franklin Transit (BFT) which operates fixed-route bus service, dial-a-ride, vanpool, and other demand responsive services within the Tri-Cities area. These transit options provide service within Pasco along with connections to Kennewick, Richland, and other regional destinations. FIXED ROUTE SERVICE BFT operates eight fixed route bus services within Pasco, including the following: • Route 1: Pasco / Kennewick / Richland • Route 3: Pasco / Kennewick • Route 64: Pasco A Street • Route 65: Pasco Lewis • Route 66 & Route 67: Pasco Sylvester & Pasco Sandifur • Route 225: Pasco / Richland • Route 268: Pasco / Richland See Figure 9 for these route locations and their existing transit stops. Weekday service is provided between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. although Route 64 and 268 both end service at 8:00 p.m. Service is similar for most routes for Saturday although service does not start until 7:00 a.m.; Route 268 does not provide Saturday service. Most routes operate on 30-minute headways for weekday and Saturday service, but Routes 1 and 3 operate on 15-minute headways, providing more frequent service to Kennewick and Richland from Downtown Pasco. Conversely, Routes 66 and 67 operate on hour headways, providing less frequent service to largely residential areas in western Pasco. Sunday service for Routes 1, 3, 64, and 225 began in August 2021. BFT operates service for Pasco to and from the 22nd Avenue Transit Center which facilitates transfers between routes. Riders can park at both the 22nd Avenue Transit Center and the HAPO Center. BFT has received two multimodal transit center grants from WSDOT to further develop multimodal hubs in Downtown and West Pasco. The bus stops within Pasco are indicated on Figure 9. Class 1 is a basic stop, which includes a sign that specifies the route number serving that location. Class 2 also has a bench for waiting riders, and Class 3 is a covered shelter with a bench. The Class 2 and 3 bus stops often require more right-of-way space to construct these facilities consistent with ADA requirements than is provided in the current street standards. To address this, this plan update identified a wider sidewalk be built on collector and arterial roadways. In addition, the city has an exemption process to provide needed easements to BFT to accommodate these higher quality facilities. According to the BFT Transit Development Plan, additional bus service is planned to extend coverage along Road 84 south of Argent Road, with continued service along the end of Court Street west of Road 68. The BFT plan also identified locations on the current service routes where stop upgrades are anticipated. Notable proposed changes are upgrades to Class 3 (sheltered) stops along Sandifur Parkway, and along Road 68 in the commercial area. Refer to Figure 10 for more information. DIAL-A-RIDE SERVICE Ben Franklin Transit operates Dial-A-Ride service for individuals with a disability between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday to Friday and between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on Saturday. There is no Sunday service. VANPOOL Vanpool services are also available for commuters traveling to Walla Walla, the Hanford Nuclear Site, and other major employment destinations. OTHER TRANSIT SERVICES BFT also offers CONNECT and general demand service which allows residents of Pasco to schedule rides to and from transit stops or other destinations within specific areas. These services make transit more accessible for all residents, especially those who lack convenient access to transit. Transit Services PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 19PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW 182 395 12 397 397 240 4TH AVEGLADE RD395 395 COURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68RAILROAD AVESYLVESTER ST LEWIS STOREGON AVEBROADMOORBLVDBROADMOOR BLVDDENT RD KARTCHNERROAD CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420TH AVE 10TH AVE WERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT N PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO UGA EXISTING BUS ROUTE BUS STOPS: CLASS 1 BASIC STOP CLASS 2 BENCH/TRASH CAN CLASS 3 SHELTER FIGURE 9. EXISTING BEN FRANKLIN TRANSIT SERVICES PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 20PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW 182 395 12 397 397 240 4TH AVEGLADE RD395 395 COURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68RAILROAD AVESYLVESTER ST LEWIS STOREGON AVEBROADMOORBLVDBROADMOOR BLVDDENT RD KARTCHNERROAD CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420TH AVE 10TH AVE WERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT N PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO UGA EXISTING BUS ROUTE BUS STOPS: PROPOSED BUS ROUTE CLASS 1 BASIC STOP CLASS 2 BENCH/TRASH CAN CLASS 3 SHELTER FIGURE 10. PLANNED BEN FRANKLIN STOP UPGRADES AND ROUTE EXTENSIONS PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 21PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW The transportation system performance was reviewed to understand where the system experiences high levels of congestion during weekday peak travel hours, where higher than expected crash rates occur, and where there are barriers to safe and convenient travel for all users. These issues were observed even with the short-term transportation improvements that are expected for Pasco. Figure 11 shows a compilation of our system performance findings for Pasco. The following sections highlight a few key findings that will be considered during the plan development. For more details on how the performance assessment was completed and full listing of the findings, please refer to the Technical Memorandum #3 in Appendix B. CONGESTION Traffic congestion for motor vehicles is significant today at the two western interchanges (Broadmoor Boulevard and Road 68) on I-182 during typical weekday commute hours. The Road 68 interchange was observed to regularly have excessive vehicle queues blocking access to adjoining intersections and driveways. Whenever traffic has significant delays during peak travel hours, it can impact the safe and convenient traffic operations in those areas. Fourteen intersections also had significant congestion. A total of 52 locations were monitored around the city, however, the rest of the locations all operated with low to moderate delays during the busiest hours of the day. The list of 14 intersections with concerns are noted in Figure 10. The Road 68 corridor from Sandifur Parkway, across I-182 and ending at Court Street has the highest group of congested locations. Several key locations along Argent Road, Sylvester Street, and Court Street are also noted as being congested on a regular basis. SAFETY Traffic safety was reviewed by considering how often crashes occurred at intersections and along roadways around the city along with the type and severity of crashes. Locations with the highest crash rates were flagged and mapped on Figure 11 (a total of five intersections). A crash rate calculation considers both the number and severity of crashes along with the traffic count at a given location. In this way, intersections with different traffic counts can be reasonably compared to each other. We found several intersections had both high congestion and high crash rates, which occurred at Road 68 at Burden Boulevard, Road 68 at Court Street, and 20th Avenue at Court Street. In addition, four corridors were flagged that had a significantly higher rate of crashes, especially between intersections. Those included Burden Boulevard, Court Street, Sylvester Street, and Lewis Street. These corridors had a total of 33 crashes involving pedestrians and bicycle riders. Each of these streets are arterial roadways that carry higher traffic volumes at increased speeds. Field observations showed that portions of these high crash corridors had frequent driveways and side streets which adds opportunities for conflicts. In addition, the city prepared a Local Road Safety Plan in February, 2020, that confirmed these findings, and recommended safety projects at North Road 28 and West Sylvester Street; South 10th Avenue and West Lewis Street; and a road diet project on West Sylvester Street. All of these projects are included in this TSMP. Transportation System Challenges INTERSECTIONS WITH BOTH HIGH CONGESTION AND HIGH CRASH RATES: • ROAD 68 AT BURDEN BOULEVARD • ROAD 68 AT COURT STREET • 20TH AVENUE AT COURT STREET PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 22PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW 182 395 395 12 397 397 240 COURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68RAILROAD AVESYLVESTER ST LEWIS ST 10TH AVEOREGON AVE CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420TH AVEWERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V EBROADMOOR BLVDDENT RD COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT INTERCHANGECONGESTION INTERSECTION WITH CONCERNS PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO UGA INTERSECTIONWITH CONCERNS CONGESTION CONCERN HIGH ACCESS DENSITY WITHOUT CENTER LANES N HIGH COLLISION ROADWAY CONNECTIVITY ISSUESFOR ALL TRAVEL MODES BIKE/PED CONNECTIVITY ISSUES ROADWAY CONNECTIVITY ISSUES OTHER IDENTIFIED OPERATIONAL NEEDS SAFETY CONCERN RAILROAD 1 ROAD 68 & SANDIFUR PKY 2 ROAD 68 & BURDEN BLVD 3 ROAD 68 & I182 WB ON/OFF RAMPS 4 ROAD 68 & COURT ST 5 MADISON AVE & BURDEN BLVD 6 ROAD 44 & ARGENT RD 7 ROAD 36 & ARGENT RD 8 SYLVESTER ST & US 395 NB OFF RAMP 9 SYLVESTER ST & ROAD 28 10 20TH AVE & COURT ST 11 4TH AVE & US 395 WB ON/OFF RAMPS 12 FOSTER WELLS RD/US 395 13 RAINIER AVE & US 395 SB ON/OFF RAMPS & KARTCHNER ST 14 A ST & US 124TH AVEGLADE RD12 13 11 10 8 9 4 6 5 1 2 3 7 14 # 395 KARTCHNER ROADBROADMOORBLVD FIGURE 11. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CHALLENGES – TODAY PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 23PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW CONNECTIVITY Connectivity describes how efficiently, directly, and conveniently a system is designed to serve its intended users. A well-connected multimodal system promotes resiliency, reduces congestion, and enhances equity for local travelers, whether they are driving, accessing transit, bicycling, or walking. For example, a well-connected roadway network provides more routes for drivers to travel between a trip’s start and end points which can reduce congestion. Improving system connectivity for drivers can spread traffic more evenly across the existing roadway network, mitigate congestion due to system disruptions, and reduce the overall distance traveled by drivers. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders also benefit from a well-connected transportation system. Providing local circulation options for short trips also helps freight traffic that otherwise must compete with autos that are forced onto the arterial roadways, such as Road 68 and Broadmoor Boulevard. Long block lengths and out-of-direction travel can dissuade potential multimodal system users and incur significant costs in both time and safety for existing users who depend on these systems. A technical review of Pasco’s existing transportation system highlighted many arterial or collector corridors and areas without access for pedestrians, vehicles, transit riders, and bicyclists. In addition, public feedback identified dozens of locations where residents felt unsafe or unable to conveniently reach their intended destination. A few specific examples where connectivity challenges were flagged include the following: • The I-182 freeway corridor divides Pasco in half and provides very limited opportunities to cross over the freeway. Local freeway interchanges have inadequate facilities for walking and biking, which compound the barriers for non-motorized travel. Further, the long spacing between these interchanges exacerbates the barrier for walking and bicycling travel between either sides of the highway. • The Pasco Airport, and the Pasco rail yards represent major barriers to intra-city travel. • In portions of unincorporated Franklin County within Pasco (for example, south of I-182), historical rural development has created a roadway network with limited east-west street connections and limited north-south street connections across the Franklin County Irrigation Canal. • Newer residential developments adjacent to Burden Boulevard and Sandifur Parkway have limited connections to adjoining services and neighborhoods. It is acknowledged that the city does have two extensive east-west trail corridors to serve walking and bicycling. These include the trail immediately north of I-182 between Broadmoor Boulevard and Argent Road. This provides connections to adjoining neighborhoods and to Road 58. Another regional trail borders the Columbia River between Sacajewea State Park and Road 100 with intermittent connections to city streets. Photo Credit: Jacob GonzalezPhoto Credit: City of Pasco PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 24PASCO TODAY AND TOMORROW In many areas of the city, the transportation system does not support travel for Pasco residents without a car. Notable corridors that require attention are portions of Burns Road, Sandifur Parkway, Burden Boulevard, Court Street and Sylvester Street. For automobile drivers, long block lengths and limited access options increase out-of-direction travel and concentrate higher traffic volumes at the entry points to the neighborhoods. The residents that live adjacent to these entry/exit points experience significantly higher traffic volumes than others in the same neighborhood. These same features also significantly increase the distance that must be traveled by pedestrians or bicyclists to access transit or other destinations, making it more difficult to walk or bike in Pasco. The current transit service routes generally are within one-quarter to one-half mile as the crow flies, to many of the key destinations and neighborhoods within the existing city limits, as shown in Figure 8, but limited street connectivity in certain areas puts these stops beyond a reasonable walking distance for many residents. Today, the exceptions are in the industrial areas east of US 12, and the edges of the urban area, particularly in the southern portions of Broadmoor Boulevard and westerly end of Argent Road. As noted previously, BFT is planning to extend bus route services along Road 84 south of Argent Road connecting to Court Street. In general, as new development occurs, there is an opportunity for the city and its regional partners to provide better quality and more consistent connection options as part of the new neighborhood designs. This will enable city residents, employees, and visitors to have safer and more convenient access to transit services and general walking and biking trips. The primary growth area is north of I-182 in the greater Broadmoor Boulevard Area. As new streets and neighborhoods are developed, providing direct, safe, and convenient walking and bicycling access to existing and planned transit routes will be critical to maintaining a safe and reliable transportation options for our residents. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 25IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES The Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCG) travel demand model was applied to forecast 2040 travel demand within the City of Pasco, and the resulting traffic volumes were evaluated at study intersections by the project team to flag major degradations or changes in traffic operations compared to present day conditions. Forecasts were developed from the Base Year (2015) and Future No-Build (2040) BFCG regional travel demand model, following the process described in the Traffic Analysis and Forecasting Methodology memo.2 Key assumptions are highlighted in the following sections along with performance results. The travel demand forecasting is directly influenced by expected land use growth throughout the Tri-Cities region. For this Transportation System Master Plan, the BFCG model was updated to a 2040 horizon year, by refining the previous 2017– 2037 Pasco Comprehensive Plan Update land use to reflect the Broadmoor Master Plan and Urban Growth Area (UGA) expansion that was identified 2 DKS Associates. Traffic Analysis & Forecasting Methodology memo. July, 2020 3 Benton-Franklin Council of Governments. Transition 2040, Appendix F. 2018. during the Comprehensive Plan Update. The updated 2040 land use significantly changed both the geographic distribution of growth and population and employment projections for the City of Pasco and its UGA. The land use totals are summarized in Table 1. The 2040 land use assumptions are the catalyst for the forecasted growth and changes of traffic patterns within the City of Pasco. Significant shifts are expected north of I-182 as higher office, retail, and mixed-use growth in the Broadmoor area reduced the number of residents traveling out of Pasco for jobs, goods, and services. Reduced regional travel was also shown to reduce peak demands at interchanges with I-182, compared to historical growth patterns in Pasco where a high share of local residents left the city for employment and shopping purposes. Overall, households are predicted to grow by 81 percent from 2015 (the BFCG model base year) to 2040, while employment is predicted to grow by about 73 percent during the same period. EXPECTED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS It was assumed that near-term transportation improvements that are reasonably likely to be funded and constructed by the cities of Pasco, Kennewick, Richland, West Richland, and WSDOT will be operational by 2040. These new improvements projects within Pasco include the following. As noted, several of these projects have been recently completed, while others are actively in development or preparing for construction: • Argent Road Improvements (Road 40 to 20th Avenue) - under construction • Wrigley Drive Extension (Convention Drive to Clemente Lane) - completed • Chapel Hill Boulevard Extension (Road 84 to Road 68) - completed • Sandifur Parkway Improvements (Road 68 to Convention Drive) • Road 68 Widening (I-182 to Argent Road) – in progress • Burns Road Improvements/Extension (Road 52 to Pasco City Limits) • Lewis Street Downtown Overpass – in progress Other projects included in the 2040 BFCG model outside of Pasco are summarized in Transition 2040, the Tri-Cities Metropolitan Area Regional Transportation Plan.3 Forecasted Growth In Pasco TABLE 1. PASCO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN URBAN GROWTH AREA LAND USE TOTAL 2015 2040 PERCENT GROWTH HOUSEHOLDS 22,500 39,645 81% POPULATION 70,855 120,275 71% EMPLOYMENT 19,765 33,895 73% PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 26IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES The system performance with growth in 2040 was re-evaluated to determine if traffic congestion would reach unacceptable levels with the added traffic volumes. We found that sixteen intersections would drop below the agency’s target, which is LOS D. This corresponds to significant delay for the average vehicle using that location during commute hours. The locations that are expected to have major congestion issues are mapped in Figure 12 and listed in Table 2. These locations and the roadways serving them were further reviewed to help gauge the scale and nature of system improvements that would adequately serve the higher travel demands, and recommendations are made in the following section. The traffic operations results showed increased congestion and below standard operating conditions throughout much of the City of Pasco west of US 395 (south), and in and around the industrial employment growth expected to occur along US 395 (north) and US 12. The Broadmoor Boulevard and I-182 interchange ramp terminal intersection failures were particularly concerning, as ramp queues could lead to safety and operations issues on I-182. The operations issues at the US 12 and A Street intersection, the US 395 and Kartchner Street interchange, and the 4th Avenue and I-182 interchange are of particular concern for freight movement, as these are all key gateways into the City of Pasco’s industrial growth centers. System Conditions After Growth TABLE 2. INTERSECTIONS WITH MAJOR CONGESTION BY 2040 (OPERATING AT LOS E OR F) #STUDY INTERSECTION AM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE PM PEAK HOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE EXISTING FUTURE NO-BUILD EXISTING FUTURE NO-BUILD 1 BROADMOOR BOULEVARD & I 182 WB ON RAMP/I 182 WB ON/OFF RAMP B B A E 2 BROADMOOR BOULEVARD & I 182 EB OFF RAMP/I 182 EB ON RAMP B C B F 8 SYLVESTER ST & US 395 NB OFF RAMP A/C A/C A/E A/F 11 4TH AVE & US 395 WB ON/OFF RAMP A B D E 13 US 395 & FOSTER WELLS RD A/F C/F B/F C/F 14 RAINIER AVE/US 395 SB ON/OFF RAMP & KARTCHNER ST A/C A/D B/F B/F 15 COMMERCIAL AVE/US 395 NB ON/OFF RAMP & KARTCHNER ST A/D A/E A/D A/F 18 HWY 12 & E A ST A/C A/E A/C A/F 19 ROAD 68 & BURDEN BLVD E E E E 20 BROADMOOR BOULEVARD & DENT RD/EDELMAN RD A/C A/F 27 ROAD 68 & SANDIFUR PKWY C E 30 ROAD 68 & COURT ST A/D A/F 31 ROAD 60 & COURT ST A/C A/F 32 MADISON AVE & BURDEN BLVD A/F A/F 33 ARGENT RD & RD 44 A/F B/F 52 CEDAR AVE & LEWIS ST A/C A/E Red text indicates where conditions will exceed accepted LOS limits. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) For motor vehicles, the LOS is an indicator of how much extra time it takes to travel through an intersection during busy travel hours. The LOS scale ranges from little or no delay (LOS A) to extreme delay (LOS F). Pasco’s target is LOS D, which is moderate delay. During off-peak hours, delay conditions improve significantly. See Appendix C for more information. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 27IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES 182 395 12 397 397 240 COURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68RAILROAD AVESYLVESTER ST 10TH AVEOREGON AVE LEWIS ST CEDARAVEBROADMOORBLVDBROADMOORBLVDDENT RD KARTCHNERROAD CLARK RD FOSTER WELLS RD ROAD 44A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420TH AVEWERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT N PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO UGA # STUDY INTERSECTIONS THAT DO NOT MEET MOBILITY TARGETS: BOTH AM & PM PEAK Refer back to Table 2 for full descriptions of intersection names. PM PEAK ONLY #4TH AVEGLADE RD395 395 13 18 19 1 2 8 11 14 15 20 27 30 31 32 33 52 FIGURE 12. INTERSECTIONS WITH MAJOR CONGESTION BY 2040 Recommended Transportation System Improvements CHAPTER 3 28 Not all recommended improvements are required to be in place prior to developing land within the UGA. The need to upgrade the existing streets or construct new ones will be driven by the multimodal access needs of the adjacent properties. The project design elements depicted are identified for the purpose of creating a reasonable cost estimate for planning purposes. The actual design elements for any project are subject to change and will ultimately be determined through a project scoping process. THE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS TO PASCO’S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM WILL IDENTIFY UPGRADES TO EXISTING STREETS AND INTERSECTIONS, AS WELL AS THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW ROADWAYS, TO SUPPORT THE MULTIMODAL NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITY. Photo Credit: City of Pasco PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 29 The first major category of system improvements to the motor vehicle system is for at-grade intersection traffic control upgrades and channelization improvements, or for major freeway interchange upgrades and re-configuration projects. As shown in Table 3, many projects are identified to upgrade existing intersections traffic controls to better serve higher traffic volumes with planned growth. This typically includes installing traffic signals or roundabouts to make those locations more efficient and safer under higher usage levels. One of the more complex intersection solutions is on Broadmoor Boulevard at Sandifur Parkway (INT42); this includes extensive additions of dedicated right- and left-turning lanes and upgrades to the existing traffic signal equipment to serve these wider street approaches. The cost estimate for these improvements is $3.6 million. In addition, there are several freeway interchanges on I-182 that require improvement to the existing off and on ramps serving the local city streets, or they require a major upgrade of the interchange itself to better service long-range multimodal travel demands (INT1, INT24, INT25, INT30). The Broadmoor Boulevard interchange (INT25) improvement project would add a loop off-ramp for eastbound freeway travel bound for northbound Broadmoor Boulevard. This will significantly reduce demands on the existing eastbound off-ramp, which queues heavily during peak periods. As noted previously, the existing freeway overcrossings of I-182 have very limited walking and bicycling facilities, and any upgrade to those interchanges would provide improved accommodations for all modes of travel consistent with City of Pasco and WSDOT design standards. The recommended improvements are listed by category in Figure 13 (Motor Vehicle System Improvements) and Figure 14 (Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects), with the project IDs corresponding with those in Table 3 through Table 7. Note that the project IDs were created in numerical order, and do not correspond with priority. While the estimated project costs are shown, the responsibility will be shared by the city, Franklin County, WSDOT, and private development, with the cost shares to be determined as applicable. Motor Vehicle System Improvements TO BETTER SERVE THE HIGHER TRAFFIC VOLUMES EXPECTED WITH COMMUNITY GROWTH, MANY MOTOR VEHICLE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE UPGRADING EXISTING INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTROLS.Photo Credit: Tri-City Herald PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 30RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 182 395 395 12 397 397 240 COURT ST ARGENT RD RAILROAD AVESYLVESTER ST LEWIS STOREGON AVE 10TH AVE CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420TH AVEWERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT N RAILROAD PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO UGA ROAD WIDENING TRANSIT CENTER TRAFFIC STUDY ROAD EXTENSION/NEW ROAD BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS NEW BRIDGE INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS# EXP#TR# TS# EXT# EXT# EXT#4TH AVEGLADE RDTS2 TS1 EXT1 EXT12 EXP1EXP14 EXP2EXP1 5EXP13 EXT13 EXT2EXT3 EXP4EXP3 EXP6EXT8 EXT5 EXT6 EXT7 EXP9 EXT16EXT9EXT5 EXP9 EXT10EXP9EXT15 EXT14 TR1 EXT11EXT4EXP7EXP10TS3EXP8EXP6EXP5EXP1132 33 34 4 14 16 17 19 23 6 9 30 46 47 15 8107 2 3 45 124443 25 42 11 49 241 48 DENT RD ROAD 68 KARTCHNERROAD BROADMOORBLVD BROADMOORBLVD FIGURE 13. MOTOR VEHICLE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 31RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS TABLE 3. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS (INT) ID NAME DESCRIPTION COST INT1 Road 68/I-182 WB Ramp Terminal Improvements Expand capacity of westbound ramp terminal $1,915,000 INT2 Sandifur Parkway/Convention Drive Improvements Install a traffic signal; restripe Convention Drive to include northbound and southbound left turn pockets $1,045,000 INT3 Road 68/Burden Boulevard Intersection Improvements Channelization improvements to reduce queueing on westbound approach and access to I-182 $260,000 INT4 Court Street/Road 68 Intersection Improvements Construct a roundabout or traffic signal to improve safety, intersection control, and capacity $2,000,000 INT6 Lewis St/Heritage Ave Intersection Improvements Install traffic signal $480,000 INT7 Burden Blvd/Road 60 Intersection Improvements Install traffic signal $480,000 INT8 Road 44/Burden Blvd Intersection Improvements Install traffic signal $480,000 INT9 Heritage Ave/A St Intersection Improvements Install traffic signal $795,000 INT10 Madison Ave/Burden Blvd Intersection Improvements Install traffic signal $480,000 INT11 Dent Rd/Road 68/Columbia River Rd/Taylor Flats Rd/ Clark Rd Intersection Improvements Realign Columbia River Road south to Dent Road and close existing connection to Road 68; construct a 1-lane roundabout at Columbia River Road/ Dent Road; construct a 2-lane four leg roundabout at Dent Road/Clark Road/ Road 68/Taylor Flats Road with eastbound and northbound right turn slip lanes; widen Taylor Flats Road to 4 lanes immediately north of roundabout $4,865,000 INT12 Sandifur Pkwy/Road 76 Intersection Improvements Install a traffic signal; remove existing channelized northbound right turn lane and convert to shared northbound through/right turn lane $480,000 INT14 Court St/Road 60 Intersection Improvements Construct a traffic signal $480,000 INT15 Argent Rd/Road 52 Intersection Improvements Construct turn pockets or traffic signal $350,000 INT16 Court St/Road 52 Intersection Improvements Construct turn pockets (included as part of road diet project)$350,000 INT17 Sylvester St/Road 28 Intersection Improvements Redesign traffic signal and install a northbound left turn lane $700,000 INT19 10th Ave/Sylvester St Intersection Improvements Installation of a northbound advance signal and warning sign on S. 10th Avenue $50,000 INT23 Cedar Ave/Lewis St Intersection Improvements Construct a traffic signal and restripe Lewis Street to three lanes $350,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 32RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ID NAME DESCRIPTION COST INT24 I-182/Road 68 Interchange Improvements Interchange reconstruction, improve on and off capacity for EB and WB traffic, widen bridge structure $15,850,000 INT25 I-182/Broadmoor Blvd Interchange Improvements Construct a 1-lane loop ramp from eastbound I-182 to northbound Broadmoor Boulevard within existing right of way; widen westbound approaches at I-182 westbound and eastbound ramp terminals to include dual right turn lanes $3,300,000 INT30 4th Ave/I-182 WB ramps Construct a southbound right turn lane at intersection $220,000 INT32 Court St/Harris Rd Install a traffic signal $480,000 INT33 Court St/Road 108 Restripe southbound approach to create a southbound left turn lane $35,000 INT34 Court St/Broadmoor Boulevard Install a traffic signal $480,000 INT42 Broadmoor Boulevard/Sandifur Parkway Intersection Improvements Widen approaches as needed to construct new dual northbound left turn lanes, a westbound through lane, a channelized southbound right turn lane, and dual eastbound right turn lanes; widen to add an additional southbound receiving lane on Broadmoor Boulevard between Sandifur Parkway and the old Harris Road intersection $3,600,000 INT43 Sandifur Parkway/Road 90 Intersection Improvements Install a traffic signal $795,000 INT44 Sandifur Parkway/Road 84 Intersection Improvements Install a traffic signal $480,000 INT45 Wrigley Drive/Road 76 Intersection Improvements Install a traffic signal $480,000 INT46 Rainier Ave/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St Install a traffic signal $480,000 INT47 Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St Install a traffic signal $480,000 INT48 Sylvester St & US 395 NB Off Ramp Install a traffic signal $480,000 INT49 Lewis St/10th Avenue Intersection Improvements Install an active signal ahead warning sign $45,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 33RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The next major category of motor vehicle system improvements is roadway extensions, which are newly constructed as development occurs, and overpasses. These projects are generally much larger investments than intersection upgrades because they are building the essential roadway network in the growth areas and addressing system limitations at key bottlenecks around the city. The first two projects would construct new street overpasses at Lewis Street (EXT1) in downtown, and at Road 76 (EXT2) just west of the Road 68 interchange with I-182. The Lewis Street Overpass replaces the existing railroad underpass facility and began construction in 2021. The Road 76 Overpass project supplements the carrying capacity of the Road 68 overpass to allow local trips to cross the freeway without passing through the ramp intersections and provides quality walking and bicycling options that are not available at Road 68. The other EXT projects are new streets that extend the existing major roadway system to service growth areas. TABLE 4. NEW ROADWAY EXTENSIONS (EXT) ID NAME EXTENTS DESCRIPTION COST EXT1 Lewis Street Overpass 2nd Avenue to Oregon Avenue Construct a new railroad overpass between 2nd Avenue and Oregon Avenue to replace existing deteriorating underpass (Built)$32,016,000 EXT2 Road 76 Overpass Chapel Hill Boulevard to Burden Boulevard Construct a new 2-lane overpass and roadway to extend Road 76 over I-182 with bicycle and pedestrian facilities; install traffic signal at Road 76/ Burden Boulevard, restripe southbound approach to include a separate left turn pocket, and construct a northbound right turn lane; complete existing roundabout at Road 76/Chapel Hill Boulevard $30,000,000 EXT3 Wrigley Drive Extension Clemente Lane to Convention Drive Extend Wrigley Drive from Clemente Lane to Convention Drive (Built)$960,000 EXT4 Crescent Road Chapel Hill Boulevard to Road 108 Construct a new 3-lane road in the existing Crescent Road ROW to connect Road 108 and Chapel Hill Boulevard $3,085,000 EXT5 Future East-West Connection (Deseret Drive)Dent Road to Road 52 Construct a 3-lane roadway and upgrade existing segments of Deseret Drive; construct two-way stop control intersection at Deseret Drive/Dent Road, Deseret Drive/Future North-South Connection (Halfway between Broadmoor Boulevard and Dent Road), Deseret Drive/Convention Drive, and Deseret Drive/Road 60; install new signals at Broadmoor Boulevard/Deseret Drive and Road 68/Deseret Drive; construct new 1-lane roundabout at Deseret Drive/ Road 90 and Deseret Drive/Road 84 $63,640,000 EXT6 Road 52 Extension Burns Road through to UGA Construct a 3-lane roadway $24,885,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 34RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ID NAME EXTENTS DESCRIPTION COST EXT7 Road 60 Extension Burns Road through to UGA Construct a 3-lane roadway; install two-way stop control at Clark Road/Road 60 $24,270,000 EXT8 Convention Drive Extension Burns Road through to UGA Construct a 3-lane roadway; install two-way stop control at Clark Road/ Convention Drive; restripe northbound approach at Burns Road/Convention Drive to include a dedicated left turn lane $24,330,000 EXT9 Road 90 Extension Burns Road through to UGA Construct a 3-lane roadway; install a traffic signal at Road 90/Burns Road; construct a 1-lane roundabout at Road 90/Dent Road $26,795,000 EXT10 Future North-South Connection (Halfway between Broadmoor Boulevard and Dent Road) Harris Road to Dent Road Construct a 3-lane roadway; install two-way stop control at Future North-South Connection/Harris Road and Future North-South Connection/Dent Road; install a traffic signal at Future North-South Connection/Burns Road $28,105,000 EXT11 Dent Road Extension Burns Road to Harris Road Construct a 3-lane roadway; install a traffic signal at Dent Road/Burns Road $14,505,000 EXT12 Hillsboro Rd Extension King Avenue to UGA New road from east of King Ave to UGA $34,940,000 EXT13 Wernett Rd Extension Road 76 to Road 84 New road from Rd 76 to Road 84 $6,075,000 EXT14 Sandifur Parkway Extension - Phase 1 Broadmoor Boulevard to Future North-South Connection (Between Broadmoor Boulevard and Dent Road) Construct a 5-lane roadway; realign Harris Road to Sandifur Parkway Extension as 2-lane road and close the existing Harris Road/Broadmoor Boulevard intersection; construct a 2-lane roundabout at Sandifur Parkway Extension/ Harris Road and a 1-lane roundabout at Sandifur Parkway/Future North-South Connection (Between Broadmoor Boulevard and Dent Road) with a westbound right turn slip lane $12,140,000 EXT15 Sandifur Parkway Extension - Phase 2 Future North-South Connection (Between Broadmoor Boulevard and Dent Road) and Shoreline Construct a 3-lane roadway; construct a 1-lane roundabout at Sandifur Parkway/ Dent Road; install two-way stop control at Sandifur Parkway/Shoreline $23,740,000 EXT16 Road 84 Extension Burns Road to UGA Construct a 3-lane roadway; install a traffic signal at Road 84/Burns Road; construct a 1-lane roundabout at Road 84/Dent Road $25,585,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 35RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS A series of focused traffic studies (TS1, TS2, and TS3) was also identified to develop conceptual plans for solutions at major intersections and freeway interchanges to better understand trade-offs and cost efficiencies. In addition, two safety studies (TS4 and TS5) were identified to help the City leverage access to grant funding for local safety improvements. The master plan also shows a potential transit park and ride lot in the general Broadmoor Road area. In addition, the city will develop and adopt a master plan that focuses on active transportation needs of the community. This will refine the findings of the TSMP projects to include a priority citywide network, and to amend plans and standards, as needed, to support safe and convenient non-motorized travel. Further study is required to fully understand the investment required for improvements to support the park-and-ride lot. TABLE 5. TRAFFIC STUDIES AND TRANSIT AMENITIES (TS & TR) ID NAME DESCRIPTION COST TS1 Study Road 44/Argent Road Intersection Study Road 44/Argent Road Intersection $65,000 TS2 Traffic Analysis for I-182/US 395 Interchange Traffic Analysis for I-182/US 395 Interchange $265,000 TS3 Traffic Analysis for US 12/Tank Farm Road Traffic Analysis for US 12/Tank Farm Road $250,000 TS4 Intersection Safety Implementation Plan Develop a program to analyze intersection safety needs, including identification of automated enforcement locations and identifying projects for safety grants $80,000 TS5 Local Roads Safety Plan (LRSP)Update the 2020 LRSP in even-numbered years (2022 and following) to gain eligibility for Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant funding $60,000 TS6 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Develop a master plan specific to the active transportation needs of the community. $200,000 TR1 Broadmoor Park and Ride Location Construct a park-and-ride facility in the Broadmoor Area TBD PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 36RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The next category of motor vehicle improvements is expansions to the existing system, which generally add more motor vehicle travel lanes to serve 2040 traffic conditions consistent with the mobility targets in place by the City and its local partners (WSDOT and Franklin County). Some expansion projects were also identified as key components to complete a comprehensive bicycle network for Pasco. These projects are included on Figure 13. Several of these roadway widening projects also identify supporting intersection and traffic control upgrades based on initial performance studies done through the TSMP. Further traffic engineering evaluation will be required at the time of improvement design to fully understand the geometric requirements associated with intersection improvements, such as the length of the suggested dedicated turn lanes, at each location. TABLE 6. ROADWAY WIDENING PROJECTS (EXP) ID NAME EXTENTS DESCRIPTION COST EXP1 Argent Road Improvements - Phase 1 20th Avenue to Varney/Saraceno Widen to 5 lanes with intersection improvements $2,015,000 EXP2 Argent Road Improvements - Phase 2 Varney/Saraceno to Road 40 Widen to 5 lanes with intersection improvements; install a traffic signal or roundabout at Road 36/Argent $8,150,000 EXP3 Sandifur Parkway Improvements Convention Drive to Road 68 Widen to 5 lanes; construct a westbound right turn lane at Road 68/ Sandifur Parkway $2,265,000 EXP4 Sandifur Parkway Improvements Road 60 to Road 52 Widen to 3 lanes; restripe westbound approach to Road 52 to include a shared through/right lane and a dedicated left turn pocket; restripe southbound and eastbound approaches to Road 60 to include dedicated left turn lanes $3,505,000 EXP5 Road 68 Improvements I-182 Eastbound Ramp Terminal to Argent Road Widen to 5 lanes; construct a southbound right turn lane at Road 68/Chapel Hill Boulevard $307,628 EXP6 Burns Road Improvements Broadmoor Boulevard to Road 44 Widen to 3 lanes; construct new 3-lane roadway between Road 68 and Rio Grande Lane; install all-way stop control at Road 52/Burns Road intersection; install a traffic signal at Burns Road/Road 68 $13,804,000 EXP7 Broadmoor Boulevard Improvements I-182 Eastbound Ramp Terminal to Court Street Widen to 3 lanes as needed; convert existing right turn pockets and acceleration lanes to a continuous through travel lane $7,905,000 EXP8 Broadmoor Boulevard Widening I-182 Westbound Ramp Terminal to Dent Road Widen to 5 lanes between I-182 Westbound Ramp Terminal and Burns Road; widen to 3 lanes between Burns Road and Dent Road; install traffic signal at Broadmoor Boulevard/Burns Road and widen eastbound approach to include dedicated left and right turn lanes; install traffic signal at Broadmoor Boulevard/Dent Road $8,035,000 EXP9 Clark Road/Dent Road Improvements Burns Road to Road 52 Widen to 3 lanes $43,225,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 37RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ID NAME EXTENTS DESCRIPTION COST EXP10 Road 68 Improvements Sandifur Parkway to Clark Road Widen to 5 lanes $13,085,000 EXP11 Road 68 Improvements Court Street to Argent Road Extend 5-lane section immediately south of Argent Road; convert existing southbound right turn lane to a shared southbound through/right turn lane $9,740,000 EXP13 Road 44 Improvements Madison Avenue to Argent Road Widen to 3 lanes; install a traffic signal at Road 44/Argent Road intersection $1,225,000 EXP14 Road 36 Improvements Desert Plateau Drive to Argent Road Widen to 3 lanes $3,345,000 EXP15 Argent Road Improvements - Phase 3 Road 40 to Road 44 Widen to 5 lanes $600,000 EXP23 Burns Road Shoreline to Broadmoor Boulevard Widen to complete a residential minor arterial cross section $13,795,000 EXP26 Court Street Harris Road to Broadmoor Boulevard Widen to complete a residential minor arterial cross section $9,920,000 EXP33 Road 84 Burns Road to Sandifur Parkway Widen to complete a residential collector cross section $25,000 EXP37 Road 76 Sandifur Parkway to Burden Boulevard Widen to complete a commercial collector cross section $1,925,000 EXP38 Wrigley Drive Road 76 to Clemente Lane Widen to complete a commercial neighborhood collector cross section $560,000 EXP46 Hudson Drive Road 84 to Okanogan Lane Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $825,000 EXP47 Okanogan Lane Hudson Drive to Chehalis Drive Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $250,000 EXP48 Chehalis Drive Okanogan Lane to Three Rivers Drive Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $490,000 EXP49 Three Rivers Drive Chehalis Drive to Road 68 Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $1,170,000 EXP53 Argent Road Road 52 to Road 44 Widen to complete a residential minor arterial cross section $3,840,000 EXP57 Road 76 Argent Road to Court Street Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $5,520,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 38RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ID NAME EXTENTS DESCRIPTION COST EXP58 Court Street Broadmoor Boulevard to Road 84 Widen to complete a residential 3-lane principal arterial cross section $15,315,000 EXP74 Wrigley Drive Road 68 Place to Roosevelt Drive Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $4,350,000 EXP75 Roosevelt Drive Wrigley Drive to Madison Avenue Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $225,000 EXP76 Madison Avenue Roosevelt Drive to Burden Boulevard Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $140,000 EXP77 Madison Avenue Burden Boulevard to Road 44 Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $50,000 EXP79 Road 60 Burns Road to Burden Boulevard Widen to complete a residential collector cross section $465,000 EXP82 Burden Boulevard Road 60 to Road 36 Widen to complete a residential minor arterial cross section $5,860,000 EXP89 Road 60 Court Street to Sylvester Street Widen to complete a residential collector cross section $3,305,000 EXP93 Sylvester Street Road 60 To Road 54 Widen to complete a residential collector cross section $2,125,000 EXP102 A Street 20th Avenue to Heritage Boulevard Widen to complete an industrial minor arterial $6,990,000 EXP103 A Street Heritage Boulevard to US 12 Widen to complete an industrial minor arterial $4,695,000 EXP111 10th Avenue Lewis Street to Sylvester Street Widen to complete a mixed use minor arterial cross section $2,895,000 EXP112 10th Avenue Ainsworth Street to Lewis Street Widen to complete an industrial minor arterial cross section $150,000 EXP115 4th Avenue Ainsworth Street to Columbia Street Widen to complete an industrial minor arterial cross section $3,480,000 EXP126 Elm Avenue Broadway Street to A Street Widen to complete a residential neighborhood collector cross section $445,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 39RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The recommended bicycle and pedestrian system improvements are listed by category in Figure 14 (Bike/Pedestrian Projects), with the project IDs corresponding with those in Table 7. Note that the project IDs were created in numerical order, and do not correspond with priority. While the estimated project costs are shown, the responsibility will be shared by the City, Franklin County, WSDOT, and private development, with the cost shares to be determined as applicable. In addition to the specific projects targeted for bicycle and pedestrian users (Table 7), Figure 14 illustrates motor vehicle projects that have bike and pedestrian elements, which were already listed in the previous sections’ project tables. The compilation of dedicated bicycle/pedestrian and other projects illustrates the citywide bicycling and walking network that will be in place once these improvements have been completed. Photo Credit: Port of Pasco Bicycle and Pedestrian System Improvements Photo Credit: City of Pasco PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 40RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 182 395 395 12 397 397 240 COURT ST ARGENT RD RAILROAD AVESYLVESTER ST LEWIS STOREGON AVE 10TH AVE DENT RD KARTCHNERROAD BROADMOORBLVD BROADMOORBLVD CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD 20TH AVEWERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT N RAILROAD PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO UGA BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIANIMPROVEMENTPROJECTS BP# MINOR ROADWAY WIDENING EXP# OTHER BICYCLEAND PEDESTRIANPROJECTS EXP# EXT# TRANSIT CENTERTR#4TH AVEGLADE RDEXT1 EXT12 EXP1EXP14 EXP2EXP1 5EXP13 EXT13 EXT2EXT3 EXP4EXP3 EXP6EXT8 EXT5 EXT6 EXT7 EXP9 EXT16EXT9EXT5 EXP9 EXT10EXP9EXT15 EXT14 TR1 EXT11EXT4EXP7EXP10EXP8EXP6 EXP23 EX P 2 6 EXP58 EXP77 EXP74EXP79 EXP102 EXP126EXP89EXP57EXP5EXP11ROAD 68 BP6 BP11, BP14 BP12, BP15 BP8 BP13, BP16BP12, BP15 BP9 BP10 BP10 BP1 BP2 BP3 BP4BP5BP7ROAD 84FIGURE 14. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 41RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS TABLE 7. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS (BP) ID NAME EXTENTS DESCRIPTION COST BP1 Burns Road Pedestrian/ Bicycle Pathway Phase 1 Broadmoor Boulevard to Road 90 12-foot-wide Pedestrian/Bicycle pathway from Broadmoor Boulevard to Road 90 (Starting construction in 2022)$775,000 BP2 Burns Road Pedestrian/ Bicycle Pathway Phase 2 Road 90 to Road 84 12-foot-wide Pedestrian/Bicycle pathway from Road 90 to Road 84 (Starting construction in 2022)$455,000 BP3 Burns Road Pedestrian/ Bicycle Pathway Phase 3 Road 84 to Road 68 12-foot-wide Pedestrian/Bicycle pathway from Road 84 to Road 68 (Starting construction in 2022)$650,000 BP4 Pedestrian/Bicycle Access Broadmoor Boulevard Interchange St Thomas Drive to Harris Road Pedestrian/Bicycle facilities on Broadmoor Boulevard from St Thomas Dr to Harris Road $2,320,000 BP5 Pedestrian/Bicycle Access Road 68 Interchange Chapel Hill Boulevard to Burden Boulevard Pedestrian/Bicycle facility on Road 68 from Chapel Hill Blvd to Burden Blvd $1,100,000 BP6 Sacajawea Heritage Trail Levee Road 52 to Road 72 Lower the levee and install pathways for pedestrians from Road 52 to Road 72 $4,731,000 BP7 James Street Improvements Oregon Avenue to Frontier Loop Improve safety and pedestrian features and consolidate accesses $1,220,000 BP8 Pedestrian/Bicycle Access Sylvester Street Overpass 32nd Avenue to 28th Avenue Pedestrian/Bicycle facility on Sylvester Street from 32nd Avenue to 28th Avenue $1,845,000 BP9 Lewis Street Corridor Improvements N/A Tie Lewis Street Overpass into other downtown improvements for safety and Pedestrian/Bicycle accessibility $1,625,000 BP10 FCID Canal Pedestrian/ Bicycle Pathway Study N/A FCID Canal Pedestrian/Bicycle Pathway Study $870,000 BP11 Court Street Road Reconfiguration Road 40 to Road 68 Reconfigure Court Street to one lane in each direction and a center turn lane; stripe bike lanes in both directions $270,000 BP12 Sylvester Street Road Reconfiguration 5th Avenue to Road 54 Reconfigure Sylvester Street to one lane in each direction and a center turn lane; stripe bike lanes in both directions $1,630,000 BP13 20th Ave Road Reconfiguration A Street to Argent Road Reconfigure 20th Avenue to one lane in each direction and a center turn lane; install buffered bikes lanes in both directions. Additional improvements (e.g. right turn lanes) may be provided at intersections $1,990,000 BP14 Court Street Sidewalk Infill Road 40 to Road 68 Complete sidewalk infill as needed $8,275,000 BP15 Sylvester Street Sidewalk Infill 5th Avenue to Road 54 Complete sidewalk infill as needed $9,795,000 BP16 20th Ave Sidewalk Infill A Street to Argent Road Complete sidewalk infill as needed $3,180,000 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 42RECOMMENDED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS The previous lists of recommended multimodal system improvements represent an investment of about $665 million, as summarized in Table 8 below. Most of the costs are associated with Roadway Extensions (EXT) and Widenings (EXP), which together total $575 million. It is noted that these improvement costs will be shared among the City of Pasco, the local development community, and other local transportation agency partners, including WSDOT and Franklin County. The city will be updating its Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) program in 2022 to address these system investments. The TIF is a one-time fee which helps build system improvements. It is collected from local development applicants at the time of new construction. Summary of Recommended Improvements TABLE 8. SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS SUMMARY ID CATEGORY NUMBER OF PROJECTS DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED COST (MILLIONS) INT Intersections 31 Intersection expansions, multimodal improvements and upgraded traffic controls $42.8 M EXT Roadway Extension Projects 16 New streets to extend or replace existing roadways and overpasses $375.1 M TS/TR Traffic Studies and Transit Amenities 6 Future traffic and concept planning to refine the scope and cost of improvements $0.9 M EXP Roadway Widening Projects 40 Expand existing roadway cross-sections to add motor vehicle through and turning lanes to support growth $206.0 M BP Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects 16 Dedicated projects to enhance and connect the citywide system for walking and bicycling $40.7 M TOTAL 108 $665.5 M 42 Transportation System Standards CHAPTER 4 43 The roadway functional classification system, special route designations, access spacing and mobility standards are also included in this chapter. For a complete listing of the system standards including typical design standards for roadways, walkways and bikeways within the city, refer to Appendix D for Transportation System Standards memo. THIS CHAPTER PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS ADOPTED CONCURRENT WITH THE PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN. TOGETHER, THESE STANDARDS WILL HELP ENSURE FUTURE FACILITIES ARE DESIGNED APPROPRIATELY AND THAT ALL FACILITIES ARE MANAGED TO SERVE THEIR INTENDED PURPOSE. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 44TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS A city’s street functional classification system is an important tool for managing the transportation system. It is based on a hierarchical system of roads in which streets of a higher classification, such as arterials, emphasize a higher level of mobility for through movements, while streets of a lower classification emphasize access to land uses. Pasco currently has four functional classes: 1. Principal Arterials connect major activity centers as well as the interstate system. They will serve a variety of travel movements supporting longer/lengthier trips and are primarily intended to serve regional traffic movement. 2. Minor Arterials create direct connections through the city and can be found on the periphery of residential neighborhoods. They generally provide the primary connection to other Arterial or Collector Streets and access to larger developed areas and neighborhoods. 3. Collectors provide local traffic circulation throughout the city and serve to funnel traffic from the arterial street network to streets of the same or lower classification. They typically have minor access restrictions. 4. Local Streets provide local access and circulation for traffic, connect neighborhoods, and often function as through routes for pedestrians and bicyclists. Local Streets should maintain slow vehicle operating speeds while providing convenient access to multimodal travel. The TSMP also introduced a new Neighborhood Collector functional classification to identify locations where local access needs should be balanced with enhanced pedestrian and bicycle amenities. These streets should maintain slow vehicle operating speeds to accommodate safe use by all modes and provide local neighborhood access. Functional classification provides a helpful framework for managing the city’s transportation system and supporting other standards summarized in the following sections, including connectivity, spacing, freight routes, cross-sections, and access management. Table 9 lists the desired spacing of each facility type throughout Pasco to ensure a high level of connectivity. Figure 15 illustrates the desired spacing for the arterial and collector network. Deviations from these guidelines may be needed in locations where there are significant barriers, such as topography, rail lines, freeways, existing development, or the presence of natural areas. In Pasco, all roadways are required to be multimodal or “complete streets”, with each street serving the needs of the various travel modes. Streets in the city will not all be designed the same. Pasco classifies the street system into a hierarchy organized by functional classification and street type (representative of their places). These classifications ensure that the streets reflect the neighborhood through which they pass, consisting of a scale and design appropriate to the character of the abutting properties and land uses. The classifications also provide for and balance the needs of all travel modes including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motor vehicles and freight. Within these street classifications, context sensitive designs may result in alternative cross-sections. Roadway Functional Classification Photo Credit: Tri-City Herald PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 45TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS TABLE 9. FACILITY SPACING GUIDELINES FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM SPACINGA PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 1 to 2 miles MINOR ARTERIAL 1 mile COLLECTOR ½ mile NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR ¼ mile LOCAL STREET 300–500 feet BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 300 feet A Recommended maximum spacing refers to distance between facilities with the same or higher functional classification. Deviations from the recommended maximum spacing are subject to approval by the City engineer. The adopted reclassifications aim to create a consistent functional classification scheme and match a roadway’s functional classification to their role in the transportation network. The existing road network was also reviewed to identify neighborhood collector routes. Neighborhood collectors were identified in locations where the functional classification map from the Pasco Comprehensive Plan previously identified two closely spaced, parallel collectors which serve similar land uses. Converting one of these routes to a neighborhood collector provides a classification that is more consistent with the actual use of the road and facilitates multimodal transportation. Neighborhood collectors were also designated on the local street system for routes which provide connections between several adjacent neighborhoods and the collector or arterial network. The adopted reclassifications summarized in Figure 16 and Tables 10 and 11 will provide better system spacing and connectivity. It is important to note that many of the existing roadway cross-sections will not meet the standard cross-sections of their new functional classification. Cross-section improvements are not expected outside of redevelopment. Note that Columbia River Road and Taylor Flats Road, north of Road 68, are classified as collectors, consistent with Franklin County’s functional classification, even though Road 68 is classified as a principal arterial. These designations will be consistent for both roadways as they continue further north in rural Franklin County. Also, the easterly end of Burns Road, also called Powerline Road, is indicated with a possible easterly extension that crosses over the rail yard and eventually connects to US 395 north of Foster Wells Road. This is an illustrative concept of how east-west principal arterial level connections could be made north of I-182 to provide an alternative regional route. However, this connection is not included in the project list of the TSMP, and has not been assumed in the 2040 horizon year system. People walking and biking benefit the most from closely spaced facilities because their travel is most affected by variation in distance. By providing walking and biking facilities or accessways that are spaced no more than 300 feet apart, Pasco will support active transportation within and between its neighborhoods. These connections also support high quality access to transit.MINOR ARTERIALMINOR ARTERIALFREEWAY COLLECTORPRINCIPAL ARTERIALPRINCIPAL ARTERIAL2 MILES 1 TO 2 MILES FOR PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS 1 MILE 1 MILE FOR MINOR ARTERIALS 1/2 1/2 MILE FOR COLLECTORS FIGURE 15. DESIRED FACILITY SPACING PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 46TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS 4TH AVEGLADE RDCOURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68RAILROAD AVESYLVESTER ST LEWIS STOREGON AVE DENT RD KARTCHNERROAD CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420THAVE 10TH AVE WERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT BROADMOOR BLVDBROADMOOR BLVD182 395 397 395 12 397 240 395PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO UGA STREET CLASSIFICATION: INTERSTATE OTHER FREEWAYS & EXPRESSWAYS RAMP PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL, FUTURE MINOR ARTERIAL MINOR ARTERIAL,FUTURE COLLECTOR COLLECTOR, FUTURE NEIGHBORHOODCOLLECTOR NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR, FUTURE LOCAL N FIGURE 16. RECOMMENDED ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 47TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS TABLE 10. FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF NEW ROADWAYS ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SANDIFUR PARKWAY EXTENSION Broadmoor Boulevard to New North-South Collector Principal Arterial DENT ROAD EXTENSION Burns Road to Harris Road Minor Arterial SANDIFUR PARKWAY EXTENSION New North-South Collector to Shoreline Drive Minor Arterial SANDIFUR PARKWAY EXTENSION New North-South Collector to Shoreline Drive Collector NEW NORTH-SOUTH COLLECTOR Dent Road to Harris Road Collector ROAD 84 EXTENSION Burns Road to Columbia River Road Collector CONVENTION DRIVE EXTENSION Burns Road to Clark Road Collector ROAD 60 EXTENSION Burns Road to Clark Road Collector DESERET DRIVE Dent Road to Road 52 Collector ROAD 76 EXTENSION Burden Boulevard to Argent Road Collector ROAD 90 EXTENSION Burns Road to UGA Neighborhood Collector THREE RIVERS DRIVE EXTENSION Road 68 to Rio Grande Lane Neighborhood Collector WRIGLEY DRIVE EXTENSION Clemente Lane to Road 68 Place Neighborhood Collector ROAD 52 EXTENSION Burns Road Deseret Drive Neighborhood Collector WERNETT ROAD EXTENSION Road 76 to Road 84 Neighborhood Collector PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 48TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS TABLE 11. ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION CHANGES EXISTING FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MINOR ARTERIAL Broadmoor Boulevard Dent Road to UGA Principal Arterial MINOR ARTERIAL 20th Avenue Lewis Street to A Street Principal Arterial PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 10th Avenue Ainsworth Street to A street Minor Arterial PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 4th Avenue A Street to I-182 Westbound Ramp Terminal Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Court Street Broadmoor Boulevard to Harris Road Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Harris Road Court Street to Dent Road Extension Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Dent Road Burns Road to Road 68 Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Clark Road Road 68 to Road 52 Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Chapel Hill Boulevard Road 82 to Road 68 Minor Arterial COLLECTOR A Street 20th Avenue to 28th Avenue Minor Arterial COLLECTOR 28th Avenue A Street to Sylvester street Minor Arterial MINOR ARTERIAL Chapel Hill Boulevard Crescent Road to Broadmoor Boulevard Collector MINOR ARTERIAL Road 60 Court Street to Sylvester Street Collector MINOR ARTERIAL Sylvester Street Road 60 to 4th Avenue Collector MINOR ARTERIAL Court Street 4th Avenue to 1st Avenue Collector MINOR ARTERIAL 1st Avenue Court Street to A Street Collector LOCAL Broadway Street Wehe Avenue to Cedar Avenue Collector LOCAL Cedar Avenue Broadway Street to Lewis Street Collector LOCAL Commercial Avenue Kartchner Street to Hillsboro Road Collector MINOR ARTERIAL Road 90 Sandifur Parkway to Burns Road Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Wernett Road Road 36 To Road 76 Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR 14th Avenue Lewis Street to Court Street Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Saratoga Lane Chapel Hill boulevard to Argent Road Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Road 44 Argent Road to Madison Avenue Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Madison Avenue Road 44 to Burden Boulevard Neighborhood Collector PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 49TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS EXISTING FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION COLLECTOR Road 52 Burden Boulevard to Burns Road Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Wrigley Drive Road 76 to Clemente Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Kohler Road Dent Road to Hillcrest Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 92 Court Street to Maple Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 76 Argent Road to Court Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 60 Argent Road to Court Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 48 Argent Road to Sylvester Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Wernett Road Road 36 to Road 30 Neighborhood Collector LOCAL 14th Avenue Court Street to Lincoln Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Pearl Street 24th Avenue to 13th Avenue & 10th Avenue to 5th Avenue Neighborhood Collector LOCAL 13th Avenue Pearl Street to Riverview Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Riverview Drive 13th Avenue to 12th Avenue Neighborhood Collector LOCAL 10th Avenue 12th Avenue to Pearl Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Elm Avenue A Street to Shepperd Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Wrigley Drive Road 68 Place to Roosevelt Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Roosevelt Drive Wrigley Drive to Madison Avenue Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Madison Avenue Roosevelt Drive to Burden Boulevard Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Vincenzo Drive Broadmoor Boulevard to Majestia Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Majestia Lane Vincenzo Drive to Road 90 Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 90 Sandifur Parkway to Burns Road Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Wilshire Drive Road 90 to Westmoreland Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Westmoreland Lane Wilshire Drive to Overland Court Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Overland Court Westmoreland Lane to Westminster Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Westminster Lane Overland Court to Stutz Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Stutz Drive Westminster Lane to Road 84 Neighborhood Collector PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 50TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS EXISTING FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION LOCAL Hudson Drive Road 84 to Okanogan Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Okanogan Lane Hudson Drive to Chehalis Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Chehalis Drive Okanogan Lane to Three Rivers Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Three Rivers Drive Chehalis Drive to Road 68 & Rio Grande Lane to Road 56 Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 56 Three Rivers Drive to Overton Road Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Overton Road Road 56 to Road 52 Neighborhood Collector PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 51TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS Freight routes play a vital role in the economical movement of raw materials and finished products, while maintaining neighborhood livability, public safety, and minimizing maintenance costs of the roadway system. The Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) tonnage classification system identifies different categories of freight corridors based on annual freight tonnage moved (refer to Figure 17). The freight corridors in Pasco are as follows: • I-182 • US 12 • US 395 • WA 397 • Broadmoor Boulevard (I-182 to Harris Road) • Road 68 (I-182 to Clark Road) • 4th Avenue (I-182 to Glade Road) • Ainsworth Avenue/Dock Street (WA 397 to Sacajawea Park Road) • Harris Road (Broadmoor Blvd to Shoreline Road) • Shoreline Road (Harris Road to Burns Road) • Burns Road (Shoreline Road to Dent Road) • Dent Road (Burns Road to Road 68) • Clark Road (Road 68 to Glad Road) • Taylor Flats Road (North of Road 68) • Columbia River Road (North of Road 68) • Glade Road (North of 4th Avenue) • Railroad Avenue (North of Hillsboro Street) • Foster Wells Road (East of US 395) • Kartchner Street (Railroad Avenue to Commercial Avenue) • Hillsboro Street (Railroad Avenue to Travel Plaza Way) • Lewis Street (US 395 to 20th Avenue) • 20th Avenue (Lewis Street to A Street) • A Street (20th Avenue to US 12) • Pasco Kahlotus Road (East of US 12) • Lewis Street (WA 397 to US 12) • 4th Avenue (Ainsworth Street to A Street) As part of the revitalization of the downtown as envisioned in the current Master Planning, the existing Lewis Street freight corridor should be modified to divert freight traffic onto parallel routes along Ainsworth Street and A Street. Other critical freight corridors that are not currently included in the Washington FGTS, as shown in Figure 17, include Sacajawea Park Road from Ainsworth Avenue to US 12 and Commercial Avenue from Lewis Street to Kartchner Street. Including these routes in a future update to the Washington FGTS will recognize their significance to Pasco’s freight system and connect key industrial areas to existing FGTS corridors. The city’s freight transportation system also includes a rail yard, port, and the Tri-Cities Airport. Intermodal connections between these freight hubs, Pasco’s industrial areas, and the Tri-Cities region are necessary to support the movement of goods. Primary routes serving these existing freight transportation needs are identified through the Washington FGTS although additional development in these areas could generate new freight traffic demands. Pasco will benefit from ensuring that its freight routes are designed to accommodate the needs of its industrial and commercial areas, while protecting its residential neighborhoods from freight traffic. Having designated freight routes will help the city better coordinate and improve its efforts regarding both freight and non-freight transportation system users, including the following: • Roadway and Intersection Improvements can be designed for freight vehicles with adjustments for turn radii, sight distance, lane width and turn pocket lengths. • Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements— such as protected or separated bike facilities, enhanced pedestrian crossings, and other safety improvements—can be identified to reduce freight impacts to other users, particularly along bikeways and walkways. • Roadway Durability can be increased by using concrete instead of asphalt for the pavement surface. • Railroad Connections can be coordinated to support businesses that ship goods by rail, particularly in areas where railroad sidings can be provided. • Coordination with Businesses and Adjacent Jurisdictions can ensure that local and regional freight traffic uses Pasco’s freight routes to travel within the city. Freight Network PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 52TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS 4TH AVEGLADE RDCOURT ST ARGENT RD ROAD 68RAILROAD AVESYLVESTER ST LEWIS STOREGON AVEBROADMOOR BLVDBROADMO OR BLVDDENT RD KARTCHNERROAD CLARK RD A ST SANDIFUR PKWY BURNS RD BURDEN BLVDHARRIS RD ROAD 8420TH AVE 10TH AVE WERNETT RD POWERLINE RD AINS W O R T H S T C OMMERCIA L A V E COLUM B I A R I V E R SNAKE RIVERTRICITIES AIRPORT 182 395 397 395 12 397 240 395 REROUTE LEWIS STFREIGHT CORRIDORTO A ST VIAHERITAGE LANE SUGGESTED FREIGHT CORRIDORS TO BE ADDED TO THE WSDOT FREIGHT MAP PASCO CITY LIMITS PASCO UGA FREIGHT CORRIDORS: T1: MORE THAN 10 MILLION TONS PER YEAR T2: 410 MILLION TONS PER YEAR T3: 300,0004 MILLION TONS PER YEAR T4: 100,0003000,000 TONS PER YEAR T5: AT LEAST 20,000 TONS IN 60 DAYS AND LESS THAN 100,000 TONS PER YEAR N FIGURE 17. FREIGHT SYSTEM PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 53TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS Neighborhood Traffic Management (NTM) involves strategies to slow traffic, and potentially reduce volumes, creating a more inviting environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. NTM strategies focus on neighborhood livability on local streets, though a few can apply to collectors and arterials, such as raised median islands. Mitigation measures balance the need to manage vehicle speeds and volumes with the need to maintain mobility, circulation, and function for service providers, such as emergency responders. Examples of tools are shown in Figure 18. Table 12 lists common NTM applications. Any NTM project should include coordination with emergency response staff to ensure that public safety is not compromised. NTM strategies implemented on a state facility would require coordination with WSDOT regarding freight mobility considerations. Neighborhood Traffic Management Tools FIGURE 18. SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES CHICANES DIVERTERS SPEED CUSHIONS CHOKERS MEDIAN ISLANDS SPEED HUMP CURB EXTENSIONS RAISED CROSSWALKS TRAFFIC CIRCLES Photo Sources: Chicanes, Chokers, Median Islands, and Speed Hump > www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden; Curb Extensions and Traffic Circles > www.pedbikeimages.org/Carl Sundstrom; Diverters > www.pedbikeimages.org/ Adam Fukushima; Raised Crosswalks > www.pedbikeimages.org/Tom Harned; Speed Cushions > NACTO Urban Street Design Guide. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 54TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS TABLE 12. APPLICATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT APPLICATION USE BY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION IMPACT ARTERIALS COLLECTORS LOCAL STREETS SPEED REDUCTION TRAFFIC DIVERSION CHICANES CHOKERS CURB EXTENSIONS DIVERTERS (WITH EMERGENCY VEHICLE PASS-THROUGH) MEDIAN ISLANDS RAISED CROSSWALKS SPEED CUSHIONS (WITH EMERGENCY VEHICLE PASS-THROUGH) SPEED HUMP TRAFFIC CIRCLES The City of Pasco does not currently have a formal neighborhood traffic management program. Suggested elements of a new program to be developed and implemented can include: • Provide a formalized process for citizens who are concerned about the traffic or safety on their neighborhood street. The process could include filing a citizen request with petition signatures and a preliminary evaluation. If the evaluation finds cause for concern, a neighborhood meeting would be held and formal data would be collected and evaluated. If a problem were found to exist, solutions would be identified and the process continued with neighborhood meetings, feedback from service and maintenance providers, cost evaluation, and traffic calming device implementation. Six months after implementation the device would be evaluated for effectiveness. • For new development proposals, in addition to assessing impacts to the entire transportation network, traffic studies for new developments must also assess impacts to residential streets. A recommended threshold to determine if this additional analysis is needed is if the proposed project increases through traffic on residential streets by 40 or more vehicles during the evening peak hour or 200 vehicles per day. Once the analysis is performed, the threshold used to determine if residential streets are impacted would be if their daily traffic volume exceeds 1,800 vehicles. NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES IMPROVE NEIGHBORHOOD LIVABILITY ON LOCAL STREETS, CREATING A MORE INVITING ENVIRONMENT FOR PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 55TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS Access management provides safe and efficient access to the transportation system for all users. Historically, the City of Pasco only managed access through restrictions on the placement of driveways. New residential driveways must be located 25 feet from an existing intersection, while new commercial driveways must be placed in coordination with the Public Works Director.4 Expanded access management spacing standards which account for the different roadway functional classifications are adopted for the City of Pasco as part of the TSMP to better manage driveway construction. These standards are summarized in Table 13. In addition to these access spacing standards, it is recommended that the city consider guidelines to enhance the system connectivity within the new neighborhoods to better balance access for all system users. As noted in previous sections of the TSMP, the public feedback during the open house events highlighted the challenges of navigating the city outside of a motor vehicle. Walking and biking and access to transit are significantly benefited by constructing neighborhoods with greater connectivity through better street and walkway spacing, and more direct routes to key destinations, such as schools, parks and transit stops. Today, the city does not provide this type of guidance, and new neighborhood circulation plans are left to the development applicants to decide. 4 City of Pasco. Pasco Municipal Code Section 12.04.100 Driveway Standards. https://pasco.municipal.codes/ PMC/12.04.090 Access Management & Street Connectivity Standards TABLE 13. ACCESS MANAGEMENT SPACING STANDARDS SPACING GUIDELINESA, B PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS MINOR ARTERIALS COLLECTORS NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTORS LOCAL STREETS MINIMUM DRIVEWAY SPACING (DRIVEWAY TO DRIVEWAY)B 300 feet 250 feet 150 feet 75 feet N/A MINIMUM FULL-ACCESS DRIVEWAY SPACING (SETBACK FROM INTERSECTION) 300 feetC 250 feet 150 feet 75 feet 25 feet MINIMUM RIGHT-IN/RIGHT-OUT DRIVEWAY SPACING (SETBACK FROM INTERSECTION) 150 feetC 125 feet 75 feet 50 feet 25 feet A All distances measured from the edge of adjacent approaches. B A property must construct access to a lower classified roadway, where possible. C WSDOT requires 1,320 between an interchange and the closest driveway. (Source: State of Washington. Washington Administrative Code Section 468-52-040 Access Control Classification System and Standards. https://app.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=468-52-040) Photo Credit: Group Health Foundation Photo Credit: Jacob Gonzalez PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 56TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS The public engagement process of the TSMP revealed a strong concern about the lack of connectivity in new neighborhoods north of I-182. To address this, guidelines were developed to clarify the community’s expectation for better circulation options in growth areas. It was recognized that it is important to balance the economic objectives of a land developer with the community values of its future residents. City standards help to assure that the shape of the resulting walking, biking and travel systems will provide a framework for new neighborhoods to thrive in the long-term, since it plays a fundamental role in defining the character of that community for generations to come. Specifically, it is recommended to apply new guidelines for the maximum block length, block size, block perimeter and access spacing as summarized in Table 14. Under this new guidance for most zoning designations, block lengths shall not exceed 660 feet and the block perimeter shall not exceed 1,760 feet. Previously blocks could not exceed 1,320 feet for residential uses or 600 feet for commercial uses.5 The recommended complete street connectivity standards plus guidelines are summarized below in Table 14. To enact these recommended street spacing and connectivity changes, the city must conduct a public hearing and the city council must adopt them to become a part of the municipal code. 5 City of Pasco. Street Connectivity – Supplemental Memorandum for CA2019-013. September 17, 2020. TABLE 14. RECOMMENDED STREET CONNECTIVITY STANDARDS SPACING GUIDELINES PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS MINOR ARTERIALS COLLECTORS NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTORS LOCAL STREETS MAXIMUM BLOCK SIZE (PUBLIC STREET TO PUBLIC STREET)660 feet 660 feet 660 feet 660 feet 660 feet MINIMUM BLOCK SIZE (PUBLIC STREET TO PUBLIC STREET)300 feet 250 feet 200 feet 150 feet 125 feet MAXIMUM BLOCK PERIMETER 1,760 feet 1,760 feet 1,760 feet 1,760 feet 1,760 feet MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE ACCESSWAYSA 330 feet 330 feet 330 feet 330 feet 330 feet A Spacing is the maximum of public street to public street, public street to accessway, or accessway to accessway distance. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 57TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS For the motor vehicle system, the city applies a list of performance targets to track how well the system works. These mobility targets are used in long-range planning and development review to identify deficiencies on the transportation network and can be used to identify needed improvements as growth occurs. Mobility targets are adopted by the City of Pasco in their comprehensive plan. The City of Pasco uses a Level of Service (LOS) standard which evaluates the average delay at signalized and unsignalized intersections. This calculation is made by using a national methodology for assessing intersection performance, as published in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The current mobility targets, which apply to the weekday peak hour, are summarized below in Table 15. The City requires a lower level of service for arterial and collector roadways where higher traffic leads to higher delays. The arterial and collector standards are consistent with the mobility targets applied by BFCG and WSDOT. TABLE 15. EXISTING MOBILITY TARGETS FOR WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR PERIODS FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MOBILITY TARGET LOCAL STREETS Level of Service C ARTERIALS AND COLLECTORS Level of Service D WSDOT FACILITIES Level of Service D Vehicle Mobility Targets TWO COMMON METHODS USED TO GAUGE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS FOR MOTOR VEHICLES ARE: VOLUME-TO-CAPACITY (V/C) RATIO A v/c ratio is a decimal representation (between 0.00 and 1.00) of the proportion of capacity that is being used at a turn movement, approach leg, or intersection. The ratio is the peak hour traffic volume divided by the hourly capacity of a given intersection or movement. A lower ratio indicates smooth operations and minimal delays. A ratio approaching 1.00 indicates increased congestion and reduced performance. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) LOS is a “report card” rating (A through F) based on the average delay experienced by vehicles at the intersection. LOS A, B, and C indicate conditions where traffic moves without significant delays over periods of peak hour travel demand. LOS D and E are progressively worse operating conditions. LOS F represents conditions where average vehicle delay is excessive, and demand exceeds capacity, typically resulting in long queues and delays. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 58TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS Typically, these LOS targets are applied at individual intersections. It is recommended that these targets be modified to account for the type of traffic controls being applied at each intersection, since the impact of delay differs between signals, roundabouts and stop sign controlled locations. In addition, it is recommended that another metric be added, the Volume-to-Capacity (v/c) Ratio, which measures how close to capacity a location operates at a given time of day. Using both a LOS (delay-based) and v/c (congestion-based) standard which can be helpful in situations where one metric may not be enough, such as an all-way stop where one approach is over capacity, but overall intersection delay meets standards. Each of these metrics is readily calculated by applying the appropriate HCM methods. Table 16 summarizes recommended changes to Pasco’s mobility targets. Also noted is the current target used for WSDOT intersections, which will remain at Level of Service D for all cases. TABLE 16. RECOMMENDED MOBILITY TARGETS TRAFFIC CONTROL TYPE MOBILITY TARGETS APPLICABLE ELEMENT SIGNALIZED Level of Service D and Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ≤0.90 Average for all vehicles using the intersection ALL-WAY STOP OR ROUNDABOUTS Level of Service D and Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ≤0.90 Worst Approach TWO-WAY STOP A Level of Service E and Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ≤0.95 Worst Major Approach/ Worst Minor Approach WSDOT INTERSECTIONS Level of Service D Intersection or Worst Approach depending on control type A Applies to approaches that serve more than 20 vehicles; there is no standard for approaches serving lower volumes. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 59TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS Pasco experiences peak congestion due to single-occupant trips during peak demand times. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) aims to remove single occupant motor vehicle trips from the roadway network during peak travel demand periods which could provide one avenue for reducing pressure on key facilities. Changing users’ travel behavior and providing alternative choices will help accommodate the expected growth in travel demand identified for Pasco. Generally, TDM focuses on reducing vehicle miles traveled for large employers by promoting active and shared modes of travel. Research has shown that a comprehensive set of complementary policies implemented over a large geographic area can affect the number of vehicle miles traveled to/from that area. For TDM measures to be effective, strategies should go beyond the low-cost, uncontroversial measures commonly used such as carpooling, transportation coordinators/associations, and priority parking spaces. Effective TDM measures include parking strategies (limiting or increasing supply in strategic locations), improved services for alternative modes of travel, and market-based incentives to encourage travel behavior changes. TDM can also include a variety of actions that are tailored to the specific needs of an area. Opportunities to expand TDM and other measures in Pasco include developing requirements for long-term bicycle parking for places of employment above a certain size, park-and-ride facilities, major transit stops, and multi-family residential developments. Other land uses, especially activity generators, should be required to provide short-term bike parking and are encouraged to implement the long-term options. Long-term bicycle parking options include: • Individual lockers for one or two bicycles • Racks in an enclosed, lockable room • Racks in an area that is monitored by security cameras or guards (within 100 feet) • Racks or lockers in an area always visible to employees Demand Management Policies EFFECTIVE TDM STRATEGIES INCLUDE: • Develop standards and policies that support alternative vehicle types and travel methods, including a network of electric vehicle charging stations, or other facilities that support Pasco’s Green House Gas Emissions Reductions Policy Resolution 3853. • Encouraging/supporting rideshare/vanpool to major employers in Benton or Franklin County and Kennewick or Richland (e.g. Hanford Nuclear Site) for employees living in Pasco. • Establishing site development standards that require pedestrian and bicycle access through sites and connections to adjacent sites and transportation facilities, to the extent the development impacts existing access. • Improving amenities and access for transit stops. Actions could include instituting site design requirements allowing redevelopment of parking areas for transit amenities; requiring safe and direct pedestrian connections to transit; and permitting transit-supportive uses outright in commercial and institutional zones. • Improving street connectivity to support direct connections between residential areas and activity centers. • Investing in pedestrian/bicycle facilities. Implementation and On-Going Strategies CHAPTER 5 60 It is important to recognize that because this is the first of its kind transportation planning process for the City of Pasco, additional work will be required to carry this strategic vision into practice. This chapter identifies the recommended implementation actions. Furthermore, it is recognized that the primary purpose of the TSMP is to guide how the city will make strategic transportation investments in the years to come. It is acknowledged that there are a host of on-going community issues related to general transportation needs that may not be resolved by this TSMP process and outcomes, and further studies may be required to help to inform how best to respond to each of those situations. Several of the most prominent on-going transportation issues that face Pasco are acknowledged in the final section of this chapter along with a summary of their status, applicable on-going strategies, and the expected path forward. THE FOREGOING CHAPTERS PRESENTED THE GOALS, POLICIES, PLANS AND PROGRAMS THAT DEFINE THE KEY ELEMENTS OF PASCO’S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN. THE TSMP DESCRIBES THE CITY’S VISION FOR HOW IT WILL ADDRESS MANY TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM WEAKNESSES AND GAPS IDENTIFIED TODAY, AND HOW IT PLANS TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO SUPPORT COMMUNITY GROWTH TO 2040. Photo Credit: Jacob Gonzalez PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 61IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES To effectively implement the TSMP citywide will require a series of updates and amendments to existing city policies, codes and regulations related to land development, transportation management and capital project funding. The major actions to be taken fall into these categories: • Secure Necessary Funding for Transportation Improvements • Implement Neighborhood Transportation Management Tools • Update Vehicle Mobility Standards • Update Engineering Design Standards for Roadways, Bikeways and Walkways • Amend the Municipal Development Code to incorporate TSMP changes regarding Streets and Sidewalks, Subdivision Regulations and Zoning The specific recommendations for each action are described in the following sections. SECURE NECESSARY LOCAL FUNDING PROGRAMS Providing adequate city funding for capital investments and on-going maintenance of transportation systems and services is a major challenge throughout the State of Washington. The City’s current funding programs are expected to allocate about $20 million annually ($360 million over 18 years) for transportation system improvements through 2040, not including other allocations from gas tax revenues that support maintenance operations. The current Traffic Impact Fee program is expected to collect about $12 million. However, when compared to the full list of capital improvement projects identified through this TSMP, which totals $665 million, additional funding options are needed to bridge the $293 million gap. If the city decides to supplement the transportation funding beyond what is currently available to advance more projects, it is recommended to further consider one of the above options. This could include more general funding allocated to the transportation improvement program, and/or increasing the current Traffic Impact Fee (TIF). A separate study was conducted to recommend update options for the city’s Traffic Impact Fee (FCS Group, October 2021). If the full amount was authorized, the new TIF would generate about $350 million in additional fees, which would fully bridge the funding gap shown in Table 17. It will be vital for the City Council to consider the proposed TIF rate and recommend a fee that ensures new development accommodates the necessary transportation infrastructure without burdening existing residents and businesses. Without significant additional funding resources, the great majority of projects identified in the TSMP will not be able to be constructed within the timeframe of the TSMP. In addition, the city should consider developing a proportionate share methodology and funding strategy for specific transportation improvements that are not funded through the TIF or other existing programs. Steps to Support Plan Implementation TABLE 17. FILLING THE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING GAP DESCRIPTION TOTAL FUNDING THOUGH 2040 TRANSPORTATION CITYWIDE INVESTMENT RECOMMENDED IN THE PASCO TSMP $665 M CURRENT CITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – $360 M CURRENT CITY TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE PROGRAM – $12 M TRANSPORTATION FUNDING SHORTFALL $293 M ACTION: PURSUE AND ENACT SUPPLEMENTAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION FUNDING OPTIONS TO BRIDGE FORECASTED FUNDING GAP. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 62IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES IMPLEMENT NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TOOLS The Transportation System Management Plan identifies a new classification of city streets that are the best candidates for applying neighborhood traffic management (NTM) strategies. The primary purpose of this new classification is to address community concerns about autos speeding through neighborhoods or diverting away from state highways while they are under severe congestion. These streets are referred to as Neighborhood Collector routes, and they are shown in Figure 15, and listed in the supporting technical memorandum . Potential management strategies include traffic humps, traffic circles and raised crosswalks, which are illustrated in the memorandum. The challenge with a NTM program is to identify a clear and objective process for collecting community inputs, assessing the prevailing concerns, and evaluating which, if any, NTM solution is appropriate to be installed. This will require developing guidelines about which NTM strategies are best for Pasco, and where and how they are to be applied. In addition, many cities balance the technical review process with a consensus opinion of the affected neighbors to help ensure community satisfaction with the NTM decision. The City of Pasco does not currently have a formal neighborhood traffic management program. If such a program were desired to help respond to future NTM issues, suggested elements include: • Provide a formalized process for citizens who are concerned about the traffic on their neighborhood street. The process could include filing a citizen request with petition signatures and a preliminary evaluation. If the evaluation finds cause for concern, a neighborhood meeting would be held, and formal data would be collected and evaluated. If a problem were found to exist, solutions would be identified and the process continued with neighborhood meetings, feedback from service and maintenance providers, cost evaluation, and traffic calming device implementation. Six months after implementation the device would be evaluated for effectiveness. • For land use proposals, in addition to assessing impacts to the entire transportation network, traffic studies for new developments must also assess impacts to residential streets. A recommended threshold to determine if this additional analysis is needed is if the proposed project increases through traffic on residential streets by 40 or more vehicles during the evening peak hour or 200 vehicles per day. Once the analysis is performed, the threshold used to determine if residential streets are impacted would be if their daily traffic volume exceeds 1,800 vehicles. ACTION: IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT CITY DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A NTM PROGRAM THAT FORMALIZES THESE PROCESSES. Photo Credit: Ben Franklin Transit PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 63IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES UPDATE VEHICLE MOBILITY STANDARDS Mobility standards for streets and intersections in Pasco provide a metric for assessing the impacts of new development on the existing transportation system and for identifying where capacity improvements may be needed. They are the basis for requiring improvements needed to sustain the transportation system as growth and development occur. Two common methods currently used in Oregon to gauge traffic operations for motor vehicles are volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios and level of service (LOS). For State facilities, mobility targets are v/c ratio based. The City of Pasco does not have adopted mobility standards for motor vehicles. It is recommended that the city consider adopting mobility standards to include both a v/c ratio and LOS standard. Having both a LOS (delay-based) and v/c (congestion-based) standard can be helpful in situations where one metric may not be enough, such as an all-way stop where one approach is over capacity, but the overall intersection delay meets standards. The City of Pasco should also introduce mobility standards that depend on the intersection control which can better capture acceptable levels of performance across different intersection control types. The recommended mobility standards shown in Table 18 should be incorporated into the Traffic Impact Analysis guidelines and applied for the next update to the comprehensive plan. TABLE 18. RECOMMENDED VEHICLE MOBILITY STANDARDS FOR LOCAL STREETS TRAFFIC CONTROL TYPE MOBILITY TARGETS REPORTING MEASURE SIGNALIZED Level of Service D and Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ≤0.90 Intersection ALL-WAY STOP OR ROUNDABOUTS Level of Service D and Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ≤0.90 Worst Approach TWO-WAY STOP A Level of Service E and Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ≤0.95 Worst Major Approach/ Worst Minor Approach WSDOT INTERSECTIONS Level of Service D Intersection or Worst Approach depending on control type A Applies to approaches that serve more than 20 vehicles per hour; below that amount, there is no standard. ACTION: AMEND CITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INTRODUCE VEHICLE MOBILITY STANDARDS ON CITY STREETS CONSISTENT WITH THE TSMP. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 64IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES UPDATE ENGINEERING ROADWAY STANDARDS The City Engineer maintains the recommended design standards for all city-maintained facilities, which include roadway, bikeway, walkway and trail cross-sections. The configurations of several elements of these facilities were modified during the TSMP process, primarily to provide better quality bicycling and walking facilities on lower class roadways. The specific facility cross-sections and new right-of-way requirements should be incorporated into the city’s design standards to guide construction of future street improvement projects. MUNICIPAL CODE REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS A variety of changes and amendments were recommended that influence the city’s municipal code as it relates to streets and sidewalks, subdivisions regulations and zoning. The city council should take action to modify the appropriate sections of the code to address these amendments, as stipulated in a memorandum (Angelo Planning Group, 20 Aug 2021) and summarized below: 1. Title 12 Streets and Sidewalks: a. Increase minimum sidewalk width in residential and mix-used areas b. Update driveway design standards to be consistent with current best practices c. Implement Complete Street guidelines and clear and objective minimum standards d. Add a fee-in-lieu provision for roadway improvements 2. Title 21 Pasco Urban Area Subdivision Regulations: a. Require a future street plan with proposed subdivision to demonstrate how it will accommodate future street extensions b. Amend arterial minimum standards consistent with the TSMP c. Amend collector minimum standards consistent with the TSMP d. Amend local access roadway minimum standards consistent with the TSMP e. Provide guidance for constrained roadway designs to enable connectivity in challenging topographical or environmental situations. f. Require pedestrian ways in areas of exceptionally long blocks or for access to recreational facilities or schools. 3. Title 25 Zoning: a. Require safe connections on all non-single- family residential development sites to: main building entries, adjacent streets and sidewalks, transit stops, and adjacent uses such as schools and parks b. Reduce minimum off-street parking standards and consider maximums c. Establish bike parking standards d. Codify recommended TSMP access management spacing standards to better manage driveway construction e. Require safe and direct pedestrian connections to existing and planning transit stops. f. Permit transit supportive uses outright in commercial and institutional zones. ACTION: AMEND THE CITY DESIGN STANDARDS TO INCLUDE THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR ARTERIAL, COLLECTOR, AND LOCAL ACCESS ROADWAYS AS DESCRIBED IN THE TSMP. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN 65IMPLEMENTATION AND ON-GOING STRATEGIES This is the first Transportation System Master Plan that has been prepared by the City of Pasco. As noted earlier in this section, to fully realize the vision of this TSMP to be “a safe and balanced multimodal transportation system which equitability serves pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, freight and drivers” will require several regulatory and administrative changes to be made by the city. Once these changes have been implemented, the shape and amenities of new transportation projects will more readily support these objectives. However, as with any long-range planning process, the TSMP should be reviewed and updated periodically to address any unanticipated major changes that could significantly influence the land development patterns or the local transportation system. Examples of possible issues that trigger a review might include new state and federal transportation regulations and funding priorities, or significant changes to the city or regional growth forecasts that are associated with comprehensive plan updates, or major urban growth area adjustments. Aside from these types of triggering events, it is recommended that the TSMP be reviewed every five to 10 years to update the growth and funding assumptions that were made in this plan. The update process should align with the requirements stipulated in the Growth Management Act for transportation elements (RCW 36.70A.070, subsection 6). On-Going Plan Review and Updates JUNE 2022 CITY OF PASCO Transportation System Master Plan Appendices Appendix A These are the results of the online survey in June and July of 2020. The Pasco community provided a total of 225 responses and we summarized the information below. THE PASCO COMMUNITY • 74% of respondents live in Pasco • 54% of respondents work in Pasco • 10% of respondents attend school in Pasco 0 20 40 60 80 100 Under 18 years 19-25 years 26-64 years 65 years or older Percentage of Respondents How old are you? 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 <1 Year 1-5 Years 5-10 Years 10-20 Years 20+ Years Percentage of Respondents How long have you lived in the City of Pasco? 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 <1 Year 1-5 Years 5-10 Years 10-20 Years 20+ Years Percentage of Respondents How long have you worked in the City of Pasco? 0%20%40%60%80%100% Car/Truck (by yourself) Carpool? Uber/Lyft? Bus? Bicycle? Walking? Scooters? Other? How Often do you travel by... Daily Weekly Weekends only Once a month, or less Never WALKING Where residents of Pasco note issues with sidewalks: 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 I disagree I agree Percentage of Respondents I can easily walk to most destinations in my neighborhood. 0 5 10 15 20 25 I disagree I agree Percentage of Respondents Crosswalks are provided wherever I want to cross the street. Transportation System Accessibility 0 5 10 15 20 I disagree I agree Percentage of Respondents I feel safe and comfortable biking in my neighborhood. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 I disagree I agree Percentage of Respondents Most places I need to visit each day (shopping, dining, parks, etc.) are available within my neighborhood. 0%20%40%60%80%100% A doctor or medical… A grocery store Restaurants or food Parks or recreation My employer A bus stop I can reach... With a 15 minute (or less) walk With a 15 minute (or less) bike ride With a 15 minute (or less) drive 0 5 10 15 20 25 Parks Schools Shopping Recreation Restaurants Jobs Other Percentage of Respondents I would like improved access to: Appendix B SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING PERFORMANCE DATE: May 18, 2020 TO: Dan Ford, Jacob Gonzalez | City of Paso FROM: Rochelle Starrett, Carl Springer, Aaron Berger | DKS Associates SUBJECT: Pasco Transportation System Master Plan Task 3: System Inventory and Existing Conditions Project #19209-000 BACKGROUND The City of Pasco is developing its first transportation system master plan (TSMP) which includes a baseline for measuring transportation system conditions. This memorandum provides an overview of the transportation system performance which includes a deta iled review of operating characteristics for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and drivers. This analysis focuses on arterial and collector roadways within Pasco’s Urban Growth Area (UGA). Study intersections were identified in coordination with the City of Pasco and are listed below and mapped in Figure 1. Note that only some locations were analyzed for both weekday AM and PM peak period conditions. AM/PM Study Intersection Locations 1. Broadmoor Blvd & I-182 WB Ramps 2. Broadmoor Blvd & I-182 EB Ramps 3. Road 68 & I-182 WB Ramps 4. Road 68 & I-182 EB Ramps 5. US 395/Morasch Ln & Argent Rd 6. US 395 SB Ramps & Court St 7. US 395 NB Ramps & Court St 8. US 395 NB Ramps & Sylvester St 9. 20th Ave & I-182 WB Ramps 10. 20th Ave & I-182 EB Ramps 11. 4th Ave & I-182 WB Ramps 12. 4th Ave & I-182 EB Ramps 13. Foster Wells Rd & US 395 14. US 395 SB Ramps/Rainier Ave & Kartchner St 15. US 395 NB Ramps/Commercial Ave & Kartchner St 16. Hwy 12 SB Ramps & Heritage Blvd/Pasco Kahlotus Rd 17. Hwy 12 NB Ramps & Heritage Blvd/Pasco Kahlotus Rd 18. Hwy 12 & A St 19. Road 68 & Burden PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 2 PM Only Study Intersection Locations 20. Broadmoor Blvd & Burns Rd 21. Broadmoor Blvd & Sandifur Pkwy 22. Broadmoor Blvd & Chapel Hill Blvd 23. Broadmoor Blvd/Road 100 & Argent Rd 24. Road 84 & Argent Rd 25. Road 84 & Court St 26. Road 68 & Powerline Rd 27. Road 68 & Sandifur Pkwy 28. Road 68 & Chapel Hill Blvd 29. Road 68 & Argent Rd 30. Road 68 & Court St 31. Road 60 & Court St 32. Madison Ave & Burden Blvd 33. Road 44 & Argent Rd 34. 20th Ave & Argent Rd 35. 20th Ave & Court St 36. 20th Ave & Sylvester St 37. 20th Ave & Lewis St 38. 10th Ave & Sylvester St 39. 10th Ave & Lewis St 40. 10th Ave & A St 41. 10th Ave & Ainsworth St 42. 4th Ave & Court St 43. 4th Ave & Sylvester St 44. 4th Ave & Lewis St 45. 4th Ave & A St 46. 4th Ave & Ainsworth St 47. Oregon Ave & Lewis St 48. Oregon Ave & A St 49. Oregon Ave & Ainsworth St 50. Heritage Blvd & Lewis St/Avery Ave 51. Heritage Blvd & A St 52. Cedar Ave & Lewis St FIGURE 1. PASCO TSMP STUDY INTERSECTIONS ANALYSIS METHODS USED The system performance evaluation applied several technical methods consistent with transportation planning practices. The following section describes the methods used and PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 3 they are consistent with the Street Light Analysis Approach Memo, the Traffic Forecast Methodology Memorandum, national guidance, and best practice. SAFETY ANALYSIS Crash data for the last five years (2014-2018) was obtained from WSDOT to analyze crash trends within the City of Pasco1. This data was used to flag typical crash patterns (e.g. crash type, severity, underlying factors) and screen the transportation system for corridors and intersections with high crash rates. Crashes involving pedestrians or bicyclists were also flagged for separate evaluation. Results of this analysis are documented in the Traffic Safety Assessment, provided in the appendix. SYSTEM CONNECTIVITY ANALYSIS Pasco’s existing road network and functional classification was reviewed to identify transportation barriers and other missing elements of Pasco’s existing transportation system. Pasco does not have spacing standards for different street types, so syst em connectivity was assessed using a 1-mile spacing standard for arterial roadways and a ½- mile spacing standard for collectors. Connections for both pedestrians and bicyclists should be provided more frequently to promote walkability and bikeability. Bicy cle and pedestrian connectivity gaps were identified when existing block lengths along arterial or collector roadways exceeded 500 feet. The gap analysis was used to identify corridors and areas that lack critical bicycle or pedestrian connections. STREET LIGHT ANALYSIS Street Light data uses GPS traces from personal devices (e.g. cell phones) or other location- based services to infer travel patterns. The personal identity of the user is kept anonymous at all times. The data is used as a sample to represent patterns and trends for all types of travel around the City. Additional details on the Street Light analysis are provided in the Street Light Analysis Approach Memo. Each Street Light analysis was set up to consider an entire year of available data (typ ically 2019) which can provide a clearer picture of typical travel patterns. Trip metrics (e.g. trip length or distance) and traveler attributes (e.g. trip purpose or income) were also evaluated in conjunction with different analyses to provide additional insights to travel behavior. Existing data, such as freight volumes from WSDOT, was also used to calibrate the estimated Street Light freight volumes. 1 Crash data provided from the 2020 City Safety Program: https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/Traffic/CitySafetyProgram PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 4 OPERATIONS ANALYSIS Traffic operations at study intersections were reported using Synchro 10 and HCM 6th Edition Methodology based on recent traffic counts and new counts collected December 2019 and January 2020. Since traffic counts are typically lower during the winter, these counts were factored to represent average traffic conditions in Pasco. Specific m ethods used for seasonal factoring and adjusting traffic counts are summarized in the Traffic Forecast Methodology Memorandum. Intersection geometry and traffic control types were collected using Google Maps/Streetview and field verified, if necessary. Tra ffic signal timings were provided by both the City of Pasco and WSDOT. Signalized intersection v/c ratios were post-processed at signalized intersections based on HCM 6th Edition Chapter 192. If HCM 6th Edition results could not be reported for signals, v/c ratios were reported using HCM 2000. Mainline through movement v/c ratios were post - processed at unsignalized intersections consistent with the Highway Capacity Manual 3. Planning mobility targets for all study intersections utilize a LOS D standard for all arterial and collector roadways, consistent with state transportation plans and adopted regional standards4. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CONNECTIVITY ROADWAY SYSTEM CONNECTIVITY Pasco’s existing roadway network is arranged largely on a grid system which establishes a system of arterial and collector streets. Within Pasco’s older downtown core (generally between US 395 and Oregon Avenue, south of I -182), the existing functional classification system establishes a traditional urban arterial and collector street system that adheres to the recommended spacing standards, seen below in Figure 2. Existing arterials in the downtown core also distribute traffic to and from existing interchanges along US 395 and I- 182. The roadway system in areas of Pasco outside the downtown core have more limited opportunities for developing an arterial and collector street system. The existing road network is constrained by post-1980s suburban-style residential developments (including new subdivisions north of I-182 and developments that remain within Franklin County south 2 TRB. Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Ed., Ch. 19 Signalized Intersections. 2016. 3 TRB. Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Ed., Ch. 20 Two-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections. 2016. 4 City of Pasco. 2018 to 2038 Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies. 2020. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 5 of I-182). The recent development in Pasco have a markedly different development style, seen below in Figure 2, which includes longer block lengths and limited access points. Limited crossing opportunities for I-182, the Pasco airport, and other geographical features (e.g. the Franklin County Irrigation Canal) also constrain the existing roadway network within Pasco. FIGURE 2. LOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS CONSTRUCTED EACH DECADE IN CITY OF PASCO The constraints to circulation and access affect the City’s ability to provide convenient and safe services for all travelers. Through this plan update process, there are opportunities to address these system weaknesses. The first is through re-classifying roadways to better represent that scale and character of facilities for a given area. A s new streets are built and existing streets are upgraded to match revised standards, those improvements will better align with what is important for residents and businesses alike. However, the long blocks and sealed off neighborhoods that are borderd by the arterial and collector network will remain, particularly in recently developed areas and across I-182. Housing construction in Pasco has built approximately 11,000 units over the past 20 years (see Figure 3). As the PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 6 City continues to grow, it will be important to consider how system connectivity could be enhanced, especially in the new neighborhoods, to achieve the City’s community values. FIGURE 3. TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS CONSTRUCTED IN CITY OF PASCO BY DECADE MULTIMODAL SYSTEM CONNECTIVITY The same development patterns also limit connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists who depend on more frequent system spacing. Key facility gaps were identified when the distance between local streets or existing trails exceeded 500’ on arterial and collector roadways. Since these gaps occur more frequently than for the arterial and collector street system, the gap analysis was used to flag arterial and collector segments with several facility gaps. The following arterial and collector corridors (adjacent to existing developments) were identified as segments with poor pedestrian or bicyclist accessibility: ● Court Street (Road 44 to Road 108) ● Wernett Road (Road 48 to Road 76) ● Argent Road (Road 48 to Road 100) ● Chapel Hill Boulevard (Road 68 to Road 100) ● Burden Boulevard (Road 36 to Road 60) ● Sandifur Parkway (Porto Lane to Road 90) ● Road 44 (Laredo Drive to Porto Lane) ● Burns Road (Road 68 to Road 100; Dent Road to Kohler Road) ● Clark Road (Road 36 to Lentz Road/Janet Street) ● Road 100/I-182 overpass ● Road 68/I-182 overpass Areas within Franklin County, south of I-182, also have limited local street connectivity which further limits the existing multimodal transportation system in these areas. Figure 4, below, shows identified corridors and areas with limited multimodal access. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 7 FIGURE 4. MULTIMODAL SYSTEM CONNECTIVITY CONSTRAINTS The multimodal system connectivity assessment did not consider existing crossing opportunities for arterial or collector roadways which can further limit the connectivity of a multimodal transportation system. Limited crossing opportunities exist on 20th Avenue between Argent Road and I-182, which divides existing student housing from the Columbia Basin Community College Campus. Other arterial and collector roadways within Pasco are also expected to provide limited crossing opportunities for multimodal system users. EXISTING TRAVEL PATTERNS (PER STREET LIGHT DATA FINDINGS) BRIDGE TRAVEL Travel on the Columbia and Snake River Bridges between Pasco and the Tri -Cities is tied to the geographic location of each regional trip’s origin or destination. The US 12 Bridge serves travel between Pasco, the eastern Tri-Cities, and other destinations to the east. The Blue Bridge/US 395 Bridge and WA-397 Bridge primarily serve travel between Pasco (especially the largely residential areas near these bridges), Kennewick, and eastern Richland. However, the Blue Bridge/US 395 Bridge also serves regional traffic between US 395 north of Pasco and I-82 south of Pasco which accounts for 4% of this bridge’s AADT. The I-182 Bridges serve travel between Pasco, Hanford, Richland, western Kennewick, and West PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 8 Richland. Within Pasco, the I-182 Bridges serve residential zones within western Pasco and the Road 68 commercial core. The I-182 Bridges also serve regional traffic to I-82 west of the Tri-Cities which accounts for 2% of these bridges’ AADT. Traffic within the Tri-Cities region primarily uses the I-182 Bridges, the Blue Bridge/US 395 Bridge, and the WA-397 Bridge. The great majority of trips on all three Columbia River bridges are less than 30 miles in length, 65% of trips on the I-182 Bridges, 78% of trips on the Blue Bridge/US 395 Bridge, and 75% of trips on the WA-397 Bridge. Conversely, the vehicle trips are longest on the US 12 Bridge where only 38% of trips are less than 30 miles and 9% of trips are longer than 100 miles. The distribution of trip lengths for each bridge is below in Figure 5. FIGURE 5. VEHICLE TRIPS LENGTH CROSSING RIVER BRIDGES (% of Total Bridge Trips, StreetLight Data) FREIGHT TRAVEL Freight transportation plays a significant role in Pasco’s economy and serves trips between the Columbia River Basin agricultural region and other major cities within the Pacific Northwest, including Seattle, Portland, Spokane, Moses Lake, and Walla Walla. Freight is concentrated on Pasco's highway system which is primarily accessed at the following interchanges/intersections: ● US 395/Kartchner Street interchange PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 9 ● US 12/Lewis Street interchange ● US 12/Sacajawea Park intersection ● US 395/Oregon Avenue interchange Freight traffic on local roadways is concentrated in eastern Pasco, adjacent to major industrial centers, including Kartchner Street, Ainsworth Street, Oregon Avenue, Heritage Boulevard, A Street, Lewis Street, and Sacajawea Park Road. Freight traffic on the bridges over the Columbia and Snake Rivers ranges from 6 -20%. Figure 6 summarizes freight activity within Pasco. FIGURE 6. FREIGHT TRAVEL PATTERNS IN PASCO (Source: StreetLight Data) Although the distribution of freight traffic for Pasco remains similar throughout the year, the total volume of freight traffic increases during summer and early fall months, as seen in Figure 7. Freight traffic peaks in the spring and summer months (April to September) where it is 7-8% above average; the months of June, August, and September have the highest freight traffic. Freight traffic is lower in the fall and winter months (October to March) where it is 6-10% below average. The seasonal variation in freight volumes mirrors the growing and harvest season within the Columbia River Basin which suggests the importance of regional agriculture for Pasco’s economy. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 10 FIGURE 7. SEASONAL VARIATION IN FREIGHT TRAFFIC FOR PASCO (Source: StreetLight Data) COMMUTE PATTERNS Street Light data can also infer trip purpose using a device’s identified “home” or “work” location. Inferred home-based work trips that begin in Pasco during the AM peak (6-10 AM) were used to understand typical commute trends for residents of Pasco. Since Street Light flags “home” and “work” locations based on where a device typically spends daylight o r evening hours, this data set does count students travelling to school or overnight shift works in Pasco who travel home during the AM peak as home-based work trips. Street Light data estimates about 50% of Pasco’s residents have local jobs within Pasco for work which is twice the percentage estimated by the US Census (25%)5. The top Pasco employers include the following: ● Downtown Pasco area businesses ● Chiawana High School (including students) ● Industrial businesses in eastern Pasco ● Commercial businesses along US 395 Within the Tri-Cities region, other major employment destinations include the cities of Kennewick, Richland, and the Hanford Nuclear Site. Commute patterns for Pasco residents on the Columbia River bridges mirror these destinations. 26% of com mute trips to jobs outside of Pasco use the I-182 Bridges to access jobs in Richland, Kennewick, and the Hanford site while 16% of commute trips use the Blue Bridge/US 395 Bridge, primarily to access jobs within Kennewick or Richland. Existing commute patterns are summarized in 5 US Census On the Map. Work Destination Report – Home Selection Area to Work Places. https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/cgi- bin/report.py?mode=serve_page&t=otm_23e9532e0d994c57afb714237fd6325d&download =false&format=pdf Accessed. May 11, 2020. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 11 Figure 8. These numbers were estimated using a full year of observed Street Light data, so high school or community college students are also captured within this commute data. Residents of West Pasco (west of US 395 or north of I-182) are more likely to travel outside of Pasco for work, and more West Pasco residents travel to Hanford, Richland, West Richland, and Kennewick/Richland than East Pasco residents. Conversely, resident s of East Pasco who travel outside of Pasco for work are more likely to be employed in Kennewick or the eastern Tri-Cities area than residents of West Pasco. Within Pasco, employment is also geographically concentrated; residents are more likely to be empl oyed near their home. A higher percentage of residents of East Pasco work at the industrial businesses of east Pasco compared to residents of West Pasco. FIGURE 8. COMMUTE PATTERNS FOR PASCO RESIDENTS (Source: Street Light Data) Commuters from the Tri-Cities region who are employed in Pasco tend to live in Kennewick (13% of Pasco workers) or in the western Kennewick/eastern Richland area (16% of Pasco workers). 5% of workers commute from Richland and 6% of workers commute from West Richland. Residents of Pasco who stay within Pasco fork work tend to live south of I-182 although some of Pasco’s workers do live in the newer residential developments around the Road 68 commercial core. PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 12 EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES Local transit services are provided by Ben Fran klin Transit which operates 8 fixed route bus services within Pasco, including: ● Route 64: Pasco A Street ● Route 65: Pasco Lewis ● Route 66 & Route 67: Pasco Sylvester & Pasco Sandifur ● Route 150: Pasco / Kennewick ● Route 160 / Kennewick ● Route 225: Pasco / Richland ● Route 268: Pasco / Richland Weekday service is typically provided between 5:45 AM and 8:15 PM on all routes with half hour headways. Select routes run until 10:15 PM on weekdays, including inter -city routes to both Kennewick and Richland. Service is similar on most routes for Saturday although service does not start until 6:45. Transit service ends an hour earlier on Saturdays for Routes 64 and 160, and Route 268 does not provide Saturday Service. No transit services are available on Sunday. Ben Franklin Transit operates service for Pasco to and from the 22nd Avenue Transit Center which facilitates transfers between routes. Riders can currently park at both the 22nd Avenue Transit Center and the HAPO Event Center. FIGURE 9. BEN FRANKLIN TRANSIT ROUTES PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 13 Ben Franklin Transit also operates Dial-A-Ride service for individuals with a disability between 6 AM and 10 PM Monday to Friday and between 7 AM and 10 PM on Saturday. Vanpool services are also available for commuters travelling to Pendleto n, Walla Walla, Connell, Patterson, and the Hanford Nuclear Site. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM OPERATIONS Most study intersections on WSDOT facilities currently operate within their mobility target during the morning peak period, including all US highway or interstate ramp terminals within Pasco. Two study intersections exceed their mobility target during the AM peak: US 12/E A Street and US 395/Foster Wells Road. These intersections are two at -grade intersections on US highways within Pasco, and the intersection of US 12/E A Street has previously been identified as a future interchange. The intersection of Road 68/Burden Boulevard, under the City of Pasco’s jurisdiction, also has major delays during the AM peak. Existing Weekday AM Peak Hour intersection operations is summarized below in Table 1. TABLE 1: EXISTING WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR WEEKDAY INTERSECTION OPERATIONS # CONTROL INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE* DELAY (SECONDS PER VEHICLE) VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO 1 Signal Road 100 & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB On/Off Ramp B 16 0.40 2 Signal Road 100 & I 182 EB Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp B 17 0.68 3 Signal Road 68 & I 182 WB On/Off Ramp/I 182 WB On Ramp B 16 0.84 4 Signal Road 68 & I 182 EB On/Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp A 7 0.50 5 Signal US 395 On/Off Ramp/Morasch Ln & Argent Rd B 13 0.44 6 Signal US 395 SB On Ramp/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Court St A 9 0.48 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 14 7 Signal US 395 NB Off Ramp/US 395 NB On Ramp & Court St B 12 0.74 8 TWSC Sylvester St & US 395 NB Off Ramp A/C 0/15 0.26/0.46 9 Signal 20th Ave & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB Off Ramp B 14 0.72 10 Signal 20th Ave & I 182 EB On/Off Ramp B 18 0.68 11 Signal 4th Ave & US 395 WB On/Off Ramp B 10 0.44 12 Signal 4th Ave & US 395 EB On/Off Ramp B 20 0.75 13 TWSC US 395 & Foster Wells Rd A/F 10/54 0.23/0.22 14 TWSC Rainier Ave/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St A/C 9/21 0.16/0.19 15 TWSC Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St A/D 8/33 0.06/0.5 16 TWSC Hwy 12 EB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St & Hwy 12 EB Off Ramp A/C 10/22 0.29/0.63 17 TWSC Hwy 12 WB Off Ramp/Hwy 12 WB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St A/B 9/14 0.31/0.18 18 TWSC Hwy 12 & E A St B/F 11/129 0.25/0.89 19 Signal Road 68 & Burden Blvd D 52 0.87 *Shaded values indicate an intersection that exceeds its mobility target During the Weekday PM peak period, WSDOT study locations, including freeway ramp terminals, handle the bulk of traffic; these locations tend to have the most severe operational issues, while most local street intersections currently operate with tolerable PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 15 congestion, as defined by their mobility target. The few ramp terminals that have severe congestion are either two-way stop control (TWSC) or at-grade intersections which have high side street delay. The intersections of US 12/E A Street and Rainier Ave & US 395 SB Ramps/Kartchner Street both currently operate over-capacity on their minor street approach with excessive vehicle delays. During the PM peak, the traffic signals at I-182 WB Ramps/Road 68 and 4th Ave/US 395 WB Ramps also both exceed their mobility targets. Most City streets operate well within their mobility target during the PM peak. Only the intersection of Road 68/Burden Bouleva rd exceeds its mobility target during the PM peak. PM peak vehicle operations for all study intersections are summarized below in Table 2. TABLE 2: EXISTING WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION OPERATIONS # CONTROL INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE* DELAY (SECONDS PER VEHICLE) VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO 1 Signal Road 100 & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB On/Off Ramp A 9 0.72 2 Signal Road 100 & I 182 EB Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp C 21 0.86 3 Signal Road 68 & I 182 WB On/Off Ramp/I 182 WB On Ramp F 136 1.43 4 Signal Road 68 & I 182 EB On/Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp B 16 0.77 5 Signal US 395 On/Off Ramp/Morasch Ln & Argent Rd B 17 0.49 6 Signal US 395 SB On Ramp/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Court St A 10 0.54 7 Signal US 395 NB Off Ramp/US 395 NB On Ramp & Court St B 17 0.89 8 TWSC Sylvester St & US 395 NB Off Ramp A/E 0/38 0.23/0.82 9 Signal 20th Ave & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB Off Ramp C 26 0.91 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 16 10 Signal 20th Ave & I 182 EB On/Off Ramp C 21 0.73 11 Signal 4th Ave & US 395 WB On/Off Ramp E 58 1.04 12 Signal 4th Ave & US 395 EB On/Off Ramp B 16 0.69 13 TWSC US 395 & Foster Wells Rd B/F 12/74 0.26/0.53 14 TWSC Rainier Ave/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St B/F 11/363 0.38/1.51 15 TWSC Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St A/D 8/31 0.08/0.61 16 TWSC Hwy 12 EB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St & Hwy 12 EB Off Ramp A/B 8/11 0.28/0.18 17 TWSC Hwy 12 WB Off Ramp/Hwy 12 WB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St B/B 11/13 0.24/0.32 18 TWSC Hwy 12 & E A St B/F 14/1688 0.44/3.88 19 Signal Road 68 & Burden Blvd E 62 1.12 20 TWSC Road 100 & Dent Rd/Edelman Rd A/D 8/26 0.13/0.35 21 Signal Road 100 & Sandifur Parkway B 12 0.50 22 Signal Road 100 & Chapel Hill Rd C 21 0.69 23 TWSC Road 100 & Argent Road A/C 8/18 0.24/0.12 24 Signal Road 84 & Argent Road B 12 0.28 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 17 25 TWSC Court Street & Road 84 A/B 8/11 0.12/0.12 26 TWSC Road 68 & Edelman Road/Powerline Rd A/C 8/18 0.24/0.13 27 Signal Road 68 & Sandifur Pkwy C 22 0.70 28 Signal Road 68 & Chapel Hill Rd C 20 0.74 29 Signal Road 68 & Argent Road C 22 0.69 30 TWSC Road 68 & Court Street A/D 8/34 0.13/0.73 31 TWSC Road 60 & Court Street A/C 8/21 0.13/0.36 32 TWSC Madison Ave & Burden Blvd A/F 9/72 0.35/0.71 33 TWSC Argent Rd & Rd 44 A/B 0/15 0.17/0.47 34 Signal 20th Ave & Argent Rd B 20 0.66 35 Signal 20th Ave & Court St C 25 0.71 36 Signal 20th Ave & Sylvester St C 23 0.51 37 Signal 20th Ave & Lewis Street C 22 0.54 38 Signal 10th Ave & Sylvester St B 12 0.59 39 Signal 10th Ave & Lewis St C 22 0.45 40 Signal 10th Ave & A St B 17 0.36 PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 18 41 Signal 10th Ave & Ainsworth St B 19 0.62 42 Signal 4th Ave & Court St B 19 0.70 43 Signal 4th Ave & Sylvester St A 8 0.24 44 Signal 4th Ave & W Lewis St B 14 0.56 45 Signal 4th Ave & A St A 5 0.29 46 TWSC 4th Ave & Ainsworth St A/A 8/9 0.29/0.02 47 Signal N Oregon Ave & E Lewis St B 17 0.43 48 Signal Oregon Ave/S Oregon Ave & E A St B 11 0.23 49 TWSC Oregon Ave & Ainsworth St A/C 8/17 0.12/0.41 50 TWSC Heritage Blvd & Lewis St & Avery Ave A/C 8/19 0.29/0.4 51 TWSC E A St & Heritage Blvd A/C 8/17 0.12/0.43 52 TWSC Cedar Ave & Lewis St A/C 9/24 0.15/0.48 *Shaded values indicate an intersection that exceeds its mobility target PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 19 KEY TRANSPORTATION ISSUES The review of Pasco’s existing transportation system was used to identify key operational, safety, and connectivity issues to inform an assessment of Pasco’s existing transportation system. This review identified locations that had high levels of congestion during peak travel hours, higher than expected crash rates, and barriers to safe and convenient travel for all users. Figure 10 shows a composite of our system performance findings for Pasco which will be considered during the plan development. Detailed findings for each travel mode are also summarized below. FIGURE 10. PASCO’S EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM CHALLENGES PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS ● Limited system connectivity; key barriers include: ○ Highway crossings without pedestrian or bicycle facilit ies (e.g. Road 100, Road 68) ○ Long blocks (up to 2,000 feet) without any pedestrian connections PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 20 ○ Limited sidewalks and bike facilities, including along arterial and collector roadways ○ Rural roadway standards which do not include multimodal facilities ● Corridors without adequate pedestrian or bicyclist connections, including: ○ Court Street (Road 44 to Road 108) ○ Wernett Road (Road 48 to Road 76) ○ Argent Road (Road 48 to Road 100) ○ Chapel Hill Boulevard (Road 68 to Road 100) ○ Burden Boulevard (Road 36 to Road 60) ○ Sandifur Parkway (Porto Lane to Road 90) ○ Road 44 (Laredo Drive to Porto Lane) ○ Burns Road (Road 68 to Road 100; Dent Road to Kohler Road) ○ Clark Road (Road 36 to Lentz Road/Janet Street) ● Limited crossing opportunities on high-speed roadways, outside of existing signals ● High crash risk ○ Over two hit and run crashes annually involve pedestrians ○ Nearly half of pedestrian crashes occurred at marked crosswalks ○ Over 60% of bicyclists crashes were caused by drivers failing to yield the right of way when turning or crossing TRANSIT ● Basic transit service ● Limited stop amenities ● Limited access from new residential developments to transit ● Limited, safe crossing opportunities near stops ● Limited existing park and ride locations VEHICLES ● Limited system connectivity; key barriers include: ○ Long blocks (up to 2,000 feet) without any local street connections ○ Limited arterial or collector roadway access points for large residential developments ○ I-182 ○ Pasco Rail Yard ● Peak period intersection congestion near ramp terminals and at critical intersections in Pasco, including at: ○ Road 100/I-182 Interchange ○ Road 68/I-182 Interchange ○ Road 68/Burden Boulevard ○ Road 68/Court Street ○ Madison Avenue/Burden Boulevard ○ Road 36/Argent Road ○ Road 44/Argent Road PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 21 ○ 20th Avenue/ Court Street ○ 4th Avenue/I-182 WB ramp terminal ○ US 12/A Street ○ US 395 SB ramp terminal/Rainier Avenue/Kartchner Street ○ US 395/Foster Wells Road ● AM peak period congestion on Road 100 between the I-182 interchange and Argent Road from Chiawana High School traffic ● Existing at-grade intersections on national highways, including US 12/A Street and US 395/Foster Wells Road ● High access density without a center, two-way left turn lane on Court Street and Sylvester Street ● Vehicle speeding ● Existing, multi-lane half street connections without striping to denote travel lanes PASCO TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MASTER PLAN • SYSTEM INVENTORY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS • MAY 2020 22 APPENDIX PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 1 TRAFFIC SAFETY ASSES SMENT DATE: Feb 12, 2020 TO: Project Management Team | City of Pasco FROM: Veronica Sullivan, Carl Springer | DKS Associates SUBJECT: Pasco Transportation System Master Plan Project #19209-000 SUMMARY Traffic safety was evaluated on major roadways within the City of Pasco. Collision data was provided by WSDOT for the five-year period from 2014 to 20181. The study team identified the following findings related the existing safety conditions: • The most common collision types were rear-end and entering at angle crashes. • 75% of rear-end crashes and 64% of all crashes occurred at intersections2. • The five intersections with the highest crash rate were W Court St reet/ Road 68, Sylvester Street/Road 28, Burden Boulevard/Road 68, 20th Avenue/ W Court Street and Sandifur Parkway/ Road 68. • The six roadway segments with highest crash rate accounted for 57% of all collisions within the city were Burden Boulevard, 20th Avenue, Sylvester Street, Lewis Street, Road 68 and Court Street. • For most crashes, neither speeding nor alcohol/drug use were documented as significant contributors, and only reported in less than 8% of all crashes. 1 Crash data provided from the 2020 City Safety Program: https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/LocalPrograms/Traffic/CitySafetyProgram 2 Intersection related crash includes “at intersection and related”, “at intersection and not related” and “intersection related but not at intersection”. PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 2 • The most common driver errors reported were inattention, failed to yield right -of-way and following too closely. • 42% of pedestrian crashes involved a driver that reported inattention or field to yield right - of way to pedestrian. • 77% of bicycle crashes occurred at intersections and 54% involved a vehicle making a turning movement. Figure 1: Identified high crash rate intersections and roadway segments. PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 3 TRAFFIC SAFETY ANALY SIS RESULTS TREND S OVER LAST FIVE YEAR S There were 3,984 total crashes reported (797 per year) within the City of Pasco on all roadway facilities. The type, severity, and reported driver errors are summarized in the following discussion. • 1159 rear-end crashes (29% of crashes) • 1087 entering at angle crashes (27% of crashes) • 54 pedestrian-related crashes (1.4% of crashes) • 26 bicycle-related crashes (0.01% of crashes) Crashes within the City of Pasco; over the past five years: • 7 crashes resulted in fatalities • 43 crashes resulted in serious injuries (Injury A) • 72% of crashes are property damage only or lead to minor injuries (Injury C) The most common driver errors are responsible for nearly 65 percent of all crashes including: • 1019 Inattention (26%) • 627 Did Not Yield Right-of-Way (16%) • 561 Followed Too Closely (14%) • 225 Improper Turn or U-turn (6%) • 121 Disregard Stop and Go Light (3%) Risky behavior, including alcohol/drug use or speeding was implicated in 141 and 175 crashes, respectively. These crashes tend to be less severe; alcohol/drug use and speeding is involved in 64% and 80% of property damage only crashes. PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 4 PEDESTRIAN SAFETY 54 crashes involved at least one pedestrian. Crashes were most common in along major arterials, including W Court Street (13 crashes), W Sylvester Street (7 crashes) and W Lewis Street (5 crashes). • About two-thirds (61%) of pedestrian-involved crashes occurred during daylight conditions. • 22% (12 crashes) were caused by drivers failing to yield the right of way and 20% were caused by driver inattention. • 11 crashes were hit and run • 26 crashes occurred at a marked crosswalk • 16 crashes involved a ped crossing at an intersection with a signal • 6 crashes involved a ped crossing at an intersection with no signal BICYCLE SAFETY 26 crashes involved a bicyclist over the past five years. • 77% of crashes occurred at an intersection. • 2 crashes occurred at the intersections of W Argent Rd/ Road 100 and W Court St/Route 395 Northbound off ramps. • 3 crashes occurred along these two segments: N 4th Ave and N 20th Ave. • 54% of crashes involved a vehicle that was making a turning movement: 8 crashes making a left turn and 6 crashes making a right turn. • 5 crashes occurred in dark conditions, including one reported with no streetlights on. The remaining crashes occurred during daylight conditions. • 8 crashes reported the cyclist with “inattention” and 4 crashes where the cyclist did not grant right-of-way to vehicle. Most of the crashes involving a bicyclist were caused by drivers failing to yield the right of way when turning or crossing (64 percent). The remaining crashes were caused by either a bicycle or motorist failing to obey traffic control devices. All bicycle crashes occurred during the day. PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 5 INTERSECTION SAFETY 52% of crashes occur at intersections and 27% of crashes were within 75 feet of a signalized intersection. Table 1 shows the weighted crash rate based on crash severity and frequency. TABLE 1 : INTERSECTIONS WITH H IGH CRASH RATES * Weighted total is based on the severity of the crash = PDO+ 10(Possible Injury +Suspected Minor Injury) + 100*(Suspected Serious Injury). 3 Intersection Crash Rate Formula in Section 3.2.2: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_rural/training/fhwasa1210/s3.cfm # LOCATION NO APPARENT INJURY POSSIBLE INJURY SUSPECTED MINOR INJURY SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY GRAND TOTAL WEIGHTED TOTAL * APPROXIMATE AADT CRASH RATE 3 1 W COURT ST AND RD 68 20 13 3 0 36 180 9830 2.01 2 SYLVESTER ST AND RD 28 28 9 1 1 39 228 14640 1.46 3 BURDEN BLVD AND RD 68 77 22 2 2 103 517 48370 1.17 4 20TH AVE AND W COURT ST 45 18 4 0 67 265 26990 1.36 5 SANDIFUR PKWY AND RD 68 26 13 2 0 41 176 23070 0.97 6 BURDEN BLVD AND CONVENTION PL 32 16 1 1 50 302 43960 0.62 7 W COURT ST AND 26TH AVE 21 8 4 0 33 141 25340 0.71 8 RD 68 AND EB RAMPS 55 13 2 0 70 205 42970 0.89 9 RD 68 AND WB RAMPS 46 15 3 0 64 226 48260 0.73 10 BURDEN BLVD AND CLEMENTE LN 39 11 1 0 51 159 43560 0.64 PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 0 SEGMENT SAFETY Six study segments were selected based on the number of crashes per mile, as summarized in Table 2 below. The combined number of crashes for all six segments make up 57% of total crashes within the City of Pasco. TABLE 2 : STUDY SEGMENTS CRASH DATA SUMMARY 4 Average AADT was an average of the volume collected from Pasco Tube Counts in 2018: https://data-cityofpasco.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/pasco- tube-counts-2018 5 Crash rate was calculated using Section 3.2.1 Road Segment Rate Calculation: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/local_rural/training/fhwasa1210/s3.cfm # STUDY SEGMENT UNKNOWN NO APPARENT INJURY POSSIBLE INJURY SUSPECTED MINOR INJURY SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DIED IN HOSPITAL GRAND TOTAL PEDESTRIAN CRASHES BICYCLIST CRASHES APPROX. STUDY CORRIDOR LENGTH IN MILES AVERAGE AADT 4 CRASH RATE 5 1 BURDEN BLVD 0 253 67 6 4 0 330 1 0 0.48 9447 3987.64 2 20TH AVE 0 236 58 12 3 0 309 6 4 2.0 7046 1201.50 3 SYLVESTER ST 6 177 61 13 4 1 262 7 0 4.12 3673 948.68 4 LEWIS ST 4 227 79 12 3 0 325 6 6 4.22 4828 874.06 5 RD 68 2 391 119 18 3 0 533 0 0 3.07 13687 695.05 6 COURT ST 5 373 126 25 2 0 531 11 2 6.68 6710 522.43 PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 0 APPENDIX A – DETAILE D DIAGRAMS OF CRASH DATA Figure 2: Heat Map of All Crashes within the City of Pasco. PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 1 Figure 3: Location of Crashes Including Suspected Serious Injury and Fatality. PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 2 Figure 4: Location of Pedestrian Crashes Based on Crash Severity. PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 3 Figure 5: Location of Bicycle Crashes Based on Crash Severity. PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 0 APPENDIX B - ADDITIONAL S AFETY ANALYSIS FOR COURT STREET AND SYLVESTER STREET COURT ST PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 1 PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 2 Top 6 Crash types along the Corridor: Reasons for Collison Type: COLLISON TYPE NUMBER OF CRASHES ENTERING AT ANGLE 185 ➢ DID NOT GRANT RW TO VEHICLE 66 ➢ INATTENTION 50 ➢ DISREGARD STOP AND G O LIGHT 19 ➢ IMPROPER TURN 14 ➢ DISREGARD STOP SIGN - FLASHING RED 8 ➢ NONE 7 ➢ OTHER 6 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Entering at angle From same direction - both going straight - one stopped - rear-end From opposite direction - one left turn - one straight From same direction - both going straight - both moving - rear-end From same direction - both going straight - both moving - sideswipe Fixed object Other Crash Type No Apparent Injury Possible Injury Suspected Minor Injury Suspected Serious Injury Unknown PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 3 ➢ EXCEEDING REAS. SAFE SPEED 5 ➢ UNKNOWN DRIVER DISTR ACTION 5 ➢ UNDER INFLUENCE OF A LCOHOL 1 ➢ OTHER DRIVER DISTRAC TIONS INSIDE VEHICLE 1 ➢ DRIVER DISTRACTIONS OUTSIDE VEHICLE 1 ➢ DRIVER NOT DISTRACTE D 1 ➢ IMPROPER BACKING 1 FROM SAME DIRECTION - BOTH GOING STRAIGH T - ONE STOPPED - REAR-END 126 ➢ FOLLOW TOO CLOSELY 56 ➢ INATTENTION 35 ➢ OPERATING DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT 7 ➢ OTHER 6 ➢ NONE 5 ➢ EXCEEDING REAS. SAFE SPEED 4 ➢ DID NOT GRANT RW TO VEHICLE 2 ➢ UNKNOWN DRIVER DISTR ACTION 2 ➢ APPARENTLY ASLEEP 1 ➢ DRIVER OPERATING HAN DHELD TELECOMMUNICAT 1 ➢ DRIVER NOT DISTRACTE D 1 ➢ APPARENTLY FATIGUED 1 ➢ UNDER INFLUENCE OF A LCOHOL 1 ➢ DRIVER DISTRACTIONS OUTSIDE VEHICLE 1 ➢ DRIVER INTERACTING W ITH PASSENGERS, ANIM 1 ➢ DRIVER OPERATING OTH ER ELECTRONIC DEVICE 1 ➢ DRIVER READING OR WR ITING 1 FROM OPPOSITE DIRECT ION - ONE LEFT TURN - ONE STRAIGHT 65 ➢ DID NOT GRANT RW TO VEHICLE 27 ➢ IMPROPER TURN 12 ➢ INATTENTION 10 ➢ NONE 6 ➢ OTHER 3 ➢ UNDER INFLUENCE OF A LCOHOL 2 PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 4 ➢ DISREGARD STOP AND G O LIGHT 2 ➢ DISREGARD YIELD SIGN - FLASHING YELLOW 2 ➢ DISREGARD STOP SIGN - FLASHING RED 1 Other Crash Data: Crash Distribution by Junction Type At Intersection and Related At Driveway Not at Intersection and Not Related Intersection Related but Not at Intersection At Intersection and Not Related At Driveway within Major Intersection Crash Distribution by Lighting Conditions Daylight Dark-Street Lights On Dusk Dark-No Street Lights Dark-Street Lights Off Dawn Other PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 5 SYLVESTER ST PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 6 PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 7 Top 6 Crash types along the Sylvester Corridor: 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Entering at angle From opposite direction - one left turn - one straight From same direction - both going straight - one stopped - rear-end Fixed object From same direction - both going straight - both moving - rear-end One parked--one moving Other Crash Type No Apparent Injury Possible Injury Suspected Minor Injury Suspected Serious Injury Died in Hospital Unknown PASCO TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN 8 Crash Distribution by Junction Type At Intersection and Related Not at Intersection and Not Related At Driveway At Intersection and Not Related Intersection Related but Not at Intersection At Driveway within Major Intersection Driveway Related but Not at Driveway Crash Distribution by Lighting Conditions Daylight Dark-Street Lights On Dusk Dawn Dark-No Street Lights HCM 6th TWSC 8: Sylvester St & US 395 NB Off Ramp 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing AM Synchro 10 Report Page 8 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR HCM 6th TWSC 13: US 395 & Foster Wells Rd 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing AM Synchro 10 Report Page 13 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 14: Rainier Ave/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing AM Synchro 10 Report Page 14 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 15: Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing AM Synchro 10 Report Page 15 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 12.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 16: Hwy 12 EB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St & Hwy 12 EB Off Ramp 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing AM Synchro 10 Report Page 16 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBR SEL SER HCM 6th TWSC 17: Hwy 12 WB Off Ramp/Hwy 12 WB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing AM Synchro 10 Report Page 17 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 18: Hwy 12 & E A St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing AM Synchro 10 Report Page 18 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.8 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 8: Sylvester St & US 395 NB Off Ramp 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 8 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 12.3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR HCM 6th TWSC 13: US 395 & Foster Wells Rd 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 13 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 14: Rainier Ave/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 14 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 45.2 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 15: Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 15 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 13 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 16: Hwy 12 EB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St & Hwy 12 EB Off Ramp 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 16 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBR SEL SER HCM 6th TWSC 17: Hwy 12 WB Off Ramp/Hwy 12 WB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 17 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 18: Hwy 12 & E A St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 18 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 51.2 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 20: Road 100 & Dent Rd/Edelman Rd 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 20 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 23: Road 100 & Argent Road 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 23 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 25: Court Street & Road 84 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 25 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR HCM 6th TWSC 26: Road 68 & Edelman Road/Powerline Rd 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 26 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 30: Road 68 & Court Street 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 30 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 10.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 31: Road 60 & Court Street 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 31 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 32: Madison Ave & Burden Blvd 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 32 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 33: Argent Rd & Rd 44 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 33 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR HCM 6th TWSC 46: 4th Ave & Ainsworth St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 46 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR HCM 6th TWSC 49: Oregon Ave & Ainsworth St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 49 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 50: Heritage Blvd & Lewis St & Avery Ave 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 50 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 51: E A St & Heritage Blvd 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 51 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR HCM 6th TWSC 52: Cedar Ave & Lewis St 04/14/2020 04/14/2020 Existing PM Synchro 10 Report Page 52 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Appendix C FUTURE TRAFFIC FORECAST DATE: September 2, 2020 TO: Pasco TSMP Project Team FROM: Carl Springer, Aaron Berger | DKS Associates SUBJECT: Pasco TSMP Task 4.2: Technical Memo #4 Project #19209-000 The City of Pasco is developing its first transportation system master plan (TSMP). Future forecasting is an important step in the transportation planning process and provides estimates of future travel demand. This memorandum documents the Future No-Build 2040 results associated with the travel demand model developed by Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCG) for the Pasco area. The Pasco model was used to develop study intersection turn movement volumes for the 2040 TSMP horizon year. INTRODUCTION This task considers how the City’s transportation system will perform with the expected travel demand growth to 2040. The future baseline assessment will include any transportation improvement projects that have committed funding available. The BFCG travel demand model will be applied to forecast 2040 travel demands within the planning area, which was evaluated by the consulting team to flag major degradations compared to today’s conditions. A summary of the Pasco Travel Demand Model results is provided in the following sections, including a discussion of the roadway network and land use assumptions included in the model. FUTURE FORECASTS Future 2040 PM traffic volumes at all study intersections were developed from the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCG) regional travel demand model. The BFCG regional travel demand model includes both existing (2015) and future (2040) model scenarios in TransCAD which formed the basis of all future traffic analysis. This model provides a regional picture of growth and transportation improvements identified as feasible and funded within the next 20 years which will be used to identify and refine projects within Pasco for the TSMP. PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 1 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK Transportation improvements assumed in the BFCG 2040 Model include projects submitted by the cities of Pasco, Kennewick, Richland, West Richland, and WSDOT that are reasonably expected to be complete by 2040 (i.e. financially constrained). Only new construction or projects that otherwise change a roadway’s alignment or capacity in the RTP are included as network changes within the BFCG 2040 model. Projects within Pasco include: • Argent Road Improvements (Road 40 to 20th Avenue) • Wrigley Drive Extension (Convention Drive to Clemente Lane) • Chapel Hill Boulevard Extension (Road 84 to Road 68) • Sandifur Parkway Improvements (Road 68 to Convention Drive) • Road 68 Widening (I-182 to Argent Road) • Burns Road Improvements/Extension (Road 52 to Pasco City Limits) • Lewis Street Rail Yard Overpass Other projects included in the 2040 BFCG model outside of Pasco are summarized in Transition 2040, the Tri-Cities Metropolitan Area Regional Transportation Plan1. 2040 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS The 2040 baseline analysis identifies how Pasco’s transportation system is expected to operate with additional residents, businesses, and visitors. These conditions were assessed based on the forecasted increase in trips generated by future transportation growth without any new investments in the transportation infrastructure. This analysis describes where the transportation system will perform satisfactorily and identifies areas that will likely be congested without additional investments. 2040 NO BUILD TRANSPORATION SYSTEM OPERATIONS Traffic operations (delay, LOS, and v/c) were analyzed for future (2040) conditions using Synchro. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition methodology was used for signalized and unsignalized intersection analyses, where possible; signalized intersection v/c ratios were post- processed to obtain intersection v/c ratios. If HCM 6th Edition results cannot be reported due to intersection geometry or other limitations, the capacity results were based on HCM 2000. All intersections within the Pasco UGA were compared against the mobility targets identified by WSDOT, the City of Pasco, or Franklin County. These agencies currently use a Level of Service (LOS) D mobility standard which were applied at all study intersections as part of the TMP update. 1 Benton-Franklin Council of Governments. Transition 2040, Appendix F. 2018. PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 2 Study intersection operations were analyzed using the methodology outlined in the traffic analysis and forecasting methodology memo2. Forecasted intersection operations were compared to applicable agency mobility targets to identify where significant congestion is likely to occur. Figure 1 shows the study intersections that do not meet mobility targets for both AM and PM peak hour in the 2040 no-build conditions. Also, Table 1 compares the existing and future no-build operational Level of Service (LOS) results for the study intersections that do not meet mobility targets for AM and PM peak periods. A complete listing of operating conditions (delay, LOS, and v/c) at study intersections is provided in the appendix. FIGURE 1: STUDY INTERSECTIONS THAT DO NOT MEET MOBILITY TARGETS FOR AM AND PM PEAK PERIODS (2040 DESIGN HOUR CONDITIONS) 2 DKS Associates. Traffic Analysis & Forecasting Methodology memo . July, 2020. PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 3 TABLE 1: STUDY INTERSECTIONS THAT DO NOT MEET MOBILITY TARGET LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) D FOR EXISTING AND FUTURE NO-BUILD (AM AND PM PEAK) AM (LOS) PM (LOS) # Study Intersection Mobility Target (LOS) Existing Future No-Build Existing Future No-Build 1 Road 100 & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB On/Off Ramp D B B A E 2 Road 100 & I 182 EB Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp D B C B F 8 Sylvester St & US 395 NB Off Ramp D A/C A/C A/E A/F 11 4th Ave & US 395 WB On/Off Ramp D A B D E 13 US 395 & Foster Wells Rd D A/F C/F B/F C/F 14 Rainier Ave/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St D A/C A/D B/F B/F 15 Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St D A/D A/E A/D A/F 18 Hwy 12 & E A St D A/C A/E A/C A/F 19 Road 68 & Burden Blvd D E E E E 20 Road 100 & Dent Rd/Edelman Rd D A/C A/F 27 Road 68 & Sandifur Pkwy D C E 30 Road 68 & Court Street D A/D A/F 31 Road 60 & Court Street D A/C A/F 32 Madison Ave & Burden Blvd D A/F A/F 33 Argent Rd & Rd 44 D A/F B/F 52 Cedar Ave & Lewis St D A/C A/E Overall, in comparison to the existing conditions, twice as many study intersections will not meet the mobility targets in the 2040 future no-build conditions. In other words, if future improvements are not made for the identified intersections that are currently operating less than LOS D, these intersections will continue to operate at a substandard level and additional intersections will not meet their mobility targets. For instance, the intersection of Road 68 and Burden Blvd reported LOS E for AM and PM peak periods for existing conditions and the LOS results will continue for the future no-build conditions. Also, the stop-controlled intersection of US 395 and Foster Wells Rd PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 4 experienced significant delays for AM and PM peak periods in both existing and future no-build conditions, however there is a planned improvement project that may impact future operational results3. With regards to the future no-build results, of the 19 study intersections in the AM peak period, four will not meet their respective mobility target during the 2040 design hour conditions. For the PM peak period, 16 of the 52 study intersection will exceed the 2040 mobility target. The four study intersections that are substandard under 2040 conditions for both AM and PM peak periods include: US 395 and Foster Wells Rd, Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp and Kartchner St, Hwy 12 and E A St, and Road 68 and Burden Blvd. The majority of the study intersections that exceed their mobility target are located near highway interchanges. Significant corridors of concern for the future no-build operations include Rd 100 and Rd 68. Three study intersections on both Rd 100 and Rd 68 will not meet the mobility targets during the 2040 design hour conditions. In particular, the intersection of Rd 68 and Court Street experience LOS LOS A/F due to the side streets operating over capacity during the PM peak period. Another area of concern for the future no-build conditions are located at ramp terminals. The ramp terminals along Rd 100 and Kartchner St both experienced LOS E or F. Significant improvements should be made at these ramp terminal locations or additional ramps terminals should be considered to alleviate some of the traffic. 3 US 396 Safety Corridor Improvements visit: https://wsdot.wa.gov/projects/us395/safety-corridor/home PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 5 APPENDIX PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 6 TABLE 3: FUTURE NO-BUILD 2040 RESULTS FOR AM PEAK Existing Future No-Build # Study Intersection Mobility Target (LOS) Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio 1 Road 100 & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB On/Off Ramp D B 14 0.40 B 19 0.69 2 Road 100 & I 182 EB Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp D B 15 0.68 C 35 0.98 3 Road 68 & I 182 WB On/Off Ramp/I 182 WB On Ramp D A 8 0.69 A 6 0.71 4 Road 68 & I 182 EB On/Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp D A 7 0.47 A 6 0.61 5 US 395 On/Off Ramp/Morasch Ln & Argent Rd D B 13 0.44 B 16 0.63 6 US 395 SB On Ramp/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Court St D A 7 0.43 A 8 0.50 7 US 395 NB Off Ramp/US 395 NB On Ramp & Court St D A 9 0.49 A 8 0.45 8 Sylvester St & US 395 NB Off Ramp D A/C 0/15 0.26/0.45 A/C 0/19 0.35/0.51 9 20th Ave & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB Off Ramp D B 12 0.65 B 15 0.79 10 20th Ave & I 182 EB On/Off Ramp D B 15 0.63 B 19 0.72 11 4th Ave & US 395 WB On/Off Ramp D A 8 0.36 B 11 0.54 PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 7 Existing Future No-Build # Study Intersection Mobility Target (LOS) Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio 12 4th Ave & US 395 EB On/Off Ramp D B 11 0.44 B 12 0.60 13 US 395 & Foster Wells Rd D A/F 10/54 0.23/0.22 C/F 16/596 0.47/1.33 14 Rainier Ave/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St D A/C 9/21 0.16/0.19 A/D 9/29 0.16/0.32 15 Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St D A/D 8/33 0.06/0.5 A/E 8/45 0.06/0.6 16 Hwy 12 EB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St & Hwy 12 EB Off Ramp D A/C 10/22 0.29/0.63 A/D 10/27 0.29/0.73 17 Hwy 12 WB Off Ramp/Hwy 12 WB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St D A/B 9/14 0.31/0.18 A/C 9/16 0.34/0.27 18 Hwy 12 & E A St D A/C 0/23 0.25/0.34 A/E 0/46 0.33/0.62 19 Road 68 & Burden Blvd D E 64 0.90 E 59 0.95 PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 8 TABLE 4: FUTURE NO-BUILD 2040 RESULTS FOR PM PEAK Existing Future No-Build # Study Intersection Mobility Target (LOS) Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio 1 Road 100 & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB On/Off Ramp D A 9 0.72 E 77 1.25 2 Road 100 & I 182 EB Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp D B 19 0.86 F 125 1.24 3 Road 68 & I 182 WB On/Off Ramp/I 182 WB On Ramp D B 15 0.97 A 9 0.88 4 Road 68 & I 182 EB On/Off Ramp/I 182 EB On Ramp D C 24 0.76 C 25 0.83 5 US 395 On/Off Ramp/Morasch Ln & Argent Rd D B 17 0.47 C 21 0.62 6 US 395 SB On Ramp/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Court St D A 8 0.44 A 9 0.53 7 US 395 NB Off Ramp/US 395 NB On Ramp & Court St D B 11 0.62 B 11 0.67 8 Sylvester St & US 395 NB Off Ramp D A/E 0/38 0.23/0.82 A/F 0/97 0.31/1.06 9 20th Ave & I 182 WB On Ramp/I 182 WB Off Ramp D B 18 0.82 C 22 0.86 10 20th Ave & I 182 EB On/Off Ramp D B 13 0.54 B 13 0.58 11 4th Ave & US 395 WB On/Off Ramp D D 42 0.82 E 60 0.94 12 4th Ave & US 395 EB On/Off Ramp D B 11 0.55 B 13 0.62 PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 9 Existing Future No-Build # Study Intersection Mobility Target (LOS) Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio 13 US 395 & Foster Wells Rd D B/F 12/74 0.26/0.53 C/F 19/2514 0.39/4.78 14 Rainier Ave/US 395 SB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St D B/F 11/363 0.38/1.51 B/F 11/496 0.4/1.81 15 Commercial Ave/US 395 NB On/Off Ramp & Kartchner St D A/D 8/31 0.08/0.61 A/F 8/55 0.08/0.8 16 Hwy 12 EB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St & Hwy 12 EB Off Ramp D A/C 8/16 0.28/0.39 A/C 8/19 0.31/0.5 17 Hwy 12 WB Off Ramp/Hwy 12 WB On/Off Ramp & Lewis St D B/B 11/13 0.24/0.32 B/B 13/15 0.37/0.37 18 Hwy 12 & E A St D A/C 0/25 0.28/0.3 A/F 0/112 0.4/0.88 19 Road 68 & Burden Blvd D E 73 1.15 E 75 1.09 20 Road 100 & Dent Rd/Edelman Rd D A/C 8/25 0.13/0.23 A/F 10/2121 0.34/5.44 21 Road 100 & Sandifur Parkway D B 12 0.50 C 21 0.77 22 Road 100 & Chapel Hill Rd D B 12 0.77 B 15 0.62 23 Road 100 & Argent Road D A/C 8/18 0.24/0.12 A/D 8/29 0.31/0.23 24 Road 84 & Argent Road D B 12 0.245034 B 13 0.31 25 Court Street & Road 84 D A/B 8/11 0.12/0.12 A/C 8/16 0.25/0.17 26 Road 68 & Edelman Road/Powerline Rd D A/C 8/18 0.24/0.13 B/A 11/0 0.62/0 27 Road 68 & Sandifur Pkwy D C 21 0.70 E 58 0.98 28 Road 68 & Chapel Hill Rd D B 15 0.61 B 19 0.55 29 Road 68 & Argent Road D C 21 0.67 C 31 0.87 30 Road 68 & Court Street D A/D 8/34 0.13/0.73 A/F 9/278 0.25/1.48 31 Road 60 & Court Street D A/C 8/21 0.13/0.36 A/F 9/178 0.17/1.22 PASCO TS MP • TECHNICAL MEMO #4 10 Existing Future No-Build # Study Intersection Mobility Target (LOS) Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio Level of Service Delay (secs) Volume/ Capacity Ratio 32 Madison Ave & Burden Blvd D A/F 9/72 0.35/0.71 A/F 9/312 0.37/1.44 33 Argent Rd & Rd 44 D A/F 10/98 0.31/1.03 B/F 12/490 0.5/1.95 34 20th Ave & Argent Rd D B 20 0.66 C 30 0.83 35 20th Ave & Court St D C 24 0.68 C 27 0.77 36 20th Ave & Sylvester St D C 21 0.46 C 21 0.45 37 20th Ave & Lewis Street D C 21 0.48 C 22 0.56 38 10th Ave & Sylvester St D B 12 0.52 B 12 0.52 39 10th Ave & Lewis St D C 22 0.44 C 23 0.45 40 10th Ave & A St D B 17 0.36 B 18 0.38 41 10th Ave & Ainsworth St D B 18 0.62 B 18 0.58 42 4th Ave & Court St D B 17 0.64 C 22 0.78 43 4th Ave & Sylvester St D A 8 0.56 A 8 0.56 44 4th Ave & W Lewis St D B 15 0.58 B 16 0.65 45 4th Ave & A St D A 4 0.20 A 5 0.24 46 4th Ave & Ainsworth St D A/A 8/9 0.29/0.02 A/A 8/9 0.3/0.02 47 N Oregon Ave & E Lewis St D B 17 0.38 B 20 0.58 48 Oregon Ave/S Oregon Ave & E A St D B 11 0.22 B 11 0.27 49 Oregon Ave & Ainsworth St D A/C 8/17 0.12/0.41 A/C 8/21 0.15/0.44 50 Heritage Blvd & Lewis St & Avery Ave D A/C 8/19 0.29/0.4 A/D 8/27 0.3/0.61 51 E A St & Heritage Blvd D A/C 8/17 0.12/0.43 A/D 9/28 0.16/0.6 52 Cedar Ave & Lewis St D A/C 9/24 0.15/0.48 A/E 9/37 0.18/0.65 Appendix D TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS DATE: February 22, 2021 TO: Dan Ford, Jacob Gonzalez | City of Pasco FROM: Rochelle Starrett, Carl Springer | DKS SUBJECT: Pasco Transportation System Master Plan: Technical Memo #5 Project #19209-000 This document provides an overview of the transportation system standards recommended for adoption as part of the Pasco Transportation System Master Plan (TSMP). Included is a detail of the roadway functional classification system, typical designs for roadways, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities, special route designations, access spacing and mobility standards, and guidance for Traffic Impact Analysis requirements. Together, these standards will help ensure future facilities are designed appropriately and that all facilities are managed to serve their intended purpose. MULTI-MODAL STREET SYSTEM Traditional roadway designs focus on the safety and flow of motor vehicle traffic. The one size fits all design approach is less effective at integrating the roadway with the character of the surrounding area and addressing the needs of other users of a roadway. For instance, the design of an arterial roadway through a commercial area has often traditionally been the same as one through a residential neighborhood, both primarily focused on the movement of motor vehicles. In Pasco, all roadways are proposed to be multi-modal or “complete streets”, with each street serving the needs of the various travel modes. Streets in the city will not all be designed the same. It is recommended that Pasco classify the street system into a hierarchy organized by functional classification and street type (representative of their places). These classifications ensure that the streets reflect the neighborhood through which they pass, consisting of a scale and design appropriate to the character of the abutting properties and land uses. The classifications also provide for and balance the needs of all travel modes including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, motor vehicles and freight. Within these street classifications, context sensitive designs may result in alternative cross-sections. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 2 ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION A city’s street functional classification system is an important tool for managing the transportation system. It is based on a hierarchical system of roads in which streets of a higher classification, such as arterials, emphasize a higher level of mobility for through movements, while streets of a lower classification emphasize access to land uses. Pasco currently has four functional classes: • Principal Arterials connect major activity centers as well as the interstate system. They provide limited access and are primarily intended to serve regional traffic movement. • Minor Arterials create direct connections through the city and can be found on the periphery of residential neighborhoods. They generally provide the primary connection to other Arterial or Collector Streets and access to larger developed areas and neighborhoods. • Collectors provide local traffic circulation throughout the city and serve to funnel traffic from the arterial street network to streets of the same or lower classification. They typically have minor access restrictions. • Local Streets provide local access and circulation for traffic, connect neighborhoods, and often function as through routes for pedestrians and bicyclists. Local Streets should maintain slow vehicle operating speeds and discourage through traffic. The TSMP also recommends adding a new Neighborhood Collector functional classification to identify locations where local access needs should be balanced with enhanced pedestrian and bicycle amenities. These streets should maintain slow vehicle operating speeds to accommodate safe use by all modes and through traffic should be discouraged. Functional classification provides a helpful framework for managing the city’s transportation system and supporting other standards discussed in the following sections, including connectivity, spacing, freight routes, cross-sections, and access management. Table 1 lists the desired spacing of each facility type throughout Pasco to ensure a high level of connectivity. Figure 1 illustrates the desired spacing for the arterial and collector network. Deviations to these guidelines may be needed in locations where there are significant barriers, such as topography, rail lines, freeways, existing development, and the presence of natural areas. TABLE 1: FACILITY SPACING GUIDELINES FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM SPACING1,2 PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 1 to 2 miles MINOR ARTERIAL 1 mile COLLECTOR ½ mile PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 3 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION RECOMMENDED MAXIMUM SPACING1,2 NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR ¼ mile LOCAL STREET 300-500 feet BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 300 feet 1. Recommended maximum spacing refers to distance between facilities with the same or higher functional classification. 2. Deviations from the recommended maximum spacing are subject to approval by the City engineer. People walking and biking benefit the most from closely spaced facilities because their travel is most affected by variation in distance. By providing walking and biking facilities or accessways that are spaced no less than 300 feet apart, Pasco will support active transportation within and between its neighborhoods. These connections also support high quality access to transit. FIGURE 1: DESIRED FACILITY SPACING The proposed roadway functional classification from the Pasco Comprehensive Plan was reviewed to identify locations where reclassifications should be considered to improve conformance with recommended spacing guidelines. The future functional classification map from the Comprehensive Plan includes instances of closely spaced arterials and sudden changes in functional classification. The recommended reclassifications aim to create a more consistent functional classification scheme and match a roadway’s functional classification to their role in the transportation network. The existing road network was also reviewed to identify potential neighborhood collector routes. Neighborhood collectors were identified in locations where the functional classification map from the Pasco Comprehensive Plan previously identified two closely-spaced, parallel collectors which PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 4 serve similar land uses. Converting one of these routes to a neighborhood collector provides a classification that is more consistent with the actual use of the road and facilitates multimodal transportation. Neighborhood collectors were also designated on the local street system for routes which provide connections between several adjacent neighborhoods and the collector or arterial network. The recommended reclassifications summarized in Figure 2 and Table 2 will provide better system spacing and connectivity. It is important to note that many of the existing roadways cross-sections will not meet the standard cross-sections of their new functional classification. Cross-section improvements are not expected outside of redevelopment. FIGURE 2: RECOMMENDED ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION A draft version of this figure identifying all recommended changes is also included for review PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 5 TABLE 2: FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF NEW ROADWAYS ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SANDIFUR PARKWAY EXTENSION Road 100 to New North-South Collector Principal Arterial DENT ROAD EXTENSION Burns Road to Harris Road Minor Arterial SANDIFUR PARKWAY EXTENSION New North-South Collector to Shoreline Drive Minor Arterial SANDIFUR PARKWAY EXTENSION New North-South Collector to Shoreline Drive Collector NEW NORTH-SOUTH COLLECTOR Dent Road to Harris Road Collector ROAD 84 EXTENSION Burns Road to Columbia River Road Collector CONVENTION DRIVE EXTENSION Burns Road to Clark Road Collector ROAD 60 EXTENSION Burns Road to Clark Road Collector DESERET DRIVE Dent Road to Road 52 Collector ROAD 76 EXTENSION Burden Boulevard to Argent Road Collector ROAD 90 EXTENSION Burns Road to UGA Neighborhood Collector THREE RIVERS DRIVE EXTENSION Road 68 to Rio Grande Lane Neighborhood Collector WRIGLEY DRIVE EXTENSION Clemente Lane to Road 68 Place Neighborhood Collector ROAD 52 EXTENSION Burns Road Deseret Drive Neighborhood Collector WERNETT ROAD EXTENSION Road 76 to Road 84 Neighborhood Collector PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 6 TABLE 3: ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION CHANGES EXISTING FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION MINOR ARTERIAL Road 100 Dent Road to UGA Principal Arterial MINOR ARTERIAL 20th Avenue Lewis Street to A Street Principal Arterial PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 10th Avenue Ainsworth Street to A street Minor Arterial PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 4th Avenue A Street to I-182 Westbound Ramp Terminal Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Court Street Road 100 to Harris Road Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Harris Road Court Street to Dent Road Extension Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Dent Road Burns Road to Road 68 Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Clark Road Road 68 to Road 52 Minor Arterial COLLECTOR Chapel Hill Boulevard Road 82 to Road 68 Minor Arterial COLLECTOR A Street 20th Avenue to 28th Avenue Minor Arterial COLLECTOR 28th Avenue A Street to Sylvester street minor arterial MINOR ARTERIAL Chapel Hill Boulevard Crescent Road to Road 100 Collector MINOR ARTERIAL Road 60 Court Street to Sylvester Street Collector MINOR ARTERIAL Sylvester Street Road 60 to 4th Avenue Collector MINOR ARTERIAL Court Street 4th Avenue to 1st Avenue Collector MINOR ARTERIAL 1st Avenue Court Street to A Street Collector LOCAL Broadway Street Wehe Avenue to Cedar Avenue Collector LOCAL Cedar Avenue Broadway Street to Lewis Street Collector LOCAL Commercial Avenue Kartchner Street to Hillsboro Road Collector MINOR ARTERIAL Road 90 Sandifur Parkway to Burns Road Neighborhood Collector PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 7 EXISTING FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION COLLECTOR Wernett Road Road 36 To Road 76 Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR 14th Avenue Lewis Street to Court Street Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Saratoga Lane Chapel Hill boulevard to Argent Road Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Road 44 Argent Road to Madison Avenue Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Madison Avenue Road 44 to Burden Boulevard Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Road 52 Burden Boulevard to Burns Road Neighborhood Collector COLLECTOR Wrigley Drive Road 76 to Clemente Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Kohler Road Dent Road to Hillcrest Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 92 Court Street to Maple Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 76 Argent Road to Court Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 60 Argent Road to Court Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 48 Argent Road to Sylvester Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Wernett Road Road 36 to Road 30 Neighborhood Collector LOCAL 14th Avenue Court Street to Lincoln Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Pearl Street 24th Avenue to 13th Avenue & 10th Avenue to 5th Avenue Neighborhood Collector PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 8 EXISTING FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION LOCAL 13th Avenue Pearl Street to Riverview Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Riverview Drive 13th Avenue to 12th Avenue Neighborhood Collector LOCAL 10th Avenue 12th Avenue to Pearl Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Elm Avenue A Street to Shepperd Street Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Wrigley Drive Road 68 Place to Roosevelt Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Roosevelt Drive Wrigley Drive to Madison Avenue Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Madison Avenue Roosevelt Drive to Burden Boulevard Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Vincenzo Drive Road 100 to Majestia Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Majestia Lane Vincenzo Drive to Road 90 Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 90 Sandifur Parkway to Burns Road Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Wilshire Drive Road 90 to Westmoreland Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Westmoreland Lane Wilshire Drive to Overland Court Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Overland Court Westmoreland Lane to Westminster Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Westminster Lane Overland Court to Stutz Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Stutz Drive Westminster Lane to Road 84 Neighborhood Collector PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 9 EXISTING FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION ROADWAY EXTENTS RECOMMENDED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION LOCAL Hudson Drive Road 84 to Okanogan Lane Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Okanogan Lane Hudson Drive to Chehalis Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Chehalis Drive Okanogan Lane to Three Rivers Drive Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Three Rivers Drive Chehalis Drive to Road 68 & Rio Grande Lane to Road 56 Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Road 56 Three Rivers Drive to Overton Road Neighborhood Collector LOCAL Overton Road Road 56 to Road 52 Neighborhood Collector FREIGHT NETWORK Freight routes play a vital role in the economical movement of raw materials and finished products, while maintaining neighborhood livability, public safety, and minimizing maintenance costs of the roadway system. The Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation system (FGTS) tonnage classification system identifies different categories of freight corridors based on annual freight tonnage moved1. The following corridors are identified in Pasco and summarized below in Figure 3: • I-182 • US 12 • US 395 • WA 397 • Road 100 (I-182 to Harris Road) • Road 68 (I-182 to Clark Road) • 4th Avenue (I-182 to Glade Road) • Ainsworth Avenue/Dock Street (WA 397 to Sacajawea Park Road) • Harris Road (Road 100 to Shoreline Road) • Shoreline Road (Harris Road to Burns Road) • Burns Road (Shoreline Road to Dent Road) 1 WSDOT. Freight Transportation System in WA. https://wsdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=0e37044a459244d9b6414826b46e8c46 PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 10 • Dent Road (Burns Road to Road 68) • Clark Road (Road 68 to Glad Road) • Taylor Flats Road (North of Road 68) • Columbia River Road (North of Road 68) • Glade Road (North of 4th Avenue) • Railroad Avenue (North of Hillsboro Street) • Foster Wells Road (East of US 395) • Kartchner Street (Railroad Avenue to Commercial Avenue) • Hillsboro Street (Railroad Avenue to Travel Plaza Way) • Lewis Street (US 395 to 20th Avenue) • 20th Avenue (Lewis Street to A Street) • A Street (20th Avenue to US 12) • Pasco Kahlotus Road (East of US 12) • Lewis Street (WA 397 to US 12) • 4th Avenue (Ainsworth Street to A Street) Other critical freight corridors that are not currently included in the Washington FGTS include Sacajawea Park Road from Ainsworth Avenue to US 12 and Commercial Avenue from Lewis Street to Kartchner Street. Including these routes in a future update to the Washington FGTS will recognize their significance to Pasco’s freight system and connect key industrial areas to existing FGTS corridors. The city’s freight transportation system also includes a rail yard, port, and the Tri-Cities Airport. Intermodal connections between these freight hubs, Pasco’s industrial areas, and the tri-cities region are necessary to support the movement of goods. Primary routes serving these existing freight transportation needs are identified through the Washington FGTS although additional development in these areas could generate new freight traffic demands. Pasco will benefit from ensuring that its freight routes are designed to accommodate the needs of its industrial and commercial areas, while protecting its residential neighborhoods from freight traffic. Having designated freight routes will help the city better coordinate and improve its efforts regarding both freight and non-freight transportation system users, including the following: • Roadway and Intersection Improvements can be designed for freight vehicles with adjustments for turn radii, sight distance, lane width and turn pocket lengths. • Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements – such as protected or separated bike facilities, enhanced pedestrian crossings, and other safety improvements – can be identified to reduce freight impacts to other users, particularly along bikeways and walkways. • Roadway Durability can be increased by using concrete instead of asphalt for the pavement surface. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 11 • Railroad Connections can be coordinated to support businesses that ship goods by rail, particularly in areas where railroad sidings can be provided. • Coordination with Businesses and Adjacent Jurisdictions can ensure that local and regional freight traffic uses Pasco’s freight routes to travel within the City. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 12 FIGURE 3: WASHINGTON STATE FGTS FREIGHT NETWORK This figure will be developed at a later date PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 13 PRIORITY BICYCLE NETWORK Currently, Pasco does not maintain designated bicycle routes although residents of Pasco have provided numerous comments and input in support of bicycle facilities. These comments were received in both the online survey conducted for the TSMP and in the 2020 National Citizen Survey conducted by the City of Pasco2. Pasco’s existing and planned bicycle facilities were reviewed to identify opportunities and constraints. Future bicycle facility gaps were identified and used to develop a comprehensive priority bicycle network for the City of Pasco. The priority bicycle network will be used to prioritize investments and develop a system that supports bicycle travel. The identified priority bicycle network for Pasco is shown in Figure 4. The priority bicycle network includes a range of treatment types based on the roadway context (e.g., vehicle speeds and volumes) and available right of way. This approach ensures that the proposed bicycle network fits within the existing neighborhood and street context. FIGURE 4: RECOMMENDED PASCO PRIORITY BIKE NETWORK A draft version of the priority bicycle network is available here: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1ZQGKg1iS76ttbP7cpz4f7Iu983_Lvng1&usp=shari ng 2 The National Community Survey. Pasco, WA, Community Livability Report. 2019. https://www.pasco- wa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/62086/NCS-Community-Livability-Report-Pasco-2020 PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 14 MULTIMODAL CROSS-SECTION STANDARDS Different streets serve different purposes, and a functional classification system provides a framework for matching the size and type of various street elements with the intended purpose of the street. While a street’s functional classification does not dictate which street elements to include, it does facilitate the selection of the multimodal facilities and widths that help the street fulfill its intended multimodal function. Adjacent land uses and available right-of-way also influence which elements are included in a specific segment. Much of Pasco’s street system is already built out and may not be easily reconfigured. However, cross-section standards should be applied to existing streets as significant redevelopment occurs and to new streets serving future development areas. For existing developed areas where significant redevelopment is not expected, the constrained cross-section standards will be applied. Constrained cross-sections may include narrower or limited travel lanes, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities, or accommodations that generally match those provided by the surrounding developed land uses. Cross-section standards can also provide a framework to guide design of existing facilities that may be candidates for future road diets or other reconfigurations. Roadway cross-section design elements include travel lanes, curbs, planter strips, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The current standard cross-sections for the City of Pasco are summarized in the Pasco Design and Construction Standards3 and summarized below for comparison with the recommended cross-sections. The following cross-sections show current standards and recommended maximum elements and total facility widths for Pasco’s functional classes. The recommended cross-sections were expanded to allow flexibility in the width of specific elements depending on the context of the adjacent land uses, as identified in the comprehensive plan zoning map. The cross-sections identified below include sections for each roadway type within each land use context to present the complete range of cross-section standards. These standards were compiled based on existing best practices for urban street design4,5 and professional judgement. A specific roadway type may not exist within a specific land use context (e.g. there are currently no identified industrial neighborhood collectors). ARTERIAL ROADWAY STANDARDS Currently, the City of Pasco maintains a five-lane cross-section standard for all minor arterials which includes a 5-foot bike lane and 7-foot sidewalks on each side of the street, seen in Figure 5. The City of Pasco does not currently have a roadway standard for their principal arterial network. 3 City of Pasco. Pasco Design and Construction Standards. https://www.pasco-wa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3229/City-of- Pasco-Standard-Drawings- 4 NACTO. Urban Street Design Guide. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/ 5 NACTO. Urban Bikeway Design Guide. https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/ PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 15 Paved Width: 68 feet, Right of Way: 83 feet FIGURE 5: EXISTING MINOR ARTERIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) The Pasco Transportation System Master Plan recommends converting the existing minor arterial roadway standard to the proposed principal arterial roadway standard and introducing a new three- lane minor arterial cross-section. Other key recommended changes include adding a planter strip between the sidewalk and street, on-street parking (for residential and mixed-use areas where less off-street parking is typically constructed), and a buffer between cyclists and adjacent travel lanes. The proposed principal arterial cross-sections, summarized in Figures 6A to 6D, and the proposed minor arterial cross-sections, summarized in Figures 7A to 7D, include flexible design standards for each cross-section element to accommodate the expected roadway users depending on the adjacent land use context. For example, the residential minor arterial cross-section standard will be applied as part of the proposed road reconfiguration on Court Street. A summary of the recommended widths for both the principal arterial and minor arterial cross-sections is also provided below in Tables 4 and 5. Paved Width: 70 feet, Right of Way: 102 feet FIGURE 6A: RECOMMENDED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL – MIXED USE STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 16 Paved Width: 70 feet, Right of Way: 94 feet FIGURE 6B: PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL – RESIDENTIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) Paved Width: 74 feet, Right of Way: 96 feet FIGURE 6C: PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL – COMMERCIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 17 Paved Width: 76 feet, Right of Way: 98 feet FIGURE 6D: PROPOSED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL – INDUSTRIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) TABLE 4: RECOMMENDED PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL CROSS-SECTION OPTIONS Note: Pasco’s standard curb section is included as part of the furnishing zone or landscape strip width; Pasco’s standard gutter section is included as part of the adjacent lane 1. On-street parking not recommended for a five-lane cross-section 2. The number of lanes is dependent on the expected street volume Cross-Section Element Mixed Use Residential Commercial Industrial Sidewalk 8 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet Furnishing Zone or Landscape Strip 8 feet 6 feet 5 feet 5 feet Bike Lanes 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet Buffer Width 2 feet minimum 2 feet minimum 2 feet minimum 2 feet minimum On-Street Parking Optional1; 8 feet None None None Vehicle Travel Lanes2 2 to 4 lanes; 11 feet 2 to 4 lanes; 11 feet 2 to 4 lanes; 12 feet 2 to 4 lanes; 12 feet Median or Center T urn L ane 12 feet 12 feet 12 feet 14 feet PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 18 Paved Width: 64 feet, Right of Way: 92 feet FIGURE 7A: PROPOSED MINOR ARTERIAL – MIXED USE STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) Paved Width: 62 feet, Right of Way: 86 feet FIGURE 7B: PROPOSED MINOR ARTERIAL – RESIDENTIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 19 Paved Width: 50 feet, Right of Way: 72 feet FIGURE 7C: PROPOSED MINOR ARTERIAL – COMMERCIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) Paved Width: 52 feet, Right of Way: 74 feet FIGURE 7D: PROPOSED MINOR ARTERIAL – INDUSTRIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 20 TABLE 5: RECOMMENDED MINOR ARTERIAL CROSS-SECTION OPTIONS Note: Pasco’s standard curb section is included as part of the furnishing zone or landscape strip width; Pasco’s standard gutter section is included as part of the adjacent lane COLLECTOR ROADWAY STANDARDS The City of Pasco’s current collector cross-section includes three lanes for vehicles with 5-foot bike lanes and 7-foot sidewalks on each side. The existing collector cross-section is shown in Figure 8. Paved Width: 48 feet, Right of Way: 63 feet FIGURE 8: EXISTING COLLECTOR STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) The Pasco Transportation System Master Plan recommends maintaining the existing collector roadway standard for collectors constructed in commercial and industrial areas where a center two- way left turn lane can better balance through movements for vehicles and business or freight access. The recommended collector street cross-section for mixed use and residential areas does not include a center two-way left turn lane to minimize the cross-section width and to support a Cross-Section Element Mixed Use Residential Commercial Industrial Sidewalk 8 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet Furnishing Zone or Landscape Strip 6 feet 6 feet 5 feet 5 feet Bike Lanes 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet 5 feet Buffer Width 2 feet minimum 2 feet minimum 2 feet minimum 2 feet minimum On-Street Parking Optional; 8 feet Optional; 7 feet None None Vehicle Travel Lanes 2 lanes; 11 feet 2 lanes; 11 feet 2 lanes; 12 feet 2 lanes; 12 feet Median or Center T urn L ane 12 feet 12 feet 12 feet 14 feet PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 21 multimodal street character. Other key recommended changes include adding a planter strip between the sidewalk and street and including on-street parking (for residential and mixed-use areas where less off-street parking is typically constructed). The proposed collector cross-sections, summarized below in Figures 9A to 9D, include flexible design standards to accommodate the expected roadway users depending on the adjacent land use context. The proposed residential, commercial, or mixed-use standards will be applied to the planned road reconfiguration on Sylvester Street. The recommended widths are also summarized below in Table 6. Paved Width: 50 feet, Right of Way: 78 feet FIGURE 9A: PROPOSED COLLECTOR – MIXED USE STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) Paved Width: 48 feet, Right of Way: 72 feet FIGURE 9B: PROPOSED COLLECTOR – RESIDENTIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 22 Paved Width: 45 feet, Right of Way: 67 feet FIGURE 9C: PROPOSED COLLECTOR – COMMERCIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) Paved Width: 46 feet, Right of Way: 68 feet FIGURE 9D: PROPOSED COLLECTOR – INDUSTRIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 23 TABLE 6: RECOMMENDED COLLECTOR CROSS-SECTION OPTIONS Cross-Section Element Mixed Use Residential Commercial Industrial Sidewalk 8 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet Furnishing Zone or Landscape Strip 6 feet 6 feet 5 feet 5 feet Bike Lanes 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet Buffer Width None None None None On-Street Parking Optional; 8 feet Optional; 7 feet None None Vehicle Travel Lanes 2 lanes; 11 feet 2 lanes; 11 feet 2 lanes; 11 feet 2 lanes; 11 feet Median or Center T urn L ane None None 11 feet 12 feet Note: Pasco’s standard curb section is included as part of the furnishing zone or landscape strip width; Pasco’s standard gutter section is included as part of the adjacent lane The Pasco Transportation System Master Plan also recommends introducing a new neighborhood collector cross-section which balances mobility for all roadway users with home or business access. Neighborhood collectors are designed to provide more connectivity than local streets with slower vehicle speeds than a typical collector street through their design or other traffic calming treatments. These features make neighborhood collectors a critical component of a multimodal transportation system. This cross-section includes two vehicle travel lanes, on-street bike lanes (in commercial or industrial areas only), on-street parking (for residential and mixed-use areas where less off-street parking is typically constructed), a planter strip between the sidewalk and street, and sidewalks. The proposed neighborhood collector cross-sections, summarized below in Figures 10A to 10D, include flexible design standards for each cross-section element to accommodate the expected roadway users depending on the adjacent land use context. Recommended widths for each element are also summarized in Table 7. Potential traffic calming treatments which can be applied to neighborhood collectors is summarized below in the Neighborhood Traffic Management Tools section. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 24 Paved Width: 40 feet, Right of Way: 68 feet FIGURE 10A: PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR – MIXED USE STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) Paved Width: 38 feet, Right of Way: 62 feet FIGURE 10B: PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR – RESIDENTIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 25 Paved Width: 32 feet, Right of Way: 54 feet FIGURE 10C: PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR – COMMERCIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) Paved Width: 32 feet, Right of Way: 54 feet FIGURE 10D: PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR – INDUSTRIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 26 TABLE 7: RECOMMENDED NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTOR CROSS-SECTION OPTIONS Cross-Section Element Mixed Use Residential Commercial Industrial Sidewalk 8 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet Furnishing Zone or Landscape Strip 6 feet 6 feet 5 feet 5 feet Bike Lanes None None 5 feet1 6 feet1 Buffer Width None None None None On-Street Parking Optional; 8 feet Optional; 7 feet None None Vehicle Travel Lanes 2 lanes; 12 feet 2 lanes; 12 feet 2 lanes; 11 feet 2 lanes; 11 feet Median or Center T urn L ane None None None None Note: Pasco’s standard curb section is included as part of the furnishing zone or landscape strip width; Pasco’s standard gutter section is included as part of the adjacent lane 1. Sharrows and traffic calming treatments can be provided in lieu of bike lanes LOCAL ROADWAY STANDARDS Existing local roadway standards for the City of Pasco are summarized in Figures 11A and 11B for local streets with and without curb. Both cross-sections include two travel lanes and parking on each side of the street. Sidewalks are only provided for sections that are constructed with curb. All new roadways within the City of Pasco are recommended to be constructed with curb, so the TSMP did not include a local street option without curb. Paved Width: 38 feet, Right of Way: 49 feet FIGURE 11A: EXISTING LOCAL STREET CROSS-SECTION WITH CURB (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 27 Paved Width: 44 feet, Right of Way: 44 feet FIGURE 11B: EXISTING LOCAL STREET CROSS-SECTION WITHOUT CURB (SOURCE: STREETMIX) The Pasco Transportation System Master Plan recommends maintaining the existing local roadway standard for streets constructed in mixed use and residential areas where on-street parking is needed to serve residences or businesses. On-street parking is less critical in commercial and industrial areas where large off-street parking areas are typically constructed, so the recommended local street cross-sections for commercial and industrial areas does not include parking. Other key recommended changes include adding a planter strip between the sidewalk and street. The proposed local street cross-sections, summarized below in Figures 12A to 12D, include flexible design standards for each cross-section element to accommodate the expected roadway users depending on the adjacent land use context. The recommended widths for each cross-section element is also summarized below in Table 8. Paved Width: 36 feet, Right of Way: 64 feet FIGURE 12A: PROPOSED LOCAL STREET WITH CURB – MIXED USE STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 28 Paved Width: 34 feet, Right of Way: 58 feet FIGURE 12B: PROPOSED LOCAL STREET WITH CURB – RESIDENTIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) Paved Width: 22 feet, Right of Way: 44 feet FIGURE 12C: PROPOSED LOCAL STREET WITH CURB – COMMERCIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 29 Paved Width: 24 feet, Right of Way: 46 feet FIGURE 12D: PROPOSED LOCAL STREET WITH CURB – INDUSTRIAL STREET CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) TABLE 8: RECOMMENDED LOCAL STREET CROSS-SECTION OPTIONS Cross-Section Element Mixed Use Residential Commercial Industrial Sidewalk 8 feet 6 feet 6 feet 6 feet Furnishing Zone or Landscape Strip 6 feet 6 feet 5 feet 5 feet Bike Lanes None None None None Buffer Width None None None None On-Street Parking Optional; 8 feet Optional; 7 feet None None Vehicle Travel Lanes 2 lanes; 10 feet 2 lanes; 10 feet 2 lanes; 11 feet 2 lanes; 12 feet1 Median or Center T urn L ane None None None None Note: Pasco’s standard curb section is included as part of the furnishing zone or landscape strip width; Pasco’s standard gutter section is included as part of the adjacent lane 1. Additional width may be needed at intersections or driveways to accommodate truck turning movements CONSTRAINED ROADWAY OPTIONS Constrained Streets are generally those where the construction may be challenging due to topography, environmentally sensitive areas, or historic areas. The constrained street standards will also be applied in existing, developed areas where significant redevelopment is not expected. These streets may require modified designs that may not be to scale with the adjacent land use to allow for reasonable construction costs. Constrained elements may include narrower or limited PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 30 travel lanes, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities, or accommodations that generally match those provided by the surrounding developed land uses. Recommended guidance for modifications to the standard designs is provided in Table 9. Any modification of a standard design requires approval prior to construction. TABLE 9: RECOMMENDED CONSTRAINED ROADWAY OPTIONS Note: Pasco’s standard curb section is included as part of the furnishing zone or landscape strip width; Pasco’s standard gutter section is included as part of the adjacent lane 1. Minimum 3 feet width for furnishing/landscape strip, if provided 2. The number of lanes is dependent on the expected street volume 3. Access restrictions required if no median is provided COUNTY ROADWAY OPTIONS County roadways within Pasco’s UGA face several unique challenges, including inconsistent roadway widths, lack of multimodal facilities, and inadequate ROW designations which can make it challenging to bring these roadways up to urban standards as these areas are incorporated. Furthermore, there is no existing formal agreement between Franklin County and the City of Pasco to guide the process for requiring dedication and improvements in the UGA or for jurisdictional transfer of County roads to the City. As a result, within the UGA ROW dedication and improvements, including multimodal facilities, are provided in an inconsistent, ad hoc manner. Three different approaches can be considered for establishing road annexation (or jurisdictional transfer) standards that ensures consistency in ROW widths and promotes multimodal facility development: 1. Interim or phased approaches for upgrading ROW in urbanizing areas (i.e. within the UGA) Cross-Section Element Principal & Minor Arterials Collectors & Neighborhood Collectors Local Streets Sidewalk 6 feet minimum width 5 feet minimum width 5 feet minimum width Furnishing Zone or Landscape Strip None1 None1 None1 Bike Lanes 6 feet minimum width, no buffer 5 feet minimum width or provide facility on adjacent corridor N/A On-Street Parking None None None Vehicle Travel Lanes 2 to 42 11 feet minimum width 2 10 feet minimum width 2 10 feet minimum width Median or Center T urn L ane As needed3 As needed3 None PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 31 2. Interagency Agreements that establish a coordinated strategy for ROW improvements among the City and the County/State 3. Standards/Fee-in-lieu that offer developers or property owners an alternative to directly providing roadway improvements These methods and examples will be used to codify a process to manage ROW dedications within the UGA as part of the TSMP. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE STANDARDS The following sections detail various walking and biking facility standards and treatment guidelines. WALKING AND BIKING FACILITIES As shown in the multi-modal roadway cross-section standards, the existing city roadway design standards should be modified to require buffered bike lanes along principal arterial and minor arterial roadways for all land use types. Wider bike lanes will also be provided along collector roadways for all land use types and neighborhood collector roadways in industrial or commercial areas. Bicyclists should be accommodated with a 5-foot bike lane and 2-foot buffer along arterial roadways and a six-foot bike lane along collector roadways. Currently, the City of Pasco requires 5- foot bike lanes on all arterial and collector roadways, so the revised standards increase the total operating room for bicyclists. Shared streets for bikes are also recommended to be designated throughout the city and should include pavement markings/ signage. All streets in mixed-use, residential, and industrial areas are also recommended to require wider sidewalks. Newly constructed roadways are recommended to include an 8-foot sidewalk in mixed- use areas and a 6-foot sidewalk in residential, commercial, and industrial areas. Additionally, each new street is recommended to include a landscape buffer strip or tree wells to create a more pleasant walking environment for pedestrians. Currently, the City of Pasco requires a 5-foot sidewalk in residential areas and a 7-foot sidewalk in commercial areas. The proposed cross sections increase the standard sidewalk width to 6 feet in residential areas and establish new standards for commercial areas that are based on the type of adjacent businesses. In mixed use areas (e.g., downtown Pasco), wider 8-foot sidewalks will be supplemented with tree wells to accommodate increase pedestrian activity while auto-oriented commercial districts will provided narrower 6-foot sidewalks. SHARED-USE PATHS Shared-use paths provide off-roadway facilities for walking and biking travel. Depending on their location, they can serve both recreational and transportation needs. Shared-use path designs vary in surface types and widths. Hard surfaces are generally better for bicycle travel. Widths need to provide ample space for both walking and biking and should be able to accommodate maintenance vehicles. Currently, the City of Pasco does not have a standard cross-section for shared-use paths. The recommended cross-section is summarized in Figure 13. The proposed cross-section is 12 feet wide, with 2-foot shoulders on each side. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 32 Paved Width: 14 feet, Right of Way: 16 feet FIGURE 13: PROPOSED SHARED-USE PATH CROSS-SECTION (SOURCE: STREETMIX) STREET CROSSINGS Roadways with high traffic volumes and/or speeds in areas with nearby transit stops, residential uses, schools, parks, shopping and employment destinations generally require enhanced street crossings with treatments, such as marked crosswalks, high visibility crossings, and curb extensions to improve the safety and convenience. Crossing locations with higher volumes of pedestrians (either observed or projected) are also candidate locations for rectangular rapid flashing beacons or pedestrian hybrid beacons which increase the visibility of the crossing for drivers. Crossings should be consistent with the recommended block spacing standards shown in Table 5, and mid-block pedestrian and bicycle accessways are recommended to be provided at spacing no more than 300 feet. Exceptions include where the connection is impractical due to topography, inadequate sight distance, high vehicle travel speeds, lack of supporting land use or other factors that may prevent safe crossing (as determined by the city). The city should consider adding enhanced pedestrian crossing treatments to increase protection where warranted by the combination of pedestrian demand volumes and cross traffic speeds and volumes. Candidate locations include trail crossings (e.g. Road 100/Planned FCID Canal Trail), parks or recreation, schools, or high-volume transit stops. Appendix A of National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 562, Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings, includes a procedure for treatment selection, with input variables including: • Vehicle speed on the major street • Pedestrian crossing distance • Peak hour pedestrian volume • Peak hour vehicle volume • Local parameters such as motorist compliance, pedestrian walking speed, and pedestrian start- up and clearance time PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 33 NCHRP Report 562 includes worksheets for inputting the variables above and identifying the appropriate treatment type. A typical worksheet used for this evaluation is seen below in Figure 14. FIGURE 14: NCHRP 562 SAMPLE EVALUATION WORKSHEET NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TOOLS Neighborhood Traffic Management (NTM) involves strategies to slow traffic, and potentially reduce volumes, creating a more inviting environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. NTM strategies target neighborhood livability on local streets, though a few can apply to collectors and arterials, such as raised median islands. Mitigation measures balance the need to manage vehicle speeds and volumes with the need to maintain mobility, circulation, and function for service providers, such as emergency responders. Examples of tools are shown in Figure 15. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 34 Chicanes Chokers Curb Extensions www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden www.pedbikeimages.org/Carl Sundstrom Diverters Median Islands Raised Crosswalks www.pedbikeimages.org/Adam Fukushima www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden www.pedbikeimages.org/Tom Harned Speed Cushions Speed Hump Traffic Circles NACTO Urban Street Design Guide www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden www.pedbikeimages.org/Carl Sundstrom FIGURE 15 : SUMMARY OF NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 35 Table 10, below, lists common NTM applications. Any NTM project should include coordination with emergency response staff to ensure that public safety is not compromised. NTM strategies implemented on a state facility would require coordination with WSDOT regarding freight mobility considerations. TABLE 10: APPLICATION OF NTM STRATEGIES Arterials Collectors Local Streets Speed Reduction Traffic Diversion CHICANES ü ü ü CHOKERS ü ü ü CURB EXTENSIONS ü ü ü ü DIVERTERS (WITH EMERGENCY VEHICLE PASS- THROUGH) ü ü ü MEDIAN ISLANDS ü ü ü ü RAISED CROSSWALKS ü ü ü SPEED CUSHIONS (WITH EMERGENCY VEHICLE PASS- THROUGH) ü ü ü SPEED HUMP ü ü ü TRAFFIC CIRCLES ü ü ü The City of Pasco does not currently have a formal neighborhood traffic management program. If such a program were desired to help respond to future issues, suggested elements include: • Provide a formalized process for citizens who are concerned about the traffic on their neighborhood street. The process could include filing a citizen request with petition signatures and a preliminary evaluation. If the evaluation finds cause for concern, a neighborhood meeting would be held and formal data would be collected and evaluated. If a problem were found to exist, solutions would be identified and the process continued with neighborhood meetings, feedback from service and maintenance providers, cost evaluation, and traffic calming device implementation. Six months after implementation the device would be evaluated for effectiveness. • For land use proposals, in addition to assessing impacts to the entire transportation network, traffic studies for new developments must also assess impacts to residential streets. A recommended threshold to determine if this additional analysis is needed is if the proposed project increases through traffic on residential streets by 40 or more vehicles during the evening peak hour or 200 vehicles per day. Once the analysis is performed, the NTM Application Use by Function Classification Impact PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 36 threshold used to determine if residential streets are impacted would be if their daily traffic volume exceeds 1,800 vehicles. ACCESS MANAGEMENT & STREET CONNECTIVITY STANDARDS Access management provides safe and efficient access to the transportation system for all users. Currently, the City of Pasco only manages access through restrictions on the placement of driveways. New residential driveways must be located 25 feet from an existing intersection, while new commercial driveways must be placed in coordination with the Public Works Director6. Expanded access management spacing standards which account for the different roadway functional classifications are recommended for the City of Pasco to better manage driveway construction. These standards are summarized in Table 11. TABLE 11: RECOMMENDED ACCESS MANAGEMENT SPACING STANDARDS SPACING GUIDELINES1 2 PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS MINOR ARTERIALS COLLECTORS NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTORS LOCAL STREETS MINIMUM DRIVEWAY SPACING (DRIVEWAY TO DRIVEWAY) 2 300 feet 250 feet 150 feet 75 feet N/A MINIMUM FULL-ACCESS DRIVEWAY SPACING (SETBACK FROM INTERSECTION) 300 feet3 250 feet 150 feet 75 feet 25 feet MINIMUM RIGHT-IN/RIGHT- OUT DRIVEWAY SPACING (SETBACK FROM INTERSECTION) 150 feet3 125 feet 75 feet 50 feet 25 feet 1. All distances measured from the edge of adjacent approaches 2. A property must construct access to a lower classified roadway, where possible 3. WSDOT requires 1,320 between an interchange and the closest driveway7 The City of Pasco recently adopted block length and block perimeter guidelines to control access to their street network. Under this new guidance for most zoning designations, block lengths shall not exceed 660 feet and the block perimeter shall not exceed 1,760 feet. Previously blocks could not exceed 1,320 feet for residential uses or 600 feet for commercial uses8. In addition to these new standards, Pasco should consider adopting standards which govern the minimum block size and the 6 City of Pasco. Pasco Municipal Code Section 12.04.100 Driveway Standards. https://pasco.municipal.codes/PMC/12.04.090 7 State of Washington. Washington Administrative Code Section 468-52-040 Access Control Classification System and Standards. https://app.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=468-52-040 8 City of Pasco. Street Connectivity – Supplemental Memorandum for CA2019-013. September 17, 2020. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 37 maximum distance between pedestrian or bicycle access points. The existing street connectivity standards plus these additional guidelines is summarized below in Table 12. TABLE 12: EXISTING AND RECOMMENDED STREET CONNECTIVITY STANDARDS SPACING GUIDELINES PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS MINOR ARTERIALS COLLECTORS NEIGHBORHOOD COLLECTORS LOCAL STREETS MAXIMUM BLOCK SIZE (PUBLIC STREET TO PUBLIC STREET)1 660 feet 660 feet 660 feet 660 feet 660 feet MINIMUM BLOCK SIZE (PUBLIC STREET TO PUBLIC STREET) 300 feet 250 feet 200 feet 150 feet 125 feet MAXIMUM BLOCK PERIMETER1 1,760 feet 1,760 feet 1,760 feet 1,760 feet 1,760 feet MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE ACCESSWAYS2 330 feet 330 feet 330 feet 330 feet 330 feet 1. Existing standard for the City of Pasco 2. Spacing is the maximum of public street to public street, public street to accessway, or accessway to accessway distance VEHICLE MOBILITY TARGETS Mobility targets are used in long-range planning and development review to identify deficiencies on the transportation network and can be used to identify needed improvements as growth occurs. Two common methods used to gauge traffic operations for motor vehicles are volume to capacity (v/c) ratios and level of service (LOS): • Volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio: A v/c ratio is a decimal representation (between 0.00 and 1.00) of the proportion of capacity that is being used at a turn movement, approach leg, or intersection. The ratio is the peak hour traffic volume divided by the hourly capacity of a given intersection or movement. A lower ratio indicates smooth operations and minimal delays. A ratio approaching 1.00 indicates increased congestion and reduced performance. • Level of service (LOS): LOS is a “report card” rating (A through F) based on the average delay experienced by vehicles at the intersection. LOS A, B, and C indicate conditions where traffic moves without significant delays over periods of peak hour travel demand. LOS D and E are progressively worse operating conditions. LOS F represents conditions where average vehicle delay is excessive, and demand exceeds capacity, typically resulting in long queues and delays. Mobility targets are adopted by the City of Pasco in their comprehensive plan. The City of Pasco currently uses a Level of Service (LOS) standard which is based on a Highway Capacity Manual calculation of delay that varies between signalized and unsignalized intersections. The current mobility targets, which apply to the daily peak hour, are summarized below in Table 13. The City requires a lower level of service for arterial and collector roadways where higher traffic leads to PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 38 higher delays. The arterial and collector standards are consistent with the mobility targets applied by BFCG and WSDOT. TABLE 13: EXISTING MOBILITY TARGETS FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFIATION EXISTING MOBILITY TARGET LOCAL STREETS LOS C ARTERIALS AND COLLECTORS LOS D WSDOT FACILITIES LOS D The City of Pasco should consider expanding their current mobility targets to include a volume-to- capacity (v/c) standard. Having both a LOS (delay-based) and v/c (congestion-based) standard can be helpful in situations where one metric may not be enough, such as an all-way stop where one approach is over capacity but overall intersection delay meets standards. The City of Pasco should also introduce mobility targets which depend on the intersection control which can better capture acceptable levels of performance across different intersection control types. Table 14, below, summarizes recommended changes to Pasco’s mobility targets. TABLE 14: RECOMMENDED MOBILITY TARGETS INTERSECTION TYPE PROPOSED MOBILITY TARGET REPORTING MEASURE SIGNALIZED LOS D and v/c ≤0.90 Intersection ALL-WAY STOP OR ROUNDABOUTS LOS D and v/c ≤0.90 Worst Approach TWO-WAY STOP 1 LOS E and v/c ≤0.95 Worst Major Approach/Worst Minor Approach WSDOT INTERSECTIONS LOS D Intersection or Worst Approach depending on control type 1. Applies to approaches that serve more than 20 vehicles; there is no standard for approaches serving lower volumes PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 39 DEMAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES Pasco experiences peak congestion due to single-occupant trips during peak demand times. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) aims to remove single occupant motor vehicle trips from the roadway network during peak travel demand periods which could provide one avenue for reducing pressure on key facilities. Changing a users’ travel behavior and providing alternative choices will help accommodate the expected growth in travel demand identified for Pasco. Generally, TDM focuses on reducing vehicle miles traveled for large employers by promoting active and shared modes of travel. Research has shown that a comprehensive set of complementary policies implemented over a large geographic area can affect the number of vehicle miles traveled to/from that area. In order for TDM measures to be effective, strategies should go beyond the low- cost, uncontroversial measures commonly used such as carpooling, transportation coordinators/associations, priority parking spaces, etc. Effective TDM measures include parking strategies (limiting or increasing supply in strategic locations), improved services for alternative modes of travel, and market-based incentives to encourage travel behavior changes. However, TDM includes a wide variety of actions that are specifically tailored to the individual needs of an area. Effective TDM strategies include: • Supporting alternative vehicle types by identifying potential electric vehicle plug-in stations and developing implementing code provisions. • Encouraging/supporting rideshare/vanpool to major employers in Benton or Franklin County and Kennewick or Richland (e.g. Hanford Nuclear Site) for employees living in Pasco. • Establishing site development standards that require pedestrian and bicycle access through sites and connections to adjacent sites and transportation facilities, to the extent the development impacts existing access. • Improving amenities and access for transit stops. Actions could include instituting site design requirements allowing redevelopment of parking areas for transit amenities; requiring safe and direct pedestrian connections to transit and permitting transit-supportive uses outright in commercial and institutional zones. • Improving street connectivity to support direct connections between residential areas and activity centers. • Investing in pedestrian/bicycle facilities. Opportunities to expand transportation demand management and other measures in Pasco include developing implementing requirements for long-term bicycle parking for places of employment above a certain size, park and ride facilities, major transit stops, and multi-family residential developments. Other land uses, especially activity generators, should be required to provide short- term bike parking and are encouraged to implement the long-term options. Long-term bicycle parking options include: • Individual lockers for one or two bicycles • Racks in an enclosed, lockable room • Racks in an area that is monitored by security cameras or guards (within 100 feet) • Racks or lockers in an area always visible to employees PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 40 ELECTRIC AND AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES Emerging transportation technologies will shape roads, communities, and daily lives for generations. Vehicles are becoming more connected, automated, shared, and electric. While the timing of when these advances will occur is uncertain, they will have significant impacts on how a community plans, designs, builds, and uses the transportation system. Below are some important emerging transportation technology terms and definitions that provide the basis for the impacts, policies and action items discussed in the following sections. Connected vehicles (CVs) will enable communications between vehicles, infrastructure, and other road users. This means that vehicles will be able to assist human drivers and prevent crashes while making the system operate more smoothly. Automated vehicles (AVs) will, to varying degrees, take over driving functions and allow travelers to focus their attention on other matters. Vehicles with combined automated functions like lane keeping and adaptive cruise control exist today. In the future, more sophisticated sensing and programming technology will allow vehicles to operate with little to no operator oversight. Shared vehicles (SVs) allow ride-hailing companies to offer customers access to vehicles through cell phone applications. Ride-hailing applications give on-demand transportation with comparable convenience to car ownership without the hassle of maintenance and parking. Examples of shared vehicles include companies like Uber and Lyft. Electric Vehicles (EVs) have been on the road for decades and are becoming more economically feasible as the production costs of batteries decline and vehicle fuel prices increase. Many of these technologies will not be exclusive of the others and it is important to think of the host of implications that arise from the combination of them. These vehicles are referred to as connected, automated, shared, and electric (CASE) vehicles. IMPACTS OF CASE VEHICLES CONGESTION AND ROAD CAPACITY There are several competing forces that will unfold as connected, automated, and shared vehicles are deployed. It is difficult to predict how these vehicles will influence congestion and road capacity. • AVs will provide a more relaxing or productive ride experience and people may have less resistance to longer commutes. • Shared AVs are projected to have lower fuel and operating costs, making them less PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 41 expensive on a per mile basis than private vehicle ownership. This may increase demand for auto-based travel in the future. • CV technology will allow vehicles to operate safely with closer following distance, less unnecessary braking, and better coordinated traffic control. This will increase road capacity in the long run when CVs and AVs comprise most of the public and private fleet of vehicles. • In the near term, since AVs make up a fraction of the fleet of vehicles, road capacity could decrease as AVs will operate more slowly and cautiously than regular vehicles. • A new class of traffic – zero-occupant vehicles – will increase traffic congestion. These could include AVs making deliveries or shared AVs circulating around the city and traveling to their next rider. • Roadways may need to be redesigned or better maintained to accommodate the needs of automated driving systems. For instance, striping may need to be wider and more consistently maintained to ensure the vehicle’s sensors can recognize it. These points raise questions about the degree to which CASE vehicles will impact road capacity and congestion. The development and use of the technologies should be monitored closely. TRANSIT AVs could become cost competitive with transit and reduce transit ridership as riders prefer a more convenient alternative. However, transit will remain the most efficient way to move high volumes of people through constricted urban environments. AVs will not eliminate congestion and as discussed above, could exacerbate it – especially in the early phases of AV adoption. In addition, shared AVs may not serve all sectors of a community so many will still require access to transit to meet their daily needs. PARKING Because AVs will be able to park themselves, travelers will elect to get dropped off at their destination while their vehicle finds parking or its next passenger. Shared AVs will have an even greater impact on parking because parking next to the destination will no longer be a priority for the traveling public. This means that parking may be over-supplied in some areas and new opportunities to reconfigure land use will emerge. Outstanding questions related to parking include: • How does vehicle ownership impact parking behavior? • What portion of the AV fleet will be shared? • How far out of the downtown area will AVs be able to park while remaining convenient and readily available? CURB SPACE In addition to parking impacts, the ability to be dropped off at the destination will create more potential for conflicts in the right-of-way between vehicles that are dropping passengers off or picking them up, vehicles moving through traffic, and vehicles parked on the street. This issue is already occurring in many urban areas with ride-hailing companies, where popular destinations are experiencing significant double-parking issues. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 42 AVs will also be used to deliver packages and food. This may mean that delivery vehicles need to be accommodated in new portions of the right-of-way. For instance, if the AV parks at the curb in a neighborhood and smaller robots are used to deliver packages from door to door, new conflicts will arise between vehicles, pedestrians, robots, and bicyclists. ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING To accommodate a future where electric vehicles are the majority of the vehicle fleet, additional charging infrastructure will be required. Cities, electric utilities, regions, and states will need to work together to create enough reliable electricity supply to fulfill the increased electrical demand. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 43 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (TIA) GUIDELINES The City of Pasco’s existing TIA guidelines were reviewed to identify areas of improvement to ensure a consistent development review process that accurately anticipates traffic impacts due to ongoing development. Currently, Pasco requires a TIA to be completed if 100 or more weekday peak hour trips are generated by the development, or due to existing traffic/roadway conditions, existing and anticipated traffic volumes, trip distribution, accident history, property zoning, truck traffic percentage, event-based traffic, expressed community concern, and other factors relating to complexity, and location of proposed development. Their current guidelines also allow for two tiers of TIAs to be completed depending on the anticipated level of development. A Tier 1 TIA can be completed when fewer than 50 PM peak hour net new trips will be generated by the development depending on the context of the development location. Tier 1 TIAs document the anticipated trip generation and detail the proposed site plans for the development at a minimum. Tier 2 TIAs are required when a development is expected to generate 50 or more net new trips during the PM peak hour. These documents include all details required for a Tier 1 TIA plus a full traffic study to document traffic conditions with the new development. The existing TIA guidelines do not provide specific details on methodologies that must be used to evaluate transportation impacts (e.g. appropriate background growth rate, appropriate trip generation resources). Recommended modifications to the TIA guidelines are summarized in the supplemental document “Pasco Guidelines for Transportation Impact Analysis,” provided in the appendix. These guidelines incorporate most material previously included in Pasco’s TIA guidelines, but include additional details on best practice for conducting TIAs. Clearly specifying these methods in the TIA guidelines will increase the uniformity of TIAs received by the City of Pasco and ensure consistent development review standards are applied. Key changes include: • Reducing the trips generated threshold to trigger a Tier 2 TIA from 50 to 25 for either the AM or PM peak hours • Adding a daily trip generation threshold to trigger a Tier 2 TIA of 300 trips • Specifying that all TIAs must be prepared by a licensed professional engineer or under the direct supervision of a licensed professional engineer registered in the State of Washington • Providing recommendations for standard analysis methodologies (e.g. standard background growth rate) • Adding additional guidelines for appropriate content to be documented in each TIA The following section presents the TIA guidelines for the City of Pasco. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 44 CITY OF PASCO GUIDELINES FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS February 2021 PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 45 This document describes the city’s required content for a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). In general terms, TIA applies to developments that are presumed to have a transportation impact. A traffic study shall, at a minimum, be a thorough review of the intermediate and long-range effects of the proposed development on the City’s transportation system and may result in mitigation of those resulting impacts. This is not to be confused with a Traffic Impact Fee. A professional engineer must prepare the TIA and must use appropriate data, methods, and standards as documented in the Pasco Guidelines for Transportation Impact Analysis. PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to implement a process to apply conditions to land use proposals in order to minimize impacts on and protect transportation facilities. In order to obtain sufficient and consistent information to assess a development’s impact on the transportation system a TIA will be performed by the City of Pasco, and/or its agents, at the Developers expense. The City of Pasco requires two tiers (Tier 1 and Tier 2) of TIAs depending on the expected level of development. In order to perform an adequate TIA the following options are available to the developer, Once a direction is chosen by the developer and/or his/her representative. it cannot be changed. This is out of consideration for responsibilities and final cost for the developer: n The City and/or its agents perform the TIA, at the Developers expense, selecting the most efficient and cost-effective means and provide the analysis to the developer without further consideration. n The Developer can perform the TIA utilizing their own licensed Traffic Engineer at the developer’s expense and the City will perform a review, at the Developers sole expense, with any and all clarifications or modifications to the TIA resulting from the review being the Developers sole financial responsibility. The preparation of the TIA report is the responsibility of the landowner or applicant. Pasco assumes no liability for any costs or time delays (either direct or inconsequential) associated with the TIA report preparation and review. The applicant can choose any qualified professional engineer. All TIA reports shall be reviewed by the city Public Works Department and the Department of Community & Economic Development (referred to as “city” in this document). Studies that do not address these guidelines adequately shall be returned to the applicant for modification. It is the responsibility of the applicant to coordinate with local agencies and/or the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for any potential impacts to county roadways or state highways. WHEN IS A TIER 1 ANALYSIS REQUIRED? PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 46 A Tier 1 TIA may be required to be submitted to the city with a land use application at the request of the city or if the proposal is expected to involve one (1) or more of the following: 1. Changes in land use designation, or zoning designation that will generate more vehicle trip ends. 2. Projected increase in trip generation of less than 25 trips during both the AM or PM peak hour, or less than 300 daily trips. 3. No additional Tier 2 requirements are met. WHEN IS A TIER 2 ANALYSIS REQUIRED? A Tier 2 TIA may be required to be submitted to the city with a land use application at the request of the city or if the proposal is expected to involve one (1) or more of the following: 1. Changes in land use designation, or zoning designation that will generate more vehicle trip ends. 2. Projected increase in trip generation of 25 or more trips during either the AM or PM peak hour, or more than 300 daily trips. 3. Potential impacts to intersection operations. 4. Potential impacts to residential areas or local roadways, including any non-residential development that will generate traffic through a residential zone. 5. Potential impacts to pedestrian and bicycle routes, including, but not limited to school routes and multimodal roadway improvements identified in the Transportation System Master Plan (TSMP). 6. The location of an existing or proposed access driveway does not meet minimum spacing or sight distance requirements, or is located where vehicles entering or leaving the property are restricted, or such vehicles are likely to queue or hesitate at an approach or access connection, thereby creating a safety hazard. 7. A change in internal traffic patterns may cause safety concerns. 8. Projected increase of five trips by vehicles exceeding 26,000-pound gross vehicle weight (13 tons) per day, or an increase in use of adjacent roadways by vehicles exceeding 26,000- pound gross vehicle weight (13 tons) by 10 percent. 9. Potential event-based traffic that could impact adjacent intersections. 10. Expressed community concern. 11. Other factors as deemed appropriate by the Public Works Department or the Department of Community & Economic Development. PROCESS A landowner or developer seeking to develop/redevelop property shall contact the city at the project’s outset. The city will review existing transportation data to establish whether a Tier 1 or Tier 2 TIA is required. It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide enough detailed information for the city to make a determination. An applicant should have the following prepared, preferably in writing: PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 47 n Type of uses within the development n The size of the development n The location of the development n Proposed new accesses or roadways n Estimated trip generation and source of data n Proposed study area If the city cannot properly evaluate a proposed development’s impacts without a more detailed study, a Tier 2 TIA will be required. Within a reasonable time following the initial contact, the city will establish whether a TIA is required. If the developer chooses to use the city to complete the TIA, the city will provide a project specific scope with an estimated cost to the applicant that includes all of the requirements in this guideline document. If the developer chooses to use its own traffic engineer, it must submit a project specific scope to the city that includes all of the requirements in this guideline document for review and approval before starting the TIA. TIER 1 REQUIREMENTS The following sections detail the TIA requirements. TIA REQUIREMENTS The following requirements shall be included in each Tier 1 TIA submitted to the city. Additional information specified by the city through scoping or through other project meetings shall also be included. 1. The TIA shall be prepared by or prepared under the direct supervision of a Registered Professional Engineer who shall sign and stamp the TIA. 2. Study Area: An inventory of the existing transportation facilities (pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicle) for all roadways fronting the proposed development will be included. The surrounding land use context and allowable zoning must also be reviewed. 3. Trip Generation: The proposed trip generation should be based on similar land uses reported in the latest version of the ITE Trip Generation Manual and shall include calculations for removed trips, pass-by trips, internal trip capture, and diverted trips, if applicable. 4. Trip Distribution and Assignment: Estimated site generated traffic for the proposed project should be distributed and assigned to intersections of existing or proposed arterial and collector roadways within three miles of the site. A summary by intersection movement should be provided in tabular format, at a minimum. Trip distribution methods should be based on a reasonable assumption of local travel patterns and the locations of off-site origin/destination points within the site vicinity. An analysis of local traffic patterns and intersection turning movement counts can be used as long as the data has been gathered PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 48 within the previous 12 months and reflect typical traffic volumes. Counts collected during periods with significant and/or extended traffic disruptions (i.e., COVID-19 pandemic, natural disasters, or other special events as determined by city staff) cannot be applied without adjustments to account for the impact on traffic volumes with approval by city staff. 5. Site plan review: A site plan for the proposed development shall be submitted detailing proposed access locations and documentation that they meet spacing and sight distance requirements; site circulation for bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles; and the proposed parking. TIER 2 REQUIREMENTS The following sections detail the TIA requirements. TIA REQUIREMENTS The following requirements shall be included in each Tier 2 TIA submitted to the city. Additional information specified by the city through scoping or through other project meetings shall also be included. All additional Tier 1 criteria not specified must be satisfied. 1. The TIA shall be prepared by or prepared under the direct supervision of a Registered Professional Engineer who shall sign and stamp the TIA. 2. Study Area: The TIA should include all roadways adjacent to and through the site (e.g., all roadways used to access the site), and any roadway with a functional classification of collector and above within a quarter-mile of the site. Study intersections will generally include site-access points, and intersections of two roadways with a functional classification of collector and above (i.e., Principal Arterial, Minor Arterial, Collector, or Neighborhood Collector) within three-miles of the site with an expected increase of 20 peak hour trips generated from the proposed project. The intersection closest to the site of any roadway with a functional classification of collector and above with a Principal Arterial should also be included (if not already required), regardless of the distance or generated trip thresholds identified above. An inventory of the existing transportation facilities (pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicle) for all study roadways will be included. The surrounding land use context and allowable zoning will also be reviewed. 3. The TIA should include the following horizon years: n Existing Conditions n No Build Conditions. The conditions in the year in which the proposed project will be completed and occupied, but without the expected traffic from the proposed project. This shall include trips generated at study intersections from approved, but not fully occupied developments at the time traffic count data was collected. n Build Conditions. The no build condition, plus traffic from the proposed project PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 49 assuming full build-out and occupancy. This shall also include phased years of completion resulting from the development, if applicable. n Mitigation Conditions (if necessary). The build conditions plus off-site (e.g. proportionate share of infrastructure improvements) and on-site (e.g. traffic management plan, parking management plan) improvements that mitigate undesirable impacts from the development. 4. Analysis Periods: The TIA should analyze the weekday (Tuesday through Thursday) AM and/or PM peak periods in which the proposed project is expected to generate 25 or more trips. Additional periods may be required depending upon the proposed project and/or surrounding land uses. Turning movement counts during the weekday AM peak period should typically be between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM, and 4:00 PM and 6:00 pm during the weekday PM peak period. Historical turning movement counts may be used if the data is not more than 12 months old. Historical counts shall be factored accordingly to meet the existing traffic conditions. 5. Trip Generation: The proposed trip generation should be based on similar land uses reported in the latest version of the ITE Trip Generation Manual and shall include calculations for removed trips, pass-by trips, internal trip capture, and diverted trips, if applicable. 6. Trip Distribution and Assignment: Estimated site generated traffic for the proposed project should be distributed and assigned to intersections of existing or proposed arterial and collector roadways within three miles of the site. Trip distribution methods should be based on a reasonable assumption of local travel patterns and the locations of off-site origin/destination points within the site vicinity. An analysis of local traffic patterns and intersection turning movement counts can be used as long as the data has been gathered within the previous 12 months. 7. Background Traffic Growth Rate: A 1 percent compound annual growth rate shall be applied to all movements at study intersections to develop background traffic growth for the horizon years. An applicant may propose an alternative background growth rate with appropriate documentation and references. 8. In-Process Developments: The TIA should add the trips generated at study intersections from approved, but not fully occupied developments at the time traffic count data was collected, to the future horizon years. The applicant should request the approved developments and their occupancy status from the city. Should the TIA not be submitted to the city within 12 months of the scoping summary, additional approved developments could be required. If multiple development applications are received by the city, but not yet approved, for projects in the same area, the city may require a sensitivity test for each subsequent applicant to ensure the adequacy of proposed improvements in the event all developments are approved. The need for any sensitivity tests will be determined based on the order of applications received and specified in the study scope. 9. Safety Analysis: crash patterns for the past five years will be reviewed for all study roadways. Crash trends and any specific recommendations to improve existing safety deficiencies will also be discussed. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 50 TIA CONTENT The following content should typically be included in each Tier 2 TIA submitted to the city. Additional information specified by the city in the scoping summary or through other project meetings shall also be included. Section 1: Introduction n Proposed project summary, including site location, zoning, project size, and project scope. This should include a figure showing the project site and vicinity map, including any roadway with a functional classification of collector and above within a quarter-mile of the site and all study intersections. Section 2: Existing Conditions n Study area description, including a figure showing the project site, key roadways, and study intersections. n Existing site conditions, current zoning, and adjacent land uses. n Roadway characteristics of important transportation facilities and modal opportunities located within the study area, including roadway functional classifications, roadway cross-section, roadway condition, posted speeds, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit facilities. n Existing lane configurations and traffic control devices at the study area intersections. n Existing traffic volumes and operational analysis of the study area roadways and intersections. This should include a figure of existing peak hour turn movement volumes. n Roadway and intersection crash history analysis (most recent five years). This should include a discussion on crash trends, if any, and recommendations for safety improvements, if any. Section 3: Assumptions and Methodologies n Project description, including site location, zoning, project size, and project scope, and map showing the proposed site, building footprint, access driveways, active transportation connections, parking, and transit facilities. n Transportation standards (e.g., roadway and access spacing standards, level-of-service standards). These can be found in the Pasco Transportation System Master Plan. n Site access for vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders, including access spacing and site distance review at site driveways, and summary of roadway grades and other vertical or horizontal obstructions. n Site frontage improvements, including provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists. PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 51 n Trip generation summary. This section should also include a summary of the expected vehicles exceeding 26,000-pound gross vehicle weight (13 tons) that the proposed project will generate. n Trip distribution and assignment assumptions, including a figure showing the trip distribution percentages. A summary of the distributed trips at intersections of existing or proposed arterial and collector roadways within three miles of the site should be provided in tabular format by intersection movement. n Background traffic growth. n In-process developments, if applicable. n Funded transportation improvements in the study area, if applicable, including improvements found in the Pasco Transportation System Plan and the Ben Franklin Transit Development Plan. n Future analysis years and scenarios (No Build Conditions, Build Conditions, Mitigation Conditions, and Phased Years of Completion, if necessary). n Future traffic volumes. This should include a figure showing the future traffic volumes broken down by existing traffic volumes, background traffic growth, in-process trip growth (if applicable), project traffic growth, and total traffic volumes. Section 4: Future Conditions n Background traffic volumes and operational analysis. n Full buildout traffic volumes and intersection operational analysis. This should also include a summary of roadway segment conditions with full buildout traffic volumes (e.g., roadway volumes, roadway condition and width). n Signal and turn lane warrant analysis at site access points, if applicable. n Intersection and site-access driveway queuing analysis. n Site access considerations for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders n Impacts of non-residential traffic through a residential zone. n Impacts from vehicles exceeding 26,000-pound gross vehicle weight (13 tons), including turning movements. n Site circulation and parking. Section 5: Recommendations n Motor vehicle improvements, including proposed cross-section for site frontage improvements and intersection improvements (if necessary). n Site access recommendations for all transportation modes, including summary of needed PASCO TSMP • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM STANDARDS • FEBRUARY 2021 52 deviations to the code, cross-over easements and driveway consolidation, and proposed driveways widths. n Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements, including provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists along the site frontage, and internally to the site. Recommendations must also consider future transit routes or stops and access to these facilities from the site. Appendix n Traffic count data. n Crash analysis data. n Traffic operational analysis worksheets, with detail to review capacity calculations. n Signal, left-turn, and right-turn lane warrant evaluation calculations. n Other analysis summary sheets, such as queuing.