TRI‐CITY METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDYbfcog.us/.../05/2013-Congestion-Management-Process.pdf · 2013 Tri‐MATS Congestion Management Process Page 2 Benton‐Franklin Council

TRI‐CITYMETROPOLITANAREATRANSPORTATIONSTUDY

2013CONGESTIONMANAGEMENTPROCESS

TRI‐CITYMETROPOLITANAREATRANSPORTATIONSTUDY

The TRI‐CITYMETROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDY (Tri‐MATS) is theMetropolitanPlanningOrganization(MPO)designatedbytheGovernortodevelopandimplementacoordinated,comprehensive, and continuing planning process that addresses issues related to thetransportationsystemsofregionalsignificanceintheurbanarea.Tri‐MATSisgovernedbyaBoardcomprised of elected officials from the jurisdictions within the Kennewick‐sco‐Richlandmetropolitan area which are responsible for building and operating our transportationinfrastructure.ThisCongestionManagementProcesshasbeen financed inpart throughgrants from theFederalHighwayAdministration,FederalTransitAdministration,andtheWashingtonStateDepartmentofTransportation.Tri‐MATSandtheauthorsaresolelyresponsibleforthematerialcontainedherein.

ADOPTED

December20th,2013BFCOGherebygivespublicnoticethatitistheagencypolicytoassurefullcompliancewithTitleVIofthe1964CivilRightsAct,theCivilRightsRestorationActof1987,ExecutiveOrder12898onEnvironmentalJustice,andrelatedstatutesandregulationsinallprograms

andactivities.

2013CongestionManagementProcessAdvisoryCommittee

JohnDeskins CityofKennewickMikePawlak CityofPascoJeffPeters CityofRichlandRoscoeSlade CityofWestRichlandPaulGonseth WashingtonStateDepartmentofTransportationTonyKalmbach BenFranklinTransitCarolMoser CommunityHealthAllianceBrianMalley Benton‐FranklinCouncilofGovernmentsCarlBerkowitz 3‐RiversBicycleClub

TableofContentsINTRODUCTIONANDBACKGROUND..............................................................................................................................1

Introduction...........................................................................................................................................................................1

Purpose....................................................................................................................................................................................1

TheCongestionManagementProcess.........................................................................................................................1

DiscussiononCongestion................................................................................................................................................2

2011‐2032MetropolitanTransportationPlan.......................................................................................................3

COMPONENTSOFACMP......................................................................................................................................................3

CMPStudyArea....................................................................................................................................................................3

CMPCorridors........................................................................................................................................................................5

PerformanceMeasures......................................................................................................................................................5

DataFramework...................................................................................................................................................................7

PeriodicReview.....................................................................................................................................................................7

CMPDATASOURCES...............................................................................................................................................................7

TravelTimeProgram..........................................................................................................................................................8

TrafficCounts.........................................................................................................................................................................8

TransitSystemData...........................................................................................................................................................9

MetropolitanAreaCollisionTrends..........................................................................................................................10

APPENDICES............................................................................................................................................................................11

AppendixA–FederalRegulationsAddressingtheCMP...................................................................................13

AppendixB–2011‐2032MetropolitanTransportationPlan.........................................................................19

AppendixC–CMPCongestedCorridorTrackingMatrix.................................................................................41

AppendixD–CongestedCorridorData...................................................................................................................45

AppendixE–TravelTimeDataCollection.............................................................................................................97

AppendixF–TransitSystemData..........................................................................................................................101

AppendixG–TransportationSystemComponentsintheCMPStudyArea..........................................107

AppendixH–PublicComment.................................................................................................................................113

TABLES

Table1:CMPCongestedCorridors..............................................................................................................................5

Table2:FrequencyofCongestedCorridorTrafficCounts..................................................................................8

Table3:MetropolitanAreaCollisionOutcomes2002‐2010...........................................................................10

Table4:BFTVanpoolOperationsData–1995‐2010......................................................................................103

Table5:ParkandRideLotsinBentonandFranklinCounties....................................................................105

MAPSANDFIGURES

Map1:CMPStudyArea......................................................................................................................................................4

Map2:CMPCongestedCorridors.................................................................................................................................6

Figure1:MetropolitanAreaCollisions2002‐2010.............................................................................................10

Figure2:BenFranklinTransitVanpoolRidership1990‐2010...................................................................103

Figure3:BenFranklinTransitVanpoolMiles1990‐2010............................................................................104

Map3:ParkandRideLotsinBentonandFranklinCounties.......................................................................106

Map4:CMPStudyAreaandthe2013FederalFunctionalClassSystem...............................................109

Map5:CMPStudyAreaandthe2011WSDOTFreightandGoodsSystem...........................................110

Map6:CMPStudyAreaandthe2013BFTFixedRouteBusRoutes,.......................................................111

Map7:CMPStudyAreaandthe2009BFCGBikeMapBikeRoutes.........................................................112

2013Tri‐MATSCongestionManagementProcess

Benton‐FranklinCouncilofGovernments Page1

TRI‐CITYMETROPOLITANAREATRANSPORTATIONSTUDYCongestionManagementProcess

INTRODUCTIONANDBACKGROUNDIntroductionAstheTri‐Citymetropolitanareacontinuestogrow,trafficcongestionwillneedtobeevaluatedandappropriatelymanaged.Thepurposeofthisdocument,theTri‐CitiesMetropolitanAreaCongestionManagementProcess,istodevelopstrategiesandimplementacongestionmanagementprocess(CMP)ensuringthatthemetropolitanareacontinuestogetthemaximumbenefitfrombothourexistingandnewtransportationsystem.TheTri‐CitiesMetropolitanAreabecameaTransportationManagementArea(TMA)asaresultofthe2010census,whichdeterminedtheKennewick‐Pasco‐RichlandUrbanAreapopulationhadsurpassedapopulationof200,000.ThatpopulationthresholdtriggerstheTMAdesignationunderFederallaw.AsaTMA,BFCGisrequiredtodevelopaCongestionManagementProcess.AdeadlineofJanuary18,2014isestablishedinlawforsubmittalofourinitialCMPtotheFederalHighwayAdministration(FHWA)andtheFederalTransitAdministration(FTA).ThisisaDRAFTRegionalCMPfortheTri‐CityMetropolitanAreaTransportationStudy(Tri‐MATS).ThisistheinitialCMPfortheTri‐MATSarea.TheCMPisdevelopedinordertofacilitatethemonitoring,analysisandreductionofcongestioninthemajorregionaltravelcorridors.Itwillbemodifiedovertime,withnewelementsphasedinasadditionalinfrastructurefordatacollection,andtheorganizationalstructuretoanalyzeanddisseminatethedataisdesignedandimplemented.ThisdocumentdescribestheelementsoftheTri‐CitiesCMP–whatwillevolveintoacomprehensivesetofpolicies,performancemeasures,ongoingactivitiesandrecommendedfutureactionsdesignedtomanagetrafficcongestionandtomaintainhighlevelsoftransportationserviceintheTri‐CitiesMetropolitanArea.PurposeThepurposeoftheCMPistoidentifycongestedareasandbringanobjectivebasistodevelopingthosestrategiesthatwillallowtheregiontoachievethegreatestbenefitforitsinvestment.AccordingtoTitle23Part450CSection450.320,aCMPmust: Measuremulti‐modaltransportationsystemperformance Identifythecausesofcongestion Assessalternativeactions Implementcost‐effectiveactions;and Evaluatetheeffectivenessofimplementedactions.

Toaccomplishtheseobjectives,theCMPfeaturesasignificantcomponentofdatacollectionandmonitoringofactivities,setsforwardperformancemeasuresorcriteriaforidentifyingwhenactionisneeded,andidentifyingthemanagementstrategiesthatwillbemosteffective.TheCongestionManagementProcessCongestionManagementistheapplicationofstrategiestoimprovetransportationsystemperformanceandreliabilitybyreducingtheadverseimpactsofcongestiononthemovementofpeopleandgoods.ACongestionManagementProcessisaregionally‐acceptedapproachformanagingcongestionthatprovidesaccurate,timelyinformationontransportationsystem


Page2 Benton‐FranklinCouncilofGovernments

performanceandassessesalternativestrategiesforcongestionmanagementthatmeetstateandlocalneeds.ThisistheinitialCongestionManagementProcessforourmetropolitanarea,andassuchisverymuchabroadpresentationofrelevantconcepts.AstheRegionalCMPisrefinedinfutureupdates,itwillprovidemoredetailedpresentationsoftheoperationalcharacteristicsofthemajortravelcorridorsintheregionandserveasabasisfortheselectionofimprovementsdesignedtoeffectivelyaddresstheidentifiedproblems.TheRegionalCMPestablishedinthisProcessaddressestwoissues:first,itmeetsthefederalrequirementsthattheareaimplementaCMP;andsecond,itlaysthefoundationfortheevolvingsystematicdatacollection,analysis,andinterpretationactivitiesthatcomprisethebackboneoftheRegionalCMP.DevelopmentoftheCMPisongoing,andthedocumentitselfwillbeupdatedataminimumofeverytwoyears.DiscussiononCongestionCongestioncanbedefinedtooasslowordifficultmovementbypeopleorvehiclesasaresultofovercrowdingbyeithervehiclesorpeoplerelativetothecarryingcapacityofthefacility.Congestioncanbecharacterizedbyfourqualitiesordimensions:intensity,duration,extentandvariability.Thesefourdimensionsallowforabetterunderstandingofhowtheroadsarebeingimpactedbythecongestion.Intensitycanbethoughtofasthenumberofpeopleorvehiclesthatarepartofthecongestion.Durationisthetemporaldimension,measuringhowlongthecongestioneventlasts.Theamountofroadsorgeographicareaincludedinthecongestioneventistheextent.Variabilityisthemeasureforhowfrequentlycongestiontakesplaceonthatroadwaysegment.Therearetwobroadcategoriesofcongestion:recurringornonrecurringcongestion.Recurringcongestioncanbeattributabletothephysicalqualitiesofthefacilities:changesinthenumberoflanes,geometricconstraints,signalsthatarenotcoordinated,andpooraccessmanagementtotheadjacentlanduses.Nonrecurringcongestionisduetoeventsthathappenrandomlyorinfrequently,includingweatherrelatedissues,incidentsandspecialevents.Nonrecurringcongestionisdifficult,butnotimpossible,toplanforandtodeviseeffectivemitigationstrategies.Oftenthestrategiesinvolvequicklyremovingthecauseofcongestionorprovidinganalternateroute.Forthemostpart,nonrecurrentcongestioncannotbeaddressedinasystematicway.Trafficincidentscanbemitigatedtoadegreebyprojectstoaddresshowtrafficflowsalongacorridorandatintersections,butthehumanoperatingthevehicleisstillthemaincontributingfactorforthemajorityofcrashes.Similarly,properdrainageoftheroadswillensurethattheimpactofextremeweatherislessened,buttherewillbeatimewhenthatisnotsufficient.Whenthathappens,ensuringthattheregionhasplansinplacetodealwithroadclosureswillbeimportant.Toeffectivelymitigaterecurringcongestion,nowandinthefuture,amulti‐facetedapproachisnecessaryutilizingeffortswithdifferenttimescales.Quickesttoimplementincludetransportationdemandmanagementefforts,suchaspromotionofrideshare,telecommuting,bikingandusingpublictransit(assumingitisavailable).Othersolutionsforrecurrentcongestionincludeprovidingtravelerswithinformationonthecurrenttrafficconditions.Medium‐termsolutionse.g.solutionsdevelopedoveratime‐scaleofa



fewyears,include:includeaddingadditionalpublictransit,iffeasible,andworkingwithemployersonimplementingflexibleschedulesandofferingtelecommutingasoptionsfortheirworkers.Roadprojectssuchasrebuildingtohighercapacities,modifyingthegeometry,orconstructingnewfacilitiesarealsointhemediumtolong‐term(ten‐year)timeframe.Longer‐termsolutionswouldentailchangestothebuiltenvironment,suchasplacinghomesclosertojobs(orviceversa)andchangingtheland‐usetopermitandencourageachangefromthesingle‐usezoningandland‐usepatternsthathavebeenprevalentformanydecades.2011‐2032MetropolitanTransportationPlanInJune2013,BFCGstaffmetwithstafffromFHWA,FTAandWSDOTforaTMACoordinationReviewofBFCGMPOworkproducts.TheintentwastogiveBFCGstaffanunderstandingofstrengths,weaknessesandnextstepsforourinitialCertificationReviewin2016,anddeadlinesforvariousTMAworkproducts.TheCongestionManagementProcesswasaprincipalcomponentofthereview.Anoutcomeofthereviewwasarecommendationthatsectionsofthe2011‐2032MetropolitanTransportationPlan(MTP)beincorporatedintotheCMP.ComponentsoftheMTPsuchasperformancemeasures,goalsandstrategies,travelmodelresultsandcongestionbackgrounddiscussion(includingacharacterizationofcongestionasatrafficvolumetoroadcarryingcapacityratio,avolume/capacityof.85),areapplicabletotheCMP.Additionally,theMTPhasbeenreviewedandapprovedbytheTechnicalandPolicyAdvisoryCommitteesandadoptedbytheBFCGBoard.IncorporatingMTPcomponentstotheCMPwillservetwopurposes.TheMTPandtheCMPareinterrelated,andincorporatingoneintotheotherenhancestherelationship.Additionally,utilizationofsectionsoftheMTP,whichhavebeenalreadybeenadoptedbyBFCG,willsavetime.TheCMPAdvisoryCommitteeagreedthatapplicablesectionsofthe2011‐2032MTPshouldbeincorporatedintocomparablesectionsoftheCMP.Thosepartsofthe2011MTPareinAppendixB.RelevantsectionsoftheMTPwillbeincorporatedintotheCMPasitisdeveloped.COMPONENTSOFACMPComponentsoftheBFCGRegionalCMPareoutlinedbelow.ItshouldbenotedthattheitemspresentedbelowwillevolveovertimeasexperienceisgainedinimplementingtheCMPsystemandanalyzingtheresultantdata. Developasetofcongestionidentificationmeasuresfortheregion. Establishaframeworkforgatheringandanalyzingthedatanecessarytodeterminehowthe

transportationsystemisoperating;whatmightbecausingcongestiononthesystem,whatactionsmightbeappropriatetoaddressthecongestion,andhoweffectivegivensolutionsmightbeinsolvingtheproblem.

Ensuretheevaluationofalternativestoaddresstheproblembothforthepresentandthefuturetransportationsystem.

Planhowandwhowillimplementthepreferredsolution,andhowitwouldbefunded. Provideforamechanismtomonitortheperformanceofthesystemtoascertainthe

continuedeffectivenessoftheimplementedsolution.CMPStudyAreaTheTri‐CitiesUrbanizedAreaBoundary(UZA)asapprovedbyFHWAin2013istheformalboundaryoftheCMPstudyarea(seeMap1).TheUZAwillchangeasaresultofeachcensusandtheCMPboundarywillchangewithit.Map1belowshowstheCMPStudyAreaandtheCongestedCorridors.



Map1:CM

PStu

dyA

rea



CMPCorridorsTheinitiallistofcongestedcorridorshastwosources:thelistofcongestedcorridorsfromChapterSevenofthe2011MTP:ModelResultsandMetropolitanSystemEvaluation,andtheprofessionaljudgmentofengineeringstaffofMPOjurisdictions.The.85v/cmeasurementforcongestionestablishedinChapterSevenwillbeonecriteriausedtoevaluatecongestiononstreetsegmentsthathavebeenidentifiedbycityengineeringstaff.Congestedcorridorsmaybeaddedordeletedovertime.ThecorridorsselectedfortheinitialregionalCMPareshowninMap2.Asstated,thelistofcorridorsbeinganalyzedissubjecttomodificationovertime.ThecorridorsarelistedinTable1below.

TABLE1:CMPCONGESTEDCORRIDORSPerformanceMeasuresThedevelopmentofperformancemeasurestoidentifycongestionisthefirststepindefiningaCMP.Inmanyapplications,thetraditionalmeasurehasbeenthevolume‐to‐capacityratio(v/c).Existingtrafficcountsonidentifiedcorridorswillbethebasisofaninitialv/ccalculationandsubsequentcongestionidentificationmeasures.TheCMPwillusemeasuresthattrackautousagewithinaspecificcorridor.Traveltimealongthecorridors,ascapturedbypilotvehiclesusingaGPS(GlobalPositioningSystem)locationdevicewillbeimplementedastheinitialstageofdatacapturefortheCMP.However,partofthefocusofaCMPistoexpandtheconsiderationofsolutionstoincludealternativemodesandinnovativesolutions.Whiletheuseofv/casacongestionidentificationmeasureisappropriateduringtheinitialstagesofCMPdevelopment,asthedocumentevolves,moresophisticatedmeasuresthataddressmulti‐modalaspectsofthetransportationsystemwillberequiredinthefuture.

RICHLANDCONGESTEDCORRIDORSQueensgateDrive:KeeneRoadtoDuportailStreetGeorgeWashingtonWay:ColumbiaPointDrivenorthtoHornRapidsRoadStevensDrive:SR240toHornRapidsRoad

KENNEWICKCONGESTEDCORRIDORSColumbiaCenterBoulevard:ClearwaterAvenuetoWillametteAvenueClearwaterAvenue:US395toKelloggStreet

PASCOCONGESTEDCORRIDORSRoad68:ChapelHillBoulevardtoSandifurParkwayRoad100:ChapelHillBoulevardtoSandifurParkwayCourtStreet:Road40to20thAvenue20thAvenue:LewisStreettoArgentRoad

WSDOTCONGESTEDCORRIDORSSR240:Milepost20.48(Route10)toMilepost28.84(StevensDrive)SR240:Milepost30.63(JadwinAvenue)toMilepost34.57(SR182offramp)SR182:Milepost.87(DallasRoad)toMilepost4.40(I‐182westboundonrampfrom

GeorgeWashingtonWaysouthbound)



Map2:CM

PCon

gestedCorrid

ors



Additionalmeasurescanbeaddedafterthebasicdatacollectionandanalysisprocessisinplace.Aregionaltrafficcountprogrammorefocusedoncongestedcorridorswillbedeveloped.Thesectionsofthe2011MTPincludedinAppendixBcontainmultiplegoalsandpossibleperformancemeasuresforconsideration.DataFrameworkCurrently,theframeworkforgatheringthedataneededbytheCMPisnotfullydeveloped.Forexample,trafficcounts:whileindividualjurisdictionshavecyclicaltrafficcountprograms,andcountdataontheiridentifiedcorridors,thosecountshavenotoccurredconsistentlyovertime.Jurisdictionsmayneedtoestablisharegularprogramofcountsonidentifiedcongestedcorridorstotrackvolumechangesovertime.Aprocessfortrackingtraveltimeoncongestedcorridorsisdescribedlaterinthisdocument.Thesuccessoftheprocessasoutlinedwillbereviewedovertimeanditwillbemodifiedifitisdeemednecessary.ToolsandprocesseswillneedtobedevelopedthroughacooperativeprocedurebetweentheMPOandthecitiestoensurethatthedatagatheredwillnotonlymeettheneedsoftheCMPrequirementsbutwillsatisfytheneedsoftheindividualjurisdictionsandagencies.Intheshort‐termcurrentdatacollectiontechniqueswillbesufficient;asadditionalperformancemeasuresareintroduced,newmethodstocollecttherequisitedatawillberequired.PeriodicReviewThefinalrequirementforaCMPisthatitprovidesanongoingreviewoftheregionalsystemasthealternativesarebroughtonline,todeterminehoweffectivethesolutionisworking.ThatisonepurposeoftheCorridorTrackingMatrixinAppendixC.Thisreviewformsatypeoffeedbacktotheplanningprocess,toinformanddirectthedecisionmakersastothepotentialeffectivenessoffutureprojects.CMPinPracticeAsof2014thedatacollectionprogramwillconsistofmeasuringthetraveltimealongselectedcorridors.Trafficcountswillcontinueandbeenhanced,andcollisiondatawillbemonitoredandevaluated.CMPDATASOURCESCurrentlyfourmeasurementprogramshavebeenidentifiedtocontributetoabasicunderstandingoftheoperationsoftheregionaltransportationsystem,includingwhere,andhowmuch,congestionexists.Theseareprogramsdesignedtomeasure:i]traveltime,ii]trafficcounts,iii]transitsystemdataandiv]collisiondata.Theseprogramsarenotatthesamelevelofmaturity.Theprocesstotracktraveltimeandeffectivelyanalyzethedataisunderdesign.TMAmemberjurisdictionshaveoperationaltrafficcountprogramswithdataavailableforthecorridors,butexistingdatamustbesupplementedbyamoreuniformcountprogram.Thenewprogram,withincreasedfrequencyofcounts,willneedtobeagreedupon.Transitsystemdataandcollisiondataprogramsareoperational.Thissectionofthereportincludesamoredetaileddescriptionofeachprogram,includingadiscussionofthedatathatisbeinggeneratedandpotentialissueswiththeimplementation.



TravelTimeProgramThetraveltimeprogram,asoutlinedinAppendixE,involvesdrivingvehiclesalongacorridorduringthemorningandeveningcommuteperiods.ThevehicleswillbeequippedwithaGPSanddatarecordingdevice,whichcapturesthevehicle’slocationandspeedalongwithtimeofdayforeachsecondoftravel.Thedataisprocessedbyspecializedsoftwarethatprovidesavisualdisplayoftheinformation,aswellassummariessuchasaveragespeedandaveragetraveltimebetweencheckpoints.TrafficCountsAsecondprogramisthecollectionandanalysisoftrafficvolumesonthecongestedcorridors.Typically,jurisdictionsinthemetropolitanareacollecttrafficcountsonathreeorfouryearcycles.Inaddition,WSDOToperatesanumberofpermanentcountersontheirfacilitiesinthearea.Aswithcollisiondata,jurisdictionshaveindicatedtheypreferpresentationofthemostrecentthreeyearsofdata(2010‐2012)tocharacterizevolumesontheircorridors.Todemonstratetheavailabilityofexistingdata,Table2belowshowsthenumberofcountsoneachofthecongestedcorridorsduringthelastsixyears.

Table2:FrequencyofTrafficCountsonCongestedCorridors

FREQUENCYOFTRAFFICCOUNTSONCONGESTEDCORRIDORS 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007

CityofRichlandQueensgateDrive X(2) X X(2)

GeorgeWashingtonWay X(3) X X(3)

StevensDrive X

CityofKennewickColumbiaCenterBoulevard X(5) X(5)

ClearwaterAvenue X(4) X(4)

CityofPascoRoad68 X(2) X(4) X(3) X X

Road100 X X

CourtStreet X(2) X(7) X(3)

20thAvenue X(5) X(2) X(4) X

WSDOTSR240(StevensDrive)* X X X X SR240(Bypass)* X X X X

I‐182(DallasRdtoGway)* X X X X Sources:MPOJurisdictionsand2012WSDOTAnnualTrafficReport

Thetableshowsthehistoricalfrequencyofeachjurisdiction’strafficcountsalongtheiridentifiedcorridors.Asshown,RichlandandKennewickhaveverylimitedcountdataontheiridentifiedcorridorsduringthatperiod.Jurisdictionshaveacknowledgedtheirestablishedtrafficcountprogramsmaynotbesufficienttosupplyenoughdatatotrackvolumesontheiridentifiedcorridors.Itmaybenecessarytodevelopaspecificcountprogramforcongestedcorridorstosupplementjurisdictions’establishedcountprograms.



Agroupconsensusappearstobebuildingaroundtheideaofhiringaconsultanttoperformcountsatthesametimespecificallyforallidentifiedcongestedcorridors.ThiswillbefurtherdevelopedbytheAdvisoryCommittee.TransitSystemDataBenFranklinTransit(BFT)currentlydoesnotcapturepassengerdatainamannerapplicabletotheCMPneeds.However,theagencyisintegraltocomponentsofthetransportationsystemthatmateriallyaffectcongestioninthemetropolitanarea,andaregermanetotheCMPprocess.ThosearetheBFTVanpoolProgramandthemetropolitanareaparkandridesystem.Bothcomponentsaresummarizedhere,withadditionalbackgrounddataoneachinAppendixF.MuchofthetextinAppendixF,andallofthetablesandfiguresarefromthe2011‐2032MTP,tablesandfigureswillbeupdated.BenFranklinTransitVanpoolProgramIn1982,BenFranklinTransit,alongwiththenowdefunctWashingtonStateEnergyOffice,begansponsoringapilotride‐shareprogramintheTri‐Cities.Priortothatdatenopubliclyorganizedridesharingactivitieswereavailableinthearea.Atthattime,theFederalDepartmentofEnergy(DOE)maintainedabussystemtotransportemployeestoselectworksitesontheHanfordReservation.BecauseoftheHanfordReservation’srelativelydistantlocation,manyHanfordemployeesutilizedcarpoolsandvanpoolsfortraveltowork.RidesharingactivitiesincreasedthroughouttheTri‐CitiesduetoBFTpromotionofitsvanpoolprogramduringthe1980s.Inthemid1990’stheDOEdiscontinuedtheircommuterbusserviceandBFTwasabletofillthegapwithanaggressivevanpoolprogram.Overtime,utilizationofBFT’svanpoolprogramhasgrown,andBFThasmaintaineditslinkagetotheHanfordjobsite.BenFranklinTransitcurrentlyhas260Vanpoolvansontheroad;theirprimarydestinationistheHanfordArea;andtheirvanpoolserviceranksfourthinthestateinnumberofvansinservice.BasedonBFTdataasofSeptember2013,theprogramaveraged2,352,381passengermilespermonthwhilecarryinganaverageof73,975passengerspermonthsofarthisyear.MetropolitanAreaParkandRideSystemTheexistingparkandridesystembegandevelopmentintheearly1980’s.Currentlyitiscomprisedof15formalparkandridelotsinBentonandFranklinCountiesandanumberofinformallots.TheCMPdiscussionwillreviewdataconcerningtheformalparkandridelots.OccupancydatapresentedinAppendixFhasbeencollectedbytheWSDOTSouthCentralRegionalofficeinYakima.Thetwo‐countyareainventoryofparkandridelotsincludesbothparkandrideandparkandpoolfacilities.OwnershipofmostformalmetropolitanareaparkandridelotsisdividedbetweenWSDOTandBFT.BFTalsoleasesparkandridesites.Distinguishingbetweenthetwo,WSDOTfacilitiesareprimarilyparkandpoollotsadjacenttomajorroadwayintersectionssuchasSR240/SR224orI‐182/Queensgateandaresitedtocapturethevanpoolandcarpooluser.BFT‐ownedparkandridefacilitiesarelocatedattransitcentersintheirrespectivecommunities.Thefocusofthesefacilitiesisonthetransituserratherthanthecommuter,thoughcommutersmayusethem.



MetropolitanAreaCollisionTrendsCollisions,whetherresultingininjuriesorpropertydamage,arealeadingcauseofnon‐recurrentcongestion.Informationregardingcollisionsontheregion’sroadsiscollectedbytheWSDOTStatewideTravelandCollisionDataOffice.Byexaminingthedataforcollisionsalongacorridorbeforeandafteraprojecthasbeeninstalled,itshouldbepossibletodeterminehoweffectivetheprojecthasbeeninmeetingitssafetygoals.Metropolitanareaautomobile‐relatedcollisiondatafortheyears2002–2010ispresentedbelowtoprovidehistoricalcontext.IndividualcorridoranalysisreportspresentedinAppendixDpresentcollisiondatafortheyears2010–2012summarizedinatable.Thatdataisdepictedonamaptohelpidentifywhetheranylocationsonthecorridorexperienceadisproportionatenumberofcrashesandtopotentiallydeviseprogramsandprojectsthatwilladdresstheseareas.

Table3:MetropolitanAreaCollisionOutcomes‐2002‐2010

MetropolitanAreaCollisionOutcomes‐2002‐2010

YEARS AREA COLLISIONS INJURIES FATALITIES *PEDESTRIANS *BICYCLISTS

2002‐2004 MPO 5,942 1,832 8 101 82

%ofIncidents 30.83% 0.13% 1.70% 1.38%

2005‐2007 MPO 5,902 1,784 10 85 76

%ofIncidents 30.23% 0.17% 1.44% 1.29%

2008‐2010 MPO 5,452 1,638 4 101 78

%ofIncidents 30.04% 0.07% 1.85% 1.43%

Source:WSDOTStatewideTravelCollisionDataOffice

*Totalsincludebothinjuriesandfatalities

Figure1:MetropolitanAreaCollisions‐2002‐2010

Source:WSDOTStatewideTravelCollisionDataOffice

INJURIES

COLLISIONS‐

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

NumberofCollisions

YearsofOccurence

MetropolitanAreaCollisions‐ 2002‐2010



APPENDICES



AppendixA–FederalRegulationsAddressingtheCMP.......................................................................................13

AppendixB–2011‐2032MetropolitanTransportationPlan.............................................................................19

AppendixC–CMPCongestedCorridorTrackingMatrix.....................................................................................41

AppendixD–CongestedCorridorData.......................................................................................................................45

AppendixE–TravelTimeDataCollection..................................................................................................................97

AppendixF–TransitSystemData..............................................................................................................................101

AppendixG–TransportationSystemComponentsintheCMPStudyArea..............................................107

AppendixH–PublicComment.....................................................................................................................................113



APPENDIXAFederalRegulationsAddressing

TheTMACongestionManagementProcess





Title23:Highways

PART450—PLANNINGASSISTANCEANDSTANDARDS

SubpartC—MetropolitanTransportationPlanningandProgramming

§450.320Congestionmanagementprocessintransportationmanagementareas.

(a)ThetransportationplanningprocessinaTMAshalladdresscongestionmanagementthroughaprocessthatprovidesforsafeandeffectiveintegratedmanagementandoperationofthemultimodaltransportationsystem,basedonacooperativelydevelopedandimplementedmetropolitan‐widestrategy,ofnewandexistingtransportationfacilitieseligibleforfundingundertitle23U.S.C.andtitle49U.S.C.Chapter53throughtheuseoftraveldemandreductionandoperationalmanagementstrategies.

(b)ThedevelopmentofacongestionmanagementprocessshouldresultinmultimodalsystemperformancemeasuresandstrategiesthatcanbereflectedinthemetropolitantransportationplanandtheTIP.ThelevelofsystemperformancedeemedacceptablebyStateandlocaltransportationofficialsmayvarybytypeoftransportationfacility,geographiclocation(metropolitanareaorsubarea),and/ortimeofday.Inaddition,considerationshouldbegiventostrategiesthatmanagedemand,reducesingleoccupantvehicle(SOV)travel,andimprovetransportationsystemmanagementandoperations.Wheretheadditionofgeneralpurposelanesisdeterminedtobeanappropriatecongestionmanagementstrategy,explicitconsiderationistobegiventotheincorporationofappropriatefeaturesintotheSOVprojecttofacilitatefuturedemandmanagementstrategiesandoperationalimprovementsthatwillmaintainthefunctionalintegrityandsafetyofthoselanes.

(c)Thecongestionmanagementprocessshallbedeveloped,established,andimplementedaspartofthemetropolitantransportationplanningprocessthatincludescoordinationwithtransportationsystemmanagementandoperationsactivities.Thecongestionmanagementprocessshallinclude:

(1)Methodstomonitorandevaluatetheperformanceofthemultimodaltransportationsystem,identifythecausesofrecurringandnon‐recurringcongestion,identifyandevaluatealternativestrategies,provideinformationsupportingtheimplementationofactions,andevaluatetheeffectivenessofimplementedactions;

(2)Definitionofcongestionmanagementobjectivesandappropriateperformancemeasurestoassesstheextentofcongestionandsupporttheevaluationoftheeffectivenessofcongestionreductionandmobilityenhancementstrategiesforthemovementofpeopleandgoods.Sincelevelsofacceptablesystemperformancemayvaryamonglocalcommunities,performancemeasuresshouldbetailoredtothespecificneedsoftheareaandestablishedcooperativelybytheState(s),affectedMPO(s),andlocalofficialsinconsultationwiththeoperatorsofmajormodesoftransportationinthecoveragearea;

(3)Establishmentofacoordinatedprogramfordatacollectionandsystemperformancemonitoringtodefinetheextentanddurationofcongestion,tocontributeindeterminingthecausesofcongestion,andevaluatetheefficiencyandeffectivenessofimplementedactions.Totheextentpossible,thisdatacollectionprogramshouldbecoordinatedwithexistingdatasources(including



archivedoperational/ITSdata)andcoordinatedwithoperationsmanagersinthemetropolitanarea;

(4)Identificationandevaluationoftheanticipatedperformanceandexpectedbenefitsofappropriatecongestionmanagementstrategiesthatwillcontributetothemoreeffectiveuseandimprovedsafetyofexistingandfuturetransportationsystemsbasedontheestablishedperformancemeasures.Thefollowingcategoriesofstrategies,orcombinationsofstrategies,aresomeexamplesofwhatshouldbeappropriatelyconsideredforeacharea:

(i)Demandmanagementmeasures,includinggrowthmanagementandcongestionpricing;

(ii)Trafficoperationalimprovements;

(iii)Publictransportationimprovements;

(iv)ITStechnologiesasrelatedtotheregionalITSarchitecture;and

(v)Wherenecessary,additionalsystemcapacity;

(5)Identificationofanimplementationschedule,implementationresponsibilities,andpossiblefundingsourcesforeachstrategy(orcombinationofstrategies)proposedforimplementation;and

(6)Implementationofaprocessforperiodicassessmentoftheeffectivenessofimplementedstrategies,intermsofthearea'sestablishedperformancemeasures.Theresultsofthisevaluationshallbeprovidedtodecisionmakersandthepublictoprovideguidanceonselectionofeffectivestrategiesforfutureimplementation.

(d)InaTMAdesignatedasnonattainmentareaforozoneorcarbonmonoxidepursuanttotheCleanAirAct,FederalfundsmaynotbeprogrammedforanyprojectthatwillresultinasignificantincreaseinthecarryingcapacityforSOVs(i.e.,anewgeneralpurposehighwayonanewlocationoraddinggeneralpurposelanes,withtheexceptionofsafetyimprovementsortheeliminationofbottlenecks),unlesstheprojectisaddressedthroughacongestionmanagementprocessmeetingtherequirementsofthissection.

(e)InTMAsdesignatedasnonattainmentforozoneorcarbonmonoxide,thecongestionmanagementprocessshallprovideanappropriateanalysisofreasonable(includingmultimodal)traveldemandreductionandoperationalmanagementstrategiesforthecorridorinwhichaprojectthatwillresultinasignificantincreaseincapacityforSOVs(asdescribedinparagraph(d)ofthissection)isproposedtobeadvancedwithFederalfunds.IftheanalysisdemonstratesthattraveldemandreductionandoperationalmanagementstrategiescannotfullysatisfytheneedforadditionalcapacityinthecorridorandadditionalSOVcapacityiswarranted,thenthecongestionmanagementprocessshallidentifyallreasonablestrategiestomanagetheSOVfacilitysafelyandeffectively(ortofacilitateitsmanagementinthefuture).Othertraveldemandreductionandoperationalmanagementstrategiesappropriateforthecorridor,butnotappropriateforincorporationintotheSOVfacilityitself,shallalsobeidentifiedthroughthecongestionmanagementprocess.AllidentifiedreasonabletraveldemandreductionandoperationalmanagementstrategiesshallbeincorporatedintotheSOVprojectorcommittedtobytheStateandMPOforimplementation.



(f)Statelaws,rules,orregulationspertainingtocongestionmanagementsystemsorprogramsmayconstitutethecongestionmanagementprocess,iftheFHWAandtheFTAfindthattheStatelaws,rules,orregulationsareconsistentwith,andfulfilltheintentof,thepurposesof23U.S.C.134and49U.S.C.5303.

§450.338Phase‐inofnewrequirements.

(a)MetropolitantransportationplansandTIPsadoptedorapprovedpriortoJuly1,2007maybedevelopedusingtheTEA‐21requirementsortheprovisionsandrequirementsofthispart.

(b)FormetropolitantransportationplansandTIPsthataredevelopedunderTEA‐21requirementspriortoJuly1,2007,theFHWA/FTAaction(i.e.,conformitydeterminationsandSTIPapprovals)mustbecompletednolaterthanJune30,2007.FormetropolitantransportationplansinattainmentareasthataredevelopedunderTEA‐21requirementspriortoJuly1,2007,theMPOadoptionactionmustbecompletednolaterthanJune30,2007.IftheseactionsarecompletedonorafterJuly1,2007,theprovisionsandrequirementsofthispartshalltakeeffect,regardlessofwhenthemetropolitantransportationplanorTIPweredeveloped.

(c)OnandafterJuly1,2007,theFHWAandtheFTAwilltakeactiononanewTIPdevelopedundertheprovisionsofthispart,eveniftheMPOhasnotyetadoptedanewmetropolitantransportationplanundertheprovisionsofthispart,aslongastheunderlyingtransportationplanningprocessisconsistentwiththerequirementsintheSAFETEA‐LU.

(d)Theapplicableaction(seeparagraph(b)ofthissection)onanyamendmentsorupdatestometropolitantransportationplansandTIPsonorafterJuly1,2007,shallbebasedontheprovisionsandrequirementsofthispart.However,administrativemodificationsmaybemadetothemetropolitantransportationplanorTIPonorafterJuly1,2007intheabsenceofmeetingtheprovisionsandrequirementsofthispart.

(e)FornewTMAs,thecongestionmanagementprocessdescribedin§450.320shallbeimplementedwithin18monthsofthedesignationofanewTMA.





APPENDIXB2011‐2032MetropolitanTransportationPlan



Asreferencedearlier, in June2013,BFCGstaffmetwithstaff fromFHWA,FTAandWSDOTforaTMA Coordination Review of BFCG work products. An outcome of the review was arecommendation that sections of the 2011‐2032 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) beincorporatedintotheCMP. SectionsoftheMTP–performancemeasures,goals,strategies, travelmodel results andbackgrounddiscussion (including a characterization of congestion as aV/Cof.85)–areapplicabletotheCMP.TheMTPhasbeenreviewedandapprovedbytheTechnicalandPolicyAdvisoryCommitteesandadoptedbytheBFCGBoard.Thosesectionsofthe2011‐2032MTParebelow.



CHAPTERTHREE‐REGIONALTRANSPORTATIONGOALS&POLICIES

INTRODUCTIONThegoals,policies,andstrategiesweredevelopedthroughthetransportationplanningprocessandsubsequentlyadoptedbytheBFCGBoard.Thesegoalsandpolicieswillguideanddirecttheregionaltransportationplanningprocessforthenexttwentyyears.MISSIONThemissionofthisRegionalTransportationPlanistodevelopandmaintainabalancedregionaltransportationsystemthatprovidesaccessandmobilityforpeople,goods,andservicesinasafe,convenient,andenergyefficientmanner;minimizesimpactsupontheenvironment;iscoordinatedthroughamulti‐jurisdictionaleffort;iscompatiblewithadjacentlanduses;facilitatesplannedeconomicgrowth;andmaintainsthelivabilityofthecommunitiesacrosstheentireregion.GOALSOFTHERTP: Thepreparationandimplementationofalongrangeplanwhichidentifiestransportation

relateddeficienciesandproblems,providescleardirection,andseekscomprehensiveleast‐costsolutionsformaintainingtheintegrityofthetransportationsysteminBenton,Franklin,andWallaWallaCounties;

Atransportationsystemthatisintegratedwithlocallandusepolicies;

Atransportationsystemthatprovideslowercostsolutionsintheformoftransit,

vanpool/carpool,bicycling,andwalking,inlieuofexpandingcapacity; Atransportationsystemthatprovidesaccessforgoods,services,andpeoplewhile

minimizingtotalsystemcosts; Atransportationsystemthatprovidesaccessandmobilityforallcitizensregardlessofage,

race,orability; Atransportationsystemthatgivesaccesswhileminimizingenergyconsumptionand

environmentalimpacts; Atransportationsystemthatmeetstheneedsforsustainedeconomicgrowth;

Atransportationsystemthatisconsistentwithlocal,regional,stateandfederalpolicies;

and Atransportationsystemthatassuresimprovementsareconsistentwithandsupportsthe

valuesofcommunitiesandneighborhoodstructures.

POLICIESPolicy1–Access&AccessManagementItisthepolicyoftheBenton‐FranklinCouncilofGovernmentstosupportaregionaltransportationsystemthatemphasizesaccessandaccessmanagementandencouragesthememberjurisdictionstoadoptpoliciesincorporatingaccessmanagementintotheirconstructionprojectsandprojectprioritizationprocesses.



ActionStrategiesEstablishasystemtodefineacceptablelevelsofaccessibilityofallmodestovariouslandusesforallpotentialusersofthetransportationsystemthroughminimumservicestandards.Supportlandusestrategiesthatreducemobilityrequirementssuchasmixed‐usedevelopment,transitorienteddevelopment,andinfilldevelopment.Encouragemulti‐modalaccessibilitytolandusesincludingmeasureswhichprovideaccessforthetransportationdisadvantagedandmobilitychallenged.Encouragecitiesandcountiestoincorporateaccessmanagementintotheircomprehensiveplanningandintotheirlanduseandsubdivisionregulationsandpolicies.Encourageincorporationofaccessmanagementintoprojectprioritizationandselectioncriteria.Encouragecitiesandcountiestoincorporateaccessmanagementintotheirconstructionprojects.Encouragedeveloperstoincorporateaccessmanagementintotheirplans.Policy2‐EfficiencyItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtosupportaregionaltransportationsystemthat1)Maintainsthegreatestefficiencyofmovementintermsoftraveltimeanddistanceand2)Requirestransportationinvestmentdecisionstomaximizethefullnetbenefitsofthesystem.ActionStrategiesExplorethepossibilityofassimilatingcosteffectivenessofalternativesupplyanddemandinvestments,longtermlevelofservice/life‐cyclecostcomparisons,andothereconomiccriteriaintotheplanningprocessinordertodevelopcost‐effectivesolutionsandmoreefficienttransportationfacilities(i.e.least‐costplanning).Encouragecoordinatedplanningpracticesandroadandstreetstandardsamongthecountiesandtheircitiesandtowns.Discourageinefficientmodesoftransportation,suchassingleoccupancyvehicles(SOVs),duringpeakhours.Promotemaintainingtheefficiencyoftheexistingtransportationsystemsbysupportinginvestmentsinoperationalstrategiesandtechnologies.PromoteTransportationDemandManagement(TDM)strategies,voluntaryCommuteTripReduction(CTR),transit,HOV,bicycling,andwalking.Policy3‐BalanceItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtosupportaregionaltransportationsystemthat1)Stressesmulti‐modalismwithminimumservicestandards,2)Providestransportationoptions,3)Avoidsdependenceonanyparticularmode,especiallysingleoccupancyvehicles,and4)Optimizestheefficiencyofeachmode.ActionStrategiesEncouragesystemsandfacilitiesthataccommodatemultiplemodes,whenpossible,especiallyalongtransportationcorridorsthatprovideuserswithcost‐effectivechoicesintheirtraveloptions.



Supportdemandmanagementtechniquesthatstrengthentheefficienciesofeachmodeoftransportation.Supporttheuseofthemostefficientformoftransportationforeacharea,recognizingthatnotallmodesareappropriateforeacharea.Encourageefficientmulti‐modaltransportationsystemsthatarebasedonregionalprioritiesandcoordinatedwithcountyandcitycomprehensiveplans.Policy4–Safety&SecurityItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtoprovideatransportationsystemthatmaintainsandimprovessafetyandsecurityinallaspectsofthetransportationnetwork,includingbothusersandnon‐usersofthesystem.ActionStrategiesSupportandpromoteregion‐wideparticipationinthestate’seffortstoidentifytrafficsafetyneedsandguideinvestmentdecisionstoachievesignificantreductionsintrafficfatalitiesandseriousinjuriesonallpublicroads(SHSP:TargetZero).Supportandpromoteprogramsthatensurebothstructurallyandoperationallysafeandsecurepedestrian,bicycle,automobile,truck,rail,waterway,andairtravelmovement.Encouragedevelopmentoftransportationsafetygoals(e.g.roadsafetytargetsandpolicies)toprovidedirectiontothesafetycomponentofaplan.Encourageinteragencycooperationbetweengovernmentalandprivateenterprisestoincreaseoverallsafetyandsecurityawareness.Promotehighlevelsofsafetystandardsforallmodesoftransportationsothatusersfeelsafeandsecureastheytravel.Implementtrafficcalmingmeasurestoreduceautomobilespeedsinpedestrianareas,suchasresidentialneighborhoodsandschoolzones.EncouragecitiesandcountiestoseekcompetitivefundingsolutionsthroughWSDOT’sSafeRoutestoSchoolsProgram.Policy5–SafetyConsciousPlanning(SCP)ItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtopromoteintegrationofurbanlanduseandtransportationplanningeffortsthroughimplementationofsafetyconsciousplanning.ActionStrategiesMonitornationaleffortstowarddevelopmentofauser‐friendlycollisionpredictionmodelandtheassociatedanalyticaltechniquestodiagnoseandidentifyareasinwhichthereispotentialtoimprovetheinherentsafetyofthetransportationsystem.Promotesafetyconsiderationsaskeycriteriainevaluatingprojectsandprogrammingexpenditures.Ensurethatthemeasuresincorporatedinaplaneffectivelyreflectroadsafetyissues.



Encourageplanimplementationstrategiesthateffectivelyimplementandreflectroadsafetyprioritiesandfinancialprogramming.StresstheneedforSCPinlanduseplanningdecisionsandprocesses.StressthatSCPisalsoanintegralpartoftransportationplanningforallmodesoftravel.Policy6‐EnvironmentalResponsibilityItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtoprovidearegionaltransportationsystemthatlimitsandmitigatesadverseandharmfulimpactsontheenvironment.ActionStrategiesEnsureallelementsoftheRTPsupportenvironmentalresponsibilityinordertomeetfederalandstaterequirements.Promoteenvironmentallyefficientmodesoftransportationsuchastransit,HOVs,bicycling,andwalkinginordertominimizenegativeimpactsontheenvironment.Promotedevelopmentofalternativestoactionsthatadverselyimpacttheenvironment.Coordinatewithlocalagenciesinidentifyingandmitigatingtheeffectsofthetransportationsystemonsensitiveareas.Promotethepreservationofagriculturallandsandopenspacesandtheconservationoffishandwildlifehabitat.Promoteconsistencywithenvironmentalrulesandregulations.Policy7‐TransportationFinancingItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtopromotefundingstrategiesthatensureregionalfinancialstabilityforthetransportationnetwork.ActionStrategiesWorkwithcommunity,businessandcitizeninterestgroupstoestablishagreementontransportationneedsandtoseeksupportonfundingmeasurestofinancecapitalimprovementprojects,includinginnovativefinancingstrategies.Encouragethestatelegislaturetoindexthestatemotorfueltaxtoinflationtoforestallever‐decreasingbuyingpower.Encouragethestatelegislaturetoconsiderfundingalternativestothegastaxasvehiclesgetmorefuelefficient,hybridize,orusealternativefuels.Encouragethestatelegislaturetoexempttransportationconstructionprojectsfromtheretailsalestaxthatcurrentlyshiftstransportationfundsbackintothegeneralfund.Policy8‐IntergovernmentalCooperationIncludingRegionalConsistency&CertificationItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtoprovidearegionaltransportationplanningprocessthat1)Coordinatesfederal,state,regional,andlocalcomprehensiveplans,policiesandlegislationand2)Emphasizescooperationamongjurisdictions.



ActionStrategiesContinuetoencourageactiveparticipationbyallmembersoftheTri‐MATSMPO/RTPOstructureatthetechnical,policy,andboardlevels,includingtheformationofspecialcommitteesforspecificprojectsorprograms.Promoteandhostmeetingsandworkshopspertinenttoregionaltransportationissues,policies,andplanning.Coordinatebetweenstateandmemberjurisdictionsconcerningtechnicalmethodsanddatatoidentifyandanalyzeneedsofregionalsignificance.Provideforcoordinationbetweenthestateandmemberjurisdictionsonmajortransportationdecisionsinvolvingalltransportationmodes.Developregional“guidelinesandprinciples”toserveasaguidefordeveloping,updating,andreviewinglocalcomprehensiveplantransportationelements.(SeeAppendixC).CertifythatthetransportationelementsofcomprehensiveplansconformtotheappropriaterequirementsofRCW36.70A.070andrecommendstepstomeettheRCWrequirementsinWashingtonAdministrativeCode(WAC)365‐195‐325.CertifyconsistencybetweenthetransportationelementsoflocalcomprehensiveplansandthisRegionalTransportationPlan.DetermineconsistencyofcitycomprehensiveplantransportationelementswiththeCountywideplanningpoliciesadoptedbytherespectiveBoardsofCountyCommissionersandthecitieswithinthosecounties.DevelopachecklistforcertifyingconformityoftransportationelementswiththeGMAandtheRegionalTransportationPlan.(SeeAppendixC)Discussandresolveanyinconsistenciesidentifiedduringthecertificationprocess,firstwithjurisdictionalstaff,andifnecessary,attheTechnicalandPolicyAdvisoryCommitteelevels.TheBFCGBoardwillmakethedecisiononanyissuesofinconsistency.Policy9‐CitizenInvolvementandPublicEducationTheBFCGinJuly1994adopted“PublicInvolvementProceduresforTransportationPlanning”(lastrevisedandadoptedJanuary2008).TheBFCGdevelopsandmaintainson‐goingprogramsthatincludecitizenparticipationinalltransportationrelateddecisions.ActionStrategiesMakeinformationabouttransportationplans,policies,projects,andprogramsavailabletothepublicinanunderstandableform.Developongoingpubliceducationprogramsandtransportationforumsaboutregionalandstatewidetransportationplanningtoassurethepublicisinformedoncurrentissues,proposedimprovements,newtechnologies,andupcomingevents.Continuetoapprisethemedia(newspapers,radio,andtelevision)ofnewsworthytransportationinformationforpublicationorgeneraldisclosure.Arrangeinterviews,printanddistributeflyers,etc.



Continuetoincludeup‐to‐datetransportationinformationintheBFCGmonthlynewsletter(circulation300).ContinuetoexpandandimproveBFCGPublicInvolvementProcedurestoattainthemosteffectivecitizeninvolvementandawareness.Communicatewithpotentialusersofthetransportationsystem,includingtheprivatesector,toensurethattransportationdecisionsthatimpactprivatefacilitiesorpublicservicesarecoordinatedwiththeaffectedusersorindustries.Policy10–Livability,Sustainability&LandUseItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtoencouragetransportationrelateddecisionsthatmaintainandenhancelivabilityandsustainabilityforallcitizensandcommunitieswithinBenton,Franklin,andWallaWallacounties.ActionStrategiesPromotetransportationprojectsandimprovementsthatsupportcommunitygoalsofaccesstojobs,affordablehousing,andgoodschools.Maximizetransportationchoicesthatwillimproveregional,community,andneighborhoodlivability.Promotetransportationprojectsandimprovementsthatenhanceandprotectacommunity’saestheticvalues.Workwithcitizensandcommunitygroupstoassuretransportationprojectssupportlivabilitywithinneighborhoodsandcommunities.Promotetheprovisionofgreenbelts,parks,andpathsandpreservationofopenspacerelativetotransportationimprovementprojectsandnewinfrastructuredevelopment.Encourageinfilldevelopmentandredevelopmentinareaswhereaccesstoalternativetransportationisprovided.Supportdevelopmentsthatprovideoptionsforpeopletolive,work,andshopinthesameareasandaccomplishday‐to‐dayneedsclosetohomeviamobilityoptionsotherthansingle‐occupancyvehicles.Supportincreaseddensitiesandin‐filldevelopmentforefficientuseofurbanlandwhilestillmaintainingopen‐spaceareaandresidentialprivacyandsafety.Strivetoimprovecirculationandaccesswithinareasthataremostlikelytosupportmixed‐usedevelopments,in‐filldevelopment,andincreaseddensity.SupporttheeffortsoftheAllianceforaLivableandSustainableCommunity.Policy11‐PedestriansandBicyclesItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtopromotepedestrianandbicycletravelasessentialmodesoftransportationbothwithinexistingcommunitiesandnewdevelopmentandtoprovideopportunitiesforthesafeandefficientuseofpedestrianandbicyclefacilitiesasalegitimatealternativetomotorizedtravelandforimprovedhealth.



ActionStrategiesDevelop,implement,andmaintain,apedestrianandbicycleplanthatisconsistentwithfederal,state,andlocalpedestriangoalsandobjectives.1

EstablishBicycle/PedestrianAdvisoryCommittee(BPAC)tooversee,promote,review,andmakerecommendationsonregionalbicycleandpedestrianissues.Assignahighprioritytotheprovisionofbicycleandpedestrianaccessinlocalcomprehensiveplans.Encouragelocaljurisdictionstodevelopordinanceswhichrequiretheprovisionofsafe,adequate,andconvenientaccessforpedestriansandbicyclesinnewdevelopment.Encourageprovisionofsidewalksandbicyclelanesonarterialsandschoolroutes.EncouragelocaljurisdictionsandschooldistrictstocooperativelyseekfundsthroughWSDOT’sSafeRoutestoSchoolsProgram.Encouragetheconnectionofparks,openspaces,waterandotherrecreationareastoresidentialareaswithbicycleandpedestrianpathsandwhenappropriate,equestrianpaths.Promotetheadoptionofefficientnon‐motorizedcompatiblelandusepatternsandzoningrequirements.Encourageconsiderationofpedestrian/bicycletransportationneedsrelativetoallurbantransportationimprovementprojectsandsubdivisiondevelopments.1See2010RegionalBicycleandPedestrianTransportationPlanforBenton,FranklinandWallaWallaCountiesandTri‐CitiesUrbanArea,October2010BFCG.Policy12‐TransitElementItisthepolicyoftheBFCGto1)SupportBenFranklinTransitandValleyTransitandtheirgoalsandpolicies;2)Promoteatransitsystemwhichoffersalternativestothesingleoccupancyvehicle;3)Promoteatransitsystemthatoffersservicestocitizenswithspecialtransportationneeds;4)Promotelandusepatternsthatsupporttheuseoftransit;and5)SupportintercitybusservicebetweenWallaWallaandtheTri‐Cities.ActionStrategiesSupportourtransitagenciesintheireffortstomaintaineffectiveandpredictableoperationsofthetransitsystemstomeetcustomers’expectations.SupporttheGrapeLine’scontinuationofintercitybusservicebetweenWallaWallaandtheTri‐Cities.Integratetheregionaltransitsystemswithothermodesoftransportationincludingair,rail,auto,bicycles,andpedestrianstofacilitatesmoothinter‐modalconnections.Evaluatethepossibilityofprovidingfurtherintercitytransitserviceasaviablealternativetohighwayexpansion.



PeriodicallyreevaluatetheviabilityofprovidingsomeformoftransitservicetothoseruralRTPOcommunitiesnotcurrentlyhavingsuchservice.Encouragetransitfriendlylanduseplansanddevelopmentpatterns.Supportservicestothosecitizenswithspecialtransportationneeds.SpecialtransportationneedsasdefinedbyRCW47.06B.012;“Personswithspecialtransportationneeds”meansthosepersons,includingtheirpersonalattendants,whobecauseofphysicalormentaldisabilityincomestatus,orageareunabletotransportthemselvesorpurchasetransportation.Policy13‐TransportationDemandManagement/CommuteTripReductionItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtopromotestrategiesthatofferlow‐costsolutionstocapacitychallengesonourstreetsandhighways.ActionStrategiesWorkwithWSDOT,BenFranklinTransit,urbanjurisdictions,andmajoremployerstodevelopandimplementavoluntaryCommuteTripReductionprogramfortheTri‐Citiestoreducesingleoccupancyvehicleuse,vehiclemilestraveled,andminimizetriplengthduringpeakperiods.Overallbenefitswillbereducedcongestionanddelay,cleanerairandlessfuelconsumption.Continuetoworkwithdecision‐makers,jurisdictions,andotheragenciestoencouragetheDepartmentofEnergy(DOE)toimplementtheFederalEmployeesCommuteTripSubsidyProgram.Encourageemployerstoofferflexibleworkschedules(flextime);telecommuting,4‐dayworkweek,andotherincentivesthatreducepeakperiodtravelandlessentheneedforroadwaycapacity.Encouragecommercialdriverstomakedeliveriesandtheshippingoffreightduringoff‐peakhours.Investigatewaysinwhichparkingcanbemanagedtodecreasedrivealonecommuters.Explorelandusestrategiesthatcanreducetheuseofsingleoccupancyvehicles.ContinuefacilitationoftheurbanTransportationDemandManagementCommittee.Policy14‐StreetsandHighwaysItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtoencourageanetworkofstreetsandhighwaysthat1)Supportsabalancedandefficientmulti‐modaltransportationnetwork;2)Isaccessibleforavarietyofusers;3)Meetstheneedsforsafelymovingpeople,goods,andservicesthroughouttheregion;4)Contributestothelivabilityofbothurbanandruralcommunities.ActionStrategiesEncourageconsiderationofmulti‐modalneedsandaccessibility,includingpedestriansandbicycles,freightandgoodsmovement,etc.,relativetoallurbantransportationimprovementprojectsandsubdivisiondevelopments.Promotetransportationimprovementsthatenhancecommunityaccessandlivability.Promotetransportationimprovementsthatmeetinfrastructureneedsoftheregion’smajorsourcesofeconomicgrowthandvitality,includingrecreationandtourism.Maintainthearterialstreetsystemforthesafeandeconomicalmovementofpeople,goods,andserviceswithinandthroughtheregionandtopromoteadiversifiedeconomy.



Encouragepreservationoftransportationcorridorsforfuturegrowth.Policy15‐Air/Waterways/RailItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtoencourageairandrailpassengerfacilitiesandservicesandriverandrailfreightfacilitiesandservicesthatenhanceregionaleconomiccompetitiveness.ActionStrategiesEnsurethattheimpactofsurroundingdevelopmentonairportoperationsisminimizedandadjacentlandusedecisionsareconsistentwithairportoperations.Promoteexpansionofmainlinefreightrailroadcapacitybytherailroadsandtheimprovementofrailaccesstoandefficientuseofinter‐modalterminalsandports.Promotecontinuationandimprovementoffreightserviceonbranchandlightdensityraillinesandpreservationofanyessentiallinesthreatenedwithabandonment.Supportandencourageprojectstoreduceoreliminateconflictsbetweentrainsandvehiclesand/orpedestrians.Continuetorejectandopposeriverdraw‐downsbelowcurrentoperatinglevelsandremovalorbreachingofanydamsonthelowerSnakeRiverorColumbiaRiversystems.TheMinimumOperatingPool(MOP)shouldbemaintainedbytheCorpsofEngineerstoensurethepreservationofthe14footfederalnavigationchannel.SupporttheUSArmyCorpsofEngineersintheirongoingeffortstodredgetheColumbiaRiver/SnakeRiversystem.SupportandencouragetheCorpsofEngineerstocontinueSnakeRiverdredgingasneededtopreservetheviabilityofportfacilitiesatClarkston,Washington,andLewiston,Idaho.Policy16‐FreightMovementItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtoencouragesafeandefficientfreightmovement;supportinter‐modalfreightfacilities;andensurethatanyharmfuleffectsoffreightmovementaremitigatedwiththeusersofthesystem.ActionStrategiesGatherandmaintainfreightinformationforallappropriatemodes.Coordinatewithlocaljurisdictions.PeriodicallyreviewandupdatetheregionalportionofthestatewideFreightandGoodsTransportationSystem.Evaluatefreightmovementneeds,restrictions,opportunities,andconstraintswithintheregion.Examinehazardscreatedbyfreightmovementtolocalcommunitiesandsearchforsolutionstomitigateinequitiesorhazards.Encouragelocalcomprehensiveplanstoaddresstheissueoffreightmovementwithintheirboundariesandaddresstheimpactsassociatedwithlanduseandfreightmovement.Supportprivatesectorinvestmentsinadvancedtechnologiesandmanagementsystemsthatsupportregionalgoalsandpolicies.



ApplytherecommendationsfromtheEasternWashingtonInter‐modalTransportationStudy(EWITS)andtheStrategicFreightTransportationAnalysis,bothbyWashingtonStateUniversity,toapplicablepoliciesandstrategies.Promoteandencourageall‐weathersurfacingoffarm‐to‐marketroadssubjecttoheavytruckusageandseasonalclosuresorweightrestrictions.Encouragefreightaccessimprovementstoagriculturalprocessing,industrialfacilities,ports,railterminalsandothershippingfacilities.Encouragethelocationoffreightfacilitiesadjacenttoappropriateexistingarterialsandtransportationhubsandencouragetheconsolidationoffreightfacilitieswhereverfeasible.SupporteffortsbytheCorpsofEngineersandthestatesofWashington,Oregon,andIdahotorestoreandupgradetheColumbia/SnakeRivernavigationsystemtostrengthenourpositionintheinternationaltrademarket.ContinuesupportoftheWSDOTintheireffortstofindsolutionstothechallengesassociatedwithI‐90overSnoqualmiePass.SupportWSDOT in efforts to secure funding for the completion of the I‐90 improvements overSnoqualmiePass.Policy17–IntermodalismItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtoencourageandmaintainanaccessibleintermodalpassengerandfreightnetworkwithtransportationhubstofacilitateaccesstourbanandruraldestinationswhilemaintaininganefficientandbalancedtransportationsystem.ActionStrategiesIdentifymajortransportationterminals,facilities,routes,andcorridorsthatconnectpassengerandfreightmovementswithotherintermodalfacilities.Developanintermodalplanoutliningtheregion’sstrategiestodealwithanyconstraintstoincreasingintermodalism.Recognizetheabilityofeachmodetoenhancetheefficiencyofothermodes.Explorethepossibilityofothermodescontributingtotheoverallefficiencyofthenetworksuchaswaterwaysandrail.Encouragethedevelopmentorexpansionofefficientfreightandpassengerintermodalfacilitiesthatexpeditetransfersbetweenmodes,routes,andcarriers.Workwithlocaljurisdictionstodevelopandpromoteregionalintermodalfacilitiestoavoidduplicationofservices.Policy18–TransportationandEconomicsItisthepolicyofBFCGtoacknowledgeandpromotetransportationashavingafundamentalroleingrowingandmaintainingahealthyandstrongregionaleconomy.



ActionStrategiesSupporttransportationprojectsthatprovideservicefornew,expandingorexistingindustry/businessesintheregion.Acknowledgetheextensivediversityofcommercewithintheregion.Encourageandsupporttransportationinfrastructureimprovementsandexpansionprojectsthateliminatecongestionpointsandsupportastrongeconomythroughpromotionofeconomicdevelopmentandincreasedemploymentopportunities.Supportimprovementstofreightroutesinordertomoveproductsandcommoditiesinandoutoftheregionforeconomicgrowthaswellastheemploymentstabilitycreatedbytheactivity.Supporttransiteffortstoserveemploymentcentersanddeveloppark&ridelots.Recognizehowprojectsmayimpacttherecreationandtourismtrade.ContinuesupportforthedevelopmentandfundingofastatewideAllWeatherRoad(AWR)systemthatallowsfortheyear‐roundmovementofagriculturalproducts,consequentlystrengtheningtheruraleconomy.Policy19–MaintenanceandPreservationItisthepolicyoftheBFCGtopromotethemaintenanceandpreservationoftheexistingregionalmulti‐modaltransportationsystem.ActionStrategiesRecognize both a federal and state emphasis onmaintaining a safe and efficient existing systemratherthanbuildingadditionalcapacity.Encourageschedulingofmaintenanceandpreservationthatwillachievelowestlife‐cyclecosts.Promotedetailed inventoriesandanalysisof transportationsystems;understanding thisexercisecantakeavarietyofformsthatmayormaynotincludeadvancedcomputertechnologies.Encourage discussions regarding the funding challenges for preservation of the existing multi‐modalsystem.(FromtheBFCG2011‐2032RegionalTransportationPlan,ChapterThree)



CHAPTERSEVEN–MODELRESULTSANDMETROPLITANTRANSPORTATIONSYSTEMEVALUATION

MODELRESULTS&TRANSPORTATIONSYSTEMEVALUATION

INTRODUCTIONAfterthemodeliscalibratedtoexistingtrafficvolumes,itisthenpossibletoevaluatewhateffectsplannedroadprojectsandgrowthpatternswillhaveupontheroadnetwork.Thisisachievedbyusingprojectedlandusedatacoupledwithroadimprovementsplannedbylocaljurisdictions.Aswithallmodels,theyareatooltoevaluatetheimpactsoffuturechange.Itisimportanttorecognizethestrengthofaregionalmodelisintheevaluationofcorridor‐basedvolumesandregionaltrends.Attentionshouldbegiventothosecorridorsthatshowmultiplepointsofcongestion,ratherthansinglesegments.Specificspotforecastsandevaluationarebetterlefttomicro‐levelevaluationthroughothermeans.ThemodelreplicatestrafficpatternsduringatypicalweekdayPMpeak‐houroftravelforthescenarioyear.Forecastvolumesaremeanttoillustratetrendsandnotabsoluteflows.Itisimportanttorememberthatwhilethemodeliscalibratedwelltoregionalvolumes,theremaybesomeareasofcongestionwhichmaynotappearinmodelresults.Conversely,theremaybesomelocationswherethemodelmayreflectcongestedconditionswherenoneexist.Additionally,theremaybeareaswherecongestionisprominentduringadifferentperiodofday,thanthePMpeak‐hour.Intheseinstances,BFCGstaffandlocaljurisdictionshavereviewedresultsandhaveseparatelylistedknownareasofconcernthatmaynototherwiseappearintheevaluation.PORTRAYINGCONGESTION/LEVELOFSERVICEThemodelingpackagecanportrayresultsinavarietyofmeasures‐somelendingthemselveswelltowrittendiscussionsregardingcongestion,andothersthatdonot.Onemeasurewidelyunderstoodthatlendsitselfwelltovisualportrayalofresultsisusingprojectedvolumesagainstthecapacityofaroadway.ThischapterwillrelyonVolumetoCapacity(V/C)ratiosforthepurposesofdiscussionregardingpotentialcongestion.Inthesimplestterms,aroadsegmentwithlittleornovolumewouldhaveaV/Crationearzero,whileasegmentoperatingatits’statedcapacitywouldhaveaV/Cratioequaltoone.Asageneralrule,V/Cratiosinexcessof.85indicatecongestionislikelyuponthatsegment.V/Cratiosareshownthrougharangeofcolors,beginningwithgreentonesnearzeroescalatingtoyellowtonesuptoaV/Cequalto.85.SegmentswithaV/Cinexcessof.85areconsideredcongestedandshadedinpinkforemphasis.ProjectedPMpeak‐hourvolumesuponeachroadsegmentareshownbothbyagraduatedlinethicknessandalsonumericallyabovetheroadways.Figure7‐1belowprovidesamodelimageportrayingV/Cratios,withvolumesreflectedbythicknessoflineandlabelsuponeachsegment.This(2010calibration)exampleshowsSR395BlueBridgesouthboundhavingaV/Cinthe.75‐1.00range,withthenorthboundV/Cratiointhe.50‐.75range.V/Cratiosinexcessof.85areevidentuponsegmentsofYelmandBentonStreetsinKennewick.LevelofService(LOS)isawidelyusedterminevaluationoftransportationfacilities.LevelofServicecanbemeasuredatintersectionsandalongroadwaysegments,withascalesimilartoareportcardwhereAisfavorableandFisundesirable.Withintheurbanarea,memberjurisdictionshaveadoptedLOSDasbeingacceptable.LOScalculationsatintersectionsvarydependinguponthetypeofintersectioncontrol(stoporsignal),whetherallapproachesarecontrolled,andthedelaysassociatedwiththosecontrols.LOScalculationsuponroadsegmentsvaryaswell,dependentuponavarietyoffactorsincluding:roadwayclass,segmentspeed,frequencyofaccesspoints,presence



ofpedestrians/bicyclists,turnlanes,andterrain.WhileneitherintersectionnorroadwayLOScalculationsarefeasibletocompleteattheregionallevel,V/Cratiosdoprovideacontextthatcanbecomparable.Forinstance,aV/Cequalto.85orabovewouldbeindicativeofanLOSEorF.2010BASE‐YEARRESULTSThebaseyearforthemodelwas2010andcloselyreflectsthetrafficvolumes,astheyexistedduringthePMpeak‐hourofatypicalweekdaythatyear.Thebase‐yearscenarioistypicallyusedasacontroltoensurethemodeliscalibratedtoactualtrafficcounts–ascongestionisevidenttoalldriverswhoexperienceconditionsuponthelocalroadways.AreasthatresultinV/Cratiosinexcessof.85(indicatingcongestion)duringthebase‐yearwere:

SR240eastboundbetweenRoute10andStevensDrive GeorgeWashingtonWaynearI‐182 SR240eastboundtoI‐182westbound(nearAaronheadedtowardQueensgate) GageBlvdeastbound,eastofSteptoe YelmStreetatIntersectionswithSR395andKennewickAve SR395southboundrampmovementsbetweenSR397I/CandCourtStI/C I‐182eastboundramptoRd100 Road100betweenSandifurandI‐182I/C Road68northboundnorthofI‐182I/C

ThegreatestvolumestravelupontheSR240,I‐182,andSR395corridorsthatstretchthroughouttheTri‐Cityarea.Congestionismostlylimitedtoareassurroundingthesestateroutesandtheirconnectiontolocalarterials.Delaysatsignalizedintersectionsresultinthepredominanceofdelaysupontheseroutes.OTHEROPERATIONALCONCERNSNOTIDENTIFIEDBYMODELThereinvariablyarelocationsinallmodelswhoseactualconditionsarenotreflectedwellwithinthemodel.BFCGstaffandlocaljurisdictionshavereviewedthemodelfindings,andhaveidentifiedlocationswherevolumesarehigherthanportrayedbythemodel,orotherwiserealizedasbeingcongestedbaseduponotherconditions.Identificationoftheselocationsisimportantwhenconsideringthebase‐yearmodel,becauselocationsthatappearlowwithinthecalibratedmodelarelikelytomodelsimilarlyinfuturescenarios.Thefollowinglocationshavebeenidentifiedasareasofcongestionwherethemodelresultsdonotadequatelyportrayexistingconditions:

SR240“Bypass”–delaysatsixsignalizedintersectionsonroute SR395,HildebrandttoYelm–delaysatsevensignalizedintersectionsalongroute I‐182InterchangesatRoad100andRoad68‐rampdelaysaccessinglocalarterials ClearwaterBlvd.‐EdisonSt.toSR395 SR397(AinsworthAve)‐4thAveto10thAvewestbound

OPERATIONALCONCERNSFORAMPEAK‐HOURThereareseverallocationsinthemodelareathathaveoperationsproblemsduringthemorningcommute,orotherperiodsoutsidethePMpeak‐hour.WiththemodelfocusuponthePMpeak‐hour,andthepredominanttravelpatternsinthearea,theselocationsarelikelytonotappearwithinthemodelresults.BFCGstaff,withthehelpofWSDOTandthelocaljurisdictions,hascompiledthefollowinglisttoidentifytheselocations.

SR240westboundramptoI‐182westbound SR240“Bypass”–delaysatsixsignalizedintersectiononroute



Queensgate–eastboundaccesstoI‐182eastbound ColumbiaCenterBlvd–northboundaccesstoSR240westbound Burden/Road68accessingI‐182westbound I‐182eastboundofframptoSR240northbound At‐graderailroadcrossingsonLeslie,Edison,WashingtonSt./Fruitland,SR397

(FromtheBFCG2011‐2032RegionalTransportationPlan,Chapter7,pages7‐1to7‐4)



CHAPTERTEN‐PLANIMPLEMENTATIONPERFORMANCEMEASUREMENTMonitoringtheperformanceoftheregionaltransportationsysteminvolvesthemeasurementofchangesinspecificfactorsovertime.“TransportationTrendsandKeyFacts”releasedbyBFCGin2010summarizesdataonmultipleaspectsofboththemetropolitanandregionaltransportationsystemsovertime.ThereportpresentsdataintheareasofGrowingTravelDemand,TransportationSystemandTransportationImpacts.TheTransportationTrendsreportisavailableontheBFCGwebsiteat:http://www.bfcog.us/transportation.html.Trackingchangesregion‐wideprovidesinformationtolocalandregionalpolicymakersandeducatesinterestedcitizens.Feedbackfromperformancemonitoringcanleadtoprogramandgoalmodification,moreintensiveevaluationofspecificfactors,changesinthetypesofdatacollected,orimprovementstothetransportationsystem.PerformanceMeasuresTwopotentialhighwaysystemperformancemeasuresarereviewedbelow.Additionalaspectsoftheregionaltransportationsystemtopicsormodesthatmaybetrackedarealsodiscussed.SystemperformancemeasureswillbeevaluatedandincorporatedintosubsequentRTPupdates.TheperformancemonitoringoftheRTPwillbecompletedandreportedasapartofthebiennialRTPreview.HighwayPerformanceMeasuresThesedataaregenerallyusedtoassessstreetcapacitydeficiencies.Nosinglemeasurecanprovideacompleteassessmentofthetransportationsystem.Eachanalyticaltechniquemeasuresadifferentperformancelevel.Astreetsegmentorintersectionthatisperformingpoorlyusingonemeasuremayfunctionadequatelyaccordingtoothercriteria.Eachmeasureindicatesadifferentrangeofresponsesthatcouldaddresstroubleareasidentifiedintheanalysis.Currently,dataavailablefortrackingroadsystemperformanceincludes:TrafficVolumesTrafficvolumesareprimarilyusefulforensuringthatroadwayimprovementsareadequatetoaddressthedemandsofpeaktravelperiods.Trafficvolumesareoneofmanydatainputsoftheregionaltransportationmodelandareusedtoprojecttheregion’stravelbehaviorandtheefficiencyofroadwaysegments.VehicleMilesTraveledThenumberofvehiclemilestraveled(VMT)inaregionrevealsarelationshipbetweenlanduseandthetransportationsystem.AverageVMTpervehicletripisoftenusedtocalculategenerallyhowfarmotoristscommutebetweenhomeandwork.The2010Tri‐Citiestrafficmodelprovidestheabilitytoextractvehiclemilestraveledoncriticalsegmentsofthemetropolitanstreetandhighwaysystem.RevisionofthemetropolitanareamodeleveryfiveyearsforRegionalTransportationPlanupdatesaffordstheopportunitytotrackchangesinvehiclemilestraveledinthemodelarea.



Level‐of‐ServiceTypically,performancestandardsthatmeasuretrafficcongestionarepresentedinthecontextoflevel‐of‐service(LOS)measures.Thesearemeasuresofobservedtrafficvolumecomparedwithcapacityalongroadwaysegmentsandameasureofdelayatintersectionsandramps.DatarequirementsforcalculatingtheLOSofarterialsincludeexistingstreetcapacity,trafficvolumes,andtraveltime.JurisdictionstypicallyadoptLOSCinruralareasandLOSDinurbanareas.AdditionalTransportationSystemMeasurementsStreetsandhighwaysareasignificantcomponentofthetransportationsystemintheRTPO,butadditionalelementscouldbemeasured.Someofthesearelistedbelow.SeasonalWeightRestrictionsSeasonalweightrestrictionsonruralcountyfreightandgoodsroutesarediscussedinChapterTwoasaregionaltransportationissueorconcern.Duringspringfreeze/thawcyclesthosefreightandgoodsroutesnotadequatelysurfacedcansufferdamageifweightrestrictionsarenotimposed.Trackingprogresstowardall‐weathersurfacingthoseroutesisaneasilyattainableperformancemeasure.PublicTransportationThedatarequiredtomeasuretheeffectivenessofpublictransportationincludesridershiptrendsandtheprovisionofservicetotransitdependentcitizens.Thesedatarequirementsshouldbeequaltoorexceedbaselinecalculations.BenFranklinTransitandValleyTransitmaintainrecordsonridershiptrendsandprovisionofservices.FreightTransportationPerformanceMeasuresFreighttransportationisveryimportanttotheeconomicvitalityofthisagriculturalregion.Aneffectivefreightsystemrequiresswiftandeconomicaltransport.Thedatarequiredtomeasuretheneedsandeffectivenessofthefreighttransportationsystemincludesanestimateoftheamountoffreighttransportedandadeterminationofdeficienciestoincludetravelroutes,frequencyoftransport,timeoftransports,andotherconstraints.FreighttonnagewascollectedfortheFreightandGoodsTransportationSystem(FGTS),whichcategorizedroadwaysbasedonthelevelofannualfreighttonnageinordertoidentifyroadsegments,whichplayasignificantroleinmovementofgoodsinthestate.Otherdatawillneedtobecollectedtoestablishbaselinerecords.AirTransportationPerformanceMeasuresTheRTPencouragesairtransportationofpeopleandfreightbyminimizingtheimpactofsurroundingdevelopmentonairportoperations.Datarequiredtomeasureairtransportationincludetheamountoffreightandpassengerstransportedandadeterminationofdeficienciestoincludeprovisionofservicedemandandfrequency.Aperformancestandardforthesedatacouldbetonotdecreasebelowthebaselinelevel.BoththePortofPasco(Tri‐CitiesAirport)andthePortofWallaWalla(WallaWallaRegionalAirport)collectannualfreightandpassengerstatistics.RailTransportationPerformanceMeasuresRailservicesintheRTPOregionareveryimportanttothetransportoffreightandpassengers.Datarequirementsformeasuringtheeffectivenessoftherailsystemincludetheamountoffreighttransportedandthenumberofpassengersserved.Dataonraildeficienciesshouldalsoincludethenumberofcrossings,theamountoflinetrackageincompliancewithstandards,andfrequencyofservice.Theperformancestandardsforthedatarequiredareitsbaselinemeasurements.Baselinedatawillneedtobegathered.



Non‐MotorizedTransportationPerformanceMeasuresThenon‐motorizedtransportationsystemcomponentincludescommuterandrecreationalbikeroutesandpedestriansidewalksandpathways.Emphasisisgiveninourcitiesandtownstoprovidingsidewalksalongallarterialsandschoolroutesandtoconnectingparksandresidentialareaswithbicycleandpedestrianpathswheneverpossible.Thedatarequiredtomeasurethenon‐motorizedsystemmayincludepedestrianandbicycleusageoftheexistingtrailsystem,non‐motorizedtravelpatterns,theexistingconnectionsbetweenpathsandparksorresidentialareas,sidewalklocations,andthenumberofimprovementsmadetotheexistingpedestriansystemtomeetADArequirements.Theperformancestandardsforthesefacilitiescouldbetoexceedbaselinelevels.Thebaselinemeasurementforsidewalksincludeslocatingthemonallarterialsandschoolroutes.Baselinedataisnotavailableandwouldhavetobegatheredforthissystemcomponent.Multi‐ModalTransportationSystemIncreasedintegrationoftransportationmodesintheregionaltransportationsystemcanresultinmoreefficientuseofexistinginfrastructureandprograms.Multi‐modalperformancemeasurescouldbedeterminedbyhouseholdtravelsurveysindicatingthepercentageoftripstakenbyalternativetransportationmodestothesingle‐occupantvehicle.IntermodalTransportationschemeThenumberofinter‐modalconnectionsintheregion,andthemodesplitbetweenthetransportationoffreightbytruck,rail,barge,orair.Theperformancestandardforthenumberofinter‐modalconnectionsandmodalsplitbetweentruck,barge,andrailintheregioncouldbetoremainatorexceedthebaselinecalculation.CoordinationTheeffectivenessofcoordinationeffortsbetweenRTPOmembers,systemstakeholders,andotherinterestgroupsandcitizensisdifficulttoevaluate.However,qualitativedatacanbegatheredbysurveyingpersonstoassessopinionsandevaluatecoordinationrelatedaccomplishments.Theperformancestandardcouldbeanoveralladequacyratingofregionaltransportationplanningcoordination.Thereiscurrentlynobaselinemeasurementofthisrating.(FromtheBFCG2011‐2032RegionalTransportationPlan,Chapter10,pages10‐4to10‐6)



CHAPTERTEN‐REGIONALTRANSPORTATIONSTRATEGIES

Regionaltransportationstrategiesareusedtoimplementtheregionalgrowthstrategydiscussedabove.Thestrategiesidentifyandaddressalternativetransportationmodeswithintheregion,enhanceindividualtransportationmodesaswellasinter‐modalconnectionsand,asappropriate,promotetransportationdemandmanagement.Countywideplanningpoliciesandpoliciesfromlocalcomprehensiveplansthatareregionalinscopeandregionallyconsistentprovidethebasisfortheregionaltransportationstrategies. Meetthetransportationinfrastructureneedsoftheregion’smajorsourcesofeconomic

growthandvitality.Projectsthatmeetthisconditionareimprovementsthatdirectlyfacilitatethemovementofgoodsorpeopleinamannerthatprovidesanetbenefittotheregionasawhole.Thiswouldincludetheimprovementoftherecreationalroadwaysystemtoattractvisitorsfromoutsidetheregion;theimprovementoftheportionsofthehaulroadsystemandaccesstowaterports,railheads,andairports.Developmentofthesecomponentsoftheroadwaysystemfacilitatesmovementthatgeneratesincomefortheregion’sprincipalindustriesandcontributestoregionaldevelopment.

Supportthecoordinationoflanduseandtransportationdecisions.

Thereareportionsoftheregionwhichareundergoingsignificantdevelopmentwithregardtolanduse.ChaptersSixandSevenhavedescribedtheseinsomedetail.Projectsthatsupportoraccommodatelandusedevelopmentintheseareasmeetthiscondition.

Improvemulti‐jurisdictionalcoordinationtoavoidtransportationsystemdeficiencies.

Thisappliestosituationswhereaprojectrequiresinvolvementofeithermorethanonelevelofgovernment,adjacentgovernmentaljurisdictions,oragreementsbetweenpublicandprivatesectorentities.Inthecaseofallthesepartnerships,theadministrativeoversight,financing,andotheraspectsofprojectdevelopmentcanbesharedandmakeaproductiveoutcomemorelikely.

Promoteefficientmultimodaltransportationsystemsandconnections.

Projectsshouldevaluateandaddresstheneedsofallformsoftransportation,includingpublictransit,pedestriansandbicyclists.Multimodalconnectionsshouldbereadilyaccessible,convenientandprovidesmoothtransitionsbetweenmodes.

Promoteeffectiveintermodaltransportationsystemsandconnections.Opportunitiesforintermodalfacilitiesarefew.Existingfacilitiesshouldbemaintainedandthedevelopmentofnewintermodalfacilitiesencouraged.RailexandthePortofPascoBigPascofacilityareexamples.

EnsuresufficientrailandroadaccesstotheSnakeandColumbiaRiverportfacilities

andensuresufficientinfrastructure(i.e.bargeslips,docks,andstoragefacilities)atthoseports.BargetransportationontheSnake/ColumbiaRiversystemisvitaltotheeconomyoftheregion,thestate,andtheentirenorthwest.Withoutthatcompetitiveoption,thecostsoftransportingbyrailortruckwouldsurelyincrease.Furthermore,massiverailandroadcapacityimprovementswouldbeneededtomovethosecommoditiesnowshippedbybarge.



ActivelysupporttheUSArmyCorpsofEngineers(COE)intheireffortstomaintain

adequatedepthinthelowerColumbiaRivershipchannelAlso,supporttheCOE’songoingeffortstodredgeandmaintainsufficientclearanceforbargetrafficontheSnakeRiverfromtheLewiston/ClarkstonareatotheColumbiaRiverneartheTri‐Cities.Asstatedabove,shipmentoffreightbybargeisasignificantcomponentoftotalfreighttrafficforgoodstravelingfromtheRTPOtothecoast.InternationalshippingisvitaltoWashington’scontinuedeconomicgrowth.Continuedviabilityoftheriversthemselvesiscriticaltosuccessfulmaintenanceofthisfreightmode.

Promoteinnovativefinancingstrategies.Decreasedtransportationrevenuesmakeitimperativethatinnovativefinancingstrategiesbeutilizedtogetthemostpossiblebenefitfromavailablefunds.Innovativefinancingstrategiescaninvolvepartneringbetweenjurisdictionsandmayalsoincludetheprivatesector.

(FromtheBFCG2011‐2032RegionalTransportationPlan,Chapter10,pages10‐2to10‐4)





APPENDIXCCMPCorridorTrackingMatrix



InSeptember2013,FHWAstaffmetwithBFCGstafftoreviewthestatusofTMAimplementation.At themeeting,aCorridorTrackingMatrixwasdescribed. Its importanceasa trackingtool tobeusedtopresentachronologyoftheprogressoftheCMPimplementationwasemphasized.FHWAstaffsuggestedinclusionofanexistingimprovementtouseasanexampleofimplementingthematrix.RichlandandKennewickhaveprovidedexamplesforthatpurpose.



CORRIDOR DATA PERFORMANCEMEASURE STRATEGIES

KeeneRoadWidening

RegionalModelprojectedtrafficvolumesgreaterthanexistingtrafficlanescouldaccommodate

TrafficCounts;RegionalModelupdates AdditionalLanes;SignalizedIntersections;AccessControl

ColumbiaCenterBoulevard‐ClearwaterAvenuetoWillametteAvenue

Counts(onSteptoeStreetandColumbiaCenter),RegionalModelprojectionsshowingneedforcapacityimprovement

LOS,TravelTimeandTravelTimeReliability,Counts(todeterminetrafficreductionsasaresultofSteptoeStreet)

Signalphasingandcrosswalkchanges.Lanereconfigurationsandlaneadditions.Constructionofalternateparallelroute(SteptoeStreet).Removalofat‐graderailcrossingbetweenClearwater&Deschutes

QueensgateDrive:KeeneRoadtoDuportailStreetTrafficcountsandtraveltimedatawillbecollectedandanalyzed.

GeorgeWashingtonWay:ColumbiaPointDrivetoHornRapidsRoad

Asegmentofthiscorridorwasidentifiedinthe2011MTPashavingav/cgreaterthan.85.

Trafficcountsandtraveltimedatawillbecollectedandanalyzed.

StevensDrive:SR240toHornRapidsRoadTrafficcountsandtraveltimedatawillbecollectedandanalyzed.

ColumbiaCenterBoulevard(CCB):ClearwaterAvenuetoWillametteAvenue


ClearwaterAvenue:US395toKelloggStreetTrafficcountsandtraveltimedatawillbecollectedandanalyzed.

Road68:ChapelHillBoulevardtoSandifurParkwayAsegmentofthiscorridorwasidentifiedinthe2011MTPashavingav/cgreaterthan.85.


Road100:ChapelHillBlvd.toSandifurParkwayAsegmentofthiscorridorwasidentifiedinthe2011MTPashavingav/cgreaterthan.85.


CourtStreet:Road40to20thAvenueTrafficcountsandtraveltimedatawillbecollectedandanalyzed.

20thAvenue:LewisStreettoArgentRoadTrafficcountsandtraveltimedatawillbecollectedandanalyzed.

SR240:Milepost20.48(Route10)toMilepost28.84(StevensDrive)



SR240:Milepost30.63(JadwinAvenue)toMilepost34.57(SR182offramp)


SR182:Milepost.87(DallasRd)toMilepost4.40(I‐182westboundon‐rampfromGeorgeWashingtonWaysouthbound)



HistoricalProjectExample:CityofRichland

HistoricalProjectExample:CityofKennewick



CORRIDOR SOLUTION IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT

KeeneRoadWidening

Addedadditionallaneseachdirection;Installedsignalizedintersections;establishedaccesscontrollimitingtheamountofdriveways

Corridorwaswidenedin3phaseswiththefinalphasecompletedin2012.

Currenttrafficcountsandmodelingindicatethiscorridorisoperatingwithanacceptablelevelofservice

ColumbiaCenterBoulevard‐ClearwaterAvenuetoWillametteAvenue

Allitemsin"Strategies"between2004andpresent.

At‐graderailcrossingremovalandaddedtravellanesbetweenClearwaterandDeschutesin2004‐2005,FlashingYellowArrow,allowingoptimalphasingandcoordinationsolutionsin2005‐2006.LanechangesatQuinault&Grandridgein2006and2011respectively.Crosswalkchangesin2012.AdditionofSteptoeStreetparallelroutein2013.

Increasedtraveltimereliabilityduetoremovalofat‐graderailcrossing.Reducedtraveltimesasaresultofimprovedphasingandsignalcoordination.Reduceddelayonsidestreetsatsomelocationsduetolaneconfigurationchangesandphasingefficiencies.13%reductioninAverageDailyTrafficonColumbiaCenterBoulevardbetweenDeschutesandClearwaterwithanticipatedreducedtraveltimesandcongestionthatgoalongwithit.

QueensgateDrive:KeeneRoadtoDuportailStreet

GeorgeWashingtonWay:ColumbiaPointDrivetoHornRapidsRoad

StevensDrive:SR240toHornRapidsRoad

ColumbiaCenterBoulevard(CCB):ClearwaterAvenuetoWillametteAvenue

ClearwaterAvenue:US395toKelloggStreet

Road68:ChapelHillBoulevardtoSandifurParkway

Road100:ChapelHillBlvd.toSandifurParkway

CourtStreet:Road40to20thAvenue

20thAvenue:LewisStreettoArgentRoad

SR240:Milepost20.48(Route10)toMilepost28.84(StevensDrive)

SR240:Milepost30.63(JadwinAvenue)toMilepost34.57(SR182offramp)

SR182:Milepost.87(DallasRd)toMilepost4.40(I‐182westboundon‐rampfromGeorgeWashingtonWaysouthbound)

HistoricalProjectExample:CityofRichland

HistoricalProjectExample:CityofKennewick



APPENDIXDCongestedCorridorData



This appendixwill be comprisedof separate sectionson each corridor.Each sectionwill containmaps(collisionsandinjuries,signalization, landuse,etc.)anddataspecific toeachcorridor. Thelevelofdetailofinformationoneachcorridorwillbeaugmentedovertime.

CMPCONGESTEDCORRIDORS

RICHLANDCONGESTEDCORRIDORSQueensgateDrive:KeeneRoadtoDuportailStreetGeorgeWashingtonWay:ColumbiaPointDrivetoHornRapidsRoadStevensDrive:SR240toHornRapidsRoad

KENNEWICKCONGESTEDCORRIDORSColumbiaCenterBoulevard(CCB):ClearwaterAvenuetoWillametteAvenueClearwaterAvenue:US395toKelloggStreet

PASCOCONGESTEDCORRIDORSRoad68:ChapelHillBoulevardtoSandifurParkwayRoad100:ChapelHillBoulevardtoSandifurParkwayCourtStreet:Road40to20thAvenue20thAvenue:LewisStreettoArgentRoad

WSDOTCONGESTEDCORRIDORSSR240:Milepost20.48(Route10)toMilepost28.84(StevensDrive)SR240:Milepost30.63(JadwinAvenue)toMilepost34.57(SR182offramp)SR182:Milepost.87(DallasRd)toMilepost4.40(I‐182westboundon‐rampfromGeorge

Washington Way southbound)



QueensgateDriveCharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:KeeneRoadtoDuportailStreetLength:0.84milesFunctionalClassification:MinorArterialTransitRoutes:39K,39HW,110







QueensgateDriveCollisionData

I/SMid‐Block TOTAL I/S

Mid‐Block TOTAL I/S

Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012

Injuries&FatalitiesSummary

TotalFatalities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TotalInjuries 0 1 1 4 6 10 5 0 5

PedestrianInjuries 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

PedestrianFatalities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

BicyclistInjuries 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

BicyclistFatalities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 0 2 2 2 2 4 0 0 0

TurningMovement 1 0 1 1 1 2 5 1 6

AngleorSideSwipe 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 4 4

FixedObject 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 0

BackingUp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ParkedMotorVehicle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Overturn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 1 2 3 5 6 11 5 5 10Source:WSDOTStatewideTravelandCollisionDataOffice



GeorgeWashingtonWayCharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:ColumbiaPointDrivetoHornRapidsRoadLength:6.07milesFunctionalClassification:PrincipalArterialTransitRoutes:23,26,27,120,225







GeorgeWashingtonWayCollisionData I/S Mid‐Block TOTAL I/S Mid‐Block TOTAL I/S Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012



TotalInjuries 29 18 47 35 18 53 23 9 32

PedestrianInjuries 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1




NatureofCrashes

Rear‐End 26 33 59 21 19 40 29 18 47



FixedObject 1 1 2 2 3 5 2 0 2

BackingUp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 1 1 2 4 0 4 1 1 2

Pedestrian 4 0 4 1 0 1 1 0 1


Overturn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

Total 67 47 63 35 63 32 Source:WSDOTStatewideTravelandCollisionDataOffice



StevensDriveCharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:SR240toHornRapidsRoadLength:2.93milesFunctionalClassification:PrincipalArterialTransitRoutes:23,27







StevensDriveCollisionData



Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012








NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 2 1 3 6 1 7 0 0 0



FixedObject 1 4 5 0 2 2 0 3 3

BackingUp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Overturn 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0

Miscellaneous 0 1 1 0 1 18 0




ColumbiaCenterBoulevardCharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:ClearwaterAvenuetoWillametteAvenueLength:1.26milesFunctionalClassification:PrincipalArterialTransitRoutes:110,39,39K,42,48,50







ColumbiaCenterBoulevardCollisionData



Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012



TotalInjuries 30 6 36 31 11 42 26 8 34





NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 13 14 27 18 8 26 15 11 26



FixedObject 0 2 2 1 1 2 2 0 2

BackingUp 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 2ParkedMotorVehicle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Overturn 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0





ClearwaterAvenueCharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:US395toKelloggStreetLength:2.01milesFunctionalClassification:PrincipalArterialTransitRoutes:41,42,47,120,160









ClearwaterAvenueCollisionData



Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012



TotalInjuries 25 35 60 17 24 41 25 30 55





NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 16 25 41 13 28 41 19 31 50



FixedObject 4 2 6 0 2 2 2 3 5

BackingUp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 2

Pedestrian 1 1 2 1 1 2 0 0 0


Overturn 0 2 2 1 0 1 0 2 2





Road68CharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:ChapelHillBoulevardtoSandifurParkwayLength:1.17milesFunctionalClassification:MinorArterialTransitRoutes:67







Road68CollisionData I/S Mid‐Block TOTAL I/S Mid‐Block TOTAL I/S Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012

Injuries&Fatalities


TotalInjuries 14 4 18 23 5 28 30 5 35



BicyclistInjuries 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0BicyclistFatalities 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 13 8 21 15 4 19 13 10 23



FixedObject 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 0 2

BackingUp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Overturn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Miscellaneous 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Source:WSDOTStatewideTravelandCollisionDataOffice



Road100CharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:ChapelHillBoulevardtoSandifurParkwayLength:0.57milesFunctionalClassification:MinorArterialTransitRoutes:66,67,225







Road100CollisionData



Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012

Injuries&Fatalities







NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2



FixedObject 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 2

BackingUp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0


Overturn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





CourtStreet

CharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:Road40to20thAvenueLength:1.25milesFunctionalClassification:PrincipalArterialTransitRoutes:60,62,67,225









CourtStreetCollisionData



Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012

Injuries&Fatalities


TotalInjuries 18 10 28 18 3 21 23 7 30





NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 8 7 15 9 6 15 14 2 16



FixedObject 1 6 7 2 2 4 2 3 5

BackingUp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 6


Overturn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0





20thAvenueCharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:LewisStreettoArgentRoadLength:1.83milesFunctionalClassification:PrincipalArterialTransitRoutes:60,62,64,65,160,225







North20thAvenueCollisionData



Mid‐Block TOTAL

2010 2010 2010 2011 2011 2011 2012 2012 2012

Injuries&Fatalities


TotalInjuries 14 6 20 17 1 18 6 5 11





NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 8 9 17 6 5 11 4 6 10



FixedObject 2 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0

BackingUp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1


Overturn 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1





SR240

CharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:Milepost20.48(Route10)toMilepost28.84(StevensDrive)Length:8.34milesFunctionalClassification:Freeway/Expressway







SR240:Route10toStevensDrive 2010 2011 2012

Injuries&Fatalities

TotalFatalities 0 0 0

TotalInjuries 0 12 4

PedestrianFatalities 0 0 0

BicyclistInjuries 0 0 0

BicyclistFatalities 0 0 0

NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 1 4 1

TurningMovement 0 0 0

AngleorSideSwipe 3 3 3

FixedObject 1 2 0

BackingUp 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0

ParkedMotorVehicle 0 0 0

Overturn 0 0 0

Miscellaneous 2 1 5

Total 7 10 9Source:WSDOTStatewideTravelandCollisionDataOffice



SR240BypassCharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:Milepost30.63(JadwinAvenue)toMilepost34.57(SR182offramp)Length:4.12milesFunctionalClassification:Freeway/Expressway







SR240:JadwinAvenuetoI‐182 2010 2011 2012

Injuries&Fatalities






NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 39 32 31



FixedObject 8 3 1

BackingUp 0 0 0

Bicyclist 0 0 0

Pedestrian 0 0 0

ParkedMotorVehicle 0 0 0

Overturn 2 3 0

Miscellaneous 1 5 3




SR182CharacteristicsoftheCorridorExtent:Milepost.87(DallasRd)toMilepost4.40(I‐182westboundon‐rampfromGeorgeWashingtonWaysouthbound)Length:3.92milesFunctionalClassification:Interstate







I‐182:DallasRoadtoI‐182 2010 2011 2012

Injuries&Fatalities






NatureofCollisions

Rear‐End 5 7 4



FixedObject 5 2 11

Overturn 1 2 1

Miscellaneous 1 4 4




APPENDIXETravelTimeDataCollection





CMPTRAVELTIMEDATACOLLECTIONTheprocessdescribedbelowhasnotbeentestedinactualpractice.Itmayremainessentiallyasoutlinedorevolvethroughimplementation.Ifthatisthecase,changeswillbeidentifiedinsubsequentiterationsoftheCMP.DataCollectionTechniquesAvehicleisequippedwithaGPSreceiverandrecordingdevice.Thisdeviceisconnectedbeforetherunsonthecorridorarestartedandunpluggedoncetherunsarecompleted.Corridorshavebeendefinedelsewhereinthisdocument.Inaddition,thedefinitionisfluid;theextentofeachcorridorwillberevisitedtodeterminewhetheritisstillappropriate.DrivingForthepurposeofthesestudies,driversareinstructedtodriveataspeedthatapproximatestheflowoftraffic.Theyweretonotpurposelygetstuckbehindslow‐movingtraffic,ormatchspeedswiththefastestdrivers.Onmulti‐laneroadswithorwithoutacenterturnlane,itwassuggestedthatthelanenexttothecenterbeusedfortravel.RepetitionIfpossible,driversareinstructedtocompleteasmanycircuitsaspossibleduringtheallottedtimeperiod(see“TimePeriods”below).Forsomecorridorsasmanyas8or9circuitsmaybepossible;forothers,eventhreecircuitsmaynotbepossibleduetocongestionand/orlength.SpecialCircumstancesIntheeventofextremeweathersuchasheavyrain,snow,orice,ormajortrafficeventssuchasaccidentsorconstruction,datagatheringalongacorridorwouldbepostponed.Thecorridorwouldbeswitchedwithanothercorridor,iftrafficeventswerethecause,orscheduledforalaterdate,ifweatheristhereason.TimePeriodsInconsideringmeasurementoftraveltime,oneconcernthatsurfaced,andmustbeaddressedasthetraveltimecollectionprocessevolves,isthelengthofpeakperiodcongestionandmeasurementissuesthatpresents.AlthoughacorridorisconsideredcongestedbasedonthenatureoftrafficintheTri‐Cities,thecongestionmayhavea15‐or20‐minutepeakperiod,ratherthanamoreconventionalone‐hourpeak.Thispresentsmeasurementfrequencychallengesthatneedtobeaddressed.TheseincludethenumberofGPSrunsthatcanbeaccomplishedinsuchashorttime,andthenumberofrunsthatconstituteasufficientdataset.Thisemphasizestheimportanceofcoordinatedplanningwitheachjurisdictionpriortothecorridordrives.ThereissomeskepticismastotheefficacyoftheGPSmethodologygeneratingconsistentdataoncorridorswithaveryshortwindowofcongestion.Thedatacollectiontimeframeswillbe“morningcommute”and“eveningcommute”incontrastto“AMpeak”or“PMpeak”.CooperationandconsultationamongjurisdictionsandBFCGwillbeneededtoestablishbothwhenandhowfrequentlytraveltimemeasurementsaremadeandtheschedulemaytakeafewiterationstofinalize.Conventionally,threetimeperiodsaredefinedasimportantinprovidinginformationonhowtheregion’sroadsareoperating.Thesetimeperiodsaredefinedbasedonwhenthe‘peak’traveloccurs.Thesetimeperiodswillbeadjustedasneededinthefuturetotakeintoconsiderationnewinformationthatsuggeststhepeakperiodsareshifting.



Asitstandstoday,thetimingoftraveltimeGPSrunshasyettobedetermined.Decisionswillvarybyjurisdictionandbyindividualcorridor.DecisionswillbebasedonconversationsamongjurisdictionstaffandBFCGstaff.



APPENDIXFTransitSystemData



TRANSITDATABenFranklinTransit(BFT)currentlydoesnotcapturepassengerdatainamannerapplicabletotheCMPneeds.However,theagencyisintegraltotwoprogramsthatmateriallyaffectcongestioninthemetropolitanareaandaregermanetotheCMPprocess.ThoseprogramsareBFTVanpoolProgramandthemetropolitanareaparkandridesystem.Muchofthetextandallofthetablesandfiguresarefromthe2011‐2032MTP.Ifappropriate,theywillbeupdated.



BenFranklinTransitVanpoolProgramAsdiscussedearlier,theBFTVanpoolprogrambeganinthe1980sandhasbeenevolvingsince.BenFranklinTransitcurrentlyhas260Vanpoolvansontheroad,theirprimarydestinationistheHanfordArea,andtheirvanpoolserviceranksfourthinthestateinnumberofvansinservice.BasedonBFTdataasofSeptember2013,theprogramaveraged2,352,381passengermilespermonthwhilecarryinganaverageof73,975passengerspermonthsofarthisyear.TableXandFigureXandXpresentdatashowingthegrowthoftheBFTvanpoolprogramovertime.Thesearefromthe2011MTPandwillbeupdated.

TABLE4:BENFRANKLINTRANSITVANPOOLOPERATIONSDATA1995‐2010

BenFranklinTransitVanpoolOperationsData1995‐2010

YearAverage#

VansOperatedTotalMiles

TotalPassengers

PassengerIncrease

MileageIncrease

%RidershipIncrease

%MileageIncrease

1995 921,563,423 466,862 237,134 756,951 51% 48%

2000 1411,998,723 574,055 107,193 435,300 19% 22%

2005 1882,716,309 733,443 159,388 717,586 22% 26%

2010 3124,962,773 1,261,396 527,953 2,246,464 42% 45%

Source:BenFranklinTransitVanpoolProgram

FIGURE2:BENFRANKLINTRANSITVANPOOLRIDERSHIP–1990TO2010

‐

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

TotalPassengers

TotalPassengers



FIGURE3:BENFRANKLINTRANSITVANPOOLMILES–1990TO2010

SourceforFigures:BenFranklinTransitVanpoolProgram

MetropolitanAreaParkandRideSystemTheexistingparkandridesystembegandevelopmentintheearly1980’s.Currentlyitiscomprisedof15formalparkandridelotsinBentonandFranklinCountiesandanumberofinformallots.Thissectionwillreviewdataconcerningtheformalparkandridelots.OccupancydatapresentedinthissectionhasbeencollectedbytheWSDOTSouthCentralRegionalofficeinYakima.Thetwo‐countyareainventoryofparkandridelotsincludesbothparkandrideandparkandpoolfacilities,whileownershipofmostformalmetropolitanareaparkandridelotsissplitbetweentheWSDOTandBFT.BFTalsoleasesafewparkandridesites.Distinguishingbetweenthetwo,WSDOTfacilitiesareprimarilyparkandpoollotsadjacenttomajorroadwayintersectionssuchasSR240/SR224orI‐182/Queensgateandaresitedtocapturethevanpoolandcarpooluser.BFT‐ownedparkandridefacilitiesarelocatedattransitcentersintheirrespectivecommunities.Thefocusofthesefacilitiesisonthetransituserratherthanthecommuter,thoughcommutersmayusethem.Also,developmentoftheWSDOTfacilitiesgenerallyprecededthatoftheBFTlots.AcriticaldistinctiontonotebetweentheTri‐CityareaparkandridesystemandthegreatmajorityofparkandridesystemsisthatthecentralpurposeoftheTri‐Citiesparkandridesystemwas/istoprovideconvenientparkingfacilitiesforvanpoolsandcarpools.Inmanymetropolitanareas,parkandridelotsprimarilyprovideparkingfortransfertoexpressbusesoramasstransitsystem.BenFranklinTransit’sserviceandroutesystemarenotdesignedtoprovidetransportationfromthesefacilitiestoworksites,thoughpeopleusetransittogettoworklocationsservedbythefixedroutesystem.Table5identifiesfacilityownership,facilitytype,andshows2010occupancydatafortheformalparkandridelotsystemintheTri‐Citiesarea.Evaluatedcollectively,theaverageannualmonthlyoccupancyrate,andutilizationoftheTri‐Citiesparkandridesystemisincreasing.Systemcapacityhasrisenfrom657stallsin2001to1,555stallsin2010,anincreaseofmorethan130percent.ParkandRidelotusage,basedonaveragemonthlysystemoccupancy,decreasedfrom2001,with42percentofcapacitybeingutilized,until2006with28percentofcapacitybeingutilized.Usagehasbeenincreasingsince,withthedatashowingaveragesystemmonthlyoccupancytobeat54percentin2010.

‐

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

TotalMiles

TotalMiles



Table5alsoindexestheParkandRidelotsinMap3andcontains2010occupancydataforeachsite.ParkandRidelotsintheTri‐CitiesmetropolitanareaareshowninMap3.

TABLE5:PARKANDRIDELOTSINBENTONANDFRANKLINCOUNTIES

PARK&RIDEFACILITIESBENTONANDFRANKLINCOUNTIES

SiteID# Facility FacilityOwner

FacilityType Capacity

2010AvgMonthlyOccupancy

2010AvgMonthly%Occupancy

1 StacyAvenueStation Prosser/BFT Park&Ride 28 10 48%

2 SR225&DaleAvenueBentonCity/BFT Park&Ride 37 31 83%

3 I‐82&SR224Interchange WSDOT Park&Pool 30 24 81%

4 WestRichlandTransitCenter WRichland/BFT Park&Ride 27 19 69%

5 FlatTopParkParkingLot WestRichland Park&Ride 127 62 49%

6 SR224&SR240Intersection WSDOT Park&Pool 89 68 76%

7 I‐182&QueensgateInterchange WSDOT Park&Pool 139 6 5%

8 KnightStreet&GoethalsDrive BFT Park&Ride 33 7 20%

9 WSDOT‐ColumbiaParkTrail WSDOT Park&Pool 249 196 79%

10 West27thAvenue&SouthUnionStreet Kennewick Park&Pool 50 40 81%

11WestClearwaterAve&NorthHuntingtonSt BFT Park&Ride 135 35 26%

12 ParkStreet&22ndAvenue BFT Park&Ride 50 19 38%

13 StevensDrive&SpenglerRoad PortofBenton Park&Pool 350 253 72%

14 TRAC TRAC Park&Pool 172 70 40%

15 US395&YelmStreet Kennewick Park&Pool 39 17 43%

Source:2007Tri‐CitiesMetropolitanAreaParkandRideLotReport;WSDOTSouthCentralRegionMonthlyParkandRideInventory



Map3:Park

andRideLotsin

Benton

andFran

klinCou

nties



APPENDIXGTransportationSystemComponentsintheCMPStudyArea



ThisappendixcontainsmapsshowingvariouselementsofthemetropolitantransportationsystemandintheCMPstudyarea.Theyinclude:The2013FederalFunctionalClasssystem,the2013BFTfixedroutebusroutes,the2011WSDOTFreightandGoodsSystemandbikepathsfromthe2009BFCGbikemap.



MAP4:CMPStudyAreaandthe2013FederalFunctionalClassSystem



MAP5:CM

PStu

dyA

reaandthe2

011WSDOTFreigh

tandGood

sTran

sportation

System



MAP6:CMPStudyAreaandthe2013BFTTransitRoutes



MAP7:CM

PStu

dyA

reaand2009BFCG

BikeM

apRoutes



APPENDIXHPublicComment



Notice of availability of the CMP for review online was mailed to more than 240 agencies andindividuals on the BFCGTransportation Section Public OutreachMailing List. One commentwasreceived.ThatcommentandtheBFCGreplyarebelow.









Benton‐FranklinCouncilofGovernments1622TERMINALDRIVE RICHLAND,WASHINGTON99352

______________________________________________________________________________________________

November26,2013Ms.LisaAndersonTri‐CityRailroadCompany2579StevensDrivePOBox1700Richland,Washington99354Re:Tri–CityRailroadCommentonthe2013CongestionManagementProcessDearMs.Anderson:ThankyouverymuchfortakingthetimetocommentoncongestionmanagementintheTri‐Cities,specificallythepotentialeffectsofincreasedrailtrafficonthePortofBentonraillinewestofRichland.The2013CongestionManagementProcess(CMP)doesnotaddresstherailloopprojectyoureference.Timeconstraints–theCMPhasaduedateofJanuary18thfordeliverytofederaltransportationagencies–andtherecentemergenceoftheloopprojecthavenotallowedsufficienttimetoaddresstheissue.DevelopmentoftheCMPisongoing.CurrentlyagencydiscussionshavescheduledtheCMPforanupdateintwoyears.TheCouncilofGovernmentsisawareoftheissueoftheeffectsofrailonstreetcongestionandthetopicwillbeapartoftheupdate.IfyouhaveanyfurtherquestionsImaybereachedat(509)943‐[email protected],LenPavelka,TransportationPlannerBentonFranklinCouncilofGovernments

Documents

TRI‐CITY METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION STUDYbfcog.us/.../05/2013-Congestion-Management-Process.pdf · 2013 Tri‐MATS Congestion Management Process Page 2 Benton‐Franklin Council