The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutApp C Transportation Tech Appendix 2025_1219Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 1 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Transportation Plan Technical Document Prepared by Jefferson County Public Works & Transpo Group Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Contents 1 Countywide ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Criteria Used in Transportation Decisions ....................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. 1.2 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.3 Land Use & Transportation Planning Method ............................................................................................................. 30 2 Urban Growth Area ............................................................................................................................................................................ 41 2.1 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................................................................................... 41 2.2 Transportation Projections ........................................................................................................................................................ 53 3 Capital Facilities .................................................................................................................................................................................. 58 3.1 Concurrency ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 58 3.2 Transportation Facilities Assessment ................................................................................................................................ 59 3.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 65 Exhibits Exhibit 1-1 Level of Service Definitions—Roadways ............................................................................................................... 4 Exhibit 1-2 Functional Classification—East County .............................................................................................................. 12 Exhibit 1-3 Functional Classification—West County ............................................................................................................ 13 Exhibit 1-4 Jefferson County Transportation Network—Traffic Collisions by Roadway ............................... 13 Exhibit 1-5 Collisions—East County, 2019–2023 ....................................................................................................................... 15 Exhibit 1-6 Collisions—West County, 2019–2023 ..................................................................................................................... 16 Exhibit 1-7 Average Collision Rate, 2019–2023 .......................................................................................................................... 16 Exhibit 1-8 Bicycle & Pedestrian Collisions, 2019–2023........................................................................................................ 17 Exhibit 1-9 Jefferson Transit Routes, 2023 Annual Ridership ......................................................................................... 19 Exhibit 1-10 Transit Routes—East County ..................................................................................................................................... 20 Exhibit 1-11 Transit Routes—West County .................................................................................................................................... 21 Exhibit 1-12 Freight Routes—East County ................................................................................................................................... 24 Exhibit 1-13 Freight Routes—West County ................................................................................................................................. 25 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 2 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-14 Active Transportation Network—East County .............................................................................................. 27 Exhibit 1-15 Active Transportation Network—West County ............................................................................................ 28 Exhibit 1-16 Land Use Forecasts for County Areas................................................................................................................... 31 Exhibit 1-17 Existing and Forecast ADT & LOS ........................................................................................................................... 32 Exhibit 1-18 Existing Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................................................................... 38 Exhibit 1-19 Active Transportation Level of Service Map .................................................................................................... 40 Exhibit 2-1 Roadway Functional Classification Descriptions .......................................................................................... 41 Exhibit 2-2 Existing Average Daily Traffic in Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA ............................................................. 43 Exhibit 2-3 Study Intersections .......................................................................................................................................................... 45 Exhibit 2-4 Existing Intersection LOS............................................................................................................................................. 48 Exhibit 2-5 Active Transportation LOS in the Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA .......................................................... 50 Exhibit 2-6 Transit LOS in the Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA ............................................................................................. 52 Exhibit 2-7 Intersection Delay & Level of Service ................................................................................................................... 53 Exhibit 2-8 Road Segment Average Daily Trips & Level of Service ............................................................................ 53 Exhibit 2-9 Forecast 2038 Baseline & With Project Intersection Operations ..................................................... 57 Exhibit 3-1 Transportation Capital Project Map ...................................................................................................................... 61 Exhibit 3-2 Transportation Capital Project List........................................................................................................................ 62 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 3 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 1 Countywide 1.1 Criteria Used in Transportation Decisions The County evaluates several factors when deciding which transportation improvements should be undertaken. These factors include available funding, whether the roadway meets the adopted level of service (LOS) standard, identified operational and safety factors, and the County's transportation goals and policies. Funding Jefferson County’s ability to fund transportation improvements is the biggest barrier to implementing the transportation improvements identified in this plan. Jefferson County Public Works’ largest revenues have historically been property tax (capped at approximately 1%), motor-vehicle fuel tax (which has been flat for the last 10+ years), and ever diminishing timber subsidies (the Secure Rural Schools program went away this year). Over the last several years, inflation at approximately 5% has dramatically outpaced revenue. Real estate taxes in the county are some of the highest in the state, but wages in the county are generally much lower than immediately adjacent municipalities and/or agencies. Given these factors, Public Works has had diminishing funds available to complete capital projects. Jefferson County was successful this past year in becoming the first county in the state to fund a Transportation Benefit District, but this funding will only make up part of the revenue losses and inflationary increases experienced in the last few years. State and Federal Grants have become absolutely critical to funding improvements yet this reliance on grants leaves the County in a precarious position. Level of Service Standards Level of service (LOS) is a multi-dimensional measurement of the quality of service provided by the existing transportation system. The concept of LOS has traditionally been used in transportation planning and engineering to describe an actual or expected operating condition for a road. A lower LOS implies worsening conditions, either as perceived by the traveler, or as a measure of efficient movement. LOS is the desired minimal operational condition for a facility, something against which actual conditions can be assessed. By applying LOS standards and then monitoring the actual LOS, a jurisdiction can implement a system for establishing traffic flow objectives, prioritizing transportation projects and funding, and directing growth of the transportation network. LOS can be described by one or more factors, such as travel times, levels of congestion, volume of use compared to system capacity, frequency of service, comfort and convenience, or safety. LOS measurements can address other modes of transportation including transit or bicycles. The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires the establishment of a level of service standard as a gauge for evaluating the performance of the existing transportation network, including roads and transit. LOS is TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 4 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 also used to determine whether transportation improvements or transportation services will be made available to serve proposed development. Vehicular Traffic—Level of Service For roadways, LOS is typically described in terms of congestion, which may be measured by average travel speed or vehicular density. 0 provides general definitions of LOS categories typically used by traffic engineers for roadways. Six levels of service are defined from A to F with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. Jefferson County’s adopted LOS standards are consistent with the standards established by the PRTPO and the Washington State Department of Transportation. These standards are as follows: ▶ Rural Roads (roads outside an urban boundary line) = LOS DC ▶ Urban Roads (roads within an urban boundary line) = LOS D ▶ Master Planned Resort Roads (roads within an MPR boundary line) = LOS D ▶ Highways of Regional Significance (rural corridors carrying an urban level of traffic) = LOS D The LOS standards adopted in this plan for County roadways and State Routes, including the existing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and the maximum ADT are shown in Exhibit 1-1 below. The maximum ADT is considered the roadway capacity for LOS evaluation. The roadway capacity is based on the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board, 6th Edition) for rural two-lane highways and urban streets. The roadway capacity considers features of the roadway, such as number of lanes, turn lanes, shoulder width, and intersection controls. State Route capacities were also consistent with generalized daily service volumes found in HCM. Exhibit 1-1 Level of Service Definitions—Roadways Level of Service Category Definition Level of Service A Describes a condition of free flow with low volumes and high speeds. Freedom to select desired speeds and to maneuver within the traffic stream is extremely high. Stopped delay at intersections is minimal. Volumes are less than 29% of capacity. Level of Service B Represents reasonably unimpeded traffic flow operations at average travel speeds. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and stopped delays are not bothersome. Drivers are not generally subjected to appreciable tensions. Volumes are between 29% and 47% of capacity. Level of Service C In the range of stable flow, but speeds and maneuverability are more closely controlled by the higher volumes. The selection of speed is now significantly affected by interactions with others in the traffic stream, and maneuvering within the traffic stream requires substantial vigilance on the part of the user. The general level of comfort and convenience declines noticeably at this level. Volumes are between 47% and 68% of capacity. Level of Service D Represents high-density, but stable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted, and the driver or pedestrian experiences a generally poor level of comfort and convenience. Small increases in traffic flow will generally cause operational problems at this level. Volumes are between 68% and 88% of capacity. Level of Service E Represents operating conditions at or near the maximum capacity level. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is extremely difficult, and it is generally accomplished by forcing a vehicle or pedestrian to "give way" to accommodate Commented [EK1]: Consideration per previous comment (LOS D?) Commented [JH2R1]: Revised to D per county’s revision in element. Transpo to confirm. Commented [PS3R1]: Confirmed. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 5 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Level of Service Category Definition such maneuvers. Comfort and convenience levels are extremely poor, and driver or pedestrian frustration is generally high. Operations at this level are usually unstable, because small increases in flow or minor disturbances within the traffic stream will cause breakdowns. Volumes are between 88% and 95% of capacity. Level of Service F Describes forced or breakdown flow, where volumes are above theoretical capacity. This condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which can traverse the point. Queues form behind such locations, and operations within the queue are characterized by stop-and-go waves which are extremely unstable. Vehicles may progress at reasonable speeds for several hundred feet or more, then be required to stop in a cyclic fashion. Volumes are greater than 95% of capacity. Sources: Jefferson County, 2025; Transpo Group, 2025. Currently, all County roadways and State Routes are operating at, or above, the established LOS standards. The Exhibit below depicts existing daily traffic volumes and LOS standards for specific County roadways and State Routes. Transit—Level of Service Transit service within Jefferson County is maintained and operated by Jefferson Transit Authority (JTA), which defines the transit level of service methodology. JTA is currently undertaking a Comprehensive Operational Analysis with the goal of improving services for residents and visitors to the county. As of 2024, the current state report identified four core service areas served by JTA. These areas include service within Port Townsend, connections between the Tri-Area and Port Townsend, regional connections which include rural Jefferson County communities and destinations outside the county, and the Olympic Connection which serves the west side of the county. Additionally, the 2022 Long Range Plan identified goals to guide future services. Among these objectives were increasing service to match population and employment, continuing to provide regional connections in coordination with neighboring transit agencies, prioritizing multi-modal connections to allow car free recreation and tourism, and focusing service to major travel destinations. JTA is also focused on maximizing transit access by participating in the land use planning process and using micro transit or other strategies to increase access in rural areas. JTA’s 2024 Climate Action Plan roadmap goals include improving bus stop and transit center amenities, advocating for local policies and projects that improve and promote active transportation, and collaborating with regional planners to ensure that transit is the focus of any new developments and regional plans. Jefferson County defaults to JTA’s goals regarding transit service definition and will collaborate with JTA on County’s transit system service needs and planning efforts. However, GMA requirements state that comprehensive plans must include measurable level of service standards for local transit systems. These standards may be based on transit access, capacity, ridership or other methods based on context, but should be created in collaboration with local transit agencies. Given JTA’s focus on accessibility and multimodal connections, the county’s transit LOS focuses on bus stop amenities and active routes to bus stops within the county Right of Way. Exhibit 1-2 defines transit LOS for Jefferson County. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 6 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-2 Level of Service Definitions—Transit LOS Rating Standard Good Stop location marked ADA Accessible boarding area Streetlight nearby Direct connection to bikeable shoulder or sidewalk Nearest intersection has crosswalk/ped signal/RRFB Acceptable 3 or less of the above Poor 1 or less of the above. Source: Transpo Group, 2025. Active Transportation—Level of Service Active Transportation LOS standards were developed for this plan in alignment with the rural character of much of the county’s road network. Planned facilities are all multi-use and can be assumed to accommodate all active modes, including walking and bicycling. Exhibit 1-19 depicts the current LOS along the planned active transportation network for the county. The planned network includes both on-street and off-street facilities. This plan identifies three roadway/facility types: (1) roadways with shoulders with width equal to or greater than 5ft, (2) shared roads, and (3) multi-use paths/off street trails. The long term goal of the network is to provide off-street multi-use connections that tie into the regional trail networks of adjacent jurisdictions, while also providing a low stress experience for users making connections between locations in Jefferson County. The Active Transportation LOS standards are presented in Exhibit 1-3. These standards emphasize the expansion and completion of wide shoulders on arterials, shared use signage on collectors, and off- street multi use pathways. The LOS designations are shown in green, orange, and red and correspond with good, acceptable, and poor LOS, respectively. Generally, a green/good LOS indicates a roadway or route that provides low stress active transportation facilities (with appropriate striping/signage) identified in the planned active transportation network, while an orange/acceptable LOS indicates facilities that may have a higher stress level due to their location on roadways that may have higher speed limits and heavier traffic. A red/poor LOS generally indicates no designated facilities are provided for active users and is considered unacceptable. Exhibit 1-3 Level of Service Definitions—Active Transportation LOS Rating Standard Good Active Transportation facilities built to provide low levels of traffic stress TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 7 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 LOS Rating Standard Acceptable Active Transportation facilities exist with high levels of traffic stress Poor No Active Transportation facilities present Sources: Jefferson County, 2025; Transpo Group, 2025. Concurrency Background Concurrency is one of the requirements of Washington's GMA. Concurrency occurs when public facilities or services needed to accommodate growth and development are provided at the time that development occurs. Transportation concurrency is intended to ensure that transportation facilities are available to accommodate expected traffic increases resulting from development. This will ensure orderly growth and development and avoid significant transportation impacts such as unacceptable levels of congestion. Achieving concurrency may require transportation improvements ranging from constructing physical improvements (e.g., wider travel lanes or shoulders, additional travel lanes, intersection improvements, or traffic signals) to implementing travel demand management techniques (e.g., improved transit service, rideshare programs, or staggered shift times for larger employers). Coordinating transportation planning and capital facility planning is an essential part of implementing concurrency. This requires maintaining an inventory of existing transportation facilities and their level of service, forecasting traffic growth particularly in areas designated for intense growth and development, projecting necessary improvements and their cost, identifying revenue sources to fund those improvements, and prioritizing improvements in the County’s Six-Year Transportation Improvements Program. Achieving concurrency may require contributions from developers that are commensurate with the transportation impacts generated by their project. Concurrency requires transportation mitigation within six years of development or returns of the fees collected by developers. The County has often had insufficient commercial development to generate funding required to construct transportation improvements, This issue is discussed in more detail below under Issues. WSDOT has separated highways into two categories—highways of statewide significance (HSS) and regionally significant highways (non-HSS). HSS routes in Jefferson County include US 101, SR 19, SR 20, and SR 104. The LOS standards for HSS facilities are set forth by State law. State law sets LOS D for HSS facilities in urban areas and LOS DC for HSS facilities in rural areas. However, GMA explicitly exempts HSS routes from concurrency requirements. Issues Jefferson County is in an unusual situation because all of the roadways identified in the Transportation Element's analysis as requiring vehicle capacity improvements are State Routes and are, therefore, outside of the County's jurisdiction. At the same time, these State Routes form the bulk of the County's Commented [EK4]: If we’re going to state that it would be beneficial to require developer contributions, it seems beneficial to also mention that there is a 6-year concurrency deadline and that the county typically has insufficient commercial development to generate enough funds to complete a project within 6 years. I believe funds have to be returned if not used. Commented [PS5R4]: That is correct. Added a few sentences to discuss. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 8 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 arterial system and are not subject to concurrency under GMA, but are integral components of the transportation system within the county. While Jefferson County does have needs associated with transportation facility safety, road shoulders, pedestrian facilities, and intersection capacity, the County is currently focusing primarily on resolving LOS issues for the State Routes within the County that are forecast to exceed capacity. To address these LOS deficiencies matters, Jefferson County has been an active and regular participant in the development of the Peninsula Regional Transportation Plan and regularly coordinates with the WSDOT to help address potential impacts as new development takes place. The analysis of capacity-related improvements has focused on equity. Two main issues have been identified. The first concerns State Routes and the regional traffic carried by those routes through local jurisdictions. The second concerns the scale of responsibility for achieving LOS standards. Increases in regional traffic flow, appropriately, should not be attributed to local development. Jefferson County has regarded the need to share the burden of addressing LOS deficiencies between locally and regionally generated traffic as an important point of discussion because State Routes provide both local and regional travel routes. As regional travel routes, State Routes within Jefferson County provide access to the Olympic Peninsula and the Pacific Ocean and, therefore, are important links in supporting the regional economy. At the same time, developers of projects that serve local needs should not be required to mitigate declines in LOS that result from regional traffic growth. This is one reason Highways of Statewide Significance are exempt from local concurrency requirements. There are also differences between roads that have the same functional classification but serve a community or area differently. For example, SR 104 and SR 19 are both State Routes and principal arterials, but SR 104 does not serve adjacent needs to the extent that SR 19 does. Local development will affect mobility on SR 19 to a greater degree than SR 104. Maintaining through travel capacity on SR 104 is a higher priority than on SR 19. But as growth occurs within the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA, the SR 19 corridor will become congested, unless appropriate improvements are made and access controls are implemented. The LOS standards address these differences in character. A second equity issue surrounding LOS deficiencies is the scale of responsibility—is a small developer as responsible for mitigation of impacts as a large developer? The resolution of this question centers around how development review is conducted and how appropriate mitigation is decided upon. A strict translation of the law would place developers of all sizes equally responsible for impacts exceeding the LOS threshold. That is, a small developer whose project generated enough trips to exceed the threshold would be held equally responsible as a large developer. This potential inequity could be avoided by developing a transportation impact fee program that focuses on the proportion of impact. Without a transportation impact fee program to help mitigate the impacts of growth, mitigation will need to continue to be obtained as part of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) process. Conclusions Jefferson County should continue to implement concurrency and address LOS deficiencies utilizing the SEPA review process, which allows the County to obtain mitigation fees based on significant LOS impacts rather than a more strict "impact/no impact" approach. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 9 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Regulations would be required under either the strict or the flexible approach to concurrency. However, under the flexible approach, the regulations are guided by policies that identify when concurrency requirements should be implemented and focus on significant impacts requiring mitigation. The policies would identify the criteria to be used to determine when concurrency should be implemented. For example, a policy could state that concurrency mitigation should occur when a development contributes more than a particular percentage of the existing traffic volume to a roadway. On the other hand, policy could state that mitigation is required for all developments that contribute more than a set number of Average Annual Daily Trips (AADT) to the roadway system. Developments that generate less AADT than this would be considered to have no mitigation responsibility. At the policy level, careful consideration regarding the utilization of adjacent land and direct access to highways should be made. For example, policies might aim to preserve through travel capacity as a priority along SR 19, due to high volumes passing through to Port Townsend and the impact that urban development within the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA may have on the mobility of this roadway. Typical policies could address appropriate uses adjacent to SR 19 or access management. The Transportation Element and this Technical Document projects that no concurrency issues or LOS deficiencies will occur on County roads during the planning period. However, other issues relating to safety, road shoulders, pedestrian facilities, and intersection capacity for intersections with state highways may arise. Transportation Demand Management Strategies Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies promote travel efficiency and energy conservation while reducing the adverse environmental impacts of the transportation system. In addition, TDM strategies lessen the need for additional capacity improvements by decreasing dependence on single-occupancy vehicle use and preserving capacity on existing roadways. The additional capacity created throughout the County’s transportation system can reduce the need for improvements. These strategies can include commute trip reduction and demand and system management strategies, telecommuting, non-motorized travel, site design standards, ridesharing, encouraging commercial and freight shipping during off-peak hours, staggered shift times, flexible work schedules and public transportation. These strategies are typically achieved through employer-based programs with technical assistance available from WSDOT, JTA, WA Rideshare, and Transportation Choices Coalition. The Department of Transportation also provides incentives to individual employers willing to provide a financial benefit to employees for reducing drive-alone commuting. The County should recognize and financially support efforts to advance TDM techniques by funding subsidized proven programs, planning and public information towards implementing these strategies. Safety, Maintenance, & Preservation Safety programs seek to reduce the frequency and severity of traffic accidents through identification of high accident locations, corridors, or elements. Maintenance and preservation practices protect the transportation infrastructure through regular repairs as well as responding to emergency situations such as mudslides, culvert washouts, or flooding. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 10 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 1.2 Existing Conditions Jefferson County's current transportation system is divided into two main categories: motorized and non-motorized. The motorized transportation system includes all automobile and transit travel and freight traffic, as well as some motorized transportation modes that travel on off-road routes (e.g., air and waterborne freight). The non-motorized transportation system includes both on-road and off-road modes for pedestrian and bicycle travel. The non-motorized transportation system is described in detail in the Non-motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan. This section also discusses accident data, weather-related traffic hazard areas, and emergency service routes. Motorized Transportation System—Vehicular A description of the motorized transportation system in Jefferson County begins with an overview of the roadway functional classification system. This system is a hierarchy of roadway types. Each type is described by standards that guide the road's design, use, and travel volumes. Roadway Functional Classification Roadways are categorized according to their role and use in carrying vehicles. The categorization is a hierarchy of roadways ranging from principal and minor arterials and major and minor collectors to local access roads and streets. The different categories vary in their ability to carry traffic for long distances, and in their ability to provide access to land uses. Principal arterials provide the most mobility. They provide for regional and inter-regional travel, typically carrying large volumes of through traffic, with limited direct access to abutting properties. Minor arterials compliment and support the principal arterial systems. They provide more access to adjacent land uses but still function primarily to link destination points. Minor arterials tend to link intra- city destinations instead of inter-regional. Collectors provide more access to adjacent land uses than arterials, but they do not provide the full access that local streets provide. These roads collect and distribute traffic between neighborhoods and business areas, and the rest of the arterial system. They provide easy and direct access to abutting properties and carry low to moderate volumes of traffic. Major collectors are those collectors that carry higher volumes of traffic directly to the arterial system. Minor collectors typically carry lower traffic volumes directly from local access roads or from less densely populated areas and distribute the traffic to major collectors or directly to the arterial system. Local access roads provide direct access to abutting land uses and carry traffic to the collector/arterial system. Local access roads typically carry low volumes of traffic, at low speeds. Because of the generalized level of analysis provided in a comprehensive plan, the inventory for the transportation element does not present traffic data on all local roads, only those carrying higher volumes or linking significant collectors. The County's road network and functional classifications are depicted in Exhibit 1-2 and Exhibit 1-3. State Routes, roads owned and operated by the Washington State Department of Transportation, provide for TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 11 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 regional and interregional travel. State routes within the County are US 101 and State Routes 19, 20, 104, and 116. They are classified according to how they function, for example, as principal or minor arterials or collectors. US 101 and State Route 20 are classified as principal arterials. SR 104 is a rural expressway. SR 19 is a rural minor arterial. SR 116 is classified as a major collector. SR 19 is designated as a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) while its functional classification remains a minor arterial. This change reflects the highway’s increasing importance within the region as an HSS route that links SR 104 to Port Townsend. Although SR 19 currently serves adjacent needs (direct access) more readily than other principal arterials, unfavorable restrictions to mobility that may develop through this corridor should be avoided. The Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization has designated US 101, SR 19, SR 20, and SR 104 in Jefferson County as highways of statewide significance and SR116 as a highway of regional significance, using criteria developed by the PRTPO. These criteria require that PRTPO Technical Advisory Committee members agree that such corridors serve as a primary conduit providing access and mobility. The County Road inventory consists of 399.29 miles of County Roads Thru Lane Surface: Major Rural Collectors = 36.35 miles; Minor Rural Collectors = 102.13 miles; Local Rural Access = 255.67 miles; and Urban Collectors = 5.14 miles. There are also 3238 Countyowned bridges. This inventory does not include City of Port Townsend streets and State Routes. All roadways and bridges maintained by the County are evaluated and ranked for inclusion in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), as funding becomes available. The County resurfaces approximately 20 to 3015 to 20 miles of road annually (down from 20-30 due to increased costs and diminished funding). Road design standards are based on a roadway’s function and use as determined by the Federal Functional Classification System. There are numerous County Roads that are classified as rural local access roads that, in fact, function as collectors. They provide access to commercial and industrial developments and to dense residential neighborhoods. Generally, roads classified as rural local access are not eligible for grant funding. Since only limited local road funds are available, improvements to these roads are not typically funded and collector road standards are not applied when improvement are made. In order to provide needed improvements to these roads and ensure that appropriate standards are applied, a local functional classification system could be developed that recognizes these distinctions. Such a system could create additional classifications such as Residential Neighborhood Collector and Commercial and Industrial Area Local Collector. Many of the County's roadways have minimal, gravel shoulders except in limited locations bordering suburban development, commercial areas, and various public facilities. In these more developed areas, some roadways have paved shoulders and/or sidewalks in addition to an upgraded roadway cross section. The County also has a large number of roads with unimproved, gravel surfaces. Commented [EK6]: Please verify where specifically these numbers came from. Commented [PS7R6]: County staff provided. Commented [EK8]: It might be worth noting that the County used to resurface 20 to 30 miles, but due to ever diminishing resources compounded by rapidly escalating costs the average has been reduced to 15-20. Commented [PS9R8]: Updated. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 12 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-2 Functional Classification—East County Source: Transpo Group, 2025; Jefferson County 2025. Commented [jo10]: replaced map with correct label for SR 116 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 13 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-3 Functional Classification—West County Source: Transpo Group, 2025; Jefferson County 2025. Traffic Safety The goal of the transportation system is to move people and goods in a safe and efficient manner. Within any region, certain locations will have a higher incidence of collisions than others due to factors such as general physical characteristics of the roadway and speed limits. Exhibit 1-4 below lists collisions rates for both County Roads and State Routes in Jefferson County and Exhibit 1-5 and Exhibit 1-6 map collisions in east and west Jefferson County, respectively. Exhibit 1-4 Jefferson County Transportation Network—Traffic Collisions by Roadway Roadway Length/MP ADT* 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Anderson Lake Rd 2.77 miles 1900 7 4 3 5 8 Cape George Road 7.55 miles 2,300 2 6 4 4 2 Cedar Avenue 0.63 miles 1,400 2 0 0 0 0 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 14 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Roadway Length/MP ADT* 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Center Road 15.01 miles 4080 19 19 13 20 21 Chimacum Road 1.57 miles 5500 4 6 1 1 8 Coyle Road 14.97 miles 500 2 2 1 4 4 Dabob Road 5.23 miles 500 2 1 1 2 1 S. Discovery Rd 4.84 miles 3600 13 9 11 10 13 Eaglemount Road 5.34 miles 600 5 0 1 1 0 Four Corners Rd 1.29 miles 2800 5 4 3 5 6 Fredericks Street 0.22 miles 700 0 0 2 1 0 Hastings Avenue 2.80 miles 2500 0 2 1 2 1 Upper Hoh Road 12.04 miles 950 1 3 2 4 4 Irondale Road 1.93 miles 5,500 3 5 7 9 7 Larson Lake Road 4.06 miles 300 2 1 0 0 0 Mason – Thomas – Patison Streets 0.83 miles 800 2 0 0 1 0 Mill Road 0.77 miles 1316 5 1 2 3 0 Oak Bay Road 9.94 miles 3,900 9 8 14 10 12 Oil City Road 10.98 miles 100 1 1 0 0 0 Paradise Bay Rd 6.00 miles 3600 12 12 7 21 11 Prospect Avenue 1.38 miles 2300 2 3 0 2 0 South Point Road 3.05 miles 1,200 0 0 2 1 2 Swansonville Rd 3.21 miles 1200 2 2 0 1 2 Teal Lake Road 3.46 miles 1483 5 1 3 8 5 Thorndyke Road 8.52 miles 900 0 1 2 1 1 West Valley Road 5.56 miles 2700 0 2 0 1 3 SR 19 MP 0.00 – 9.10 7200 27 18 18 27 29 SR 19 MP 9.10 – 11.88 10400 8 11 5 11 12 SR 19 MP 11.88 – 14.09 14100 21 8 14 18 21 SR 20 MP 0.00-7.79 6100 26 16 22 26 30 SR 20 MP 7.79-9.78 18,200 16 9 17 12 10 US 101 MP 143.98-184.62 1,200 16 19 21 27 20 US 101 MP 274.63-314.01 14400 70 71 89 65 57 SR 104 MP 0.20-14.67 15600 47 41 42 68 67 SR 116 MP 0.00-1.98 6,200 10 8 5 6 12 SR 116 MP 1.98-9.83 3100 5 7 9 3 4 N/A—Not Available *ADT—On roads with multiple segments, the highest ADT was used Sources: WSDOT 2019-2023 Collisions in Jefferson County; WSDOT Traffic Count Data, Jefferson County 2025 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 15 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-5 Collisions—East County, 2019–2023 Source: Transpo Group, 2025; WSDOT 2019-2023 Collisions in Jefferson County. Commented [jo11]: replaced map with correct label for SR 116 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 16 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-6 Collisions—West County, 2019–2023 Source: Transpo Group, 2025; WSDOT 2019-2023 Collisions in Jefferson County. To obtain a better understanding of the collision and safety characteristics of Jefferson County, collision data for State Route segments identified in Exhibit 1-4 was used to calculate Average Collision Rates. This rate is based on millions of vehicle miles traveled on each segment and ADT. This rate is easily comparable to statewide averages and State Routes with similar characteristics to Jefferson County. The Average Collision Rate for 2019-2023 is presented in Exhibit 1-7. Exhibit 1-7 Average Collision Rate, 2019–2023 Roadway Milepost ADT 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Average Collision Rate 2019-2023* SR 19 MP 0.00 – 9.10 7200 27 18 18 27 29 1 SR 19 MP 9.10 – 11.88 10,400 8 11 5 11 12 0.89 SR 19 MP 11.88 – 14.09 14,100 21 8 14 18 21 1.44 SR 20 MP 0.00-7.79 6100 26 16 22 26 30 1.37 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 17 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Roadway Milepost ADT 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Average Collision Rate 2019-2023* SR 20 MP 7.79-9.78 18,200 16 9 17 12 10 0.97 US 101 MP 143.98-184.62 1,200 16 19 21 27 20 1.19 US 101 MP 274.63-314.01 14,400 70 71 89 65 57 0.34 SR 104 MP 0.20-14.67 15,600 47 41 42 68 67 3.17 SR 116 MP 0.00-1.98 6,200 10 8 5 6 12 1.87 SR 116 MP 1.98-9.83 3100 5 7 9 3 4 0.62 Average 1.29 *Collisions per million vehicle miles of travel Source: WSDOT 2019-2023 Collisions in Jefferson County; WSDOT Traffic Count Data; Jefferson County Collision Data Summary. WSDOT compiles State Highway accident data for all 39 Counties in Washington. The average rate, on State Routes in Jefferson County, in 2015 was 1.29 collisions per million vehicle miles of travel. Statewide, in 2015, the collision rate per million vehicle miles of travel was 1.37. Compared to statewide averages, Jefferson County currently experiences a relatively low number of collisions. Notable exceptions to the county average are along SR 104 where it joins highway 101 which has a collision rate of 3.17 crashes per million vehicle miles travelled. Collision rates are evaluated to determine which roadways, if any, have potential safety issues. However, the collision data does not reveal the cause of collisions, it only indicates areas where further investigation of may be necessary. Further investigation at collision locations helps define the problem and appropriate solutions. Exhibit 1-8 summarizes the number of collisions involving a bicycle or a pedestrian from 2019 through 2023 along the major roadways in Jefferson County. Few collisions involving a bicycle or a pedestrian occurred, with less than one collision per year for all roadway segments. Exhibit 1-8 Bicycle & Pedestrian Collisions, 2019–2023 Roadway Milepost ADT Bike Collisions Pedestrian Collisions SR 19 MP 0.00 – 9.10 7200 1 0 SR 19 MP 9.10 – 11.88 10,400 0 0 SR 19 MP 11.88 – 14.09 14,100 2 0 SR 20 MP 0.00-7.79 6100 1 0 SR 20 MP 7.79-9.78 18,200 3 1 US 101 MP 143.98-184.62 1,200 0 2 US 101 MP 274.63-314.01 14,400 0 1 SR 104 MP 0.20-14.67 15,600 1 1 SR 116 MP 0.00-1.98 6,200 1 1 SR 116 MP 1.98-9.83 3100 0 0 Sources: WSDOT 2019-2023 Collisions in Jefferson County; WSDOT Traffic Count Data; Jefferson County Collision Data Summary. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 18 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Weather-Related Traffic Hazards Inclement weather affects driving conditions, contributes to accidents, and can damage roadways. Higher elevation areas of some roads, such as Dosewallips and Duckabush Roads, are subject to freezing conditions. During periods of thawing, the Public Works Department installs signs informing travelers of load-limit restrictions, because heavy loads can damage the road structure. Some roadway segments require sanding during winter conditions, including Irondale Road, Flagler Road/Oak Bay Road intersection, SR 19 Beaver Valley Road/Center Road/Chimacum Road intersection, Walker Mountain above 700 feet elevation, Dosewallips and Duckabush River Roads, and several roads in the Brinnon area. In addition, some roads are subject to flooding and washouts during storm events. These include the Shine Road, Linger Longer Road, Dabob Road, Lords Lake Road, Dosewallips Road, Duckabush Road, Oil City Road, Quinault-South Shore Road, Undi Road, Dowans Creek Road, and Upper Hoh Road. In the past few years, the Upper Hoh Road has experienced severe flooding and washout damage and has been totally closed on several occasions. Emergency Service Routes and Facilities During emergencies or disasters, the highway system is crucial for evacuation and the delivery of supplies. The County has developed an Emergency Management Plan (2013) that addresses transportation issues and needs. The Emergency Management Plan provides for actions to be taken in the event that certain transportation systems become disabled. It requires the cooperation of various County departments, police and sheriff's departments, the City of Port Townsend, Jefferson Transit, school districts, and the State of Washington. Major routes of travel in the County include northbound on SR 101; westbound on SR 104; northbound on Center Road, SR 19, and eastbound on the Ness' Corner Road segment of SR 116. Fire trucks, sheriff's vehicles and ambulances must also be considered as part of the evaluation of emergency service routes. These vehicles must be able to respond to emergencies as quickly as possible. Access to roadways by emergency vehicles, as they leave the station, as well as the road conditions on the way to the emergency, are both safety concerns. Potential safety hazard locations include the Fire District 1 access to SR 19 in Chimacum and the Fire District 6 access to SR 19 at Airport Road. Public Transit Jefferson Transit was created in 1981 to provide transportation services primarily to transit-dependent persons. Jefferson Transit provides service between Port Townsend and Jefferson County communities including Port Hadlock, Port Ludlow, Quilcene, and Brinnon with additional service to Sequim and Poulsbo. Jefferson Transit provides links to adjoining transit systems including Island Transit, Kitsap Transit (from Route 7), Clallam Transit (from Route 8), Mason Transit (from Route 1) and Grays Harbor Transit (West Jefferson Transit service connecting Forks and Amanda Park along the Pacific Coast). The link with Kitsap Transit provides Transit Service to the Washington State Ferry terminals in Bainbridge Island and Kingston. Bicycle racks are available on all Jefferson Transit routes. Exhibit 1-9 describes the destinations, passenger trips, and ridership per service hour for 2023. Major transit routes including routes by other agencies that operate within Jefferson County are depicted in Exhibit 1-10. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 19 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-9 Jefferson Transit Routes, 2023 Annual Ridership Route Route Number Passenger Trips Passengers/Service Hour Brinnon (M-F) 1 14,715 6.54 Brennon (Sat) 1 1,459 6.02 Fort Worden (M-F) 2 14,930 11.72 Fort Worden (Sat) 2 2,285 10.67 Castle Hill (M-F) 3 11,126 8.74 Castle Hill (Sat) 3 1,806 8.43 Upper Sims Loop (M-F) 4 32,251 19.21 Upper Sims Loop (Sat) 4 5,009 16.75 Tri-Area A (M-F) 6 11,313 10.17 Tri-Area A (Sat) 6 920 7.57 Tri-Area B (M-F) 6 11,412 10.88 Tri-Area B (Sat) 6 1,445 10.94 Poulsbo (M-F) 7 16,274 6.23 Poulsbo (Sat) 7 1,469 7.20 Sequim (M-F) 8 14,753 7.61 Sequim (Sat) 8 1,006 6.00 Downtown Shuttle (M-F) 11 48,503 22.24 Downtown Shuttle (Sat) 11 8,568 23.05 Kingston Express (M-Sat) 14 215 1.26 Wooden Boat Festival (4 days in Sept) 7,393 1998.11 Fixed Route Total 209,418 11.71 Dial-A-Ride (M-Sun) 11,710 2.0 Total Passenger Trips 221,128 Source: Jefferson Transit, 2023. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 20 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-10 Transit Routes—East County Sources: WSDOT 2025; Transpo Group, 2025. Commented [jo12]: replaced map with correct label for SR 116 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 21 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-11 Transit Routes—West County Sources: WSDOT 2025; Transpo Group, 2025. Air, Waterborne, & Freight Travel Airports The Jefferson County International Airport (JCIA) is owned and operated by the Port of Port Townsend. It is situated about four miles southwest of the City of Port Townsend on about 316 acres. Its runway is about 3,000 feet in length, and over 53 aircraft are based there. The Airport is designated as a General Aviation (GA) airport by the FAA’s National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS). In 2019, the total operations equaled approximately 58,100 annual flights, a small percentage of which are air taxi and commuter service and the majority of which are general aviation flights, Airport use is anticipated to increase in the future. The Port’s Airport Master Plan Update (July, 2014) identifies an expansion plan to meet a 2.8% growth rate for its based aircraft and to stay within FAA requirements for safety and efficient airside and landing facilities. The Port will apply for airport development grants for eligible components of its preferred airport layout plan. The airport is designated and zoned as an Essential Public Facility by TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 22 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Jefferson County. Some airport master plan recommendations address height, noise, and other factors (Port of Port Townsend, 2014). Ferry Service Ferry service is provided by the Washington State Ferry System (WSF) to Whidbey Island via the Port Townsend/ Coupeville ferry route, and to the greater Puget Sound through Kitsap County via the Kingston/Edmonds, Bainbridge Island/Seattle, Bremerton/Seattle, and Southworth/Vashon/Fauntleroy routes. The ferry service can accommodate automobiles, pedestrians, bicyclists, kayaks, and canoes. A private carrier, Puget Sound Express and whale watch tour operator, provides passenger-only service between Port Townsend and the San Juan Islands. WSF service at Port Townsend is provided by a Kwa-di Tabil class ferry with capacity for 64 vehicles and 748 pedestrians. Propelled by diesel, the primary and spare vessels have 15 knot speeds and are susceptible to tidal and weather conditions in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Schedules vary according to the season, with fewer crossings during the winter months. Reservations are required nearly all-year long to secure a vehicle fare on the auto deck. Service between Port Townsend and Coupeville, in general, begins at 6:30 a.m., with the last ferry leaving Coupeville at 9:10 pm in the winter, and 10:40pm in the spring and summer. Special fares are available for registered vanpools containing seven or more regular passengers. Discounted fares are also available to qualifying passengers with a Regional Reduced Fare Permit, Medicare card or other identification of disability or over 65 years of age. Bicycles are surcharged a small fee. The ferry system supports a tourism loop that runs through the North Cascades Highway. The system brings visitors to the City of Port Townsend and experiences overloads, particularly on weekends and holidays. Development of additional passenger-only runs from Port Townsend to areas within greater Puget Sound is a long-range option for Washington State Ferries or other ferry boat operators. Expanded foot ferry service would potentially decrease auto-dependent trips within the city and increase pedestrian, bike transportation and reliance on the JTA downtown shuttle to the regional transit hub, Haines Place. Freight Travel There are three basic forms of freight travel in Jefferson County: truck, waterborne (shipping and ferry) and air. Trucking is the predominant mode of freight transportation. Most of the total westbound truck freight is carried over the Hood Canal Bridge, towards Port Townsend, or up US 101 through Shelton. Washington State Ferries are also a part of the freight transport system in the County, carrying commercial trucks from East Puget Sound via Keystone to Port Townsend. WSDOT maintains a classification system for freight corridors statewide, including Jefferson County. The Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) classifies highways, county roads, and city streets according to the average annual gross truck tonnage they carry. Truck tonnage values are derived from actual or estimated truck traffic count data that is converted into average weights by truck type. The FGTS uses five truck classifications, T-1 through T-5, depending on the annual gross tonnage the roadway carries. Jefferson County has roadways or roadway segments that fall into every classification level, except for T-1: ▶ T-1: more than 10 million tons per year TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 23 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 ▶ T-2: 4 million to 10 million tons per year ▶ T-3: 300,000 to 4 million tons per year ▶ T-4: 100,000 to 300,000 tons per year ▶ T-5: at least 20,000 tons in 60 days and less than 100,000 tons per year Corridors with the highest annual gross tonnage, T-1 and T-2 routes, are also identified as Strategic Freight Corridors. SR-104 and US 101 are T-2 routes that run through Jefferson County and connect to other freeways in Washington and Oregon. Freight corridors in east and west Jefferson County are illustrated in Exhibit 1-12 and Exhibit 1-13, respectively. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 24 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-12 Freight Routes—East County Sources: WSDOT 2025; Transpo Group, 2024. Commented [jo13]: replaced map with correct label for SR 116 TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 25 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-13 Freight Routes—West County Sources: WSDOT 2025; Transpo Group, 2025. Active Transportation System Given the rural nature of Jefferson County, travel occurs predominantly by motorized vehicle. However, bicycle and pedestrian circulation are important transportation modes that are used by County residents and visitors. The City of Port Townsend within Jefferson cCounty is the eastern terminus for the Olympic Discovery Trail (ODT), a multi-use route stretching from Port Townsend to La Push. The ODT is also part of the Great American Rail Trail project, and the County has successfully pursued grants and funding for improvements to this network within its boundaries. However, more infrastructure for walking and biking is also neededwould be beneficial in other areas of the county, and more residents would likely use non-motorized transportation modes if adequate and more extensive facilities were available. Many County roads lack adequate shoulders that would makeaccommodate bicycling and walking safer and more enjoyable. Pedestrian facilities including sidewalks and walking paths would improve conditions for walking to school and in densely developed areas such as the Tri-Area around Port Hadlock. Recent legislative changes in Washington State have mandated an increased focus on planning for non-motorized transportation. In 2022 the state legislature added a requirement Commented [EK14]: Consider previous funding comment. Commented [PS15R14]: new sentence at bottom TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 26 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 (RCW47.04.035) requiring all projects with a budget of $500,000 or more on state owned facilities within a census designated place to include facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users. In addition, as part of HB 1181 passed in 2023, Washington State’s GMA was amended with the requirement that communities plan for a multimodal transportation network, including walking and cycling. To fulfill the requirements of the updated GMA, this update to the Comprehensive Plan includes a proposed network of active transportation facilities. The Active transportation system will be comprised of facilities that promote mobility without motorized vehicle use. Development of this network was informed by the 2010 Recreational Trails Plan and the priorities laid out in the 2022 Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Plan. Some of this network is already built, some of it is currently in planning or construction phases, while other sections will require additional planning efforts which are included in the Capital Improvement Projects section of this report. Exhibit 1-14 and Exhibit 1-15 show the proposed active transportation network in east and west Jefferson County, respectively. Critical active transportation connections with limited infrastructure include sections of highway 101 on the east and west side of the county, and highways 104 and 19. These highways fall under WSDOT jurisdiction and where they pass through the communities of Brinnon, Quilcene, Port Ludlow and Port Hadlock the state will be obligated to add active transportation infrastructure as part of RCW47.04.035. Center Road, which runs between Quilcene and Port Hadlock currently has wide (>=5ft) shoulders and moderate traffic and would require only minor improvements in the way of increased signage and shoulder maintenance. Other Sections, including Oak Bay Road have inadequate shoulders for walking or biking and will need improvements to become accessible to all road users. While the County is facing large price increases due to inflation and diminished funding capabilities, many active transportation improvements will likely require the County to secure grant funding. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 27 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-14 Active Transportation Network—East County Source: Transpo Group, 2025. Commented [PS16]: take of anderson lake road between old anderson and SR 19 Commented [jo17]: Anderson Lk RD removed east of Old Anderston Lk RD TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 28 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-15 Active Transportation Network—West County Source: Transpo Group, 2025. Existing Roadway Deficiencies Jefferson County has developed a systematic approach for evaluating deficiencies of transportation facilities (roadway segments, intersections, and bridges) and ranking them in the Six Year Transportation Improvement Program. The Road Project Priority Programming System is used to determine what structural, design, or other characteristics may need revision to improve the functioning of roadway facilities. The State of Washington Inventory of Bridges and Structures (SWIBS) is used by the County to evaluate bridges. The County also has two additional rating systems: the Gravel Road Priority Program that rates gravel roads for upgrading to chip seal and the Safety Priority Program that rates road safety projects. These two programs are funded through the TIP. Road Project Priority Programming System The Road Project Priority Programming System was developed in order to equitably balance the various needs of the transportation system: general capital and operational needs; safety needs; non-motorized TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 29 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 needs; transportation planning needs; and others. The model contains three main steps. The first, needs identification and screening, identifies a list of potential improvements from a large number of sources. Projects identified are then screened for 1) feasibility, 2) whether they are maintenance projects rather than capital projects, or 3) inappropriateness because they conflict with existing County policy or they are not the best solution to the problem. Remaining projects are grouped according to the category of project (e.g., general transportation, non-motorized needs, safety needs, planning project, or other). The second step evaluates prospective projects using a technical evaluation and ranking. Twenty-four criteria have been developed (e.g., accident history, non-motorized needs, public request or complaints, Average Daily Traffic). A point system ranging from 1 to 10 has been developed to reflect the degree of need, deficiency, or demand. The third step is to include the policy direction of the Board of County Commissioners that determines the weight to be applied to the criteria and how transportation revenue is to be split between categories. The end result is a ranking of road projects within the transportation system. This ranking provides direction for the allocation of funding available for improvement projects. These projects are then adopted in the annual update of the County's Six-year Transportation Improvement Program. State of Washington Inventory of Bridges & Structures The State of Washington Inventory of Bridges and Structures utilized by the County enables all bridges in the State to be inventoried and rated for structural and operational deficiencies. The bridges can then be ranked much like roadway segments and intersections (as discussed in the preceding text). The inventory meets the requirements of the Federal Highway Administration. The methodology used to rate bridges consists of at least bi-annual inspections that include a rating of individual members of the bridge for conditions; a structural rating based on the bridge design; and, for bridges over water, a scour evaluation. Functional operation is also considered in the evaluation. Gravel Road Priority Program This program uses factors such as functional classification, traffic volume, accident rating, and commercial/industrial use to prioritize the limited funds available for upgrading gravel roads to chip seal. Safety Priority Program This program uses an inventory of roadway and intersection characteristics, analysis of collision data, and a benefit/cost analysis to analyze and prioritize potential roadway safety projects. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 30 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 1.3 Land Use & Transportation Planning Method Transportation planning is closely linked with land use. Traffic forecasts are built on the location and demand of traffic generators, which are controlled by the adopted land use designations. Analysis for this Transportation Element is consistent with the land use designations and policies of the Land Use and UGA Elements of the Jefferson County Comprehensive plan. The analysis of the established land use scenario and its impacts on transportation in the County is available in the Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the Comprehensive Plan and the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement prepared for the Comprehensive Plan 1999 Amendments. Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan designates three Urban Growth Areas; the incorporated City of Port Townsend, unincorporated Port Townsend UGA, and unincorporated Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA. This designation permits commercial, industrial, and residential development at an urban scale and density. The Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan provides a complete examination regarding the transportation facilities necessary to support urban development in the UGA. A Master Planned Resort (MPR) is a GMA designation that permits rural development at urban densities and intensities, consistent with MPR designation criteria and any specific local conditions of approval for a designated zone. An MPR master plan also specifies urban levels of service standards for transportation facilities. Jefferson County has two designated MPRs: Pleasant Harbor MPR, near Brinnon, and the existing resort community of Port Ludlow, which was designated as an MPR after Jefferson County began planning under GMA. The Pleasant Harbor MPR was approved in 2008 and Development Regulations and Development Agreement adopted in 2018. Impacts to transportation systems were addressed in the Pleasant Harbor Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, 2015, and in the development regulations. Traffic analysis for the planning period 2025-2045 were conducted using 20-year growth forecasts. Commercial areas in Quilcene and Brinnon are designated as Rural Village Centers. These established historic rural business centers will continue to serve as commercial and service centers serving their respective surrounding communities and rural neighborhoods, and are not to be regarded as future urban growth areas. The type and intensity of future commercial growth within the Rural Village Centers will be regulated to allow for development that serves the needs of the surrounding rural area, including the expected needs of the projected future residential population. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan requires that any future subdivision of rural residential land not exceed 1:5, 1:10, or 1:20 acre densities. The overall land use pattern intended for unincorporated Jefferson County outside of the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA is rural in nature, with rural commercial activities focused in the Rural Village Centers. It is recognized that the County has an excess of buildable lots needed for the growth projected for the county. A number of these lots are located within the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA but are not projected to be served by an existing sanitary sewer system or by the Phase I planned sewer service TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 31 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 area in the UGA (anticipated in 2025). Many of the lots located in rural areas are at densities greater than the densities specified in the Land Use Element. Since these lots are recognized as existing lots of record, they can be developed provided they meet Health Department requirements. As these lots are developed in the future and additional traffic is generated, transportation system improvements, including non-motorized transportation facilities, may be necessary. Linking Land Use & Transportation The link between the future land uses and the transportation system is the traffic forecasting process. The demand for transportation is a derived demand. That is, people do not travel specifically for the sake of traveling, but travel to perform other tasks that are in different locations. Travel is secondary and derived from the need to perform other tasks. Land use designations and development regulations determine the locations and intensities of these activities. These variations in potential land use influence the travel demand. The travel forecasts conducted for this transportation analysis were based on the land use designations and policies discussed in the Land Use and UGA Elements. This forecasting procedure is described below. Traffic Forecasts Land use forecasts were used to estimate future traffic volumes for County roadways and intersections. Land use control totals were developed for the county areas based on the Land Use Element of the comprehensive plan. Exhibit 1-16 below lists the resulting land use control totals for county areas. Exhibit 1-16 Land Use Forecasts for County Areas Location Existing Units 2020 Housing Units Growth 2020–2045 Total Units 2045 Annual Growth Rate Port Townsend (Inc.) 5,692 1,648 7,340 1.3% Unincorporated 11,159 2,471 13,630 1.0% Unincorporated UGA 1,411 1,648 3,059 3.9% Unincorporated Rural 9,748 823 10,571 0.4% Port Ludlow MPR 1,950 300 2,250 0.7% Pleasant Harbor MPR 0 127 127 n/a Brinnon RVC 1,041 30 1,071 0.1% Quilcene RVC 299 30 329 0.5% Other Rural Areas 6,458 336 6,794 0.3% Total 16,851 4,119 20,970 1.1% Sources: Jefferson County, 2025; BERK, 2025. Traffic forecasts were based on the average annual growth rate for the urban and rural areas. The traffic forecasts are shown in Exhibit 1-17. It depicts State Routes and selected County Road segments, adopted LOS standards, road capacity in Average Daily Traffic (ADT) at the adopted LOS standard, TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 32 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 existing ADT, 2045 ADT, existing LOS, and 2045 LOS. Existing ADT and LOS for selected State Routes and County Roads are also depicted on Exhibit 1-18. Exhibit 1-17 Existing and Forecast ADT & LOS Planning Area Roadway From To Roadway Capacity ADT ADT Year Existing LOS 2045 ADT 2045 LOS Discovery Bay Gardiner Highway 101 Jefferson/ Clallam CL Old Gardiner Rd 27,000 14,400 2022 C 17,250 C Highway 101 Old Gardiner Rd Store Rd 27,000 14,400 2022 C 17,250 C Highway 101 Store Rd SR 20 27,000 14,400 2022 C 17,250 C Highway 101 SR 20 SR 104 27,000 9,500 2022 B 11,400 B SR 104 Hwy 101 Center Rd 27,000 7,800 2023 A 9,300 B SR 20 Hwy 101 Eaglemont Rd 16,000 6,100 2023 B 7,250 B SR 20 Eaglemont Rd Anderson Lake Rd 17,000 6,100 2016 B 7,650 B SR 20 Anderson Lake Rd Four Corners Rd 21,000 6,100 2016 B 7,650 B Gardiner Beach Rd Clallam County Line Old Gardiner 16,000 200 2019 A 250 A Gardiner Beach Rd Old Gardiner SR 101 16,000 100 2019 A 100 A W. Uncas Rd Hwy 101 Hwy 101 17,000 300 2019 A 350 A Leland/ Quilcene Highway 101 SR 104 Leland Valley Rd 27,000 2,900 2023 A 3,450 A Highway 101 Leland Valley Rd Lords Lake Loop Rd 27,000 2,900 2023 A 3,450 A Highway 101 Lords Lake Loop Rd Quilcene City Limit 27,000 2,800 2023 A 3,350 A Highway 101 Quilcene City Limit Center Rd 27,000 2,800 2023 A 3,350 A Highway 101 Center Rd Washington St 27,000 5,300 2023 A 6,300 A Highway 101 Washington St Penny Creek Rd 27,000 4,200 2023 A 5,000 A Highway 101 Penny Creek Rd Buckhorn Rd 27,000 3,500 2023 A 4,150 A Center Rd Hwy 101 Dabob Rd S. End 18,000 3,600 2021 A 4,350 A Center Rd Dabob Rd S. End SR 104 18,000 3,600 2021 A 4,350 A Dabob Rd Dabob P.O. Rd Center Rd 17,000 200 2021 A 250 A E. Columbia St Center Rd Hwy 101 15,000 900 2021 A 1,100 A E. Quilcene Rd Center Rd Lindsey Hill Rd 15,000 500 2021 A 600 A E. Quilcene Rd Lindsey Hill Rd McDonald Rd 16,000 200 2021 A 250 A Leland Valley Rd Hwy 101 Leland Cut-off 16,000 200 2021 A 250 A Leland Valley Rd Leland Cut-off Hwy 101 (south) 16,000 100 2021 A 100 A Lindsey Hill Rd E. Quilcene Rd Lindsey Beach 16,000 200 2021 A 250 A TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 33 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Planning Area Roadway From To Roadway Capacity ADT ADT Year Existing LOS 2045 ADT 2045 LOS Linger Longer Rd Hwy 101 End 16,000 600 2021 A 700 A Lords Lake Loop Rd Hwy 101 Lords Lake 16,000 300 2021 A 350 A Lords Lake Loop Rd Lords Lake Snow Creek Rd 16,000 0 2021 A 0 A Penny Creek Rd Hwy 101 National Forest Boundary 16,000 100 2021 A 100 A Snow Creek Rd Hwy 101 National Forest Boundary 17,000 200 2021 A 250 A Washington St Hwy 101 Hwy 101 16,000 300 2021 A 350 A Brinnon Highway 101 Buckhorn Rd Bee Mill Rd 27,000 3,500 2023 A 6,600 A Highway 101 Bee Mill Rd Dosewallips Rd 27,000 3,500 2023 A 6,600 A Highway 101 Dosewallips Rd Mt. Jupiter Rd 27,000 3,500 2023 A 6,600 A Highway 101 Mt. Jupiter Rd Duckabush Rd 27,000 3,500 2023 A 6,600 A Highway 101 Duckabush Rd Seamount Dr 27,000 3,000 2023 A 5,650 A Highway 101 Seamount Dr Mason/Jefferson C.L. 27,000 2,400 2023 A 4,500 A Bee Mill Rd Hwy 101 Point Whitney Rd 16,000 200 2021 A 400 A Black Point Rd Hwy 101 Fulton Lake 17,000 0 2021 A 0 A Dosewallips Rd Hwy 101 National Forest Boundary 16,000 700 2021 A 1,400 A Duckabush Rd Hwy 101 National Forest Boundary 17,000 400 2021 A 800 A Forest Dr Hwy 101 End 15,000 200 2021 A 400 A Mt. Jupiter Rd Hwy 101 National Forest Boundary 16,000 100 2021 A 200 A Point Whitney Rd Bee Mill Rd End 17,000 100 2021 A 200 A Seamount Dr Hwy 101 Forest Service Rd 15,000 200 2021 A 400 A Tri-Area SR 116/ Ness Corner Rd Rhody Rd Irondale Rd 21,000 6,200 2023 B 7,350 B SR 116/ Oak Bay Rd Irondale Rd Flagler Rd 21,000 5,800 2023 A 6,900 B SR 116/ Flagler Rd Oak Bay Rd Indian Island Annex Rd 16,000 3,200 2023 A 3,800 A SR 19/ Airport Cut-off SR 20 Four Corners 24,000 14,100 2023 C 16,750 D SR 19/ Rhody Dr Four Corners SR 116/Ness Corner Rd 21,000 16,600 2023 D 19,750 E SR 19/ Rhody Dr SR 116/ Ness Corner Rd Center Rd 21,000 10,400 2023 C 12,350 C Anderson Lake Rd SR 20 Rhody Dr/SR 19 21,000 1,200 2019 A 2,550 A Cedar Ave SR 116/ Ness Corner Rd Irondale Rd 17,000 1,400 2020 A 2,850 A TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 34 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Planning Area Roadway From To Roadway Capacity ADT ADT Year Existing LOS 2045 ADT 2045 LOS Chimacum Rd Beaver Valley Rd/ SR 19 Elkins Road 17,000 4,500 2021 A 8,950 C Chimacum Rd Elkins Road Oak Bay Road 21,000 4,500 2021 A 8,950 B E. Maude St 5th Ave 7th Ave 16,000 300 2020 A 600 A Four Corners SR 20 Airport Cut-off/ SR 19 17,000 2,800 2020 A 5,750 B Irondale Rd Rhody Rd/SR 19 Patison Street 18,000 5,500 2021 B 10,950 C Irondale Rd Patison St SR 116/Ness Corner Rd 17,000 5,200 2021 B 10,350 C Kala Point Rd Prospect Rd Kala Point Development 17,000 1,600 2020 A 3,300 A Lower Hadlock Rd Oak Bay Rd/ SR 116 Water St 16,000 600 2020 A 1,250 A Mason St Cedar Ave Thomas Dr 18,000 800 2020 A 1,650 A Oak Bay Rd Sentinal Firs Rd Flagler Rd/SR 116 17,000 3,900 2019 A 8,250 C Patison St S. 7th St Irondale Rd 17,000 700 2020 A 1,450 A Prospect Ave Airport Cut-off/ SR 19 Kala Point Dr 21,000 2,300 2020 A 4,700 A S. 7th Ave Thomas Dr Patison St 16,000 400 2020 A 800 A Thomas Dr Mason St S. 7th Ave 16,000 600 2020 A 1,250 A 5th Ave Irondale Rd E. Maude St 15,000 900 2020 A 1,850 A 7th Ave Irondale Rd W. Swaney St. 16,000 800 2020 A 1,650 A 3rd St Cedar Ave Irondale Rd 16,000 400 2020 A 800 A Central/ Inland Valley SR 104 Center Rd Beaver Valley Rd/SR 19 27,000 9,200 2023 B 10,950 B SR 19/ Beaver Valley Rd Center Rd Swansonville Rd 21,000 7,200 2023 B 8,550 B SR 19/ Beaver Valley Rd Swansonville Rd Larson Lake Rd 21,000 6,500 2023 B 7,750 B SR 19/ Beaver Valley Rd Larson Lake Rd Oak Bay Rd 21,000 6,500 2023 B 7,750 B SR 19/ Beaver Valley Rd Oak Bay Rd SR 104 21,000 6,500 2023 B 7,750 B Center Rd SR 104 Eaglemont Rd 18,000 3,200 2021 A 3,850 A Center Rd Eaglemont Rd Egg and I Rd 18,000 3,300 2021 A 4,000 A Center Rd Egg and I Rd Beaver Valley Rd/SR 19 18,000 4,100 2021 A 4,950 A Eaglemount Rd SR 20 Center Rd 17,000 600 2019 A 750 A Egg & I Rd W. Valley Rd Center Rd 15,000 200 2019 A 250 A Egg & I Rd Center Rd Beaver Valley Rd/SR 19 15,000 500 2019 A 600 A Larson Lake Rd Center Rd Beaver Valley Rd/SR 19 16,000 300 2019 A 350 A Sandy Shore Rd SR 104 Larson Lake Rd 15,000 200 2019 A 250 A W. Valley Rd Eaglemont Rd Rhody Dr/SR 19 21,000 800 2019 A 1,000 A TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 35 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Planning Area Roadway From To Roadway Capacity ADT ADT Year Existing LOS 2045 ADT 2045 LOS Quimper/ Glen Cove SR 20 Four Corners Rd SR 19/Airport Cut-off 21,000 5,700 2023 A 6,800 B SR 20 SR 19/Airport Cut-off Mill/Discovery Rd 24,000 16,673 2023 D 19,850 D Carrol Ave Glen Cove Rd S. 8th St 10,000 300 2020 A 600 A Fredericks St SR 20 Otto St 10,000 400 2020 A 800 A Glen Cove Rd North Otto St Carrol Ave 10,000 300 2020 A 600 A Mill Rd SR 20 Paper Mill 10,000 1,300 2020 A 2,650 A North Otto St Fredericks St Glen Cove Rd 10,000 400 2020 A 800 A Otto St Fredericks St Seton Rd 10,000 500 2020 A 1,050 A Seton Rd. SR 20 Otto St 10,000 800 2020 A 1,650 A Thomas St SR 20 Paper Mill 10,000 600 2020 A 1,250 A S. 8th St Carrol Ave Mill Rd 10,000 400 2020 A 800 A Quimper Cape George Rd Discovery Rd Beckett Point Rd 16,000 1,400 2020 A 1,700 A Cape George Rd Beckett Point Rd Hastings Ave W 16,000 1,900 2020 A 2,300 A Cape George Rd Hastings Ave W Discovery Rd 16,000 2,300 2020 A 2,800 A Cook Ave Extension Hastings Ave W City Limit 16,000 1,000 2020 A 1,200 A Discovery Rd S SR 20 Cape George Rd (south) 17,000 3,600 2020 A 4,400 A Discovery Rd S Cape George Rd (south) Cape George Rd (north) 16,000 1,500 2020 A 1,850 A Discovery Rd S Cape George Rd (north) SR 20 17,000 2,600 2020 A 3,150 A Hastings Ave W Cape George Rd N Jacob Miller Rd 16,000 1,600 2020 A 1,950 A S Jacob Miller Rd Hastings Rd SR 20 17,000 2,600 2020 A 3,150 A Shine/ Paradise Bay SR 104 Beaver Valley Rd/SR 19 Teal Lake Rd 27,000 14,800 2023 C 17,600 C SR 104 Teal Lake Rd Paradise Bay Rd 27,000 15,600 2023 C 18,550 D SR 104 Paradise Bay Rd Kitsap/Jefferson C.L. 27,000 15,600 2023 C 18,550 D Andy Cooper Rd Teal Lake Rd Paradise Bay Rd 16,000 200 2019 A 250 A Paradise Bay Rd SR 104 Andy Cooper Rd 17,000 2,900 2019 A 3,550 A Paradise Bay Rd Andy Cooper Rd Watson Rd 17,000 3,600 2019 A 4,400 A Shine Rd SR 104 Teal Lake Rd 17,000 300 2019 A 350 A South Point Rd SR 104 Thorndyke Rd 17,000 1,200 2021 A 1,450 A Teal Lake Rd SR 104 Andy Cooper Rd 15,000 400 2019 A 500 A Thorndyke Rd Milepost 2 South Point Rd 17,000 900 2021 A 1,100 A TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 36 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Planning Area Roadway From To Roadway Capacity ADT ADT Year Existing LOS 2045 ADT 2045 LOS Marrow- stone SR 116/ Flagler Rd Indian Island Annex Rd Robbins Rd 16,000 2,200 2023 A 2,350 A SR 116/ Flagler Rd Robbins Rd Schwartz Rd 16,000 1,800 2023 A 1,900 A SR 116/ Flagler Rd Schwartz Rd Fort Gate Rd 16,000 800 2023 A 850 A E. Beach Rd SR 116/ Flagler Rd E. Marrowstone Rd 17,000 200 2019 A 200 A E. Marrowstone Rd Robbins Rd E. Beach Park Dr 16,000 300 2019 A 300 A Robbins Rd Flagler Rd/ SR 116 E. Marrowstone Rd 17,000 400 2019 A 450 A Coyle Coyle Rd Dabob P.O. Rd Camp Discovery Rd 16,000 500 2021 A 550 A Coyle Rd Camp Discovery Rd Thorndyke Rd 16,000 400 2021 A 450 A Coyle Rd Thorndyke Rd Camp Harmony Rd 16,000 500 2021 A 550 A Coyle Rd Camp Harmony Rd Hazel Point Rd 17,000 300 2021 A 300 A Dabob Rd Center Rd Old Tarbo Rd 17,000 500 2021 A 550 A Dabob Rd Old Tarbo Rd Dabob P.O. Rd 15,000 400 2021 A 450 A Dabob P.O. Rd Dabob Rd Coyle 15,000 500 2021 A 550 A Hazel Point Rd Coyle Rd Bay 16,000 200 2021 A 200 A Thorndyke Rd Coyle Rd Milepost 2 17,000 300 2021 A 300 A Zelatched Point Rd Coyle Rd End 16,000 100 2021 A 100 A Port Ludlow/ N. Port Ludlow Highland Dr Teal Lake Rd End 17,000 800 2019 A 1,700 A Oak Bay Rd Beaver Valley Rd/ SR 19 Paradise Bay Road 16,000 1,700 2019 A 3,600 A Oak Bay Rd Paradise Bay Rd Olympus Blvd 17,000 3,800 2019 A 8,000 C Oak Bay Rd Olympus Blvd Olele Pt Rd 17,000 3,900 2019 A 8,250 C Oak Bay Rd Olele Pt Rd Sentinal Firs Rd 17,000 3,900 2019 A 8,250 C Osprey Ridge Rd Walker Way Oak Bay Rd 17,000 900 2019 A 1,900 A Paradise Bay Rd Watson Rd Oak Bay Rd 17,000 3,600 2019 A 7,600 B Pioneer Dr Swansonville Rd Swansonville Rd 16,000 600 2019 A 1,250 A Swansonville Rd Beaver Valley/ SR 19 Oak Bay Rd 16,000 1,200 2019 A 2,550 A Teal Lake Rd Andy Cooper Rd Paradise Bay Rd 18,000 1,500 2019 A 3,150 A Walker Way Oak Bay Rd Osprey Ridge Rd 17,000 600 2019 A 1,250 A West End Highway 101 Jefferson/Gray s Harbor C.L. Clearwater Rd 27,000 1,100 2021 A 1,200 A TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 37 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Planning Area Roadway From To Roadway Capacity ADT ADT Year Existing LOS 2045 ADT 2045 LOS Highway 101 Clearwater Rd Jefferson/Grays Harbor C.L. 27,000 1,100 2023 A 1,150 A Highway 101 Jefferson/Gray s Harbor C.L. Lower Hoh Rd 27,000 1,100 2023 A 1,150 A Highway 101 Lower Hoh Rd Oil City Rd 27,000 1,200 2023 A 1,300 A Highway 101 Oil City Rd Upper Hoh Rd 27,000 1,100 2023 A 1,150 A Highway 101 Upper Hoh Rd Jefferson/Clalla m C.L. 27,000 1,100 2023 A 1,150 A Clearwater Rd Hwy 101 End of county section 16,000 200 2016 A 200 A Clearwater Rd End of county section Owl Creek Rd 16,000 200 2012 A 200 A Clearwater Rd Owl Creek Rd Hwy 101 18,000 200 2012 A 200 A Lower Hoh Rd Hwy 101 Hoh Village 16,000 200 2021 A 200 A Maple Creek Rd Owl Creek Rd End 16,000 100 2021 A 100 A Oil City Rd Hwy 101 Goodman Mainline 16,000 100 2021 A 100 A Oil City Rd Goodman Mainline National Park 16,000 100 2021 A 100 A Owl Creek Rd Clearwater Rd Maple Creek Rd 16,000 100 2021 A 100 A Quinault-S. Shore Rd Grays Harbor Rd National Park 16,000 100 2021 A 100 A Upper Hoh Rd Hwy 101 Oscar Peterson Rd 17,000 1,000 2016 A 1,100 A Upper Hoh Rd Oscar Peterson Rd Maple Creek Rd 16,000 900 2016 A 1,000 A Upper Hoh Rd Maple Creek Rd National Park 16,000 900 2012 A 1,000 A Source: Existing ADT Counts WSDOT and Jefferson County Traffic Counts, 2024 Forecast 2045 ADT based on growth rates defined in Traffic Forecast Section Above Roadway Capacity based on Exhibit 15-46 in HCM 2010, and estimates developed by Transpo Group. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 38 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-18 Existing Traffic Volumes Source: WSDOT Traffic Counts 2025; Jefferson County Traffic Counts, 2024;Transpo Group, 2025. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 39 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Countywide Deficiencies Based on the policies of the Transportation Element and the Capital Facilities & Utilities Element, Jefferson County requires concurrency only for County-owned transportation facilities. Analysis of other transportation facilities is provided, but concurrency is not required. Based on the level of service standards set forth in this appendix and the projected impact of the land use designations and policies on the transportation system, this Transportation Element provides the following findings and recommendations: Vehicle Capacity The capacity analysis and traffic forecasts indicate that at the planning horizon year of 2045, all County roads are expected to operate at or above the adopted level of service (LOS) standard. However, if any proposed development were to cause the level of service to significantly fall below adopted levels, the proponents of the development would be required to mitigate the deficiency prior to development approval. A number of State Route segments will exceed their estimated capacity based on the LOS standards established by WSDOT and the PRTPO and the roadway LOS methodology adopted by the County. These LOS standards are based on roadway classification. For this analysis, the roadways within the UGA were assumed to be classified as urban (which increases the LOS standard from LOS C to LOS D). It should be noted that they are currently classified as rural under WSDOT standards. State highways that are forecast to not meet LOS standards within the planning period include: ▶ SR 19 (Four Corners to SR 116) The state highway system is owned and maintained by WSDOT and serves regional and statewide travel needs. While several roadway segments of the state highway system through Jefferson County are expected to exceed adopted state LOS standards, further widening of the corridors to accommodate future demand would require significant investments in capital dollars, impact adjoining property owners, and would be beyond the financial capacity of Jefferson County. See prior discussion in the concurrency section on strategies for addressing needs along State Routes. Active Transportation Gaps Exhibit 1-19 shows the existing level of service for the planned active transportation network identified in Section 1.2. Green bands indicate low stress, generally off-street portions of the network, while orange signifies adequate on-street facilities which allow for safe, albeit higher stress bicycle travel. Red sections are deficient due to inadequate shoulder widths where improvements are needed to make the segment a viable part of the overall network. The map also includes areas where deficiencies currently exist but projects to address them are either planned or funded. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 40 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 1-19 Active Transportation Level of Service Map Source; Transpo Group, 2025. Commented [EK18]: See notes on page 49 Commented [JH19R18]: Exhibit updated by Transpo TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 41 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 2 Urban Growth Area 2.1 Existing Conditions Functional Classification The roadways and highways in the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA have been identified according to functional classification. The functional classification system is based on a road's ability to provide either mobility or access to adjacent land. There are five road classes used to describe roads: principal arterials, minor arterials, major collectors, minor collectors, and local roads. These classes are further defined by specifying whether the road is part of an urban or rural roadway system. Exhibit 2-1 provides a brief description of the roadway functional classification system. Exhibit 2-1 is based on WSDOT publication, Guidelines for Amending Urban Boundaries, Functional Classifications and Federal Aid Systems. As stated above, mobility is a key component in the functional classification system. When reviewing a regional road system, it is important to note that arterials provide the most mobility in the functional classification system. Arterials connect major destination points such as cities and communities. Principal arterials and minor arterials are distinguished by the importance of the destination, and the priority given to mobility. Collectors serve as the link between arterials and local streets. They gather (or collect) traffic from the smallest streets (local access) and direct the traffic onto the arterial system. Local streets are those which provide direct access to property and consequently provide more limited mobility. For local streets, mobility is not considered as important as access to land uses. Roadway spacing and design standards are directly related to the functional classification of the road. In addition, right-of-way width requirements, lane widths, design speed and other similar characteristics are all related to a roadway's functional classification. Exhibit 1-2 illustrates the updated functional classification of roadways in the UGA. It is noted that SR19 has been designated as a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) and the functional classification will change from a minor arterial to a principal arterial. This change reflects the highway's increasing importance for the region and as an HSS route that links SRI 04 to Port Townsend. Exhibit 2-1 Roadway Functional Classification Descriptions Functional Class Urban (5,000 population or more) Rural Principal Arterial Serves regional major activity areas. Carries all inter-urban and significant intra- urban auto and transit trips. Offers most mobility, least land access. Fully or partially controlled access. Carries statewide or interstate travel. Serves most urban areas with populations of at least 25,000. Provides an integrated network. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 42 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Functional Class Urban (5,000 population or more) Rural Minor Arterial Interconnects and augments principal arterials. Distributed travel to areas smaller than those associated with major arterials. Places more emphasis on land access than principal arterials. Links cities, larger towns, and major activity areas (e.g. resorts). Forms integrated network of providing interregional and inter-county service. Spaced so that all developed areas are within reasonable distance of arterial highway. Provide for high travel speed with minimum interference to through movement. Major Collector Provides both land access and traffic circulation within residential area. Provides intra-community continuity but doesn’t penetrate identifiable neighborhoods. Carries local bus routes. Provides service to county seats and major towns. Links county seats and major towns with nearby cities and arterials Serves the more important intra-county travel Minor Collector Collects traffic from local system and channels it to arterials. Provides both land access and traffic circulation within residential neighborhoods, commercial areas, and industrial areas. Collects traffic from local roads. Provides for all developed areas to be near collector road. Provides service to smaller communities. Link locally important traffic generators with their rural hinterland. Local Provides direct access to abutting land and access to higher classified cities. Offers least mobility. Usually contains no bus routes. Through traffic deliberately discouraged. Serves primarily to provide access to adjacent land. Provides service to travel over relatively short distances. Source: WSDOT, 2024. Traffic Volumes & Level of Service Exhibit 2-2 illustrates existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes at several locations within the study area. The most heavily traveled roadways within the UGA include SR19, SR 116 and Irondale Road. Existing traffic volumes are about 10-17,000 vehicles per day (vpd) on SR 19, 6,000 vpd on SR 116 and 5,000 vpd on Irondale Road. As vehicle volumes fluctuate at various locations along a roadway, level of service analysis was performed at locations where the ADT volumes were the highest. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 43 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 2-2 Existing Average Daily Traffic in Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA Source: WSDOT Traffic Counts 2025; Jefferson County Traffic Counts, 2024, Transpo Group, 2025. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 44 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure that combines the features of speed, safety, travel time, comfort, convenience and traffic 'interruptions. Creation of the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA changes the UGA land use designation from rural to urban. One of the impacts of this change is a concurrent change in the LOS standard for roadways in the Urban Growth Area. See Exhibit 1-1 for roadway level of service definitions. The LOS standard in Jefferson County for rural roadways is LOS CD, and in an urban area is LOS D. This difference reflects the understanding that higher volumes of traffic are expected in urban areas because of a concentration of economic activities and higher residential densities. These higher levels of congestion are considered acceptable during peak hours. In 1998 the Washington State legislature passed House Bill 1487 that separated state highways into two categories: Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) and Regionally Significant Highways (RS). This bill authorizes WSDOT to set level of service standards on Highways of Statewide Significance. SR 19 is designated as a HSS. The Level of Service standard for SR 19 is LOS D and is established by WSDOT. Existing roadway traffic volumes were measured by Jefferson County and obtained from WSDOT’s annual traffic report. SR 19 currently operates at LOS C and D, an acceptable level for the Urban Growth Area. Outside of the UGA boundary, SR 19 continues to operate at LOS C or better. Exhibit 2-8 shows current LOS designations for roadways within the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA. In addition to roadway LOS, intersection LOS analysis was conducted for twelve intersections within and surrounding the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA, as shown on Exhibit 2-3. In urban areas, sources of congestion and delay are typically first experienced at intersections because as volumes increase on State Routes or County roadways, it can be difficult to gain access to and from adjoining properties. Additionally, intersection control can degrade overall capacity of both State Routes and County roadways. As a result, a comprehensive evaluation of key intersections throughout the UGA was completed. The intersection operations as a whole and individual turning movements can be described alphabetically with a LOS range of A through F. LOS A indicates free-flow traffic and LOS F indicates extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. LOS is measured in average control delay per vehicle and is reported for the intersection as a whole at signalized intersections and for the approach or turning movement that experiences the most delay at unsignalized intersections. Control delay is defined as the combination of initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. Existing LOS, delays, and volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios were calculated at the study intersections based on methods contained in the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition (Transportation Research Board, 2010), or HCM 7th Edition methodology. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 45 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 2-3 Study Intersections Source: Transpo Group, 2025. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 46 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Planned Roadway Improvements Jefferson County's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for 2025–2030 includes a number of transportation non-motorized capital improvements in the UGA. The projects include: ▶ Elsie Lopeman Trail Extension - including a 0.45-mile trail extension along Lopeman Road through the County Sewer Treatment plant and connecting to the Jefferson County Library and Chimacum Creek Primary School.property which This project is a key link in the Tri-Area Active Transportation Network. ▶ Extend Rick Tollefson Trail from Loperman Road to the Jefferson County Library and Chimacum Creek Primary School. ▶ Rick Tollefson Trail - Ballfield Connection which will realign the Old Hadlock and Chimacum Road intersection to include multi use trail connections to Bob Bates Fields and the Elsie Lopeman Trail. Another key missing link in the Tri-Area Active Transportation Network. ▶ Rhody Drive Pedestrian and Bicycle - North Improvements, which will add pedestrian and bicycle facilities along SR 19 to connect the Chimacum School Campus to HJ Carroll Park and the Rick Tollefson Trail. ▶ Rhody Drive Pedestrian and Bicycle South Improvements which will add pedestrian and bicycle facilities along SR 19 to connect the Chimacum School Campus to the Chimacum Crossroads commercial corridor. ▶ West Valley Road Safe Routes to School including the design and construction of a multi-use trail along West Valley Road to connect neighborhoods to the 2015 SRTS sidewalk project. WSDOT currently has no funded improvements for State Routes 19 or 116 through the UGA. Current Deficiencies Existing intersection level of service results show that two of the twelve study intersections currently operate at LOS E and LOS F, as shown in Exhibit 2-4. Each of these intersections are two-way stop- controlled. For two-way stop-controlled intersections, HCM 7 methodology bases the LOS on the vehicle delay for the worst movement (generally vehicles making a left onto the major road when stopped on the minor road). While this methodology shows two intersections operating below standard, the vehicles traveling along the major approaches currently experience little to no delay. Exhibit 2-4 summarizes the existing intersection LOS for the twelve study intersections in and around the UGA. Under GMA and SEPA, new development and growth would not be required to mitigate existing deficiencies. The County could require new development to mitigate conditions back to existing levels of service, if traffic conditions worsen due to development. Under existing conditions and urban standards, there are no roadways currently operating below LOS Standards in the UGA road system. Roadway level of service was calculated using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios. Roadway capacities were calculated based on functional classification, as well as roadway characteristics that affect capacity such as roadway width, shoulder width, the presence of turn lanes and the presence of any traffic control. Exhibit 2-8 provides a summary of roadway LOS for all major roadways within the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA area. Commented [EK20]: These two projects are the same project. Commented [PS21R20]: Thanks for clarifying. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 47 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Deficiencies in intersection and roadway level of service mean increases in travel delays for County roadway users. Increased travel times can lead to increases in operating costs for local businesses and residents. Traffic congestion can also lead to more frequent vehicle idling that can impact air quality in the region. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 48 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 2-4 Existing Intersection LOS Source: Transpo Group, 2025. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 49 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Active Transportation Jefferson County has worked to provide a network of active transportation facilities to enhance alternative modes to travel by automobile and for recreational purposes. On-road bicycle routes and lanes, wide shoulders, sidewalks and multipurpose trails that link destinations are common examples. Exhibit 2-5 shows the level of service for the planned active transportation network in the Tri Area. Green bands indicate low stress, generally off-street portions of the network, while orange signifies adequate on street facilities which allow for safe, albeit higher stress bicycle travel. Red sections are deficient due to inadequate shoulder widths where improvements are needed to make the segment a viable part of the overall network. The map also includes dashed areas where deficiencies currently exist but projects to address them are either planned or funded. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 50 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 2-5 Active Transportation LOS in the Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA Source: Transpo Group, 2025. Commented [JH22]: Transpo see notes from staff on the exhibit Commented [JH23R22]: Map updated by Transpo TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 51 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Transit The Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA is served by the Jefferson Transit Authority that provides regular scheduled service to the UGA as well as Port Townsend, Port Ludlow and Poulsbo. Weekday service operates from 6:10 AM to 7:55 PM with Dial-a-Ride available for qualified individuals. Transit services and levels of service are further described in the Countywide section above. Transit bus stop level of service is summarized in Exhibit 2-6. Generally, bus stops on the state routes are relatively accessible, with a few bus stops in the UGA on more residential roadways that lack adequate access. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 52 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 2-6 Transit LOS in the Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA Source: Transpo, 2025. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 53 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 2.2 Transportation Projections Traffic Forecasts & Traffic Operations Traffic forecasts were based on the land use forecasts as discussed above. The traffic forecasts used the estimated annual household growth to forecast traffic volumes on the transportation network. Exhibit 2-7 and Exhibit 2-8 show the traffic operations results based on currently adopted Jefferson County LOS thresholds. Exhibit 2-7 Intersection Delay & Level of Service Intersection Existing Control Existing Delay (sec) LOS Baseline 2045 Vehicle Delay Baseline 2045 LOS With Project Control 2045 with Project Vehicle Delay 2045 with Project LOS 1. Chimacum Rd & SR 19 AWSC 15.6 C 54.2 F RAB 13.2 B 2. Chimacum Road & SR 116/ Oak Bay Rd AWSC 13.5 B 21.6 C AWSC 21.6 C 3. SR 19 & Irondale Road TWSC 49.8 E 43.6 E RAB 9.2 A 4. Irondale Road & Montgomery Rd TWSC 11.5 B 13.3 B TWSC 13.3 B 5. SR 19 & Four Corners Rd TWSC 20.4 C 30.2 D TWSC 30.2 D 6. SR 19 & SR 116 TWSC 77.2 F 86.9 F RAB 14.4 B 7. SR 116 & Cedar Ave TWSC 11.6 B 13.8 B TWSC 13.8 B 8. Oak Bay Rd & SR 116/Flagler Rd TWSC 14.1 B 18.5 C TWSC 18.5 C 9. SR 19 & Airport Rd/Woodland Dr TWSC 21.2 C 33.6 D TWSC 33.6 D 10. SR 19 & Prospect Ave TWSC 22 C 39.4 E RAB 12.3 B 11. SR 19 & Anderson Lake Rd TWSC 14 B 18.3 C TWSC 18.3 C 12. SR 19 & West Valley Rd TWSC 13.6 B 16.9 C TWSC 16.9 C Source: Transpo Group, 2025. Exhibit 2-8 Road Segment Average Daily Trips & Level of Service Roadway From To Roadway Capacity ADT ADT Year Existing LOS 2045 ADT 2045 LOS SR 116/ Ness Corner Rd Rhody Rd Irondale Rd 21,000 6,200 2023 B 7,350 B SR 116/ Oak Bay Rd Irondale Rd Flagler Rd 21,000 5,800 2023 A 6,900 B SR 116/ Flagler Rd Oak Bay Rd Indian Island Annex Rd 16,000 3,200 2023 A 3,800 A Commented [EK24]: Just out of curiosity where did the County Road ADT #’s come from? Commented [PS25R24]: Most recently available data, with a growth factor applied. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 54 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Roadway From To Roadway Capacity ADT ADT Year Existing LOS 2045 ADT 2045 LOS SR 19/ Airport Cut-off SR 20 Four Corners 24,000 14,100 2023 C 16,750 D SR 19/ Rhody Dr Four Corners SR 116/Ness Corner Rd 21,000 16,600 2023 D 19,750 E SR 19/ Rhody Dr SR 116/ Ness Corner Rd Center Rd 21,000 10,400 2023 C 12,350 C Anderson Lake Rd SR 20 Rhody Dr/SR 19 21,000 1,200 2019 A 2,550 A Cedar Ave SR 116/ Ness Corner Rd Irondale Rd 17,000 1,400 2020 A 2,850 A Chimacum Rd Beaver Valley Rd/ SR 19 Elkins Road 17,000 4,500 2021 A 8,950 C Chimacum Rd Elkins Road Oak Bay Road 21,000 4,500 2021 A 8,950 B E. Maude St 5th Ave 7th Ave 16,000 300 2020 A 600 A Four Corners SR 20 Airport Cut- off/ SR 19 17,000 2,800 2020 A 5,750 B Irondale Rd Rhody Rd/SR 19 Patison Street 18,000 5,500 2021 B 10,950 C Irondale Rd Patison St SR 116/Ness Corner Rd 17,000 5,200 2021 B 10,350 C Kala Point Rd Prospect Rd Kala Point Development 17,000 1,600 2020 A 3,300 A Lower Hadlock Rd Oak Bay Rd/ SR 116 Water St 16,000 600 2020 A 1,250 A Mason St Cedar Ave Thomas Dr 18,000 800 2020 A 1,650 A Oak Bay Rd Sentinal Firs Rd Flagler Rd/SR 116 17,000 3,900 2019 A 8,250 C Patison St S. 7th St Irondale Rd 17,000 700 2020 A 1,450 A Prospect Ave Airport Cut- off/ SR 19 Kala Point Dr 21,000 2,300 2020 A 4,700 A S. 7th Ave Thomas Dr Patison St 16,000 400 2020 A 800 A Thomas Dr Mason St S. 7th Ave 16,000 600 2020 A 1,250 A 5th Ave Irondale Rd E. Maude St 15,000 900 2020 A 1,850 A 7th Ave Irondale Rd W. Swaney St. 16,000 800 2020 A 1,650 A 3rd St Cedar Ave Irondale Rd 16,000 400 2020 A 800 A Source: Transpo Group, 2025. Deficiencies Under existing conditions, roadway capacity on SR 19, SR 116, and all roadways in the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA are adequate. However, there are two unsignalized intersections along SR 19 in the Irondale, Port Hadlock, and Chimacum areas that experience long delays as vehicles wait for gaps in TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 55 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 traffic on SR 19. To accommodate the minor street delays while also maintaining mobility on SR 19, a minimum number of interruptions to traffic flow (traffic signals or roundabouts) should be pursued. The most appropriate way to avoid excessive traffic control is to minimize the number of locations of traffic access onto SR 19 as well as control turn movements onto SR 19. The intersection of SR 19 and SR 116 (Ness's Corner) currently experiences the greatest side-street delay and is therefore the most immediate need for signalization or roundabout installation. If traffic control is installed, traffic could be redirected to this intersection by way of further road improvements to facilitate traffic circulation and mobility. The benefits of this would include the following: ▶ Limited access to SR19 would increase the mobility along SR19 ▶ Minimize impacts of growth to the neighborhoods along Irondale Rd. ▶ Greater control of turn movements onto SR19 ▶ Reduce existing delays on the minor leg of the intersection ▶ Provide safe, efficient route through the UGA for freight and other commercial traffic Improved traffic control of the SR 19/SR 116 and SR 19/Irondale Road intersections would create sufficient gaps in traffic along SR 19 to allow safer, more comfortable turn movements onto SR 19. To reduce this delay, relieve congestion and enhance safety, these intersections should be signalized or have a roundabout installed as identified in the project list summarized in Exhibit 3-3. Based on projected volumes, intersection improvements as shown in Exhibit 3-3 will be required at the following intersections by 2045: ▶ Chimacum Road and SR 19 ▶ SR 19 & Irondale Road ▶ SR 19 & SR 116 ▶ SR 19 & Prospect Ave As growth and development continues in the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA as planned over the next twenty years, further improvements to the road system will be required to maintain adopted Level of Service standards. New development could be required to pay for these improvements through new construction, or pro-rata payments to defined improvements as discussed in the Transportation Facilities Assessment section. A TIA would be needed for new developments to distinguish between existing deficiencies (not growth funded) and deficiencies caused by the new development (growth funded). The forecast 2045 intersection operations, as well as the intersection operations after the installation of improved intersection traffic control are shown in Exhibit 2-9. Chimacum Road and SR 19 Intersection (Outside UGA). Increasing volumes at this all-way stop- controlled intersection will require signalization or roundabout installation to maintain mobility on SR 19 and handle increasing volumes along Chimacum Road /Center Road due to growth and development expected in the Port Hadlock commercial core. SR 19 and Irondale Road (Inside UGA). Possible widening of SR19 through the UGA to four lanes of traffic would further increase the difficulty and danger of vehicles turning onto SR19. Signalization or roundabout installation at this intersection is required to handle the volumes on both legs. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 56 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 SR 19 and Prospect Avenue Intersection (Outside UGA). Increasing volumes at this two-way stop- controlled intersection will require signalization or roundabout installation to maintain mobility and handle increasing volumes on SR 19. SR 19 Roadway Level of Service capacity for SR 19 as a two-lane highway with turn lane median is a maximum of 21,000 ADT for LOS threshold "D." The 2045 volumes for the segment of SR 19 between Four Corners and SR 116 are projected to approach capacity and result in the roadway operating at LOS E. Capacity improvements will have to be completed to increase the level of service of SR 19 to acceptable standards. Typically, this involves the addition of travel lanes in each direction including illumination, stormwater mitigation, right-of-way acquisition, and wetland reparations. Access management improvements could improve the overall capacity but would require improved intersections treatments at Irondale Road to the north and SR 116 to the south. SR 116 Roadway Level of Service capacity for SR 116 as a two-lane highway is a maximum of 21,000 ADT for LOS threshold "D." The 2045 volumes for the segments within the UGA are not projected to exceed this threshold, and will operate at LOS B. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 57 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 2-9 Forecast 2038 Baseline & With Project Intersection Operations Source: Transpo Group, 2025. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 58 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Environmental Considerations Human activity can have a major impact on vegetation, wildlife, and water resources. Land use policies seek to protect the environment, conserve our resources, and permit future development only in areas that can support it without significant adverse impact. Protecting the natural environment, including environmentally sensitive lands in developed areas of the UGA requires the following: ▶ Preserving ecological balance ▶ Maintaining or improving air and water quality ▶ Retaining open space in its natural state ▶ Protecting groundwater from pollution ▶ Providing public access to and setbacks from environmentally sensitive land New developments within the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA will be required to minimize and mitigate adverse environmental impacts. The UGA designation will have little impact on the transportation system. This is not to say that there will not be transportation issues or needs associated with growth in and adjacent to the UGA, only that designation as a UGA is not the overriding factor. The foremost effect the UGA will have on transportation will be when the availability of sewers to the commercial, industrial, or multi-family zoned areas allows them to be developed more intensely and generate higher traffic volumes. Transportation decisions are not, and should not be, exempt from environmental review. Impacts to the natural and built environment need to be taken into consideration before any major transportation improvement projects are made. Most transportation projects are subject to state and federal environmental regulations as well as any local environmental laws that apply. County road projects routinely follow NEPA/SEPA regulations unless they are specifically exempted. 3 Capital Facilities 3.1 Concurrency The concurrency requirement in the GMA states that "...public facilities and services ... shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards." [GMA, Section 2, Planning Goals (12)] This means that public facilities and services must be in place to serve the proposed use at the level of service (LOS) set by the community. Some improvements may be completed in whole or in part, by new development within the UGA. Under current State law and Jefferson' County Comprehensive Plan policies, highways owned by the State (State Routes) are not bound by the constraints of concurrency requirements. In these instances, the timing and prioritization of improvements is ultimately that of the Washington State Department of Transportation. Typically, WSDOT coordinates with the local jurisdiction and regional transportation TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 59 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 planning organization to maintain a balance between the free -flow movement of people and goods, and the needs of the local community. 3.2 Transportation Facilities Assessment A list of long-term transportation improvement projects have been identified and evaluated to address the needs and issues identified in the LOS evaluation. The transportation projects that have been identified address the needs for both motor vehicles and active transportation users, with particular focus in the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA. Many of the projects are already identified within County six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), the regional PRTPO Plan, and the WSDOT Sate Highway System Plan. The Quimper Peninsula travel demand model was used to evaluate improvement alternatives for the roadways and intersections in the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA. Low-cost improvements were evaluated before more complex and expensive solutions were analyzed. Low-cost improvements included minor traffic control changes, signal timing or phasing changes, or the addition of turn pockets. More complex solutions included the addition of through lanes, changes in traffic control devices, or geometric reconstruction and/or realignment of intersections and roadways. Each improvement project was treated as an integral component of the transportation system, and the effects of each improvement project on adjacent roads and intersections were factored into the analysis. Transportation Projects The transportation improvement projects have been sorted into three categories: intersection, active transportation, and roadway improvement projects. The projects are illustrated in Exhibit 3-1 and Exhibit 3-2 and listed in Exhibit 3-3. Exhibit 3-3 lists each improvement project and includes a brief description of the project. The projects are based upon the detailed analysis completed as part of the Quimper Peninsula Transportation Study, which contains a more detailed description of each project and a brief justification summary. Intersection Improvements—Intersection improvement projects include the construction of roundabouts or traffic signals. Many of the future level of service deficiencies in the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA are anticipated to be located at intersections. Most of the major intersections along SR 19 will require some form of traffic control improvement with the forecast traffic growth as left-turns to and from the highway will become more and more difficult, increasing delays, and reducing safety. Intersection improvements will need to be made at key intersections to compliment the access management improvements and circulation roads envisioned in the UGA. Active Transportation Improvements—Active transportation improvement project costs of constructing multiuse paths, bicycle lanes, sidewalk enhancements, off-street trail facilities and shoulder widening. These projects are meant to build connections for active transportation users and improve level of traffic stress (i.e. the comfort of using the facility) and safety. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 60 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Roadway Improvement Projects— These projects include roadway repair improvements, bridge repair projects, repaving roadways and other enhancements to roadways to improve vehicle throughput and safety. TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 61 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 3-1 Transportation Capital Project Map—Eastern Jefferson County Source: Transpo Group, 2025. Commented [EK26]: Need Jefferson County West End Inset Commented [PS27R26]: No projects on West End identified. Would you like it added anyway? Commented [JH28R26]: See new exhibit Commented [PS29]: T-34 may be an AWSC based on Mason Street TIA Commented [JH30R29]: Map updated by Transpo TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 62 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Exhibit 3-2. Transportation Capital Project Map—Western Jefferson County Source: Jefferson County, 2025. Exhibit 3-3 Transportation Capital Project List Map ID1 Project Description Cost Funding Status T-01 SR 116 / Chimacum Rd Bicycle Improvements Install bicycle lane marking on SB, EB and WB approach at intersection of SR 116 / Chimacum Rd TBD Planned T-02 Cape George / Hastin Ave Shoulder Widening Widen shoulders on Cape George / Hastings Ave to 5' TBD Planned T-03 SR-20 Shoulder Widening Widen shoulders on SR 20 to 5ft TBD Planned T-04 Four Corners Road Shoulder Widening Widen shoulders on Four Corners Rd to 5ft TBD Planned T-05 SR 116 Shoulder Widening Widen shoulders on SR 116 to 5ft TBD Planned Commented [EK31]: Where did the first 9 projects come from? Also, projects 10 -32 were pulled from PW’s 6-yr TIP, but why these 23 projects and not the other 15? The list also skips from T-21 to T-23 (missing T- 22: Center Road MP 3.26 Culvert Correction). Commented [PS32R31]: We did not include culvert projects on the list. Should we add them in? The first 9 are new projects. Commented [PS33R31]: Footnote that culverts are left off for XXX reason Commented [PS34]: add comment about connecting to prospect through future development TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 63 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Map ID1 Project Description Cost Funding Status T-06 Oak Bay Road Shoulder Widening Widen shoulders on Oak Bay Road to 5ft TBD Planned T-07 Anderson Lake Road Shoulder Widening Widen shoulders on Anderson Lake Road to 5ft TBD Planned T-08 US 101 Shoulder Widening Widen shoulders on US 101 to 5ft TBD Planned T-09 US 101 Shoulder WideningAnderson Lake Road Shoulder Widening Widen shoulders on US 101 to 5ft TBD Planned T-10 Quilcene Complete Streets - Phase 1 Publicly driven pedestrian and bicycle improvements involving US 101 traffic calming, crosswalk improvements, sidewalk, with a focus on connections to the school campus. $997,500 Secured T-11 4 Corners to Anderson Lake State Park Olympic Discovery Trail (ODT) Connection PS&E, ROW and construction of ODT segment connecting the Larry Scott Trail, via Jefferson Transit P&R, to Anderson Lake State Park. $5,603,952 Secured T-12 Lords Lake Loop Road - Slide Repair An approximately 300 foot long, 11-12 foot wide realignment to repair an embankment slide that occurred during a 2021 storm event. $440,490 Secured T-13 Shine Road - Slide Repair Shift approximately 800 +/- feet of road away from the bluff as a corrective measure following 2021 storm damage. Project also includes potential work to repair riprap. $367,152 Secured T-14 Little Quilcene River Bridge Replacement Replacement of a 1955, 64-ft. concrete bridge with structural deficiencies, through a FHWA local bridge program grant. $5,680,128 Secured T-15 Rhody Drive Ped-Bike Improvements - North Segment Pedestrian & bicycle facilities along SR19 connecting HJ Carroll Park and the Rick Tollefson Trail to existing facilities at the Chimacum Schools Campus. $520,437 Partial T-16 Rhody Drive Ped-Bike Improvements - South Segment Pedestrian & bicycle facilities along SR19 connecting the Chimacum School Campus to the Chimacum Crossroads commercial corridor. $1,673,654 Partial T-17 Olympic Discovery Trail - PS2P Project Planning & design project for 5 segments of the ODT: (1) Old Hwy 9 (100% PS&E); Discovery Bay (30% PS&E); Fairmount Rd. to Eaglemount Rd. (10% PS&E); Eaglemount Rd. to Anderson Lake State Park (10% PS&E); Sound to Olympic Trail to ODT (10% PS&E). $2,030,000 Secured T-18 Big Quilcene River Bridge Replacement Project Project will restore a 1.1 mile segment of the Big Quilcene River and adjacent floodplain, including a new 1,100 foot long Linger Longer Bridge. $25,000,000 Secured T-19 Port Townsend Gateway Project Joint City, County, WSDOT intersection safety improvement project including South Discovery Road, Jacob Miller Road, Mill Road, and SR20. $9,500,000 Partial T-20 Upper Hoh Road Spruce Creek Mitigation Project Environmental mitigation / Permanent repairs in response to 2015 emergency repairs. $293,160 Partial TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 64 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 Map ID1 Project Description Cost Funding Status T-21 Upper Hoh Road Bank Stabilization - FLAP Project Approximate location of next critical area of scour along Upper Hoh Road MP 7.9 - 8.2 , providing access to the Hoh Rain Forest/Olympic National Park boundary. Project performed by FHWA Western Federal Lands division, thru FLAP program. $4,993,378 Secured T-23 Rick Tollefson Trail - Ballfield Connection Old Hadlock Road and Chimacum Road intersection realignment with multi-use trail connecting Rick Tollefson trail to Bob Bates Fields and Elsie Lopeman Trail. $726,722 Planned T-24 Duckabush Estuary Restoration-Realignment Project Project will replace US 101 causeway with a bridge. Will also realign a segment of Duckabush Road and replace a culvert with a bridge on Shore Road. $126,000,000 Partial T-25 Oil City Road MP 8.8-8.9 Permanent Repair Environmental mitigation / Permanent repairs in response to 2015-2016 emergency repairs. $860,000 Planned T-26 West Valley Road Safe Routes to School Project Design and construction of a multi-use trail along West Valley Road to connect more neighborhoods to the 2015 SRTS sidewalk project. $916,000 Planned T-27 Yarr Bridge Replacement Replacement of a 1955, 25-ft. concrete bridge with structural deficiencies. $5,564,000 Planned T-28 Quilcene Complete Streets - Phase 2 Phase 2 project implementing a community driven plan to provide sidewalks, crosswalks, & bicycle lanes to connect school, community center & local businesses. $2,023,018 Planned T-29 Olympic Discovery Trail (ODT) - West PS&E, ROW and construction of a 1.5-mile segment of the ODT from Old Gardiner Road, just south of Contractor's Creek Bridge, to Broders Road. $6,151,000 Planned T-30 Elsie Lopeman Trail Extension A 0.45 mile trail extension through the County Sewer Treatment plant property. Project is a link in the Tri- Area Active Transportation Network. $743,200 Planned T-31 Countywide Safety Improvements Systemic safety countermeasures applied to county road network as identified in the Local Road Safety Plan and funded through a biennial WSDOT federal grant program. $1,400,000 Planned T-32 Countywide Various Road Improvements Various projects countywide involving lighting, signage, intersection control, culvert replacement/ rehabilitation, drainage, surface upgrades, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, or other improvements. $237,000 Planned 1 The Map ID of each project corresponds to the project ID as illustrated in Exhibit 3-1. Source: Jefferson County, 2025. Addressing LOS Deficiencies A total of 12 intersections were evaluated within or in immediate proximity to the UGA. Of the 12 intersections, 4 intersections are expected to operate at a LOS E or F during the PM peak hour in 2045. The intersection improvements that are listed in Exhibit 3-3 are intended to reduce or eliminate the number of intersections that will operate poorly in the future by reducing average control delays, improving mobility and safety, and providing better access to properties expected to develop over the Commented [EK35]: Deleted ‘next’. This was previously anticipated as next, but may no longer be true. Commented [JH36R35]: Thanks TRANSPORTATION TECHNICAL DOCUMENT Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan | Appendix C 65 Public Hearing Draft April 2026 next 20 years. While additional intersection improvements will reduce delays for side street traffic volumes and improve local access in the UGA, they are likely to increase travel times for regional highway users along the SR 19 corridor. The County and WSDOT will need to work closely within one another to consider the trade-offs between corridor mobility and local access needs when prioritizing and implementing the intersection improvements identified for the state highways. Growth and development in the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA will have some impacts on the transportation system. A significant portion of that impact will occur on SR 19. WSDOT has jurisdiction over this corridor. Continued and increased intergovernmental coordination between WSDOT and Jefferson County will become more important to coordinate transportation improvements within and adjacent to the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA. This coordination will be necessary to accommodate future population growth and development while mitigating the resulting impacts and increased congestion from growth both within and outside the UGA. Buildout of the active transportation network, especially within the UGA will allow residents to choose another mode of travel. The county has made significant progress in building out the active transportation network within the UGA over the last 5 years, and continues to seek grant funding to build out this network. Federal and state grants will continue to be a key source of funding to facilitate this network expansion. Project Implementation Considerations Implementation of the Transportation Element involves several strategies. One strategy includes coordinating with WSDOT and the PRTPO to build support and secure funding to complete the transportation improvement projects along the state highways, as conditions warrant. Another strategy includes the pursuit of grants and other regional or statewide funding, which will be especially critical in the implementation of state highway improvements within the UGA and completion of the non- motorized system. The County will also need to review its development review processes regularly to assure that the impacts of growth are mitigated and transportation improvements are completed concurrent with new development for County roadways. However, if improvements are unable to be funded on County roadways to meet adopted level of service (LOS) standards, then the County will need to reassess its LOS standards, land use plan, or funding sources. The annual Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program will allow the County to match shorter-term improvement project needs with land use activity and available funding. 3.3 Conclusion The analysis shows that overall; impacts from the development of the UGA on the transportation system and potential transportation needs in the UGA and adjacent areas are manageable. While the UGA designation may impact transportation by increasing demand earlier than it would have otherwise occurred, many of the impacts would still be likely to occur without UGA development. The primary concern has been and continues to be the SR19 Corridor and how future adjacent land use will impact its ability to carry through-traffic. While this analysis considers the overall growth of the UGA and is based on the land use assumptions provided and known at this time, further analysis of the transportation system should be undertaken as development takes place to determine project implementation and timing.