Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout110215_ra01Department of Public Works O Regular Agenda: 10:00 AM Page 1 of 1 Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Agenda Request To: Board of Commissioners Philip Morley, County Administrator From: Monte Reinders, Public Works Director/County Engineer Agenda Date: November 2, 2015 Subject: Adopt the 2016-2021 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Statement of Issue: Conduct a public hearing for the purpose of receiving public testimony concerning adoption of the 2016-2021 Jefferson County Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Analysis / Strategic Goals / Pros Et Cons: RCW 36.81.121 requires the annual adoption of a six-year transportation improvement program after holding a public hearing. The purpose of the law is to "assure that each county shall perpetually have available advanced plans looking to the future for not less than six years as a guide in carrying out a coordinated transportation program" (RCW 36.81.121(1)). Fiscal Impact / Cost -Benefit Analysis: The TIP relies heavily on the availability of outside grant and program funding from the State and federal government. Fiscal impact is evaluated through the annual budgeting process including adoption of an Annual Road Construction Program. Recommendation: After considering public testimony, approve by Resolution the proposed Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program. Return a signed copy of the Resolution to Public Works for further processing. Department Contact: Zoe Ann Lamp, AICP, Transportation Planner 385-9162 Date COUNTY OF JEFFERSON STATE OF WASHINGTON In the Matter of Adoption of the 2016-2021 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, State law obligates the legislative authority of each county to adopt on an annual basis a six-year transportation improvement program, holding a public hearing prior to adoption, the purpose of which is to "assure that each county shall perpetually have available advanced plans looking to the future for not less than six years as a guide in carrying out a coordinated transportation program" (RCW 36.81.121(1)), and; WHEREAS, an analysis of the Road Fund was prepared covering the six-year program period using the County's best estimate of future revenues and expenditures in accordance with WAC 136-15-130 and, WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners, Jefferson County, State of Washington, has reviewed the transportation priority array and bridge condition report as prepared by the Department of Public Works, and has conducted a public hearing on the corresponding proposed six-year transportation improvement program; IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the Board of County Commissioners does approve and adopt the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program for the years 2016 through 2021, inclusive. ADOPTED and signed this day of SEAL: ATTEST: Erin Lundgren Clerk of the Board 2015. JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS David Sullivan, Chair Phil Johnson, Member Kathleen Kler, Member Jefferson County Public Works 2016-2021 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program r Jefferson County Public Works 623 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone: 360-385-9160 ww.co.jefferson.wa.us/publicworks "70 _r 4 - 1 I� Eli :V'4ff.ftN DRAFT 2016-2021 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program Table of Contents Letter of Introduction from the Public Works Director...............................................................1 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Noticeof Public Hearing......................................................................................................3 2016-2021 Six -Year Transportation Improvement (TIP) Program ProjectLocation Map..........................................................................................................5 ProjectList............................................................................................................................7 Acronyms Used In the Project List...................................................................................11 Budget and Funding Information 2016 — 2021 Six Year TIP by Project Category...............................................................12 Graphs.................................................................................................................................13 Six -Year County Road Fund Projections.........................................................................15 BridgeCondition Report ................................................................................................................17 Roadway Priority Rating Program and Development of the Six -Year Transportation ImprovementProgram..................................................................................................................39 Jefferson County Department of Public Works 623 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9160 Monte Reinders, P.E. Public Works Director/County Engineer Welcome to the 2016-2021 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (T.I.P.). A lot has been accomplished in the last 12 months. Jefferson County completed the Chimacum Safe Routes to School project, Paradise Bay Road improvement project, Dowans Creek Road relocation, a major pipe ramming culvert replacement on the Upper Hoh Road, and correction of a fish passage barrier on the Clearwater Road through a partnership with the Pacific Coast Salmon Coalition. These projects represent a construction value of over $3,000,000 of which over 90 % was covered by State and Federal grants. In addition, Public Works responded to an unusually severe winter storm damage season completing emergency repairs to four significant road washouts with a combined cost of approximately $800,000. The Six -Year T.I.P. is a "rolling" plan that is updated each year to provide direction to transportation improvements on Jefferson County's 400 -mile public road system. Development of the T.I.P. is a process that identifies needs, prioritizes those needs, develops projects to meet the needs, and rolls some of those projects into a plan that may occur over the next six years. A range of different project types is included in the T.I.P. The T.I.P. is strongly influenced by the availability of funding, and many of the projects listed do not, as yet, have secured funding. Historically, projects on Jefferson County's T.I.P. have averaged about 70% funding from State and Federal sources. Many non -local transportation revenue sources, however, only fund certain types of improvements on certain types of roads, and the result is that Federal and State priorities strongly influence what actually gets accomplished. Lack of available local match limits the number and size of grants that can be utilized. Local funds available for this proposed 6 -year capital program average only $225,000 per year. Jefferson County has a limited tax base with transportation revenues among the lowest in western Washington when measured in terms of dollars available per road mile. The county road fund has seen a 25% overall reduction in annual operating revenue due to loss of federal land timber revenue in recent years. As a result, road fund reserves are drawn down more and more each year. The Six -Year T.I.P., like any other capital improvement plan, is only a plan for what should be done provided adequate funding is available. It shows what funding must be sought and/or what revenue sources must be developed. Decisions about which projects actually get advanced are made through the annual County budgeting process. Since the Six -Year T.I.P. is updated annually, it can be changed to reflect new needs, priorities, and changed budgetary conditions. I hope you find this document useful in understanding Jefferson County's Transportation Improvement Program. If you would like more information, feel free to contact the Jefferson County Public Works office, located at 623 Sheridan Street, at (360)385-9160. Monte Reinders, P.E. Director/County Engineer NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held by the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners on Monday, November 2, 2015, at 10:00 AM in the Commissioners' Chambers at the County Courthouse, 1820 Jefferson Street, Port Townsend, Washington, for the purpose of taking testimony concerning the adoption of the Jefferson County 2016-2021 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program. "Each county shall perpetually have available advanced plans looking to the future for not less than six years as a guide in carrying out a coordinated transportation program" (RCW 36.81.121(1)). Written public comments on the proposed Program will also be accepted any time up through the close of the public hearing, addressed to the BoCC at P. O. Box 1220, Port Townsend, WA 98368 or by email at jeflbocc(&co.jefferson.wa.us. The proposed 2016-2021 Program is available at the Commissioners' office at the County Courthouse, (360) 385-9100, and on the County website:'www.co.jefferson.wa.us. Jefferson County ensures full compliance with Title VI of the Civil rights Act of 1964 by prohibiting discrimination against any person on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex in the provision of benefits & services resulting from its federally assisted programs & activities. The meeting site is accessible to persons with disabilities and accommodations for people with disabilities can be arranged with advance notice by calling (360) 385-9100. Jefferson County Transportation Improvement Program 2016-2021 D _ I Bay 12 Old C -W, CANADAj,-��ihland Clallam`' lcwnty 3� $ County county 1 o� 9 C y 10 5on� ca'"n' 26 A -I 'fine ,z� •� 9 Quo cate y 1` &y s 9a A Li 3 j +b. Dabob oil c Bay [� 3 i` -------------------------------- — 5 _6 _ 7 007©pa¢ ae �Ra da460©�U PoPC3 ® Funding Secured Planned (unfunded) Box numbers correspond r to project numbers in narrative summary. i Kaia 9 x � St'lish p c y o �. A 3 �OPa O Wood �" :S '�. m a ct Av ..... S].. I 22 N 14 Admiralty g._.: 17 , 0 Inlet ' I p 1 ( D ,dens" la e 23 9 c 1 1, ltd C Oak Bay 1 `\ 21 \ 19 1 R / dae � E g & 1 qd atl Puget SounR re RM �� d� Nd G II Lake R , 13 1 1 0 \ , N Y N r0' � $ � ; N Squamish 4 Harbor 9 C y 10 5on� ca'"n' 26 A -I 'fine ,z� •� 9 Quo cate y 1` &y s 9a A Li 3 j +b. Dabob oil c Bay [� 3 i` -------------------------------- — 5 _6 _ 7 007©pa¢ ae �Ra da460©�U PoPC3 ® Funding Secured Planned (unfunded) Box numbers correspond r to project numbers in narrative summary. ,p p � X 3z % x u Z K O O IY IL F Z Q. W WW W T > XO N d F � W 0O O f f O CL a F !� MV3A/H1NOW 2 > z Y s > > s> Y= Y O O o 3131d W0031V0 N/A 6038 M/8 ^ m m m m z U 0 w w 3dAL lVLNAW -NONIAN3 G o W o o D o D o wR Is - -ITT- - a � . . . . . . O ¢ a ao ¢ w jw w o Y r O U m � m K W o Y � O 2 X m � ao wm s - o o� _ oSo aass _ o w� F z a K 0 w ¢ O m Z m w O m i y p x a 00 u U z m W _ a _ 0U¢_x0 U O ~ w F U 333 m p 3SVHd A8 j .3 1V8303j 1 - - - _ 1� IF 3000 LL ON0j 1V8303j SLNVIS 3SVHdVI 8V3A/H1NOW _ _ m.. _ _ _ x xxx x xx _ _ _ _ > _ _ _ _ 3SVHd ioambd y c o c 9 i �� i c 9 �� i yS w o �� wa w o �� i c o �� i c �� y w o �� a c o �� c o aa�� oao g'o 53000,unan m, a a i a a ; H1ON311V1Oi ^� z o z _ i 0 0 0 SOiV1S'ONOd m m m m m (S(3dA1 LN3W3AOHdWI o n o o n r o E - - - - ri E 1 - - 2 E ry .2 2 =- E - o - E _ c E E u u _ v - m u- -_ - m .a .a O„-- O„ - 0 �,- - g a c= V o E E S H y U 3 K E a LLm ma E E d p u' - E E C a -m-=2m UEm _o E m um E m 0 x O u o i gg - co_ E m E o 2 0 2 a o s o E a q- U °° E E x= E n e c 3 F E a y `m - m a- a= a a a r O 8 9 - x m f E o f o m s ' m = z = m C o_ m y m a c E m K c o^ Z c a a c m C m c= 0 0 D E o c p Jg c_ f mf d" m f i=„ m f a=„ m f a=?' f m C m U m m U m u E m m b o o g V N= oEO' K$K o m E 9 o p m m m m N O U u 0 0 0- 'ON iowONd dl ^' ^ 'm 'm ^ ^' SSVl3'3NOda i a i a 'z MOMMEMEMEME l�Ili:a:�c: MEMEMEMEM �I O�I�OfI� NiN IINII TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2016-2021 The following is a guide to codes and acronyms used in the TIP project spreadsheet for Jefferson County. PROJECT PHASE P.E.=Preliminary Engineering; RNV=Right-of-Way; Const.=Construction FEDERAL FUND CODES (applicable to Jefferson County) ER Emergency Relief FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FLAP Federal Lands Access Program STP -S Surface Transportation Program -Safety HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program PLHD Public Lands Highways Discretionary Program STP -R Surface Transportation Program -Regional TAP Transportation Alternatives Program WAFH Washington Forest Highways Program STATE FUND. CODES (applicable to Jefferson County) ALEA Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account EMD Emergency Management Department NOVA Non -Highway and Off -Road Vehicle Activities Program PBP Pedestrian and Bicycle Program PIF Public Infrastructure Fund PSAR Puget Sound Acquisition and Restoration Fund RAP Rural Arterial Program RCO Recreation & Conservation Office SRTS Safe Routes to School Program WWRP Washington Wildlife Recreation Program PBSP Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Program 1:4►1v/I:I*]k'IT, i=1.rl_1_IIIIIIIII[VAi" CE Categorically Exempt DCE Documented Categorically Exempt EA Environmental Assessment EIS Environmental Impact Statement Updated: August 14, 2015 CENTER RD OVERLAY - PHASE 5 $0 $916,740 $ DRAFT 2016-2021 SIX-YEAR TIP BY PROJECT CATEGORY $30,000 $ - Prior. $30,000 12 SOUTH DISCOVERY ROAD PAVEMENT PRESERVATION $53,000 # Project Description $ $503,000 13 PARADISE BAY ROAD - PHASE 3 Emergency Repairs & Mitigation Local State Federal Total 2 QUINAULT SOUTH SHORE ROAD REPAIR $ 13,302 $ - $ 1,005,533 $1,018,835 3 1 DOSEWALLIPS ROAD PERMANENT SLIDE REPAIR $ 17,600 $ 158,400 $ - $176,000 Category Subtotal $30,902 $158,400 $1,005,533 $1,194,835 Rnari Z Intarcartinn Imnrnvamantc I nral State Federal Total 1 CENTER RD OVERLAY - PHASE 5 $0 $916,740 $ $916,740 7 UPPER HOH ROAD/OLYMPIC NAT. PARK FLAP PROJECT $30,000 $ - $ - $30,000 12 SOUTH DISCOVERY ROAD PAVEMENT PRESERVATION $53,000 $450,000 $ $503,000 13 PARADISE BAY ROAD - PHASE 3 $100,000 $900,000 $ $1,000,000 15 SOUTH DISCOVERY ROAD REALIGNMENT $217,000 $1,953,000 $ $2,170,000 17 ICHIMACUM ROAD IMPROVEMENT 1 $249,7501 $ 1 $1,600,2501 $1,850,000 25 RUN -OFF-ROAD & INTERSECTION SAFETY PROJECT 1 $ $ 1 $600,000 $600,000 26 IQUILCENE CENTER RD REBUILD & PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT 1 $6,750 $ 1 $43,250 $50,000 Category Subtotal 565b,5UU 54,219,/4U yZ,243,5UU j/,119,/4U Culvert R Rridcre Renlacement/Renair Local State Federal Total 4 ACCESS PRESERVATION: HCH RAIN FOREST MP 3.338 $ $ $5,000 $5,000 5 ACCESS PRESERVATION: HOH RAIN FOREST MP 4.38 $ $ $993,540 $993,540 6 ACCESS PRESERVATION: HCH RAIN FOREST MP 6.95 $ $ $1,038,120 $1,038,120 16 SALMON CREEK BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION $750,350 $39,700 $763,300 $ 100,000 $903,000 19 WEST VALLEY ROAD CULVERT REPLACEMENT-NAYLOR CREEK $ - $500,000 $ - $500,000 20 ISNOW CREEK ROAD CULVERT REPLACEMENT -MP 0.84 $ $ $1,000,0001 $1,000,000 21 ICENTER ROAD CULVERT REPLACEMENT -MP 1.358 1 $100,000 $ 1 $ $100,000 27 1COUNTYWIDE BRIDGE LOAD RERATING PER FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS 1 $20,250 $ 1 $ 129,750 1 $150,000 Category Subtotal 5159,950 $1,263,300 53,266,410 54,689,bb0 Nnn_Mntnri7ad Trancnnrtntinn Local State Federal Total 8 RICK TOLLEFSON TRAIL -PHASE 1 (CHIMACUM VALLEY) $ 4,800 $311,514 $641,797 $958,111 9 RICK TOLLEFSON TRAIL- BALLFIELD CONNECTION 1 $0 $85,000 $ - $ - $85,000 10 QUILCENE COMPLETE STREETS $ - $750,350 $ $750,350 11 ODT SOUTH DISCOVERY BAY -SEGMENT A $205,000 $1,250,000 $ $1,455,000 14 RICK TOLLEFSON TRAIL -PHASE 2 (CONNECTIONS) $25,000 $125,000 $ $150,000 18 SALMON CREEK CROSSING HIGHWAY 20 $ 77,500 $775,000 $ $852,500 22 CEDAR AVENUE NON -MOTORIZED & INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS $ 15,000 $550,000 $ $565,000 23 ICHIMACUM GRANGE TO HJ CARROLL PARK -PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT $ 15,000 $175,000 $ - $190,000 24 JODT - MILO CURRY ROAD TO FOUR CORNERS $15,053 $ - $96,447 $111,500 Category Subtotal 5442,353 $3,936,864 $738,244 55,117,461 Planning & Countywide Programs Local State. Federal Total 28 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENT FOR MULTIPLE LOCATIONS 1 $0 $ $ 250,000 1 $250,000 29 1COUNTYWIDE VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS 1 $60,000 $ $ $60,000 Category Subtotal $60,000 $0 $250,000 $310,000 A 2016 - 2021 Six -Year Transportation Program Expenditure Breakdown Amounts by Project Category Culvert & Bridge Replacement/Reps $4,689,660 25% Road & Intei Improven $7,119;1 vu 39% Non -Motorized T"^ station ,461 Planning & Countywide Programs $310,000 2% Emergency Repairs & Mitigation $1,194,835 6% 2016 - 2021 Six Year Transportation Program Funding Breakdown Percentages by Revenue Source Fede--' $7,503 41° Local °' '"^,705 13 $9,578,304 52% 2016 - 2021 Funding: Secured vs. Planned Planned $10,502,000 57% Secured $7,929,696 43% Average Annual Road Fund Revenue Used on Capital Projects Road Levy & MVFT Revenue for Operating Costs $5,146,543 96% Road Levy & MVFT for Capital Projects $224,951 4% Average Annual Road Fund Revenue = $5,371,494 14 N C Q W O L CL U. V m O L O U L x V/ r N O 04 CD W r O N 15 mIO N O N O O O m .D 0 00 v 0 O O O rO O m 0 0 O > O O m 0 O h u M o m O m N, O N 000 0 0 m 0 Obf 00f Q CO C (09 pNj O N N !� a N m b b b O N o O rf�O bh�pp m M r m Ib0 Q m u7 r O _ Cl ^ .0 ? N m G N N c N i O O 10 I{� m M'O b 00 0 0 0 0 O. 00 m M O m N O m 0 0 0 0 0 O 0Iq pp N m M O O, `� OQ b a in 'tli' O O N 0 N N 00 v v m a ^ m O.- Nm m N m M N M O N b IL b y Q N m o rn M gj O g o g In 12: Icy o$ 'q o o o 0 0 o o 0 N o d N o m, 0 0 0 o o O m m rn ui d m 0 0 N O 8 Zi ZS �i uS l9 A. d aa pp�1 N N N A O O m N M O) m H N d O m m 0 N m O) m N O N O m p 01 m tl M m O r N m m O O N N y O 0M000l0 10 000 IV' OI Q o 0000VO1 MN MIp ye O mm 0OmI mr 0�o NN c> 1 O0 at O OMm a d Q • n A A b m m c0 M N O N m f p Of N N IL N a ^ N A r m Np�1 c O O O io I1p ^ IN' o O V b 0 0 0 0 O 0 O$ m i0 O m n n � N N o 00i O c'f r b O�ro p �Oy. dl O0: M m 1� q m N N 100 lm0 � A N_ O o �f OD G O W O{Npf OO m00 d bf b < C N O OO cU OMbomNIt me AN Ib O p m � N O i O O 'C O O O O O O O O M Ol M r ,II 1`G�O b M A mm O O m N t0 1'4 < H W N Q m N` O M< N f m CO M m m O. m V n R H N IO d l0 <O Oml I.bj M 0m Q V O A o p y 12 vl Q m a ry N (V O d N M 01 V C2 b O_ Ol 1 O m h q Om0 � m 0 Np r b N 0♦0♦pp N 0 n O m N O- � n m m T [�D m O ry� m O V n 88 ���f00fppppp N _b dp � M F 111 m� 01 O N 01 �[1 O M f O A O i0 Q m O61 O Io O N 00 ly U N N d M N O O N N - O m O Q y IC N m ti JQ N 0 N OI i0 O)i Q IO r N tl IO q S A t7, �i �qy s P N N M Q M OI m OI v> O n r m N O b ♦ W p cry m w01 m r d M W O O m N Ol 0I. m M ' '_' Y m O O b t0 p m It ..1 M m OQi (D m M U H d N Q r • ni ei m v � to � Op V d v M " Q i Q O m N N O m 0xa1 0 df O O M O O O N m m M O 0d N N 6l l0 mpp O m m m Q� O m � � Mo m h 7 AQ M N M t0 m co r{ In O) N tp N M ^b1' 000 h� pO 001 fm0 N d M Q 0'D t0 Ian ai0s O N r N ob (11 O O0 r M m O m U Q Oh n N b m m r M O w m N m m Q Q cm0 G O Q O O M Q m m N N 00 M 0 ! O 00pp NO 8 ^ b M Nn A O f� t7 M l7 O b O N M m m O N O m N N J Q O 01 O m''. N m mifI N b m O N b A N O m d Of M N N •- M m <D n m M m CI O m i0 tl n m O Of O O m N U N m O M M 01 Q b N O m A 0 Y1 cr0 M Of A O N O OO Pf O d 0 m LQ 0 T .O m m Q of d Q m C' O r d W m l_ 0 Omi Q Q 7 p A m O o M m I[] • r Nr m N m -' m m o' N N �: m �� b a 0 0o QQ m O1 N _ Q o 00 N^ b r p m V � L7 IC Ot O m N U N N O N O ,O O N W yy y Z b N W m N q N m b N W OI ZU Q c tr a Q W OI W O C O K 'A Z F W (0 U 7 Q w H 1.. • N w W w > rc O m. U w W z N w w O a fn W U z a a r X� Z U Imo- 7 w a w F u1 a W m Z Z W N a w U z U m w> r/j rc t7 m c ;>> d p' a w rc> Q¢ O w z �- r w w z N O w X U O r z w w w 7" U z rr w a x g w b Q a z Q m x a 0 w J ib h w > yy�� WWW ca N w W 1t x U W K N Z r O a > C a F J w a' w Z G U H Z O 2 W Z H K~ > F Z> I- H !� w K J a w D D J y = W K O Q 0 N Z N m W Z 0>> GQF-,. QQF a a. Vl W U W a o m 9 w ?. �' y F a a m Q ~ 2 Q o W 0 z O U 7 m z Q U Q O lam- a° c F o Iii Z w W w b m z o. m c m C c d o a 0 X w J p z p 0 w a rr LL w Q D m z 7 n z w w N a w U ir a. i- LL D H O o o d U O. g a LL J tat O Q Q Q Q U y z a K Z K U 1n w W W W w a' - w m a a Y m W a W 0 0 Z 0 w a rr 2 J Q f- O N i m O s N '� dt d J .'�_ Q a r J Q m z z o W Z W F C7 z a W Q F J Z a_~~ o Q r C7 a a J Q m v 1- W W ? 2 C7 > o v� W K K Q w Z Q W H W O O .. V X S d _ O W a' LL (n O m O U F J a W W W K~ K¢w lr m U` F z a O X W Q Q W a' U U O O v F- R J W W Z Q 0] tr W U O a a mm 1- O LL U a K n W LL (n F a J F O a0 u O sanuanaa 6ui4eiadp sanuanaa laafOJd lepdeo sajnlipuadx3 yseo 15 N O_ O N O_ N O_ N N O_ W N O A N O_ cn N O_ 6> N O_ OD N O 1 N O N O N O N PA R • • • ba Ea Ea cfl (A � j N W CJI O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Ea O O O O O O O O O O O O O O R N O O N O N cn K� �1 0 O C rt `G O 91) Q. C CL M O L. ^D 0 rf O N MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County Department of Public Works 623 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9160 Monte Reinders, P.E. Public Works Director/County Engineer FROM: Monte Reinders, P.E., Public Works Director/County Engineer/_� DATE: September 1, 2015 SUBJECT: Bridge Condition Report 2015 INTRODUCTION As required by WAC 136-20-060, each county engineer shall furnish the county legislative authority with a written resume of the findings of the bridge inspection effort. This resume shall be made available to said authority and shall be consulted during the preparation of the proposed six-year transportation program revision. The resume shall include the county engineer's recommendations as to replacement, repair or load restriction for each deficient bridge. The resolution of adoption of the six-year transportation program shall include assurances to the effect that the county engineer's report with respect to deficient bridges was available to said authority during the preparation of the program. BRIDGE INVENTORY Jefferson County Public Works has 31 active bridges — see the attached Master Bridge List (Appendix A) for a listing of the county bridges. Jefferson County also has two permanently closed bridges, which are not listed on the Master Bridge List. BRIDGE INSPECTIONS The National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) and WAC 136-20-030 mandate that public agencies inspect and report on all bridges at least once every two years (routine inspection). Jefferson County staff performs all routine inspections. Special inspections are required for bridges that cannot be inspected adequately from the ground. For these bridges an Under -Bridge Bridge Condition Report 2015 Page 1 of 3 17 Inspection Truck (UBIT) is required. Steel bridges with fracture critical members may also require special inspections with the UBIT and/or other special equipment. Jefferson County has two bridges which require the UBIT inspection and one bridge which requires both the UBIT and the fracture critical inspection (identified in the attached Master Bridge List). Jefferson County currently has a contract with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to perform these inspections. Jefferson County Public Works has split up the bridge inspections so that East Jefferson County bridges are inspected in odd -numbered years and West Jefferson County bridges are inspected in even -numbered years. In conformance with that schedule, Jefferson County completed the biennial inspections for all East Jefferson County bridges in 2015. The inspection reports were submitted to WSDOT, which then verifies compliance with the NBIS and reports to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). DEFICIENT BRIDGES All bridges are assigned a sufficiency rating (SR), which is a calculated score based on numbers assigned to all of the bridge elements reviewed by the bridge inspector. The SR is a number from 0 to 100, with 100 being an entirely sufficient bridge, and 0 being an entirely insufficient or deficient bridge. For additional explanation of the sufficiency rating and other ratings see the attached WSDOT publication, Bridges and Structures — Ratings (Appendix B). The sufficiency rating is used to determine if a bridge is eligible for federal rehabilitation or replacement funding. Currently, none of the county's bridges have any major deficiencies, and none are eligible for rehabilitation or replacement. As described in previous Bridge Condition reports, Tower Creek Bridge is being monitored for potential scour problems associated with down -cutting of the streambed. The Tower Creek streambed experienced significant down -cutting in 2007-2008 due to migration of the Hoh River and heavy flows in Tower Creek. However, based on regular monitoring, the streambed elevation has been relatively stable since 2008. Public Works will continue to monitor this situation. POSTED BRIDGES All bridges are required to have a "Load Rating" calculation. The Load Rating establishes how much weight the bridge can carry for several standard configurations of vehicle axle loads. If the load rating calculation shows that a bridge cannot safely carry the legal traffic loads then the bridge must posted with the appropriate load limits. Jefferson County currently does not have any bridges with load restrictions. The load rating values (in tons) are listed on the attached Master Bridge List (Appendix A). OBSOLETE BRIDGES The Old Little Quilcene Bridge and the Maple Creek Bridge have been placed in obsolete status and removed from the Master Bridge List. Both are permanently closed to vehicular traffic. This action removes the requirement for biennial bridge inspection. Bridge Condition Report 2015 Page 2 of 3 18 EMERGENCY REPAIRS AND INSPECTIONS There have not been any emergency repairs or inspections since the last Bridge Condition Report in 2013. MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES Routine maintenance of the county's bridges is conducted by the road maintenance department. Typical routine maintenance consists of deck cleaning, brush clearing, and minor miscellaneous repairs. COMPLETED PROJECTS Public Works applied for and received federal funding to repaint the Queets Bridge, which spans the Queets River on Clearwater Road. The painting project was completed successfully in December 2013. It was 100% funded by the Federal Highway Administration. A new bridge was added to the system in 2014. At Andrews Creek on Snow Creek Road at mile post 3.78, a 24 ft. span, pre -cast, reinforced concrete three -sided structure was constructed. This project corrected a fish -passage barrier, and replaced a pair of deteriorated culverts. The project was funded with 100% funding from the Federal Highway Administration. The Hell Roaring Creek Bridge on the Upper Hoh Road was repaired by reattaching the steel angle armor on the southerly end of the bridge. CURRENT PROJECTS Current projects include the following: • A 21 ft. span, pre -cast, reinforced concrete three -sided structure at Upper Hoh Road MP 6.95. The contract bid documents are complete. The project is scheduled to be advertised to bidders in January, 2016 and be constructed in summer 2016. This project is 100% funded by the Federal Highway Administration. • An 80 foot span bridge on West Uncas Rd MP 0.804 is designed. Funding for construction is being sought through the Recreation and Conservation Office. PROGRAMMED PROJECTS There are no programmed bridge projects at this time. RECOMMENDED PROJECTS There are no recommended bridge projects at this time. Bridge Condition Report 2015 Page 3 of 3 APPENDIX A 21 Jefferson County Public Works Master Bridge List LAST UPDATED: 9/2/15 Total number of bridges in inventory: Total number of permanently closed bridges: Total number of active bridges: Total number of West Jefferson County bridges Total number of East Jefferson County Bridges 31 2 31 18 active bridges 1 permanently closed bridge 13 active bridges 1 permanently closed bridge 23 25 z c < N E - L d U�, O s+lavw3N c F- F > m Jzj za y� Ol F v (aS).LN31ar33a.1'19vai7:L7na.L- N M rn m r o l03}3.L3`IOS80.i"I'1VNOI.L7N.'ld a ,,, o P Vt .-• N N Q 7 NO[.LJ3dSN1 SV'1 V1 = V) N �n •n M N Vl Vi = 7 N 03NIn�3H .LN3 wdlna3 O a D � D O � F `��, r N cn 1 O Z Z 2 Z. 9NLLVa 9N1.LVN3d0 O O O O O O O O c..F CD F o'" 10 E' F Q CV 7 9N1.LVH ANO.LN3AN1 x 0 O O O rl O O O O v Q N O O M O _ N C O rl a3.Lsod avol O O O o O 0 O 0 0 NOl.LJH,I"l H31VAH3OV) 000 O O O O O O O 'LvO13laO HIIOJS 0 0 Z Z Z Z 0 O Z s3Hn.LV3:1'1VL73d. O O 0 O O O O O O 1V3111HO3Nn19vNd. O O O O O O O O O 1111119 HV3A a rn a rn a o 3 E'g c o �'a v E° F£ G- y C C �" -� G C'' - U U V U CL U 1 U00 U U C-) U U U 4� u fl. L cr F F v `. (1339) H19N3'1 N m n w M N J30113'I1w � d R 3wv.v avow W. s' v u a as cua n M O V N O 7 N3HW11N aVON C 3wv.' �ace 0 m 3 u u UHLN:1N A.LNf10; �? �_ M w W a N N N N O`Uo N N O O O O O C O O O C O O O O C O O O H38WfiN 3Nn.LJ11 H.LS '1VN3a3a T [� ;p 00 � roi JO � OG N 00 oo 'JO M OO � JO 25 SNHV W 3N WS).LN31J133U AI IVNfCLJf]HL ao 00 0o v (09)313"losao A3'IVNOLLJNn3 JNI.LVN AJN31JIJARS NOI.L:)3dSN1 SVI Q39Inoa9.LN3t4ljla03 O Q rn C4 C cn O O O JNI.LVN JNI,LVN3dO Ez- z z z O O O O 'JNI.LVN ANO.CN3AN1 03.LSOd QVO'1 O O O O N0I.LJ:1d S,N193,LVMH3aNn O O 'O Z 1VJI.LI113HflojS O O Z Z Z S3Nn.l,V3T'TVIJ3d O O O Z 'IVJI1l9J aafl,LJVNd Z O z O ,L"ling 9V3A o oN ID o o N cOv 3 3 3 ate. u � � 7 y a J m� v C ❑ � L to N Vl U1 U M C O 7 U U (.CTIA) H.LON9'1 N .I.SOd3'Ilw vi N 0 r r 0 ao oa o 00 r m o � -'4 o aCi U u 3WVN AVON 5 CY 1139 W(1,N 0V011 r r N m m o 3WVN U 939HInN A.LN110" N LLJ _� M M run O O O O O O O O N391V t1N 3T11.LJfiN.LS -1 v)13(133 o a� o0 00 r 00 r 00 r 00 r 00 26 27 N i" sMNVW3ll x F 1 2 �Q (OJ) 313'IOSNO.I'13VNOLLJN!ld o M M x a o oa a (Os).LN3IJIJ3U ATIVN!I.LJn Nl. c� M t� JNI.LVN nJN31JIJan$ a O a N N OG O M NOIlilissl1 SV'I z Z � z '7 � = N U3NI003N 1N3 Wdlnd3 'a O n '^ � ;n in s vri ti vri ; J in z o z z z z z z z ONIl VN DNILVN3110 O — O O O C O O O z z z z z z z z z 7NII.VN ANO.LN3Ahil O O O VI rh v y M u N U31LSOJ avoll O O O O O O O C C z z z z z z z z z z NO11J3d SNI N3J.VMN3ON,l O O O O O O O O C O z z z z z z z z z z nVJIl1NJ NnoJ o 0 O C o 0 0 0 0 0 z z z z z z z z z z S3N01V3J -IVD3dS O O O 0 0 O OO O Z z z z z z z z z z nVJIlINJ 3Nil.LJVNJ O C O C O z O z z z 1'1108 NV3,l `s 3 3 3 3 3 3 • y - 3 � y U _v y V y O •�-• N N . E E E o E c U E E c ° ¢ J ¢$ ¢ S d v ¢° ¢ v `v UU Li_) u V s UU u :)U UQ � v o � A i Jo, m A v 3 y a E E y y = aC am aXr n m nJ = am ,LSOd331 W cCC4 •c 0 04 y 3WVN(IVON ¢: >• S S T, a �+ Y 2 3 3 y r a a r r r a a a N3NWnN UVON 0 0 M o M c o 0 o 7 c o 0 rn rn rn a c 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 N39W IN n1NfIOJ C O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O N38WnN 3NiiJ.JiI N.LS 3VN343J n vi v o0o a m x a v � 00 00 x x r 27 28 �y 3.3 C U' SNaVW3a Boa =qF m ti tlq u:3:� (Od) 313'IOSHO ATIVNOIIJNO.d WS) 1N313td30 A'1'1vHO1JOH.L, ONIIVH AJNJQl:L4O N011J3dSNt SV'1 7 N 7 C o � 7 z z Q3HI(Ia3H 1N3Wd1003 .p ci 0 O G d z z z z z z z z 9N11VH 9N11vH3d0 O O O O C O O O z z z z z z z z OO O O F O O O ON11VH AHO.LN3ANi O 43.LSOd GVO'l O z U O O O O O z Z z Z z Z z NOId.J3dSN1 H3IVAM( NO O O O O O O O O Z- z z z z z z z 9vJ111H3 HOODS O o O o O oo O z z z z z z z z S3HO1V3d'1VIJ3d. O O O O O O z z IVJ1.1.roJ 3HO.LJVHd O O O aj O O O O z z z z z z z 1"IIOH HV3A L 3 c o K V a 3 N a O y E O U �, Op p V V �.- O V d` O V 'c. p 0 V G: ll 0 U '= O O J :r, O 0 V w A m O O O y y y y V U U _ v N N C N >G V U U J U U U C7, cC tb ;n C (133d) H.L9N3'1 v 1SOdT119V ry cy ri ,•i o` a ci 3WVNOVOH iU C-) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cl 0 H3ewnNavoH M r 7 R 7 C rn rn rn rn rn Y N � U 3WVN U a ( mG v U g o x 3v v 713SWIlN A1Nn033 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H3HWON 3HOIJOH.LS'IVH3O3d n 00 vmi 00 m 00 n 00 N OC n 00 28 APPENDIX B 29 -VSDOT - Bridges and Structures - Ratings Alft T Washington state Doped - me i o/ Transportation Bridge Ratings The safety of bridge structures in Washington State is ensured through a meticulous inspection system. All public bridge owners, such as WSDOT, Counties and Cities, follow the same bridge inspection procedures. The condition rating of all bridge decks, superstructures and substructures and other elements based on these inspections. USDOT's Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires all public bridge owners (state, city, and county ) to inspect and their bridges and report information including bridge condition ratings as part of their requirements in the National Bridge Inventory Standards (NBIS). Important aspects of the NBIS were: 1. All states must perform periodic inspections of bridges greater than 20 feet in span on at least a biennial basis. Page 1 of 2 SR6 Wiliapa River bridge SR20 Deception Pass Bridge 2. Data collection was standardized and must be reported to FHWA. 3. Qualifications for inspection personnel were defined. 4. Training programs were developed and implemented. 5. The Bridge Replacement Program (BRP) was established to provide funding for bridge replacement on the system. Structurally Deficient Structurally deficient means that a bridge requires repair or replacement of a certain component. This may include cracked or spalled concrete, the bridge deck, the support structure, or the entire bridge itself. If the condition is such that it no longer is able to carry its intended traffic loads it may be weight restricted. Being structurally deficient does not imply that the bridge is in danger of collapse or unsafe to the traveling public. If a bridge is open then it is considered safe. A bridge is classified as "Structurally Deficient" when bridge inspectors give either the superstructure, deck, and/or substructure a rating of four or less on a scale of zero to nine. WSDOT's poor condition category uses the same data, criteria, and rating scale. http://www.wsdot.wa.govBridge/Reporting/BridgeRatings.htm 8/14/2015 31 WSDOT - Bridges and Structures - Ratings WSDOT has 137 state owned bridges that are classified as structurally deficient as of Jan. 2015. A list of these bridges is available in pdf and web page and map format. Functionally Obsolete Functional obsolescence is assessed by comparing the existing design of each bridge to current standards. A bridge can be categorized functionally obsolete a number of ways including: substandard bridge widths, low vertical clearance that can lead to repeated damage from over height trucks, load -carrying capacity, or flood potential. There are 866 WSDOT bridges that are rated "Functionally Obsolete" Good, Fair, Poor Condition Rating Page 2 of Interstate 82 Columbia River bridge near Umatilla Good: A range from no problems to some minor deterioration of structural elements. Fair: All primary structural elements are sound but may have deficiencies such as minor section loss, deterioration, cracking, spalling, or scour. Poor: Advanced deficiencies such as section loss, deterioration, cracking, spalling, scour, or seriously affected primary structural components. Bridges rated in poor condition may be posted with truck weight restrictions. A summary of the WSDOT bridge network conditions is available in the 2014 Bridge Annual Report in the Gray notebook. Copyright WSDOT © 2015 http://www.wsdot.wa.govBridge/Reporting/13ridgeRatings.htm 8/14/2015 32 Definitions What are "general condition ratings?" According to the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS), condition ratings are used to describe an existing bridge or culvert compared with its condition if it were new. The ratings are based on the materials, physical condition of the deck (riding surface), the superstructure (supports immediately beneath the driving surface) and the substructures (foundation and supporting posts and piers). General condition ratings range from 0 (failed condition) to 9 (excellent). For detailed definitions, click here. Which bridges are included in the NBI system? NBI structures are bridges or culverts that carry vehicular traffic and have an opening longer than 20 feet measured along the center of the roadway. What bridges are not considered part of the NBI system? Non-NBI structures include bridges or culverts that carry vehicular traffic and are equal to or less than 20 feet measured along the center of the roadway. VDOT exceeds the NBI standards by inspecting and documenting in our inventory all bridges regardless of their length and all culverts having an opening greater than 36 square feet. What is a "structurally deficient" bridge? Bridges are considered structurally deficient if they have been restricted to light vehicles, closed to traffic or require rehabilitation. Structurally deficient means there are elements of the bridge that need to be monitored and/or repaired. The fact that a bridge is "structurally deficient" does not imply that it is likely to collapse or that it is unsafe. It means the bridge must be monitored, inspected and maintained. How is "structural deficiency" determined? The condition of different parts of a bridge is rated on a scale of 0 to 9 (with 9 being "excellent" and zero being "failed"). A structurally deficient bridge is one for which the deck (riding surface), the superstructure (supports immediately beneath the driving surface) or the substructure (foundation and supporting posts and piers) are rated in condition 4 or less. What makes a bridge structurally deficient, and are structural deficient bridges unsafe? The fact that a bridge is "structurally deficient" does not imply that it is likely to collapse or that it is unsafe. A "deficient" bridge is one with some maintenance concerns that do not pose a safety risk. A "deficient" bridge typically requires maintenance and repair and eventual rehabilitation or replacement to address deficiencies. To remain open to traffic, structurally deficient bridges are often posted with reduced weight limits that restrict the gross weight of vehicles using the bridges. If unsafe conditions are identified during a physical inspection, the structure must be closed. What is a "functionally obsolete" bridge? A functionally obsolete bridge is one that was built to standards that are not used today. These bridges are not automatically rated as structurally deficient, nor are they inherently unsafe. Functionally obsolete bridges are those that do not have adequate lane widths, shoulder widths, or vertical clearances to serve current traffic demand, or those that may be occasionally flooded. A functionally obsolete bridge is similar to an older house. A house built in 1950 might be perfectly acceptable to live in, but it does not meet all of today's building codes. Yet, when it comes time to consider upgrading that house or making improvements, the owner must look at ways to bring the structure up to current standards. What is a "fracture -critical" bridge? A fracture -critical bridge is one that does not contain redundant supporting elements. This means that if those key supports fail, the bridge would be in danger of collapse. This does not mean the bridge is inherently unsafe, only that there is a lack of redundancy in its design. What is a bridge's "sufficiency rating?" Sufficiency ratings were developed by the Federal Highway Administration to serve as a prioritization tool to allocate funds. The rating varies from 0 percent (poor) to 100 percent (very good). The formula considers structural adequacy, whether the bridge is functionally obsolete and level of service provided to the public. History of Federal Bridge Inspection Program The federal bridge inspection program regulations were developed as a result of the Federal -Aid Highway Act of 1968 following the collapse of the Silver Bridge in Point Pleasant, West Virginia. The United States Secretary of Transportation established the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) to locate and evaluate existing bridge deficiencies to ensure the safety of the traveling public. The 1968 Federal -Aid Highway Act directed the states to maintain an inventory of federal -aid highway system bridges. This was amended over time to establish criteria for NBIS bridges including: • Defining the NBIS to bridges to those on the federal -aid highway system • Requiring inspections of bridges longer than 20 feet on all public roads • Expanding bridge inspection programs to include special inspection procedures for fracture - critical members and underwater inspection 35 r rftvem m � M, Code Description N NOT APPLICABLE 9 EXCELLENT CONDITION 8 VERY GOOD CONDITION No problems noted. 7 GOOD CONDITION Some minor problems. 6 SATISFACTORY CONDITION Structural elements show some minor deterioration. 5 FAIR CONDITION All primary structural elements are sound but may have some minor section loss (due to corrosion), cracking, spalling (deterioration of concrete surface) or scour (erosion of soil) 4 POOR CONDITION Advanced section loss, deterioration, spalling or scour. 3 SERIOUS CONDITION Loss of section, deterioration, spalling or scour have seriously affected primary structural components. Local failures are possible. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present. 2 CRITICAL CONDITION Advanced deterioration of primary structural elements. Fatigue cracks in steel or shear cracks in concrete may be present or scour may have removed substructure support. Unless closely monitored it may be necessary to close the bridge until corrective action is taken. "IMMINENT" FAILURE CONDITION Major deterioration or section loss present in critical structural components or obvious vertical or horizontal movement affecting structure stability. Bridge is closed to traffic but corrective action may put back in light service. 0 FAILED CONDITION Out of service - beyond corrective action. 37 Jefferson County Public Works ROAD WA Y PRIORITY RA TING PROGRAM AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATIONIMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ROADWAY PRIORITY RATING PROGRAM The Roadway Priority Rating Program is intended to address the requirements in Chapter 136-14 WAC, Standards of Good Practice — Priority Programming. The full Roadway Priority Rating process, as described below, is conducted on odd -numbered years and completed no later than June I". Staffs technical evaluations are ongoing and updated at least annually in preparation for each year's Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (6 -yr TIP). There are three steps in the Roadway Priority Rating Program. They are: 1. Technical Evaluations and Scoring: In this first step, using data and professional judgment, staff evaluates each road segment for arterials, collectors, and selected local access roads based on 19 technical criteria. Each criterion has a potential value of ten points. 190 points is the highest possible score. The criteria and how point values are determined are described on the next page under RATING CRITERIA. 2. Applying Policy Direction: The next step in developing the priority program is applying policy direction from the Board of County Commissioners. To do this a weighting factor procedure was developed. Unlike the evaluations staff conducts, these weighting factors are not intended to be technically objective factors but are expressions of official public policy direction of the Board. The weighting factor procedure is as follows: a. Each Commissioner reviews the 19 criteria and determines a weighting factor between 0.0 and 1.0 for each criterion. b. Each technical score for each criterion is multiplied by the average of the Board's weighting factor. While one criterion will most likely not cause a segment to be ranked high or low, it is anticipated that the cumulative effect will reflect the policy direction of the Board. 3. Ranking: All segments are then sorted by total scores which creates a priority ranking for each segment. This ranked list of segments is called the Priority Array. The Priority Array is one of the primary tools used in developing projects to be included in the annual Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program. April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program 39 RATING CRITERIA: Each criterion shall be eligible for a maximum of ten points. Ten represents the highest, greatest or most significant measure. Professional judgment shall be applied to quantify between guideline values as represented below. These criteria are not listed in order of significance. Criteria 1. NON -MOTORIZED NEEDS: 0 points Segment has no known non -motorized needs. (bike, pedestrian, equestrian, disability, etc.) OR the existing non -motorized facilities are sufficient for the demand. 5 points Segment has been recognized use by non -motorized users. 10 points Segment is on adopted trail or non -motorized route maps and is used regularly by non -motorized users but tacks sufficient non -motorized facilities for the demand. Criteria 2. ACCIDENT HISTORY: 0 points Segment has no known, inventoried or obvious traffic defects, hazards or collision statistics. 5 points Segment has known hazards, defects or collision statistics but each is of low magnitude or statistical incidence. 10 points Segment has significant hazard potential, defects and/or collisions. Has experienced one or more fatalities within past five years. Criteria 3. PRESENT OR FUTURE CAPACITY (LOS): 0 points Segment has no capacity problems. Experiences no congestion -related symptoms, no intersection delays. 5 points Segment occasionally experiences congestion during peak hours, seasonal busy peaks or intersection delays or segment is LOS or concurrency critical to future land use which as not yet developed. 10 points Segment presently has concurrency problems; LOS D or worse. Or; segment has LOS C and land use zoning and projections forecast LOS D within five (5) years without segment. Criteria 4. PUBLIC INTEREST: 0 points Segment has not been the subject of public interest. Public at large has not been requesting improved services or facilities at this location. 5 points Segment has occasionally generated public inquiries requesting improved service. May be a localized or special interest group rather than public at large. 10 points Segment is receiving public complaint and request on a regular basis. Requests are definitely public at large rather than special interest group. April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program 40 Criteria 5. SCHOOL PEDESTRIAN ROUTE: 0 points Segment is not identified by school districts as an authorized or desirable pedestrian route. OR the segment has sufficient pedestrian facilities. 5 points Segment is recognized as being used by school children or others to access school facilities although it is not an authorized pedestrian route. 10 points Segment is an authorized school pedestrian route sanctioned by the school transportation coordinator and does not have sufficient pedestrian facilities. Criteria 6. TRANSIT AND SCHOOL BUS ROUTES: 0 points Segment has no known bus routes with stops. 5 points Segment has stops but not many and low volume users. 10 points Segment is regular route with numerous stops and high volumes of users. Criteria 7. FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS: 0 points Segment has a federal functional class of local access. 5 points Segment has a federal functional class of minor collectors. 10 points Segment has a federal functional class of major collectors. Criteria 8. AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC: 0 points Segment has an average daily traffic count of less than 400 vehicles per day. 5 points Segment has an average daily traffic count greater than 400 vehicles per day and less than 1500 vehicles per day. 10 points Segment has an average daily traffic count greater than 1500 vehicles per day. Criteria 9. RECREATIONAL LAND USE: 0 points Segment has no known or planned public recreational land. 5 points Segment has planned public recreational land use. 10 points Segment has current public recreational land use (judgmental values between thresholds shall include active recreational land use vs. passive, numbers of public participants and seasonality). Criteria 10. COMMUNITY CENTER USE: 0 points Segment is not an arterial which directly accesses a community center. 5 points Segment is an arterial which does directly provide access to a community center. 10 points Segment directly accesses a community center and has been prioritized highly in the community centers transportation input to Jefferson County. April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program 41 Criteria 11. GEOMETRIC CONSISTENCY WITH STANDARDS: 0 points Segment is geometrically consistent with vertical and horizontal standards of lane width, sight distance and shoulder width and has no operational problems at this time. 5 points Segment is not geometrically consistent with one or more vertical or horizontal standards of lane width, sight distance and shoulder width and may have slight operational problems. 10 points Segment is not consistent with geometric standards at all and has significant operational problems. Criteria 12. PAVEMENT RATING (ROADWAY CONDITION) Staff evaluates each segment every two years to establish an objective Pavement Rating based on the surface condition of the road. 0 points If pavement rating for the segment is greater than 85. 5 points If pavement rating for the segment is between 84 and 51. 10 points If pavement rating for the segment 50 or below. Criteria 13. SERVICEABILITY: (each quality of maintenance shall be rated for a maximum of 2.5 points) 0 points Segment has adequate ride quality with reasonably smooth surface texture, few if any dips or surface irregularities. 0 points Segment has good structural characteristics without linear or lateral cracking of significance. Also has no depressions, pot holes, slumps or slips. 0 points Segment has good drainage with adequate sized and maintained ditches, cross drains and get a way. Segment docs not flood with normal annual rain fall. 0 points Segment has good geometry with transverse slope of normal ratio, good radii of curvature and good vertical sight distance. 2.5 points Segment has less than adequate ride quality, would be a good candidate for serious pre -level and resurfacing. 2.5 points Segment has structural defects exhibited by linear and/or lateral cracking, surface subsidence, slips, slumps or depressions, with pot holes and for serious pre -level and resurfacing if not being considered for a capital segment. 2.5 points Segment has inadequate drainage with symptoms of surface failure and frost heaving. Segment floods too frequently from seasonal rains and water ponds along road. 2.5 points Segment has poor general geometry with flat pavement or excessive crown slope, poor vertical or horizontal sight distance. Criteria 14. COMMUNITY PLANNING/COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE CONSISTENCY: 0 points Segment is not necessary to support future land use by permitted zoning. Segment has never been included in a community plan nor brought to the attention of Jefferson County by a formal community planning committee. April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program 42 5 points Segment may be important for future development as zoned and authorized. Segment has been mentioned during community planning processes, but is not on their formal project list. 10 points Segment has known land use of immanent nature which is consistent with zoning and approved land use. Segment is on the formal priority list of a community plan. Criteria 15. ROADSIDE SAFETY: 0 points Segment has no known roadside safety defects. Meets all standards for clear zones, guardrail or other safety hazards. 5 points 50 % of the segment does not meet current standards for clear zones, guardrail, or other safety hazards. 10 points The entire segment does not meet current standards for clear zones, guardrails or other safety hazards. Criteria 16. GRANT AVAILABILITY: 0 points Segment has not had applications filed for grants nor is there any knowledge of potential grant eligibility. 5 points Segment may be eligible but has not been applied for nor is there positive inference from grant agencies of eligibility. 10 points Segment is eligible for grants, has application filed to grant agencies and has indication of grant availability. Criteria 17. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT max 10 points Segment which, if not improved, will have a measurable and obvious impact on economic development or other rational measures of public necessity. Criteria 18. FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS max 10 points This criteria addresses WDFW inventoried and prioritized fish passage barriers on county roads. Points are assigned using the following matrix. PI 0 to 3.00 PI 3.01 to 10.00 Pl > 10.00 B/C 0.0 to 1.0 0 0 0 B/C 1.01 to 3.0 2 5 8 B/C > 3.0 5 8 10 PI = Priority Index value; BIC = Benefit/cost ratio, all from WDFW priority array Criteria 19. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT max 10 points This criterion evaluates road related surface water management segments. Points are assigned by dividing the segment score developed using the Jefferson County Surface Water Segment Ranking form by 10 and rounding the result to the nearest whole number. April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program 43 DEVELOPMENT OF THE SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) As required by RCW 36.81.121 Jefferson County annually prepares a six-year comprehensive transportation program. The program is adopted by resolution by the Board of County Commissioners any time before adoption of the annual budget. The TIP includes all anticipated road and bridge construction projects, non -motorized transportation projects and any other specified capital outlays for the following six-year period. There are several steps in preparing the TIP. 1. Needs Identification: The first step in the process is compiling a comprehensive list of potential improvements using many different sources. These sources consist of the Priority Array, Bridge Condition Report, traffic and crash data, culvert inventory, input from various county departments, including engineering and road maintenance staff, results of special transportation studies, community plan recommendations, input from other governments, County residents and businesses. 2. Screening: The next step is screening this list of proposed projects to eliminate proposals that are: (1) not feasible; (2) maintenance projects rather than capital improvements; (3) inappropriate because they conflict with county policies as set by the Board of County Commissioners or are not the best solution to a specific problem, or are responsibilities of other governments; or (4) are listed only because they meet the criteria of being high volume collectors eligible for funding and do not have any specific need or warrants for improvement. Funding: The reduced list is reviewed to determine available funding sources. The TIP is not a "wish list". It is based on a realistic assessment of available local funds and grant sources. Consequently, there may be many desirable projects where no funding source has been identified and those projects are not included in the TIP. 4. CateEorization: The remaining projects are then categorized by type. Road and Transportation projects can logically be categorized into several groups which reflect common needs, traits or services. Projects within categories are unique to each other and not easily rated against projects in other categories for purposes of determining relative priority. For that reason it is recommended projects be rated internally, by category, against each other. Rated and categorized projects can then be considered by the Board when making annual road fund distribution decisions by category. Transportation Improvement Program Project categories can include: Emergency Repair & Mitigation: Projects in this category include all emergency repairs and all required mitigation projects for emergency repairs. Road & Intersection Improvements: Projects in this category comprise all road and intersection improvements that are not emergency projects. Examples include road widening, pavement preservation, safety improvements (sight distance, guardrail, hazard mitigation) and road realignments. April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program 44 Culvert & Bridge Replacement/Repair: Projects in this category include all culvert and bridge replacement or repairs that are not included in Emergency Repairs & Mitigation. Non -motorized Transportation: Projects in this category include all non -motorized transportation facilities, which are primarily bicycle, pedestrian, and ADA accessible routes but may include equestrian needs where appropriate. Planning & Countywide Programs: Planning projects are those where there is potential need or projects for which there is no funding at present, but which may be needed in the future and will receive funding at that time. This category can include planning or engineering studies to determine appropriate future capital projects. Countywide Programs includes projects that cover at least a large portion of the county where a site-specific location is inappropriate. Other: This category is for all other projects which do not fit into the above categories. These may be projects needed to create economic stimulus in Jefferson County or to serve significant public facilities being constructed in Jefferson County. These projects are usually the product of policy development by the Board of County Commissioners. 5. Policy: The Board of County Commissioners has the opportunity to direct policy at least twice in the process of developing the TIP. The first time is during the Roadway Priority Rating Program process when the Board determines weighting factors for each criterion. This is discussed on page one. The second time is during the review and adoption of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). During the development of the TIP staff presents the Board with a list of site-specific projects along with each project's secured or proposed funding sources. Staff also presents information breaking down the proposed program expenditures by project category. Prior to adoption of the TIP the Board can direct staff to add, change, or remove projects. See attached "Exhibit A" for further information. 6. Public Hearing and Adoption: The final step in the process is an official public hearing. Staff presents the project list, funding sources, county road fund projections and other information during an open public hearing. This is an opportunity for the public to review and comment on the proposed list of projects and it is opportunity for the Board to provide staff with additional policy guidance. Upon direction of the Board, staff prepares a resolution for the adoption of the TIP. 7. Annual Construction Program: The first year of the Six -Year TIP is brought forward to the Annual Construction Program and is adopted as part of that year's budget. April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program 45 Exhibit "A" Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (6 -Yr. TIP), Annual Road Program and Annual Construction Report CLIFF NOTES Six -Year Tran rportatzon Improvement Program (6 -Yr. UP) Revised Code of Washington (,RCWI State law obligates the legislative authority of each county to adopt on an annual basis a six-year transportation improvement program (6 -Yr. TIP). RCW 36.81.121. The purpose of the law is "to assure that each county shall perpetually have available advanced plans looking to the future for not less than six years as a guide in carrying out a coordinated transportation program" RCW 36.81.121(1). The 6 -Yr. TIP shall:l a. Be adopted by the county legislative authority at any time before adoption of the budget and after one or more public hearings b. Be consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan. c. Include proposed road and bridge construction work and other transportation facilities deemed appropriate. d. Include any new or enhanced bicycle or pedestrian facilities identified pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070(6) or other applicable changes that promote non -motorized transit. e. Be filed with the County Road Administration Board (CRAB) and with the Secretary of Transportation within 30 days of adoption. f. Contain information as to how a county will expend its moneys, including funds made available pursuant to Chapter 47.30 RC_`1'', for non -motorized transportation purposes. g. Specifically set forth those projects and programs of regional significance for inclusion in the transportation improvement program within that region. With respect to amending the TIP, "The program may at any time be revised by a majority of the legislative authority but only after a public hearing thereon." RCW 36.81.121(1). Washington Administrative Code (WAC Title 136 WAC addresses CRAB. The procedures for preparation of 6 -Yr. TIPS are detailed in Chanter 136-1 WAC. The TIP includes all anticipated road and bridge construction projects, paths and trails projects, and any other specified capital outlays for the following six-year period. The TIP should be based on a realistic assessment of available funding during the program period. WAC 136-15-010. WAC 136-15-050 requires that the adoption resolution for a 6 -Yr. TIP include reference to availability of: a. A "priority array" as required by WAC 136-14-050. b. An engineer's bridge condition report as required by WAC 136-20-060. c. The multiyear financing plan of the transportation element of the county's comprehensive plan as required by Chapter 36.70A RCW the Growth Management Act (GMA). This Est does not include items in RCW 36.81.121 that are not applicable to Jefferson County. The same approach is used when excerpting from other information sources throughout the "cliff notes." April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program Ie Priority Programming "Priority programming" is the development and application of techniques designed to rank any array of potential projects in order of importance to serve as a guide in assisting a county legislative authority in the formulation of road programs and distribution of limited resources. WAC 136-14-010. The "standards of good practice" for priority programming procedures are detailed in Chapter 136-14 WAC. The procedures include provisions pertaining to application, process, items for consideration, certification, and inventory records. Priority programming is required for the arterial road system of each county and is recommended, but not required, for the local access road system. WAC 136-14-020. Annual Road Program As provided for in R('AV'36.81.1i30tand detailed in Chapter 136-16 WAC, the County Engineer submits a recommended annual road program (a.k.a., "annual construction program" or simply "annual program' to the county legislative authority on or before the first Monday of each October. The annual program includes recommendations for all road and bridge construction projects and all road equipment purchases for the ensuing year. The county legislative authority considers the recommended program, makes any revisions deemed necessary, and adopts a final annual program at any time prior to adoption of the budget. WAC 136-16-QND 0. and -018. At any time prior to April 1 of the year following the annual program year, the County Engineer submits an annual construction report to CRAB. The report shows actual expenditures for all construction work including administration and engineering done during the previous budget year. WAC 136-16-050. Timing of Actions and Submittals • At any time prior to April 1 of each year, submit annual construction report for previous year to CRAB. WAC_136,1.6-050. • Update road inventory system (including existing road conditions) by May 1 of each year (to reflect work done and improvements made during the previous year according to the requirements of Chapter 130- 60 W 36y0-W A . WAC 13644-060. • Update priority array by June 1 of each odd -numbered year. WAC 136-14-040. • County legislative authority adopts 6 -Yr. TIP at any time after holding a public hearing and before adoption of the annual budget. RCW 36.81.121(1) and WAC 136-15-050. • Within 30 days of adoption, the County submits the 6 -Yr. TIP to CRAB and the Secretary of Transportation. RCW36.8'1.121!(1) and WAC 136-15-050. • County Engineer submits recommended annual road program to county legislative authority on or before the first Monday in October. RCW 36.81.130. • At any time before adoption of the budget, the county legislative authority adopts the annual road program. WAC 136-16-018. • County forwards the adopted annual road program to CRAB within 30 days of adoption and not later than December 31 of each year. WAC 136-16--040. [End] April 2015 Roadway Priority Rating Program 47 RCW 36.70A.070: Comprehensive plans—Mandatory elements. 36.70A.060 << 36.70A.070 » 36.70A.080 RCW 36.70A.070 Comprehensive plans—Mandatory elements. *** CHANGE IN 2015 *** (SEE 5923.SL) *** Page 1 of 5 The comprehensive plan of a county or city that is required or chooses to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 shall consist of a map or maps, and descriptive text covering objectives, principles, and standards used to develop the comprehensive plan. The plan shall be an internally consistent document and all elements shall be consistent with the future land use map. A comprehensive plan shall be adopted and amended with public participation as provided in RCW 36.70A.140. Each comprehensive plan shall include a plan, scheme, or design for each of the following: (1) A land use element designating the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of land, where appropriate, for agriculture, timber production, housing, commerce, industry, recreation, open spaces, general aviation airports, public utilities, public facilities, and other land uses. The land use element shall include population densities, building intensities, and estimates of future population growth. The land use element shall provide for protection of the quality and quantity of groundwater used for public water supplies. Wherever possible, the land use element should consider utilizing urban planning approaches that promote physical activity. Where applicable, the land use element shall review drainage, flooding, and storm water run-off in the area and nearby jurisdictions and provide guidance for corrective actions to mitigate or cleanse those discharges that pollute waters of the state, including Puget Sound or waters entering Puget Sound. (2) A housing element ensuring the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods that: (a) Includes an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs that identifies the number of housing units necessary to manage projected growth; (b) includes a statement of goals, policies, objectives, and mandatory provisions for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing, including single-family residences; (c) identifies sufficient land for housing, including, but not limited to, government -assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured housing, multifamily housing, and group homes and foster care facilities; and (d) makes adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community. (3) A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; (b) a forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities; (c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; (d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and (e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. Park and recreation facilities shall be included in the capital facilities plan element. (4) A utilities element consisting of the general location, proposed location, and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities, including, but not limited to, electrical lines, telecommunication lines, and natural gas lines. (5) Rural element. Counties shall include a rural element including lands that are not designated for urban growth, agriculture, forest, or mineral resources. The following provisions shall apply to the rural element: (a) Growth management act goals and local circumstances. Because circumstances vary from county to county, in establishing patterns of rural densities and uses, a county may consider local http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70A.070 9/2/2015 49 RCW 36.70A.070: Comprehensive plans—Mandatory elements. Page 2 of 5 circumstances, but shall develop a written record explaining how the rural element harmonizes the planning goals in RCW 36.70A.020 and meets the requirements of this chapter. (b) Rural development. The rural element shall permit rural development, forestry, and agriculture in rural areas. The rural element shall provide for a variety of rural densities, uses, essential public facilities, and rural governmental services needed to serve the permitted densities and uses. To achieve a variety of rural densities and uses, counties may provide for clustering, density transfer, design guidelines, conservation easements, and other innovative techniques that will accommodate appropriate rural densities and uses that are not characterized by urban growth and that are consistent with rural character. (c) Measures governing rural development. The rural element shall include measures that apply to rural development and protect the rural character of the area, as established by the county, by: (i) Containing or otherwise controlling rural development; (ii) Assuring visual compatibility of rural development with the surrounding rural area; (iii) Reducing the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development in the rural area; (iv) Protecting critical areas, as provided in RCW 36.70A.060, and surface water and groundwater resources; and (v) Protecting against conflicts with the use of agricultural, forest, and mineral resource lands designated under RCW 36.70A.170. (d) Limited areas of more intensive rural development. Subject to the requirements of this subsection and except as otherwise specifically provided in this subsection (5)(d), the rural element may allow for limited areas of more intensive rural development, including necessary public facilities and public services to serve the limited area as follows: (i) Rural development consisting of the infill, development, or redevelopment of existing commercial, industrial, residential, or mixed-use areas, whether characterized as shoreline development, villages, hamlets, rural activity centers, or crossroads developments. (A) A commercial, industrial, residential, shoreline, or mixed-use area shall be subject to the requirements of (d)(iv) of this subsection, but shall not be subject to the requirements of (c)(ii) and (iii) of this subsection. (B) Any development or redevelopment other than an industrial area or an industrial use within a mixed-use area or an industrial area under this subsection (5)(d)(i) must be principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural population. (C) Any development or redevelopment in terms of building size, scale, use, or intensity shall be consistent with the character of the existing areas. Development and redevelopment may include changes in use from vacant land or a previously existing use so long as the new use conforms to the requirements of this subsection (5); (ii) The intensification of development on lots containing, or new development of, small-scale recreational or tourist uses, including commercial facilities to serve those recreational or tourist uses, that rely on a rural location and setting, but that do not include new residential development. A small-scale recreation or tourist use is not required to be principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural population. Public services and public facilities shall be limited to those necessary to serve the recreation or tourist use and shall be provided in a manner that does not permit low-density sprawl; (iii) The intensification of development on lots containing isolated nonresidential uses or new development of isolated cottage industries and isolated small-scale businesses that are not principally designed to serve the existing and projected rural population and nonresidential uses, but do provide job opportunities for rural residents. Rural counties may allow the expansion of small-scale businesses as long as those small-scale businesses conform with the rural character of the area as defined by the local government according to RCW 36.70A.030(15). Rural counties may also allow new small-scale businesses to utilize a site previously occupied by an existing business as long as the new small-scale business conforms to the rural character of the area as defined by http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70A.070 9/2/2015 50 RCW 36.70A.070: Comprehensive plans—Mandatory elements. Page 3 of 5 the local government according to RCW 36.70A.030(15). Public services and public facilities shall be limited to those necessary to serve the isolated nonresidential use and shall be provided in a manner that does not permit low-density sprawl; (iv) A county shall adopt measures to minimize and contain the existing areas or uses of more intensive rural development, as appropriate, authorized under this subsection. Lands included in such existing areas or uses shall not extend beyond the logical outer boundary of the existing area or use, thereby allowing a new pattern of low-density sprawl. Existing areas are those that are clearly identifiable and contained and where there is a logical boundary delineated predominately by the built environment, but that may also include undeveloped lands if limited as provided in this subsection. The county shall establish the logical outer boundary of an area of more intensive rural development. In establishing the logical outer boundary, the county shall address (A) the need to preserve the character of existing natural neighborhoods and communities, (B) physical boundaries, such as bodies of water, streets and highways, and land forms and contours, (C) the prevention of abnormally irregular boundaries, and (D) the ability to provide public facilities and public services in a manner that does not permit low-density sprawl; (v) For purposes of (d) of this subsection, an existing area or existing use is one that was in existence: (A) On July 1, 1990, in a county that was initially required to plan under all of the provisions of this chapter; (B) On the date the county adopted a resolution under RCW 36.70A.040(2), in a county that is planning under all of the provisions of this chapter under RCW 36.70A.040(2); or (C) On the date the office of financial management certifies the county's population as provided in RCW 36.70A.040(5), in a county that is planning under all of the provisions of this chapter pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040(5). (e) Exception. This subsection shall not be interpreted to permit in the rural area a major industrial development or a master planned resort unless otherwise specifically permitted under RCW 36.70A.360 and 36.70A365. (6) A transportation element that implements, and is consistent with, the land use element. (a) The transportation element shall include the following subelements: (i) Land use assumptions used in estimating travel; (ii) Estimated traffic impacts to state-owned transportation facilities resulting from land use assumptions to assist the department of transportation in monitoring the performance of state facilities, to plan improvements for the facilities, and to assess the impact of land -use decisions on state-owned transportation facilities; (iii) Facilities and services needs, including: (A) An inventory of air, water, and ground transportation facilities and services, including transit alignments and general aviation airport facilities, to define existing capital facilities and travel levels as a basis for future planning. This inventory must include state-owned transportation facilities within the city or county's jurisdictional boundaries; (B) Level of service standards for all locally owned arterials and transit routes to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the system. These standards should be regionally coordinated; (C) For state-owned transportation facilities, level of service standards for highways, as prescribed in chapters 47.06 and 47.80 RCW, to gauge the performance of the system. The purposes of reflecting level of service standards for state highways in the local comprehensive plan are to monitor the performance of the system, to evaluate improvement strategies, and to facilitate coordination between the county's or city's six-year street, road, or transit program and the office of financial management's ten-year investment program. The concurrency requirements of (b) of this subsection do not apply to transportation facilities and services of statewide significance except for counties consisting of islands whose only connection to the mainland are state highways or ferry routes. In these island counties, state highways and ferry route capacity must be a factor in meeting the concurrency requirements in (b) of this subsection; http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70A.070 9/2/2015 51 RCW 36.70A.070: Comprehensive plans—Mandatory elements. Page 4 of 5 (D) Specific actions and requirements for bringing into compliance locally owned transportation facilities or services that are below an established level of service standard; (E) Forecasts of traffic for at least ten years based on the adopted land. use plan to provide information on the location, timing, and capacity needs of future growth; (F) Identification of state and local system needs to meet current and future demands. Identified needs on state-owned transportation facilities must be consistent with the statewide multimodal transportation plan required under chapter 47.06 RCW; (iv) Finance, including: (A) An analysis of funding capability to judge needs against probable funding resources; (B) A multiyear financing plan based on the needs identified in the comprehensive plan, the appropriate parts of which shall serve as the basis for the six-year street, road, or transit program required by RCW 35.77.010 for cities, RCW 36.81.121 for counties, and RCW 35.58.2795 for public transportation systems. The multiyear financing plan should be coordinated with the ten-year investment program developed by the office of financial management as required by RCW 47.05.030; (C) If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs, a discussion of how additional funding will be raised, or how land use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that level of service standards will be met; (v) Intergovernmental coordination efforts, including an assessment of the impacts of the transportation plan and land use assumptions on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions; (vi) Demand -management strategies; (vii) Pedestrian and bicycle component to include collaborative efforts to identify and designate planned improvements for pedestrian and bicycle facilities and corridors that address and encourage enhanced community access and promote healthy lifestyles. (b) After adoption of the comprehensive plan by jurisdictions required to plan or who choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040, local jurisdictions must adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the development causes the level of service on a locally owned transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development. These strategies may include increased public transportation service, ride sharing programs, demand management, and other transportation systems management strategies. For the purposes of this subsection (6), "concurrent with the development" means that improvements or strategies are in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years. (c) The transportation element described in this subsection (6), the six-year plans required by RCW 35.77.010 for cities, RCW 36.81.121 for counties, and RCW 35.58.2795 for public transportation systems, and the ten-year investment program required by RCW 47.05.030 for the state, must be consistent. (7) An economic development element establishing local goals, policies, objectives, and provisions for economic growth and vitality and a high quality of life. The element shall include: (a) A summary of the local economy such as population, employment, payroll, sectors, businesses, sales, and other information as appropriate; (b) a summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the local economy defined as the commercial and industrial sectors and supporting factors such as land use, transportation, utilities, education, workforce, housing, and natural/cultural resources; and (c) an identification of policies, programs, and projects to foster economic growth and development and to address future needs. A city that has chosen to be a residential community is exempt from the economic development element requirement of this subsection. (8) A park and recreation element that implements, and is consistent with, the capital facilities plan element as it relates to park and recreation facilities. The element shall include: (a) Estimates of park and recreation demand for at least a ten-year period; (b) an evaluation of facilities and http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70A.070 9/2/2015 52 RCW 36.70A.070: Comprehensive plans—Mandatory elements. Page 5 of 5 service needs; and (c) an evaluation of intergovernmental coordination opportunities to provide regional approaches for meeting park and recreational demand. (9) it is the intent that new or amended elements required after January 1, 2002, be adopted concurrent with the scheduled update provided in RCW 36.70A.130. Requirements to incorporate any such new or amended elements shall be null and void until funds sufficient to cover applicable local government costs are appropriated and distributed by the state at least two years before local government must update comprehensive plans as required in RCW 36.70A.130. [2010 1 st sp.s. c 26 § 6; 2005 c 360 § 2; (2005 c 477 § 1 expired August 31, 2005); 2004 c 196 § 1; 2003 c 152 § 1. Prior: 2002 c 212 § 2; 2002 c 154 § 2; 1998 c 171 § 2; 1997 c 429 § 7; 1996 c 239 § 1; prior: 1995 c 400 § 3; 1995 c 377 § 1; 1990 1 st ex.s. c 17 § 7. [2010 1 st sp.s. c 26 § 6; 2005 c 360 § 2; (2005 c 477 § 1 expired August 31, 2005); 2004 c 196 § 1; 2003 c 152 § 1. Prior: 2002 c 212 § 2; 2002 c 154 § 2; 1998 c 171 § 2; 1997 c 429 § 7; 1996 c 239 § 1; prior: 1995 c 400 § 3; 1995 c 377 § 1; 1990 1 st ex.s. c 17 § 7.1 NOTES: Expiration date -2005 c 477 § 1: "Section 1 of this act expires August 31, 2005." [2005 c 477 § 3.] Effective date -2005 c 477: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect immediately [May 13, 20051." [2005 c 477 § 2.1 Findings—Intent-2005 c 360: "The legislature finds that regular physical activity is essential to maintaining good health and reducing the rates of chronic disease. The legislature further finds that providing opportunities for walking, biking, horseback riding, and other regular forms of exercise is best accomplished through collaboration between the private sector and local, state, and institutional policymakers. This collaboration can build communities where people find it easy and safe to be. physically active. It is the intent of the legislature to promote policy and planning efforts that increase access to inexpensive or free opportunities for regular exercise in all communities around the state." [2005 c 360 § 1.1 Prospective application -1997 c 429 §§ 1-21: See note following RCW 36.70A.3201. Severability -1997 c 429: See note following RCW 36.70A.3201. Construction—Application-1995 c 400: "A comprehensive plan adopted or amended before May 16, 1995, shall be considered to be in compliance with RCW 36.70A.070 or 36.70A.110, as in effect before their amendment by this act, if the comprehensive plan is in compliance with RCW 36.70A.070 and 36.70A.110 as amended by this act. This section shall not be construed to alter the relationship between a countywide planning policy and comprehensive plans as specified under RCW 36.70A.210. As to any appeal relating to compliance with RCW 36.70A.070 or 36.70A.110 pending before a growth management hearings board on May 16, 1995, the board may take up to an additional ninety days to resolve such appeal. By mutual agreement of all parties to the appeal, this additional ninety -day period may be extended." [1995 c 400 § 4.] Effective date -1995 c 400: See note following RCW 36.70A.040. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70A.070 9/2/2015 53 Chapter 36.81 RCW: ROADS AND BRIDGES — ESTABLISHMENT Chapter 36.81 RCW ROADS AND BRIDGES — ESTABLISHMENT Chapter listing I RCW Dispositions RCW Sections 36.81.010 Resolution of intention and necessity. 36.81.020 Freeholders' petition -- Bond. 36.81.030 Deeds and waivers. 36.81.040 Action on petition. 36.81.050 Engineer's report. 36.81.060 Survey map, field notes and profiles. 36.81.070 Notice of hearing on report. 36.81.080 Hearing -- Road established by resolution. 36.81.090 Expense of proceedings. 36.81.100 County road on or over dikes. 36.81.110 County road on or over dikes -- Condemnation for dike roads. Page 1 of 7 36.81.121 Perpetual advanced six-year plans for coordinated transportation program, expenditures -- Nonmotorized transportation -- Railroad right-of-way. 36.81.122 Provisions for bicycle paths, lanes, routes, roadways and improvements to be included in annual revision or extension of comprehensive road programs -- Exception. 36.81.130 Procedure specified for establishment, construction, and maintenance. 36.81.140 Columbia Basin project road systems -- Establishment by plat. Notes: Alternate date for budget hearing: RCW 36.40.071. Bicycles; pavement marking standards: RCW 47.36.280. State highways in urban areas, allocation of funds, planning, bond issue, etc.: Chapter 47.26 RCW. Urban arterials, planning, construction by cities and towns, transportation improvement board, funds, bond issue, etc.: Chapter 47.26 RCW. 36.81.010 Resolution of intention and necessity. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.81 &full=true 8/27/2015 55 Chapter 36.81 RCW: ROADS AND BRIDGES — ESTABLISHMENT Page 2 of 7 The board may by original resolution entered upon its minutes declare its intention to establish any county road in the county and declare that it is a public necessity and direct the county road engineer to report upon such project. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.010. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 19; RRS § 6450-19.] 36.81.020 Freeholders' petition — Bond. Ten or more freeholders of any county may petition the board for the establishment of a county road in the vicinity of their residence, setting forth and describing the general course and terminal points of the proposed improvement and stating that the same is a public necessity. The petition must be accompanied by a bond in the penal sum of three hundred dollars, payable to the county, executed by one or more persons as principal or principals, with two or more sufficient sureties, conditioned that the petitioners will pay into the county road fund of the county all costs and expenses incurred by the county in examining and surveying the proposed road and in the proceedings thereon in case the road is not established by reason of its being impracticable or there not being funds therefor. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.020. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 20, part; RRS § 6450-20, part.] 36.81.030 Deeds and waivers. The board may require the petitioners to secure deeds and waivers of damages for the right-of- way from the landowners, and, in such case, before an examination or survey by the county road engineer is ordered, such deeds and waivers shall be filed with the board. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.030. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 20, part; RRS § 6450-20, part.] 36.81.040 Action on petition. Upon the filing of the petition and bond and being satisfied that the petition has been signed by freeholders residing in the vicinity of the proposed road, the board shall direct the county road engineer to report upon the project. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.040. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 20, part; RRS § 6450-20, part.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.8 I &fullrtrue 8/27/2015 56 Chapter 36.81 RC W: ROADS AND BRIDGES — ESTABLISHMENT Page 3 of 7 36.81.050 Engineer's report. Whenever directed by the board to report upon the establishment of a county road the engineer shall make an examination of the road and if necessary a survey thereof. After examination, if the engineer deems the road to be impracticable, he or she shall so report to the board without making any survey, or he or she may examine or examine and survey any other practicable route which would serve such purpose. Whenever he or she considers any road as proposed or modified as practicable, he or she shall report thereon in writing to the board giving his or her opinion: (1) As to the necessity of the road; (2) as to the proper terminal points, general course and length thereof, (3) as to the proper width of right-of-way therefor; (4) as to the estimated cost of construction, including all necessary bridges, culverts, clearing, grubbing, drainage, and grading; (5) and such other facts as he or she may deem of importance to be considered by the board. [2009 c 549 § 4136; 1963 c 4 § 36.81.050. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 21, part; RRS § 6450-21, part.] 36.81.060 Survey map, field notes and profiles. The county road engineer shall file with his or her report a correctly prepared map of the road as surveyed, which map must show the tracts of land over which the road passes, with the names, if known, of the several owners thereof, and he or she shall file therewith his or her field notes and profiles of such survey. [2009 c 549 § 4137; 1963 c 4 § 36.81.060. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 21, part; RRS § 6450-21, part.] 36.81.070 Notice of hearing on report. The board shall fix a time and place for hearing the report of the engineer and cause notice thereof to be published once a week for two successive weeks in the county official newspaper and to be posted for at least twenty days at each termini of the proposed road. The notice shall set forth the termini of the road as set out in the resolution of the board, or the freeholders' petition, as the case may be, and shall state that all persons interested may appear and be heard at such hearing upon the report and recommendation of the engineer either to proceed or not to proceed with establishing the road. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.070. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 22, part; RRS § 6450-22, part.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.8 l &full rue 8/27/2015 57 Chapter 36.81 RCW: ROADS AND BRIDGES — ESTABLISHMENT Page 4 of 7 36.81.080 Hearing — Road established by resolution. On the day fixed for the hearing or any day to which the hearing has been adjourned, upon proof to its satisfaction made by affidavit of due publication and posting of the notice of hearing, the board shall consider the report and any and all evidence relative thereto, and if the board finds that the proposed county road is a public necessity and practicable it may establish it by proper resolution. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.080. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 22, part; RRS § 6450-22, part.] 36.81.090 Expense of proceedings. The cost and expense of the road, together with cost of proceedings thereon and of right-of-way and any quarries or other land acquired therefor, and the maintenance of the road shall be paid out of the county road fund. When the costs are assessed against the principals on the bond given in connection with a petition for the improvement, the county auditor shall file a cost bill with the county treasurer who shall proceed to collect it. [1963 c 4 §36.81.090 . Prior: (i) 1937 c 187 § 22, part; RRS § 6450-22, part. (ii) 1937 c 187 § 20, part; RRS § 6450-20, part.] 36.81.100 County road on or over dikes. The board of any county may establish county roads over, across or along any dike maintained by any diking, or diking and drainage, district in the manner provided by law for establishing county roads over or across private property, and shall determine and offer the amount of damages, if any, to the district and to the owners of the land upon which the dike is constructed and maintained: PROVIDED, That every such county road must be so constructed, maintained, and used as not to impair the use of the dike. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.100. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 15; RRS § 6450-15.] 36.81.110 County road on or over dikes — Condemnation for dike roads. If any offer of damages to any diking, or diking and drainage, district is not accepted in the manner provided by law, it shall be deemed rejected, and the board by order, shall direct condemnation proceedings to procure the right-of-way to be instituted in the superior court of the county by the prosecuting attorney in the manner provided by law for the taking of private property for public http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.81 &full=true 8/27/2015 58 Chapter 36.81 RCW: ROADS AND BRIDGES — ESTABLISHMENT Page 5 of 7 use, and to that end the board may institute and maintain in the name of the county such proceedings against the diking, or diking and drainage, district and the owners of any land on which the dike is located and that have failed to accept the offer of damages made by the board: PROVIDED, That no taxes or assessments shall be charged or collected by any diking, or diking and drainage, district for any county road as provided in this section. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.110. Prior: 1937 c 187 § 16; RRS § 6450-16.1 36.81.121 Perpetual advanced six-year plans for coordinated transportation program, expenditures — Nonmotorized transportation — Railroad right-of-way. (1) At any time before adoption of the budget, the legislative authority of each county, after one or more public hearings thereon, shall prepare and adopt a comprehensive transportation program for the ensuing six calendar years. If the county has adopted a comprehensive plan pursuant to chapter 35.63 or 36.70 RCW, the inherent authority of a charter county derived from its charter, or chapter 36.70A RCW, the program shall be consistent with this comprehensive plan. The program shall include proposed road and bridge construction work and other transportation facilities and programs deemed appropriate, and for those counties operating ferries shall also include a separate section showing proposed capital expenditures for ferries, docks, and related facilities. The program shall include any new or enhanced bicycle or pedestrian facilities identified pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070(6) or other applicable changes that promote nonmotorized transit. Copies of the program shall be filed with the county road administration board and with the state secretary of transportation not more than thirty days after its adoption by the legislative authority. The purpose of this section is to assure that each county shall perpetually have available advanced plans looking to the future for not less than six years as a guide in carrying out a coordinated transportation program. The program may at any time be revised by a majority of the legislative authority but only after a public hearing thereon. (2) Each six-year transportation program forwarded to the secretary in compliance with subsection (1) of this section shall contain information as to how a county will expend its moneys, including funds made available pursuant to chapter 47.30 RCW, for nonmotorized transportation purposes. (3) Each six-year transportation program forwarded to the secretary in compliance with subsection (1) of this section shall contain information as to how a county shall act to preserve railroad right-of-way in the event the railroad ceases to operate in the county's jurisdiction. (4) The six-year plan for each county shall specifically set forth those projects and programs of regional significance for inclusion in the transportation improvement program within that region. [2005 c 360 § 3; 1997 c 188 § 1. Prior: 1994 c 179 § 2; 1994 c 158 § 8; 1990 1 st ex.s. c 17 § 58; 1988 c 167 § 8; 1983 1 st ex.s. c 49 § 20; prior: 1975 1 st ex.s. c 215 § 2; 1975 1 st ex.s. c 21 § 3; 1967 ex.s. c 83 § 26; 1963 c 4 § 36.81.121; prior: 1961 c 195 § 1.1 Notes: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.81 &full=true 8/27/2015 59 Chapter 36.81 RCW: ROADS AND BRIDGES — ESTABLISHMENT Page 6 of 7 Findings -- Intent -- 2005 c 360: See note following RCW 36.70A.070. Captions not law -- Severability -- Effective date —1994 c 158: See RCW 47.80.902 through 47.80.904. Severability — Part, section headings not law --19901st ex.s. c 17: See RCW 36.70A.900 and 36.70A.901. Savings -- Severability --1988 c 167: See notes following RCW 47.26.121. Severability -- Effective date --19831st ex.s. c 49: See RCW 36.79.900 and 36.79.901. Severability -- Effective dates --1967 ex.s. c 83: See RCW 47.26.900 and 47.26.910. Highways, roads, streets in urban areas, urban arterials, development: Chapter 47.26 RCW. Long range arterial construction planning, counties and cities to prepare data: RCW 47.26.170. 36.81.122 Provisions for bicycle paths, lanes, routes, roadways and improvements to be included in annual revision or extension of comprehensive road programs — Exception. The annual revision and extension of comprehensive road programs pursuant to RCW 36.81.121 shall include consideration of and, wherever reasonably practicable, provisions for bicycle paths, lanes, routes, and roadways: PROVIDED, That no provision need be made for such a path, lane, route, or roadway where the cost of establishing it would be excessively disproportionate to the need or probable use. [1974 ex.s. c 141 § 9.] 36.81.130 Procedure specified for establishment, construction, and maintenance. The laying out, construction, and maintenance of all county roads shall hereafter be in accordance with the following procedure: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.81 &full=true 8/27/2015 60 Chapter 36.81 RCW: ROADS AND BRIDGES — ESTABLISHMENT Page 7 of 7 On or before the first Monday in October of each year each county road engineer shall file with the county legislative authority a recommended plan for the laying out, construction, and maintenance of county roads for the ensuing fiscal year. Such recommended plan need not be limited to but shall include the following items: Recommended projects, including capital expenditures for ferries, docks, and related facilities, and their priority; the estimated cost of all work, including labor and materials for each project recommended; a statement as to whether such work is to be done by the county forces or by publicly advertised contract; a list of all recommended purchases of road equipment, together with the estimated costs thereof. Amounts to be expended for maintenance shall be recommended, but details of these proposed expenditures shall not be made. The recommended plan shall conform as nearly as practicable to the county's long range road program. After filing of the road engineer's recommended plan, the county legislative authority shall consider the same. Revisions and changes may be made until a plan which is agreeable to a majority of the members of the county legislative authority has been adopted: PROVIDED, That such revisions shall conform as nearly as practicable to the county's long range road program. Any appropriations contained in the county road budget shall be void unless the county's road plan was adopted prior to such appropriation. The final road plan for the fiscal year shall not thereafter be changed except by unanimous vote of the county legislative authority. [2005 c 162 § 2; 1991 c 363 § 86; 1975 1 st ex.s. c 21 § 4; 1963 c 4 § 36.81.130. Prior: 1949 c 156 § 7; Rem. Supp. 1949 § 6450-8f.] Notes: Purpose -- Captions not law --1991 c 363: See notes following RCW 2.32.180. 36.81.140 Columbia Basin project road systems — Establishment by plat. When plats or blocks of farm units have been or are filed under the provisions of chapter 89.12 RCW which contain a system of county roads, or when a supplemental plat of a system of county roads to serve such a plat is filed in connection therewith, the filing period and formal approval by the board of county commissioners shall constitute establishment as county roads: PROVIDED, That the board of county commissioners have obtained the individual rights-of-way by deed or as otherwise provided by law. [1963 c 4 § 36.81.140. Prior: 1953 c 199 § 1.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/'rcw/default.aspx?cite=36.8 I&full=true 8/27/2015 61 Chapter 47.30 RCW: TRAILS AND PATHS Chapter 47.30 RCW TRAILS AND PATHS Chapter Listing RCW Sections 47.30.005 Definitions. 47.30.010 Recreational trail interference. 47.30.020 Facilities for nonmotorized traffic --joint usage of rights-of-way. 47.30.030 Facilities for nonmotorized traffic -- Expenditure of available funds. 47.30.040 Establishing paths and trails -- Factors to be considered. 47.30.050 Expenditures for paths and trails -- Minimum amount. 47.30.060 Expenditures deemed to be for highway purposes -- Powers and duties of department -- Restrictions on use of paths and trails. 47.30.070 Bicycle, equestrian, pedestrian paths as public highways. Notes: Recreation trails system: Chapter 79A.35 RCW. 47.30.005 Definitions. Page I of 5 For the purposes of this chapter, "trail" or "path" means a public way constructed primarily for and open to pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists, or any combination thereof, other than a sidewalk constructed as a part of a city street or county road for the exclusive use of pedestrians. The term "trail" or "path" also includes a widened shoulder of a highway, street, or road when the extra shoulder width is constructed to accommodate bicyclists consistent with a comprehensive plan or master plan for bicycle trails or paths adopted by a state or local governmental authority either prior to such construction or prior to January 1, 1980. [1979 ex.s. c 121 § 4.1 47.30.010 Recreational trail interference. (1) No limited access highway shall be constructed that will result in the severance or destruction of an existing recreational trail of substantial usage for pedestrians, equestrians or bicyclists unless an alternative recreational trail, satisfactory to the authority having jurisdiction over the trail being severed or destroyed, either exists or is reestablished at the time the limited access highway is constructed. If a proposed limited access highway will sever a planned recreational trail which is part of a comprehensive plan for trails adopted by a state or local governmental http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=47.30&full=true 9/2/2015 63 Chapter 47.30 RCW: TRAILS AND PATHS Page 2 of 5 authority, and no alternative route for the planned trail exists which is satisfactory to the authority which adopted the comprehensive plan for trails, the state or local agency proposing to construct the limited access highway shall design the facility and acquire sufficient right -of --way to accommodate future construction of the portion of the trail which will properly lie within the highway right-of-way. Thereafter when such trail is developed and constructed by the authority having jurisdiction over the trail, the state or local agency which constructed the limited access highway shall develop and construct the portion of such trail lying within the right-of-way of the limited access highway. (2) Where a highway other than a limited access highway crosses a recreational trail of substantial usage for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists, signing sufficient to insure safety shall be provided. (3) Where the construction or reconstruction of a highway other than a limited access highway would destroy the usefulness of an existing recreational trail of substantial usage for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists or of a planned recreational trail for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists incorporated into the comprehensive plans for trails of the state or any of its political subdivisions, replacement land, space, or facilities shall be provided and where such recreational trails exist at the time of taking, reconstruction of said recreational trails shall be undertaken. [1971 ex.s. c 130 § 1.] 47.30.020 Facilities for nonmotorized traffic —joint usage of rights-of-way. Facilities for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists shall be incorporated into the design of highways and freeways along corridors where such facilities do not exist upon a finding that such facilities would be of joint use and conform to the comprehensive plans of public agencies for the development of such facilities, will not duplicate existing or proposed routes, and that safety to both motorists and to pedestrians, equestrians, and bicyclists would be enhanced by the segregation of traffic. In planning and design of all highways, every effort shall be made consistent with safety to promote joint usage of rights-of-way for trails and paths in accordance with the comprehensive plans of public agencies. [1971 ex.s. c 130 § 2.] 47.30.030 Facilities for nonmotorized traffic — Expenditure of available funds. Where an existing highway severs, or where the right-of-way of an existing highway accommodates a trail for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists or where the separation of motor vehicle traffic from pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists will materially increase the motor vehicle safety, the provision of facilities for pedestrians, equestrians, or bicyclists which are a part of a comprehensive trail plan adopted by federal, state, or local governmental authority having http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=47.30&ful1--true 9/2/2015 64 Chapter 47.30 RCW: TRAILS AND PATHS Page 3 of 5 jurisdiction over the trail is hereby authorized. The department of transportation, or the county or city having jurisdiction over the highway, road, or street, or facility is further authorized to expend reasonable amounts out of the funds made available to them, according to the provisions of RCW 46.68.090, as necessary for the planning, accommodation, establishment, and maintenance of such facilities. [1999 c 269 § 10; 1979 ex.s. c 121 § 1; 1974 ex.s. c 141 § 12; 1972 ex.s. c 103 § 2.] Notes: Effective date --1999 c 269: See note following RCW 36.78.070. Severability --1972 ex.s. c 103: "If any provision of this 1972 amendatory act, or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act, or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [1972 ex.s. c 103 § 8.] 47.30.040 Establishing paths and trails — Factors to be considered. Before establishing paths and trails, the following factors shall be considered: (1) Public safety; (2) The cost of such paths and trails as compared to the need or probable use; (3) Inclusion of the trail in a plan for a comprehensive trail system adopted by a city or county in a state or federal trails plan. [1972 ex.s. c 103 § 3.] Notes: Severability --1972 ex.s. c 103: See note following RCW 47.30.030. 47.30.050 Expenditures for paths and trails — Minimum amount. (1) The amount expended by a city, town, or county as authorized by RCW 47.30.030 shall never in any one fiscal year be less than 0.42 percent of the total amount of funds received from the motor vehicle fund according to RCW 46.68.090. However, this section does not apply to a city or town in any year in which the 0.42 percent equals five hundred dollars or less, or to a county in any year in which the 0.42 percent equals three thousand dollars or less. Also, a city, town, or county in lieu of http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=47.30&full=true 9/2/2015 65 Chapter 47.30 RCW: TRAILS AND PATHS Page 4 of 5 expending the funds each year may credit the funds to a financial reserve or special fund, to be held for not more than ten years, and to be expended for the purposes required or permitted by RCW 47.30.030. (2) In each fiscal year the department of transportation shall expend, as a minimum, for the purposes mentioned in RCW 47.30.030 a sum equal to three -tenths of one percent of all funds, both state and federal, expended for the construction of state highways in,such year, or in order to more efficiently program trail improvements the department may defer any part of such minimum trail or path expenditures for a fiscal year for a period not to exceed four years after the end of such fiscal year. Any fiscal year in which the department expends for trail or path purposes more than the minimum sum required by this subsection, the amount of such excess expenditure shall constitute a credit which may be carried forward and applied to the minimum trail and path expenditure requirements for any of the ensuing four fiscal years. (3) The department of transportation, a city, or a county in computing the amount expended for trails or paths under their respective jurisdictions may include the cost of improvements consistent with a comprehensive plan or master plan for bicycle trails or paths adopted by a state or local governmental authority either prior to such construction or prior to January 1, 1980. [1999 c 269 § 11; 1979 ex.s. c 121 § 2; 1972 ex.s. c 103 § 4.] Notes: Effective date --1999 c 269: See note following RCW 36.78.070._ Severability --1972 ex.s. c 103: See note following RCW 47.30.030. Perpetual advanced six-year plans for coordinated transportation program, expenditures -- Nonmotorized transportation -- Railroad right-of-way: RCW 36.81.121. 47.30.060 Expenditures deemed to be for highway purposes — Powers and duties of department — Restrictions on use of paths and trails. For the purposes of this chapter, the establishment of paths and trails and the expenditure of funds as authorized by RCW 47.30.030, as now or hereafter amended, shall be deemed to be for highway, road, and street purposes. The department of transportation shall, when requested, and subject to reimbursement of costs, provide technical assistance and advice to cities, towns, and counties in carrying out the purposes of RCW 47.30.030, as now or hereafter amended. The department shall recommend construction standards for paths and trails. The department shall provide a uniform system of signing paths and trails which shall apply to paths and trails under the jurisdiction of the department and of cities, towns, and counties. The department and cities, towns, and counties may restrict the use of paths and trails under their respective jurisdictions to pedestrians, equestrians, and nonmotorized vehicles. [1979 ex.s. c 121 § 3; 1972 ex.s. c 103 § 5.1 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=47.30&full=true 9/2/2015 66 Chapter 47.30 RCW: TRAILS AND PATHS Notes: Severability --1972 ex.s. c 103: See note following RCW 47.30.030. 47.30.070 Bicycle, equestrian, pedestrian paths as public highways. For purposes of 43 U.S.C. 912 and related provisions of federal law involving federally granted railroad rights-of-way, a bicycle, equestrian or pedestrian path shall be deemed to be a public highway under the laws of the state of Washington. [1993 c 224 § 14.] Page 5 of 5 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=47.30&fult=true 9/2/2015 67 Chapter 136-14 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—PRIORITY PROGRAMMING Page I of 3 Chapter 136-14 WAC Last Update: 12/7/98 STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—PRIORITY PROGRAMMING Chapter Listing WAC Sections 136-14-010 Purpose and authority. 136-14-020 Application. 136-14-030 Process. 136-14-040 Application of process. 136-14-050 Certification. 136-14-060 Inventory records. 136-14-010 Purpose and authority. The requirement to develop and adopt both long range and short range programs as a prerequisite to road construction is established in RCW 36.81.121 and 36.81.130. Numerous studies have shown that road construction needs far exceed available revenue. Priority programming is the development and application of techniques designed to rank any array of potential projects in order of importance to serve as a guide in assisting a county legislative authority in the formulation of road programs and distribution of limited resources. Priority programming procedures for counties must be adaptable to a wide variety of situations. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-14-010, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90-07-075 (Order 75), § 136-14- 010, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90; Order 16, § 136-14-010, filed 7/22/71.] 136-14-020 Application. Priority programming techniques shall be applied in the ranking of all potential projects on the arterial road system of each county. They may be applied to all arterial projects combined in a single group, or may be applied to individual functional classes of arterials and further subdivided into rural and urban systems if desired. Priority programming will not be required, but is recommended, for the local access road system. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90-07-075 (Order 75), § 136-14-020, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90; Order 16, § 136-14-020, filed 7/22/71.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite= 136-14&full=true 8/27/2015 69 Chapter 136-14 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—PRIORITY PROGRAMMING Page 2 of 3 136-14-030 Process. Each county engineer will be required to develop a priority programming process tailored to meet the overall roadway system development policy determined by his or her county legislative authority. Items to be included and considered in the technique for roads shall include, but need not be limited to the following: (1) Traffic volumes; (2) Roadway condition; (3) Geometrics; (4) Safety and accident history; and (5) Matters of significant local importance. The manner in which these various items are treated may vary from county to county. Bridge priorities shall be established in accordance with WAC 136-20-060. Accident records may be considered where their use will make a legitimate contribution. A description of the priority programming technique to be used shall be submitted by each county engineer to the county road administration board. The county road administration board, upon request, will provide assistance to counties in the development, evaluation or modification of their priority programming process in order to meet the requirements of this rule. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-14-030, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-14-030, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90- 07-075 (Order 75), § 136-14-030, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90; Order 3388, § 136-14- 030, filed 4/7/72; Order 16, § 136-14-030, filed 7/22/71.] 136-14-040 Application of process. The priority programming process for roads shall be applied by the county engineer to all potential arterial projects in the county, and to local access road projects if directed by the legislative authority. The resulting priority array shall be updated not later than June 1 st of each odd -numbered year and shall be consulted together with bridge priorities by the county legislative authority and county engineer during the preparation of the proposed six-year transportation program as described in chapter 136-15 WAC. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-14-040, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-14-040, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90- 07-075 (Order 75), § 136-14-040, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90; Order 25, § 136-14-040, filed 1/27/75; Order 3388, § 136-14-040, filed 4/7/72; Order 16, § 136-14-040, filed 7/22/71.1 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite= 136-14&full=true 8/27/2015 70 Chapter 136-14 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—PRIORITY PROGRAMMING Page 3 of 3 136-14-050 Certification. In order to assure that priority arrays were available and were consulted during the preparation of the proposed six-year transportation program each year, the resolution of adoption of such program by each legislative authority shall include assurances to this effect. A copy of the adopting resolution shall be forwarded to the county road administration board together with the six-year transportation program. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-14-050, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90-07-075 (Order 75), § 136-14-050, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90; Order 25, § 136-14-050, filed 1/27/75; Order 16, § 136-14-050, filed 7/22/71.] 136-14-060 Inventory records. Each priority programming process will be based, at least in part, on existing road conditions. It is required, therefore, that in each county an adequate road inventory system be maintained. The inventory system shall be updated no later than May 1 st of each year to reflect work done and improvements made during the previous year in accordance with requirements of chapter 136-60 WAC. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-14-060, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-14-060, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90- 07-075 (Order 75), § 136-14-060, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90; Order 16, § 136-14-060, filed 7/22/71.1 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=136-14&full=true 8/27/2015 71 Chapter 136-15 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE PROCEDURES FOR PREPARATION OF SI... Page 1 of 3 Chapter 136-15 WAC Last Update: 8/7/13 STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE PROCEDURES FOR PREPARATION OF SIX- YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS Chapter Listing WAC Sections 136-15-010 Purpose and authority. 136-15-020 Contents of six-year program. 136-15-030 Road fund revenue and expenditure analysis. 136-15-040 Program listings of specific projects. 136-15-045 RAP projects in the six-year program. 136-15-050 Adoption and submittal of six-year program. 136-15-060 Conflicts with WSDOT and TIB authority. 136-15-010 Purpose and authority. RCW 36.81.121 requires the preparation and annual updating of a six-year comprehensive transportation program. The program shall be adopted by the county legislative authority at any time before adoption of the annual budget and shall include all anticipated road and bridge construction projects, capital ferry expenditures, paths and trails projects and any other specified capital outlays for the following six-year period. The purpose of this chapter is to implement these statutory requirements with assurance that the program is based on a realistic assessment of available funding during the program period. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-15-010, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.81.121. WSR 97-24-068, § 136-15-010, filed 12/2/97, effective 1/2/98. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17- 013, § 136-15-010, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 88-16-017 (Order 68), § 136-15-010, filed 7/25/88.] 136-15-020 Contents of six-year program. Each adopted program shall designate the six-year time period included, the name of the county, the county number as assigned by the state office of financial management, the dates) of the public hearing held to provide public input to the program, the date of the adoption by the legislative authority and the adopting resolution number. The adopted program for submittal to the county road administration board shall consist of two parts: (1) A road fund revenue and expenditure analysis for the six-year time period; and (2) A program listing of specific projects. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=136-15&full=true 9/2/2015 73 Chapter 136-15 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE PROCEDURES FOR PREPARATION OF SI... Page 2 of 3 [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-15-020, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-15-020, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 88-16-017 (Order 68), § 136-15-020, filed 7/25/88.] 136-15-030 Road fund revenue and expenditure analysis. The road fund revenue and expenditure analysis shall include the county's best estimates of future road fund revenues and expenditures over each year of the six-year program period. The anticipated revenues should include a line item for motor vehicle fuel tax, the road levy after diversion, federal transportation program grants (by program), TIB funds, RATA funds, RID funds, public works trust fund loans, state forest funds, federal forest funds, and other miscellaneous revenues. The anticipated road fund expenditures should include line items for administration, maintenance, facilities, transfers and loan repayments, reimbursable work and miscellaneous. expenditures and shall show by subtraction the amount available for construction during each year of the program period. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-15-030, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 88-16-017 (Order 68), § 136-15-030, filed 7/25/88.] 136-15-040 Program listings of specific projects. This listing shall include projects having an estimated cost approximately equal to the anticipated revenues for projects during the program period, clearly identifying those projects (1) for which funding is reasonably assured; (2) for which funds are not specifically assured but are within expected levels of existing programs for the applicable year; and (3), if desired, those which are unfunded within currently anticipated resources. Because of the possibility of unforeseen future circumstances at the time of approval of the six-year program, the above construction funding classification for any project shall not be considered final, but only an indication of the relative certainty of the various proposed projects. It is recommended that provision be made in the program for one or more generic projects each year for improvements such as miscellaneous safety projects, new culvert and small bridge construction and other minor improvements. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 88-16-017 (Order 68), § 136-15-040, filed 7/25/88.] 136-15-045 RAP projects in the six-year program. http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=136-15&full=true 9/2/2015 74 Chapter 136-15 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE PROCEDURES FOR PREPARATION OF SI... Page 3 of 3 Each county's six-year transportation program shall include all projects for which the county is seeking RATA funds during the succeeding biennium. The six-year transportation program may include a general subprogram item of which RAP projects, although not specifically listed, may be a part. A county may only include a proposed RAP project within a subprogram item if: (1) The project(s) is not rehabilitation or reconstruction in scope; (2) The specific listing of projects used for support of the general subprogram item was made available to the public at the time of six-year program adoption; (3) The county provides the county road administration board with the specific project listing in writing, citing the subprogram that includes the specific project. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 13-16-105, § 136-15-045, filed 8/7/13, effective 9/7/13. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-15-045, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99.] 136-15-050 Adoption and submittal of six-year program. A six-year program shall be adopted by resolution of the county legislative authority after appropriate public hearing at any time before adoption of the annual budget. The resolution of adoption shall include reference to availability of: (1) A priority array as required by WAC 136-14-050; (2) An engineer's bridge condition report as required by WAC 136-20-060; and (3) The multiyear financing plan of the transportation element of the county's comprehensive plan if required by chapter 36.70A RCW. Within thirty days of adoption, the county legislative authority shall submit the six-year program to the county road administration board. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-15-050, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.81.121. WSR 97-24-068, § 136-15-050, filed 12/2/97, effective 1/2/98. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 88-16-017 (Order 68), § 136-15-050, filed 7/25/88.1 136-15-060 Conflicts with WSDOT and TIB authority. Nothing in this rule shall eliminate or modify any requirements or procedures or authorities of either the Washington state department of transportation or the transportation improvement board as codified in the Revised Code of Washington or as adopted in the Washington Administrative Code. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 88-16-017 (Order 68), § 136-15-060, filed 7/25/88.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=136-15&fuli=true 9/2/2015 75 Chapter 136-16 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—ANNUAL ROAD PROGRAM, CONSTRU... Page 1 of 5 Chapter 136-16 WAC Last Update: 8/13/14 STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—ANNUAL ROAD PROGRAM, CONSTRUCTION REPORT, AND CONSTRUCTION BY COUNTY FORCES LIMITS Chapter Listing WAC Sections 136-16-010 Purpose and authority. 136-16-018 Adoption of annual program. 136-16-020 Contents of annual program. 136-16-022 Construction by county forces limit. 136-16-025 Miscellaneous and alternate projects. 136-16-030 Requirements of listing equipment. 136-16-035 Requirements of listing maintenance. 136-16-040 Forwarding of program. 136-16-042 Modification of program. 136-16-050 Annual construction report. DISPOSITION OF SECTIONS FORMERLY CODIFIED IN THIS CHAPTER 136-16-012 Projects of environmental significance. [Order 21, § 136-16-012, filed 4/19/73.1 Repealed by Order 29, filed 8/3/76. 136-16-014 Projects of environmental insignificance. [Order 21, § 136-16-014, filed 4/19/73.] Repealed by Order 29, filed 8/3/76. 136-16-016 Dissemination of environmental assessment information. [Order 21, § 136-16- 016, filed 4/19/73.1 Repealed by Order 29, filed 8/3/76. 136-16-060 Publication of information on day labor projects. [Order 17, § 136-16-060, filed 7/22/71.1 Repealed by Order 23, filed 3/11/74. 136-16-010 Purpose and authority. As provided for in RCW 36.81.130, the county engineer shall submit a recommended annual road program, hereinafter referred to as the annual program, to the county legislative authority on or before the first Monday in October. The annual road program shall include recommendations for all road and bridge construction projects and all road equipment purchases for the ensuing year. The county legislative authority shall consider the recommended program and make any revisions deemed necessary. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-16-010, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-16-010, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90- 07-076 (Order 76), § 136-16-010, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90; Order 29, § 136-16-010, http://apps.ieg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx"cite=136-16&full---true 77 8/27/2015 Chapter 136-16 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—ANNUAL ROAD PROGRAM, CONSTRU... Page 2 of 5 filed 8/3/76; Order 21, § 136-16-010, filed 4/19/73; Regulation 2, § 136-16-010, filed 12/13/67.] 136-16-018 Adoption of annual program. The county legislative authority shall adopt a final annual program at anytime prior to the adoption of the budget. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-16-018, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90-07-076 (Order 76), § 136-16- 018, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90; Order 29, § 136-16-018, filed 8/3/76; Order 21, § 136- 16-018, filed 4/19/73.] 136-16-020 Contents of annual program. The adopted annual program shall include, but not be limited to: (1) A line item for estimated preliminary engineering costs; (2) A line item for estimated right of way acquisition costs; and (3) A listing of all proposed construction projects for the year including a brief description of the work, the name, number and functional classification of the road, an estimate of the total cost of each project, including construction engineering but excluding preliminary engineering and right of way acquisition, and a notation as to whether construction work on each project is to be done by contract or construction by county forces or both. When a project involves both contract and construction by county forces work the estimate shall be divided to show the estimated cost of each type of work. The sum of all construction costs shall be approximately equal to the amount included in the road fund construction budget for construction work. All construction projects shall be shown, regardless of funding source, including all projects previously authorized and under way on which expenditures are anticipated during the program year. Projects previously authorized on which construction work is contemplated within the program year shall also be listed showing the estimated costs of work during the program year. In all cases, the total amount of proposed construction by county forces costs shall not exceed the construction by county forces limit as computed in WAC 136-16-022. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 09-23-044, § 136-16-020, filed 11/9/09, effective 12/10/09. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-16-020, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 80-09-084 (Order 38), § 136-16-020, filed 7/22/80; Order 29, § 136-16-020, filed 8/3/76; Order 21, § 136-16-020, filed 4/19/73; Regulation 2, § 136-16-020, filed 12/13/67.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=136- 16&fullrtrue 8/27/2015 78 Chapter 136-16 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—ANNUAL ROAD PROGRAM, CONSTRU... Page 3 of 5 136-16-022 Construction by county forces limit. The statutory construction by county forces limit shall be computed in accordance with RCW 36.77.065. The county population used in the computation shall be the official office of financial management estimate as of April 1 st of the previous calendar year. Determination by the county road administration board that a violation of RCW 36.77.065 has occurred shall be cause for issuance of a conditional certificate of good practice by the board as specified in WAC 136-04-060 on behalf of the county in which the violation occurred. The first condition of such a conditional certificate of good practice shall be that the county be required, at the next regular or special meeting of the county road administration board, to show cause why a certificate of good practice should not be denied to that county. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 09-23-044, § 136-16-022, filed 11 /9/09, effective 12/10/09. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW and SSB 5733. WSR 01-24-074, § 136-16-022, filed 12/3/01, effective 1/3/02. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-16-022, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-16-022, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90-07-076 (Order 76), § 136-16-022, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 80-16-020 (Order 40), § 136-16-022, filed 10/29/80; WSR 80-09-084 (Order 38), § 136-16-022, filed 7/22/80.] 136-16-025 Miscellaneous and alternate projects. The adopted program may include an item for miscellaneous unspecified projects in a dollar amount not to exceed ten per cent of the total. The adopted program may also include a separate section for alternate projects which shall be listed in the same manner as required for regular. program projects. No construction work shall be done on any alternate project until it has been authorized by resolution. Said resolution shall clearly identify the project as an alternate project, and shall specify which project or projects are being deferred or deleted in order that adequate funding be available for the alternate. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 80-09-084 (Order 38), § 136-16-025, filed 7/22/80.] 136-16-030 Requirements of listing equipment. In accordance with RCW 36.81.130. The annual program shall also include a list of all major road equipment purchases and repairs contemplated for the year, together with the estimated costs thereof. The total estimated cost of all equipment listed shall be approximately equal to the amount budgeted for equipment purchase in the annual equipment rental and revolving fund budget. The equipment list may include an item for miscellaneous minor equipment in any amount up to ten percent of the estimated total cost. The list may also include a list of alternate or http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=136-16&fulI=true 8/27/2015 79 Chapter 136-16 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—ANNUAL ROAD PROGRAM, CONSTRU... Page 4 of 5 additional items of equipment totaling up to fifteen percent of the basic list cost to allow for unforeseen conditions. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 14-17-035, § 136-16-030, filed 8/13/14, effective 9/13/14. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-16-030, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96- 17-013, § 136-16-030, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96; Regulation 2, § 136-16-030, filed 12/13/67.] 136-16-035 Requirements of listing maintenance. In accordance with RCW 36.81.130, the annual program shall also include the amounts to be expended for maintenance but details of the proposed expenditures shall not be made. This requirement shall be deemed satisfied by submission of a maintenance management work plan and budget per WAC 136-11-040. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 14-17-035, § 136-16-035, filed 8/13/14, effective 9/13/14. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-16-035, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99.1 136-16-040 Forwarding of program. A copy of the adopted annual program and appropriate resolution shall be forwarded to the county road administration board within thirty days of its adoption but not later than December 31 st of each year. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-16-040, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99; Order 21, § 136-16-040, filed 4/19/73; Regulation 2, § 136-16-040, filed 12/13/67.] 136-16-042 Modification of program. The adopted annual program may not be changed, revised or increased except by unanimous vote of the members of the legislative authority who are present when the vote is taken. Such modifications shall be by resolution of the legislative authority and shall list each changed, revised or added project. A copy of such resolution shall be forwarded to the county road administration board within thirty -days of its adoption. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-16-042, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=136-16&full=true 8/27/2015 80 Chapter 136-16 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—ANNUAL ROAD PROGRAM, CONSTRU... Page 5 of 5 136-16-042, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90- 07-076 (Order 76), § 136-16-042, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 80-09-084 (Order 38), § 136-16-042, filed 7/22/80; Order 29, § 136-16-042, filed 8/3/76; Order 21, § 136-16-042, filed 4/19/73.] 136-16-050 Annual construction report. At any time prior to April 1 st of the year following the annual program year, the county engineer shall submit an annual construction report to the county road administration board in accordance with forms and instructions provided by the county road administration board. The construction report shall show actual expenditures for all construction work including construction administration and engineering done during the previous budget year. Upon receipt of each county's annual construction report, the construction by county forces limit as described in RCW 36.77.065 will again be compared with the actual accomplishments as set forth in the annual construction report. A county which exceeds the construction by county forces limit as part of the annual program or as part of the annual construction report shall be in violation of this standard of good practice. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 09-23-044, § 136-16-050, filed 11 /9/09, effective 12/10/09. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-16-050, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96- 17-013, § 136-16-050, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90-07-076 (Order 76), § 136-16-050, filed 3/21/90, effective 4/21/90. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 80-09-084 (Order 38), § 136-16-050, filed 7/22/80; Regulation 2, § 136-16-050, filed 12/13/67.] http://apps.leg.wa.gov/wac/default.aspx?cite=136-16&full=true 8/27/2015 81 Chapter 136-20 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—INSPECTION OF BRIDGES ON COUNTY ... Page 1 of 3 Chapter 136-20 WAC Last Update: 8/13/14 STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE—INSPECTION OF BRIDGES ON COUNTY ROADS Chapter Listing WAC Sections 136-20=010 Purpose and authority. 136-20-020 Inventory. 136-20-030 Inspection. 136-20-040 Certification. 136-20-050 Failure to comply. 136-20-060 Engineer's report. 136-20-010 Purpose and authority. Bridges of many kinds are an integral part of every county road system. The safety and adequacy of these bridges is of vital importance to the traveling public. A program of regular periodic inspection and reporting is necessary to fully inform each county legislative authority regarding the condition and adequacy of all bridges. RCW 36.78.070(1) authorizes the county road administration board to establish standards of good practice for the administration of county roads and the efficient movement of people and goods over county roads. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-20-010, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 90-17-075 (Order 78), § 136-20- 010, filed 8/16/90, effective 9/16/90. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 79-01- 099 (Order 36), § 136-20-010, filed 1/3/79; Order 11, § 136-20-010, filed 10/9/69.] 136-20-020 Inventory. Each county engineer shall have available in his or her office a complete inventory of all National Bridge Inventory (NBI) bridges on the county road system. The inventory shall list the location of each bridge by the state road log number and appropriate milepost, and shall include such other information as the engineer deems necessary. In addition, all data required for the Washington state bridge inventory system (WSBIS) data base system as maintained by the Washington state department of transportation (WSDOT) shall be submitted to the WSDOT local programs bridge engineer on appropriate media furnished or otherwise approved by the WSDOT. It is highly recommended that each county engineer maintain a similar inventory of the short span bridges, drainage structures, and large culverts on the county road system. [Statutory Authority: Chapter. 36.78 RCW. WSR 14-17-035, § 136-20-020, filed 8/13/14, effective 9/13/14. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-20-020, http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=136-20&fLtll=true 83 9/2/2015 Chapter 136-20 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE -INSPECTION OF BRIDGES ON COUNTY ... Page 2 of 3 filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96- 17-013, § 136-20-020, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 91-21-136 (Order 83), § 136-20-020, filed 10/23/91, effective 11/23/91; WSR 90-17- 075 (Order 78), § 136-20-020, filed 8/16/90, effective 9/16/90. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 79-01-099 (Order 36), § 136-20-020, filed 1/3/79; Order 11, § 136-20-020, filed 10/9/69.] 136-20-030 Inspection. Each county engineer shall be responsible for all routine and special inspections of all NBI bridges on the county road system in accordance with the National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS) as promulgated and periodically revised by the WSDOT local programs office. The county engineer shall note the date of all inspections and any changes since the previous inspection on the bridge inspection report and the WSBIS form and submit all such forms to the WSDOT local programs bridge engineer within ninety days of each inspection. It is highly recommended that each county engineer perform routine inspections of the short span bridges, drainage structures, and large culverts on the county road system. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 14-17-035, § 136-20-030, filed 8/13/14, effective 9/13/14. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-20-030, filed 12/7/98, effective 1 /7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96- 17-013, § 136-20-030, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 91-21-136 (Order 83), § 136-20-030, filed 10/23/91, effective 11 /23/91; WSR 90-17- 075 (Order 78), § 136-20-030, filed 8/16/90, effective 9/16/90. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 79-01-099 (Order 36), § 136-20-030, filed 1/3/79; Order 11, § 136-20-030, filed 10/9/69.1 136-20-040 Certification. Prior to April 1 st of each calendar year, the WSDOT director of local programs will provide the following to the county road administration board: (1) A listing on a county -by -county basis of all county NBI bridges which have not had a regular WSBIS and bridge inspection report submitted within the previous thirty months; and (2) A listing on a county -by -county basis of all county NBI bridges which have not had a required special inspection report submitted within six months after the required inspection date; and (3) A listing of all counties which are not in compliance with the requirements of the National Bridge Inspection Standards and the status of efforts toward achieving such compliance. Any county which is not in compliance with the NBIS or has a bridge or bridges on any of the above listings shall be assumed to be not in compliance with bridge inspection procedures. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 14-17-035, § 136-20-040, filed 8/13/14, effective 9/13/14. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-20-040, http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=136-20&full-true 9/2/2015 84 Chapter 136-20 WAC: STANDARDS OF GOOD PRACTICE -INSPECTION OF BRIDGES ON COUNTY ... Page 3 of 3 filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96- 17-013, § 136-20-040, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 91-21-136 (Order 83), § 136-20-040, filed 10/23/91, effective 11/23/91; WSR 90-17- 075 (Order 78), § 136-20-040, filed 8/16/90, effective 9/16/90. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 79-01-099 (Order 36), § 136-20-040, filed 1/3/79; Order 22, § 136-20-040, filed 4/19/73; Order 11, § 136-20-040, filed 10/9/69.1 136-20-050 Failure to comply. Failure of a county to be shown in compliance with required NBIS bridge inspection procedures may be cause for the county road administration board to withhold a certificate of good practice on behalf of that county in accordance with the procedures of chapter 136-04 WAC. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 14-17-035, § 136-20-050, filed 8/13/14, effective 9/13/14. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96-17-013, § 136-20=050, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 79-01-099 (Order 36), § 136-20-050, filed 1/3/79; Order 11, § 136-20-050, filed 10/9/69.] 136-20-060 Engineer's report. Each county engineer shall furnish the county legislative authority with a written report of the findings of the bridge inspection effort. This report shall be made available to said authority and shall be consulted during the preparation of the proposed six-year transportation program revision. The report shall include the county engineer's recommendations as to replacement, repair or load restriction for each deficient bridge. The resolution of adoption of the six-year transportation program shall include assurances to the effect that the county engineer's report with respect to deficient bridges was available to said authority during the preparation of the program. It is highly recommended that deficient short span bridges, drainage structures, and large culverts be included in said report. [Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 14-17-035, § 136-20-060, filed 8/13/14, effective 9/13/14. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.79 RCW. WSR 99-01-021, § 136-20-060, filed 12/7/98, effective 1/7/99. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070 and 36.79.060. WSR 96- 17-013, § 136-20-060, filed 8/12/96, effective 9/12/96. Statutory Authority: RCW 36.78.070. WSR 91-21-136 (Order 83), § 136-20-060, filed 10/23/91, effective 11 /23/91; WSR 90-17- 075 (Order 78), § 136-20-060, filed 8/16/90, effective 9/16/90. Statutory Authority: Chapter 36.78 RCW. WSR 79-01-099 (Order 36), § 136-20-060, filed 1/3/79; Order 28, § 136-20-060, filed 5/4/76; Order 26, § 136-20-060, filed 5/6/75; Order 22, § 136-20-060, filed 4/19/73; Order 11, § 136-20-060, filed 10/9/69.1 http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=136-20&full=true 9/2/2015 85