HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 0702 07STATE OF WASHINGTON
Jefferson County
Master Land Use Application }
MLA 07 -265: An Ordinance Amending)
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan)
and the Unified Development Code for)
the Proposed Irondale/Hadlock }
Urban Growth Area }
ORDINANCE No. 04- 0702 -07
WHEREAS, the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings
Board ( "Board ") issued a Final Decision Order (FDO) on May 31, 2005 in
response to Petitions For Review (PRF) in Case No. 04 -2 -0022, Irondale
Community Action Neighbors and Nancy Dorgan v. Jefferson County, and in
Case No. 03 -2 -0010, Irondale Community Action Neighbors v. Jefferson County,
WHEREAS, the Board in its May 2005 FDO finds that the plan for the
new UGA and its implementing regulations do not comply with the GMA because
the County's capital facilities plan for this area does not provide sanitary sewer
throughout the new UGA over the 20 -year planning period and that the plan fails
to show a firm funding element for sewer service within the first six years,
WHEREAS, the Board recognizes the high quality of the County's plans
and regulations, and that Jefferson County staff have done impressive work within
the confines of their funding capacities,
WHEREAS, the Board in it subsequent rulings issued May 30, 2006 and
April 9, 2007 again reference noncompliance in the Unified Development Code
and Comprehensive Plan, establishing a timeline by which legislative measures,
up to and including adoption, need to be taken,
WHEREAS, the first task, or milestone, in this new timeline is July 3,
2007, which expressly states that the County must make "minor corrections to
items identified in Conclusions of Law G through I of the 5/31/05 FDO ",
WHEREAS, the Planning Department of Jefferson County consisting of
the Planning Commission and the Department of Community Development's
Long Range Planning Division have made `good faith' efforts to comply thereto,
WHEREAS, these efforts are documented in the establishment of a
Planning Commission Committee, which regularly held publicly noticed meetings
with the assistance of Jefferson County staff, to approve changes to the Unified
Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan, to obtain input from the general
July 2, 2007 Page 1
ORDINANCE NO , 04- 0702 -07
public in the drafting of these proposed changes and to finalize these changes with
a duly noticed public hearing before the full Planning Commission,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission felt that the magnitude of changes
to the Unified Development Code and the Comprehensive Plan during the duly
noticed and scheduled meeting and Public Hearing on February 21, 2007 required
a continuation until March 7, 2007,
WHEREAS, the public comment period was extended to 4:30pm March
16, 2007 by a vote of the Planning Commission with 8 in favor and none opposed,
and a duly noticed deliberation of the full body of the Planning Commission
occurred on March 21, 2007, whereby (14) fourteen motions with eight in favor
and one abstention each time to approve changes to amend the Comprehensive
Plan and the UDC,
WHEREAS, the Department of Community Development's Long Range
Planning Division as well as the Department of Community Development, and its
Director, are in complete agreement with the recommendations of the Planning
Commission for every amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Unified
Development Code voted upon on the 21 day of March 2007,
WHEREAS, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners completes the
process by the adoption of this Ordinance and now makes the following findings
of fact:
1. The Jefferson County County Wide Planning Policy Policies 1, 2, and 3 and
Comprehensive Plan goals and policies LNG 9.0, 9. 1, and LNP 9.5 call for
an Urban Growth Area ( "UGA ") for the Tri -Area.
2. The Tri- Area/Glen Cove Special Study conducted on behalf of the Board in
1999 determined that the future demand for commercial and industrial
lands would outstrip the land so zoned and available in rural designations.
3. The Special Study also determined that it would be appropriate to designate
a UGA for Irondale/Hadlock.
4. The Irondale/Hadlock UGA meets the following requirements specified in
RCW 36.70A.110 for a non - municipal UGA
• Characterized by urban growth
• Adequate developable land has been designated for residential,
commercial, and industrial uses to accommodate the growth for the
20 -year planning period
• Sufficient area for the designation of open space and greenbelts
July 2, 2007 Page 2
ORDINANCE NO, 04 -- 0702 -07
• Urban services such as roads, water, and storm drainage are
provided or are planned for.
5. The Department of Public Works and Community Development are
continuing their due diligence, outreach and cooperation with local
governments, agencies and the general public to complete the last major
hurdles by doing the following:
• Drafting a feasible financing plan for a sanitary sewer system for the
first six years,
• Completing sound engineering for effluent discharge that will not
harm the environment,
• Providing for the economic needs of the local population, now and
into the future,
• Determining boundaries that shall comply with the WWGMHB
decisions to restrict the UGA to areas provided sanitary sewer
service within the 20 -year horizon of the Comprehensive Plan,
6. The following environmental documents have been adopted pursuant to
SEPA administrative rules:
• Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements (DEIS/FEIS) and
addenda prepared in anticipation of adoption of the Comprehensive
Plan in 1998. The DEIS and FEIS are dated February 24, 1997 and
May 27, 1998, respectively, and examined the potential cumulative
environmental impacts of adopting alternative versions of the
Comprehensive Plan.
• Draft and Final Supplemental EIS (DSEIS/FSEIS) and addenda for
the Comprehensive Plan 1999 Amendments, also known as Tasks III
and IV of the Tri -Area / Glen Cove Special Study. The DSEIS and
FSEIS are dated June 30, 1999 and August 18, 1999, respectively, and
examined the potential environmental impacts of adopting one of the
identified planning alternatives for the Tri -Area of Chimacum -Port
Hadlock - Irondale and the Glen Cove mixed use area.
• DCD Integrated Staff Report and DSEIS/FSEIS for the 2002, 2003,
2004, 2005 and 2006 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Dockets.
Amidst other information, the adopted documents provide
background and analysis on the designation of a UGA in the Irondale
& Port Hadlock area.
• DCD Integrated GMA/SEPA Staff Report dated February 21, 2007
July 2, 2007 Page 3
ORDINANCE NQI 040702 --117
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED as follows:
Section One
The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan be, and hereby is, amended as described
in Exhibit "A" of this ordinance. Exhibit "A" of this ordinance, attached hereto and
incorporated by reference, includes changes to the following ten (10) pages:
1) 2 -8,
2) 2 -16,
3) 2 -23,
4) 3 -7,
5) 10 -32,
6) 10 -33,
7) 10 -35,
8) 10 -36,
9) 10 -41 and
10) 10 -44
Section Two
Jefferson County Code Title 18 is hereby amended as follows:
18.30.020 General development standards.
(5) All land use activities shall be served by appropriate transportation facilities.
Transportation facilities shall be adequate to meet the Level of Service Standards adopted in
the Jefferson CouM Comprehensive Plan and the appropriate design standards referenced in
JCC Chapter 18.30.080 (1)a. both to serve the pr-epesed land use and to avoid adverse effeets
system. to the exisfing tr-afispeftafien If transportation facilities would become are inadequate,
the applicant shall be required to rp ovide make previsien -fey necessary improvements and/or
implement alternative measures such as Transportation Demand Manage ment (TDM), project
phasing, or other measures acceptable to Jefferson County that will maintain the adopted
Level of Service Standards and meet desigg standards. If transportation facilities are not
adequate, Jefferson County shall not approve the proposed development. Transportation
facilities shall be deemed adequate if necessary improvements are planned and designated
funding is secured in the Jefferson County Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program
[Ord. 8 -06 § 1 ]
Section Three
A document entitled "Transportation," intended to augment the Transportation and
Capital Faculties chapters of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and made
Exhibit `B" to this ordinance, is hereby adopted and incorporated into the Jefferson
County Comprehensive Plan.
July 2, 2007 Page 4
ORDINANCE.NO, 04,0702 -07
Section Four
If any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is
determined to bee non- complaint or invalid, then the reminder of the Ordinance or the
application of the provisions of the Ordinance to other persons or circumstances shall
not be affected. If any amendment to a development regulation adopted by this
Ordinance is found to be non - complaint or invalid, then the prior version of said
development regulations shall become immediately effective and valid.
Section Five
This Ordinance shall take effect immediately after passage.
_-This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption.
ca ,� D AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of July , 2007
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
i 9 1 f
• d 11� f
g G I
1 Jo son, Chair
TTEST, Julie Matthes, CMC
CLERK OF THE BOARD
Da i Wliva4n, ember
L ()�t
J Austin, Member
July 2, 2007 1 Page 5
Townsend Bay and lower Chimacum Creek are prone to impacts related to erosion, seismic events and
landslides. Protection of these areas is regulated under UDC Section 3.6.7 (Geologically Hazardous Areas).
The UGA contains limited 100 -year flood plain areas designated by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA). The boundaries of the 100 -year flood essentially encompass Port Townsend Bay, the marine
shorelines of the Irondale and Port Hadlock community, and the mouth of Chimacum Creek. Urban level
residential, commercial or industrial development is discouraged in the 100 -year flood plain. Any structure
built within the flood plain's boundaries must provide for adequate protection against the 100 -year flood (i.e.,
structures within the floodplain are constructed at a minimum of one foot above the flood plain elevation).
These areas are regulated according to UDC Section 3.6.6 (Frequently Flooded Areas).
Potable Water & Sewage Treatment and Disposal
The entire UGA is served by a public water system now owned and operated by Public Utility District #1
(PUD) of Jefferson County. The water source is groundwater acquired by two different wells. The primary
source is the Sparling Well located at the intersection of Rhody Drive and Kennedy Road on the western border
of the UGA. A secondary well, the Kivley Well, is located just southeast of the Port Hadlock core area of the
UGA.
There is no sanitary sewer system presently in the UGA. All wastewater treatment is provided either by
individual on -site septic systems or small community -based on -site systems. The Jefferson County
Environmental Health Department records indicate no significant failure rates for existing on -site systems in the
UGA. Although the concentration of existing on -site septic systems, given the density and proximity of
development to the Sparling Well, is an issue of concern that is addressed as a part of the capital facility
planning for the new sanitary sewer system. The UGA General Sewer Plan designates an "optional sewer
service area" for a portion of the Urban Low Density Residential zone along the eastern periphery of Chimacum
Creek as a means to make available and encourage (through a density bonus) the provision of sanitary sewer to
existing and/or future development in a significant portion of the Critical Aquifer Recharge Area for the
Sparling Well.
PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH
in 2003, a new 20 year- pepulatien greMh alleeatien for- the UGA of 2,353 pefsens was adopted by jeff-er-sen
County. Based on a 2004 population of 2,553 persons and the projected 20 7year growth of an additional 2,353
persons, the UGA must be able to accommodate a minimum of 4,906 persons by 2024. The new allocation was
based on updated Jefferson County overall population projections prepared by the Washington State Office of
Financial Management (OFM) in 2002 (after adoption of the initial UGA boundary and land use designations).
The new allocation was incorporated into the 2004 Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Update per RCW
36.70A.130(l)(a).
Based on the existing pepulafieft ef2,553 per-seas and the PF@jeeted 20 yeaf gFewth of:2,353 per-sons, the UGA
must be able te aeeemmedeAe a minifnefft ef 4,906 per-sens by 2024. Gr-e-mh Management 14eafings Be
have also ruled that jufisdiefiefis fnay alleeme up to 0
demand) within UQAs se as fiet te aftifiraially eenstfiet the supply ef land te the point where rising land eests
should be sized &Rd densities assigned te aereemmedate an appr-e*iffla4e 20 and maxi
population Fange of 4,906 6,133 ,. r-espeetively.
One of the key efforts of the Special Study was the assessment of future demand for commercial/industrial lands
in the County (based on assumed employment growth and other variables). This analysis is contained in the
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 2 -8 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
EXHIBIT "A"
is also in discussion with the City of Port Townsend about purchasing and treating additional wholesale water
for the PUD water system. This may provide for a more equitable and better long -term solution to meeting
projected demands on the resource.
Three improvement projects are identified in the PUD's preliminary draft Capital Facilities Plan for the UGA
Water System based upon anticipated future demand as follows:
• Sparling�Well Improvements. In order to provide the water requirements for the next 20 years the PUD
is increasing the treatment capacity of the Sparling well by 500 gpm. Estimated Cost : $350,000.
Funding Sources: System Development Charges. Estimated Implementation Date: 2004 -2005.
• New Well. The PUD will be drilling a new production well to maximize its existing water rights, to
meet potential future demands, expand system flexibility, and emergency response capacity. Estimated
Cost : $375,000. Funding Sources: System Development Charges. Estimated Implementation Date:
2005 -2015.
• Surface Water Sources. The PUD is working with the City of Port Townsend to increase the amount of
wholesale water purchased by the PUD from the City as alternative to pursuing additional groundwater
rights.
The PUD is eufr-efitly updating 4s UGA Wa4eF System Plan based en the 20 yeaF population alleeatien fef the
UGA adep4ed by the Getifity ift 2003 and the Fulufe Land Use and Zening Maps adepted in this elefneft4. The,
PUP's adopted Wmer- System Plaff, as may be amended, is heFby adopted by r-efeFenee fmd ineer-pefated if4e
the Gempr-ehensive Plan. However, any water system plan as approved by the Department of Health (DOH)
shall not be incorporated into or by reference into the Comprehensive Plan.
Stormwater Management
The UGA Stormwater Management Plan is a planning document that provides guidance to minimize adverse
effects of stormwater runoff on ground and surface water, including aquatic resources and habitats, water
quantity. It identifies water quality and quantity problems associated with stormwater runoff that may
adversely affect the environment and community and provides recommendations for improvements and
programs including a cost analysis and an implementation schedule. The primary goal of the UGA Stormwater
Management Plan is to preserve and protect water quality and the hydraulic regime within the UGA drainage
basins and the receiving waters of Chimacum Creek and Port Townsend Bay.
The Plan identifies specific structural and non - structural solutions to conveyance and water quality problems
within the UGA. Structural solutions include constructing detention and infiltration ponds, pipes, and treatment
facilities. Non - structural solutions include stormwater management facility inspection and maintenance, public
education and outreach, water quality monitoring, and encouraging low impact development.
The Plan was developed in conformance with Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Rural
Element: Drainage, Flooding, Stormwater Management Issues and Polluted Discharges. It meets the stormwater
management recommendations of the Puget Sound Water Quality Action Plan and the technical standards of the
2001 Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (DOE
Manual).
UGA designation will require the provision of drainage and stormwater management facilities at an urban level
of service standard in order to avoid significant stormwater run -off and water quality impacts to Port Townsend
Bay and Chimacum Creek and to ensure that stormwater run -off does not contaminate groundwater resources.
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 2 -16 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
that can be implemented consistent with the adopted levels of service for urban public
facilities and services.
(b) Provide urban governmental services at urban levels of services (see Capital Facilities
Element, Policy CFP 1.1, and UGA Element, Policy UGA -P 2.8, for list of urban public
facilities and their adopted levels of service) prior to or concurrent with development.
(c) The County shall coordinate with the respective purveyor, special district, agency or other
entities delivering, or who are anticipated to deliver, urban public facilities and services to
ensure that growth and development are timed, phased, and consistent with the provision of
adequate urban level facilities and services.
(d) Where the County is not the urban public facility or service provider for the unincorporated
UGA, the County may adopt an Interlocal Agreement with the appropriate service provider,
where necessary, to ensure the provision of adequate levels of service for urban public
facilities and services. Such agreements, when utilized, shall include the level of urban public
facilities and services.
UGA -P 1.5 Encourage growth in UGAs that will be served by a combination of both existing urban public
facilities and services and any additional needed urban public facilities and services that are
provided by either public or private sources. Development within the unincorporated UGA shall be
consistent with the densities and intensities of use, bulk and dimensional, and other development
standards found within this element and the adopted urban public facilities levels of service.
UGA -P 1.6 The Irondale & Port Hadlock UGA has a limited amount of undeveloped commercial parcels
suitable for attracting and accommodating regional commercial development. To enhance the
potential for commercial redevelopment opportunities in the UGA, parcels currently utilized for
and designated as Urban Residential on the UGA Zoning Map (Figure 2 -2) may be designated
Urban Commercial on the UGA Future Land Use Map (Figure 2 -1), provided that those parcels
meet all of the following criteria:
1) are immediately adjacent to an existing designated Urban Commercial zone; and
2) have direct frontage on or access to a state arterial roadway;.
3) have documented evidence of the need for transformation;
4) a capital facilities plan is in place with the capacity to support the transfer from Urban
Residential to Urban Commercial, and
5) the area rezoned is planned for sewer service within the 20 -year planning horizon of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The UGA Future Land Use Map may designate such parcels for Urban Commercial use indicating
the long -term (i.e., 20 year planning horizon) desire for that type of development while
recognizing the proper current utilization of such parcels for residential use. This policy shall not
be interpreted to require a property owner with such a Zoning Map/Future Land Use Map
combination designation to re -zone their property to the same designation as shown on the Future
Land Use Map. Where such designations may occur for a particular parcel on the Official Maps of
the County, as described herein, the Official Maps and implementing regulations shall be
interpreted to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to RCW 36.70A.040.
UGA -P 1.7 Amendments to the UGA Future Land Use Map (Figure 2 -1) shall be subject to the annual
Comprehensive Plan amendment requirements of UDC Section 9.1. Revisions to the UGA Zoning
Map (Figure 2 -2) and implementing UGA regulations in Appendix D of the UGA shall be subject
to the amendment requirements of UDC Section 9.9.
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 2 -23 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
Table 3.3
Residential Lot Demand Compared to Existing Vacant Residential Lot Supply
Projected Over the Next 20 Years
1996-2016
•iy loci, ,'. t. .. A•
,.352
,, .. .
..::.;;
• .• > •i•.. 4. °�,�; •': i`
?i4, •lei f.4'
:.i
'
.. �,�> .;'�,: -
• `OiJn.....^•�.:ij•
:•;..•Dew.: ,
i %•�`.•„y. ::'Y:.
'.�`:•
�:g�.i
x:y
�• �/•' •2. 9 ytv y�
Incorporated Areas:
Port Townsend (b)
2690
8600
5910
220%
Unincorporated Areas:
Quimper Peninsula (including Glen
500
1735
1235
247%
Cove
iViarrowstone Island 1 dSR 1 381
495%
Irondale/Port Hadlock 112
417%
xala Point
Chimacum TABLE REMOVED
-Discovery Bay (includingGar 227
734 %
S. Chimacum / Inland Valleys 608
344%
Center
Port Ludlow Planned Communi
1141
1354
213
18%
North Port Ludlow
127
367
240
188%
Paradise BM / Shine / Worudyke
250
730
480
192%
Toandos Peninsula (including Coyle)
.80
1116
1036
1295%
Quilcene (including Lake Leland
213
1068
855
401%
Valley)
Brinnon
280
1189
909
325%
West End
19
307
288
1515%
1996 Staff Inventory
3538
13,122
9584
271%
Reduced by recalculation at a mini-
mum lot size of 12,500 sq. R
3538
8280
4742
134%
Reduced by 752 timber and
agricultural resource lands parcels
3538
7528
3990
113%
Reduced by 25% market factor
3538
5646
2993
84%
Total buildable lots for the
unincorporated area:
0 , 1996 staff inventory
5646
2993
84%
0 1995 consultant inventory
4679-
2025-
43%
5944
3290
to 93%
Note: (a) Data compiled as of June 1, 1996 (includes "vested" lots).
(b) The City of Port Townsend has addressed the accommodation of future population growth in its Comprehensive
Plan. The figures above are provided for informational purposes only. The City's lot inventory was calculated
at a 10,000 -sq. & lot Sim minimum, with some consolidation.
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 3 -7 UPDATED BY ORDIANCE #10- 0823 -04
TRANSPORTATION
GOALS AND POLICIES
The purpose of the Jefferson County Transportation Element is to establish goals and policies in support
of the desired and projected transportation system pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management
Act. "
plans" eempfehensive . Goals and policies are set forth in the Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan for all aspects of the transportation system. The overall goal of the transportation
element is to "encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on regional priorities
and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans" RCW 39.70A.020 (3)). The Peninsula
Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO) also provides coordination of local jurisdiction
goals and policies on a larger, regional, system -wide scale. Goals and policies set forth by the PRTPO's
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) provide a framework on which to develop detailed goals and
policies on a local level. The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan and amendments (such as the Non -
Motorized and recreational Trails Plan) contain Goals, Policies and Strategies relating to transportation
for UGA's and should be referred to for further og als, policies and strategies applicable to transportation
in the UGA.
The transportation goals and policies are an integral part of the adopted plan and set forth the adopted
Level of Service (LOS) standards and other policy commitments for Jefferson County. Individual goals
are established for specific targeted issues relating to transportation planning. The overall set of goals
relate to the following targeted issues:
Highways and Arterials
Goal 1
Public Transportation
Goal 2
Non- motorized Transportation
Goal 3
Land Development Standards
Goal 4, Goal 5, and Goal 6
Intergovernmental Coordination
Goal 7 and Goal 8
Demand Management
Goal 9
Environment and Energy
Goal 10
Transportation Improvement Program
Goal 11
Each goal statement is followed by policies that provide direction and mechanisms for reaching the stated
Goals. Also, the Capital Facilities Element provides a list of specific transportation projects determined
to be necessary to address deficiencies identified in roadway sections and at intersections. These projects
are also listed in the County's Six -year Transportation Improvement Plan.
HIGHWAYS AND ARTERIALS
GOAL
TRG 1.0 Provide a safe, convenient, efficient and integrated highway and arterial system for
the movement of people and goods, one that is functionally well maintained,
reflects local environment, and meets the demands of the future.
POLICIES
TRP 1.1 Provide for a Level of Service C, or better, for rural County Road facilities based upon Average
Annual Daily Trips.
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 10 -32 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
TRANSPORTATION
TRP1.2 Provide for a Level of Service D, or better, on all County Road facilities within Urban Growth
Areas, the Port Ludlow Master Planned Resort, and Designated Tourist Corridors as established by
the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization, based upon Average Annual Daily
Trips.
TRP 1.3 Minimize life cycle costs of the County transportation system by preserving and maintaining both
the adequacy and operating condition of the existing transportation system.
TRP 1.4 Maintain the efficiency of traffic flow by monitoring traffic, upgrading traffic control devices, and
developing traffic management techniques as appropriate.
TRP 1.5 Require that streets are designed and constructed to County standards to efficiently and effectively
meet the needs of the community and promote overall transportation safety.
TRP 1.6 Require use of access management techniques to regulate driveway access.
TRP 1.7 Encourage the use of roadway features in rural areas that enhance rural character, minimize
impervious surfaces, and minimize cost to taxpayers and developers.
TRP 1.8 Prevent glare and minimize pollution to the night sky through the use of appropriate roadway
lighting and fixtures without compromising public safety.
TRP 1.9 Encourage the retention or use of roadway features that enhance rural qualities by applying
appropriate rural standards.
TRP 1.10 Encourage the use of roadway features that enhance urban qualities by applying urban design
standards as deemed appropriate in the Urban Growth Area.
TRP 1.1144 Enhance urban qualities by applying appropriate urban standards in Urban Growth Areas and
Master Planned Resorts.
TRP 1.12 44 Design roadways in the County Road system according to their functional classification and
forecasted 20 -year traffic demand.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
GOAL
TRG 2.0 Promote a coordinated and integrated public transportation system available to all
residents, guests, and those without personal transportation options in Jefferson
County.
POLICIES
TRP 2.1 Support existing public transportation programs and coordinate with the Peninsula Regional
Transportation Planning Organization to improve the system as needed.
TRP 2.2 Encourage cooperation between private transportation providers and public transportation
providers.
TRP 2.3 Provide 8,400 Annual Transit Revenue Service Hours ( ATRSH) or a minimum Level of Service of
270 ATRSH per 1,000 County-wide population for fixed routes in Jefferson County. Additionally,
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 10 -33 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
TRANSPORTATION
TRP 3.8 Promote safe, convenient, and protected bicycle parking at activity centers such as schools, parks,
commercial centers, employment and service centers, and mass transit facilities (ferry, bus, etc.) in
accordance with the Non- motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan.
TRP 3.9 In coordination with the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan and the Non - motorized
Transportation and Recreation Trails Plan, provide signage for on- street segments of bicycle,
pedestrian, and equestrian routes in accordance with the Federal Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD).
TRP 3.10 Promote development of adequate pedestrian walkways and crossings, where appropriate,
including facilities separated from the roadway, in accordance with the Non - motorized
Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan. Evaluate safety issues associated with pedestrian and
bicycle travel near school sites and identify potential improvements.
LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
GOAL
TRG 4.0 Encourage land use types, mixes, and densities that promote efficient multi -modal
transportation systems.
POLICIES
TRP 4.1 Reinforce the link between land use and public transportation by promoting urban residential
densities within urban growth areas.
TRP 4.2 Encourage land development proposals that are consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Element and Rural Element and utilize the capacity of the existing transportation system,
including the capacity of transit and non - motorized modes, and avoid costly expansion of the
system.
TRP 4.3 Consider the use of impact fees as a means to ensure that adequate facilities (including, but not
limited to transit, pedestrian facilities, bikeways or road shoulders) are available to serve new
growth and development, and to maintain adopted level of service standards for those facilities.
TRP 4.4 Enhance transportation system safety by requiring appropriate facility design, including providing
landscaping and setbacks adjacent to transportation facilities.
TRP 4.5 Protect outstanding scenic vistas accessible from transportation facilities through site design, and
provide visual, and where possible and appropriate, physical, access to these resources.
TRP 4.6 Require that subdivision and commercial project designs address the following issues:
a. Cost effective transit and delivery of emergency service;
b. Provisions for all transportation modes;
c. Dedication of rights of way for existing and future transportation needs;
d. Motorized and non - motorized access;
e. Shoulders, sidewalks and bicycle pathways;
f. Compatibility between motorized vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users;
g. Inclusion of transit friendly design elements;
h. Adequate parking for non -peak periods; and
i. Frontage improvements and roadway features to meet urban design standards within the
Irondale -Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area_ , the Pon Ludlow Mastef
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 10 -35 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
TRANSPORTATION
TRP 4.7 Provide adequate right -of -way for future transportation needs, through implementation of a
systematic right -of -way acquisition program, by limiting encroachment of structures or ancillary
uses into the right -of -way (e.g., setbacks), requiring right -of -way dedication or easements as part of
development approval, and by acquiring right -of -way for future needs through purchase from
willing sellers.
TRP 4.8 Ensure that unacceptable safety hazards will be mitigated. The definition of unacceptable will be
based on analysis of the existing facility(s) and the current standards for that facility(s) contained
in commonly used and adopted transportation publications.
TRP 4.9 Ensure that the Level of Service for County roads are met for existing and proposed development
concurrent with proposed development prior to issuing development approvals.
TRP 4.10 Jefferson County should not approve new development that would generate traffic that would
decrease the Level of Service below the adopted Level of Service Standards. If a new development
would lower the Level of Service below the adopted Level of Service Standards, the development
proponent should be required to implement one of the following:
1. Construct improvements that will maintain the Level of Service at the adopted Level of
Service Standards•
2. At such time as Jefferson CouDV adopts and implements an impact fee ordinance, pay an
impact fee that is a proportionate share of the cost of improvements necessary to maintain the
adopted Level of Service Standards: or
3. Implement alternative measures such as Transportation Demand Management (TDM), project
phasing, or other appropriate measures approved by the County that will avoid reducing the
Level of Service below the adopted Level of Service Standards.
Ensure that new developments that would geneFate t-Faffi-e-, t-hat ;,*A-uld signifirantly deeFease the
Level of SeFyieae below the adopted Level of -Sep.dee- Stand-Mr-d- fifflr- aH iffteFSOrAi0fi OF Fea
segfnefA fiet be apffeved witheut stipulations feF mitigeAien. When a new development would
loweF the Level Of SeFVire below the adopted Level of Serviese Standar-d, r-equiFe the developmefft
prepenent to mitigate the impact by one of the fellewing&
1 . Genstmet impFevements that restore the Level of SeFviee to the adopted Level of Sefyiee
the development;
phasing, eF otheF appFE)pFiate HARMSHF-0-S deteffnined by the Count), that will avoid the imp
TRP 4.11 Encourage land use development patterns and support technologies that reduce the demand for
increased capacity on roadways.
TRP 4.12 Ensure that proposed roads on unopened public rights -of -way are constructed to appropriate
County standards based on their function, location, projected traffic, and potential for future
circulation.
GOAL
TRG 5.0 Provide additional roadway aesthetic features that are consistent with surrounding
land use.
POLICIES
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 10 -36 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
TRANSPORTATION
STRATEGIES
Action Items
1. Monitor traffic volumes and intersection performance within UGAs on all arterial and major
collector facilities. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 1)
2. Develop access management techniques to regulate driveway access, including use of shared
driveway access. Work with the Washington State Department of Transportation and property
owners to develop appropriate access management measures that will minimize the impacts to SR 19
and SR 116 from new developments and redevelopments in the Irondale and Port Hadlock UGA.
(Corresponding Goal: TRG 1)
3. Discourage direct access from individual lots to present and planned future arterials and collectors
wherever possible. Access from these sites should be provided though local access roadways.
(Corresponding Goal: TRG 1)
4. Develop a method to assess the need for rural area parking facilities on County routes using
appropriate service standards. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 2)
S. Develop site design standards for public transit facilities to be incorporated into County land use
codes and regulations. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 2)
6. As appropriate, require that construction of new roadways and improvements to existing roadways
address the safety needs of bicyclists and pedestrians in conformance with the Non - motorized
Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 3)
Develop a Non - motorized Project Priority Programming System that identifies and ranks projects
necessary to provide safe bicycle and. pedestrian travel; develop operation standards and a
maintenance program that addresses the safety needs of non - motorized travelers, and; develop a
proposal to the Board of County Commissioners for inclusion in the Six Year Transportation
Improvement Plan for allocating transportation funds to support non - motorized transportation
projects. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 3)
8. When appropriate opportunities occur, develop abandoned railroad rights -of -way or utility corridors
as future transportation corridors such as bikeways, pedestrian/equestrian trails, and roadways.
(Corresponding Goal: TRG 3)
9. Develop incentives for developers to dedicate land for expansion of the County's trail network and
adopt into land development regulations. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 3)
10. As appropriate, require that development proposals provide bicycle /pedestrian facilities that meet the
standards in the Non - motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan. (Corresponding Goals:
TRG 3 and TRG 4)
11. In cooperation with school districts, identify the boundaries of school pedestrian walking zones,
develop standards and criteria for roadways within these areas, and define the types of improvement
projects that would need to comply with these standards. (A portion of the action item has been
addressed through the development of the Non - motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails
Plan.) Adopt the standards into the county subdivision code. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 3)
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 10 -41 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
TRANSPORTATION
> UFban &eA4h AFea,
37 34. Develop standards that provide pedestrian facilities along one side of local access streets and
both sides of collectors and arterials. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 3.0)
38. -W. Develop and implement a Truck Routing Plan to ai -eet tmek and hea-.y tFae k *-°ffi^ away f ^m
(Corresponding Goal: TRG 1.0)
39 40. Develop a traffic circulation plan within and adjacent to Urban Growth Areas that considers the
adjacent land use and potential development patterns to ensure that the proper transportation
facilities are planned. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 4.0)
40 41 -Amend the Unified Development Code to provide a consistent and equitable process for opening
public rights -of -way in existing plats. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 4.0)
41 4-2Develop a County Road functional classification system that includes sub - classifications for local
access roads. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 11.0)
42 Revise the Unified Development Code (Jefferson County Code) Section 18.30.020 (5) to require that
approval of development permit applications by Jefferson County is contingent on maintaining the
County's adopted transportation facility Level of Service Standard. (Corresponding Goal: TRG 4.10)
Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 10 -44 UPDATED BY ORDINANCE #17- 1213 -04
TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION
PURPOSE: The purpose of the Transportation Plan portion of Chapter 2, the Irondale -Port Hadlock
Urban Growth Area (UGA) Element, is to amend and augment the Transportation and Capital Facilities
chapters of the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. This portion of the UGA Element contains
information and analysis relative to transportation both within and adjacent to the UGA. The UGA
Transportation Plan considers the impacts to transportation due to UGA designation and forecasts the
transportation needs and costs for a twenty -year planning period. The UGA Transportation Plan describes
the service standards desired for the County's; transportation system within an Urban Growth Area,
projects the impact that the land use pattern contained in this Chapter will have on the transportation
system, and identifies the improvements necessary to meet future demand. The Jefferson County
Comprehensive Plan provides a framework of goals, - policies, and strategies necessary to develop
transportation facilities throughout the County. This portion of the UGA Plan further defines these goals
and policies for development inside the boundaries of the Urban Growth Area at appropriate urban
standards. The adopted Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan portions relating to transportation include
the majority of policy needed to accommodate this UGA. This text is intended to be an amendment or
supplement to the Comprehensive Plan, which should be referenced for additional goals, policies and
strategies not specifically detailed in this document.
INTRODUCTION
The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) was passed in 1990 to encourage planned,
coordinated, growth for a more efficient use of the State's resources by reducing sprawl. One of the ways
in which the GMA seeks to accomplish these goals is to require communities to adopt comprehensive
growth plans that specify how new population growth will be accommodated. By law, these plans must
address the following areas: transportation, capital facilities, utilities, land use, housing, and rural land.
With respect to transportation and transportation infrastructure, the GMA requires the coordinated
planning of regional transportation facilities and services. The GMA also mandates that new development
cannot occur unless infrastructure is in place to accommodate the increased demand, or will be built
concurrent with development.
In response to GMA requirements, the Tri -Area, an area encompassing the Chimacum, Irondale and Port
Hadlock communities, underwent a transportation planning and forecasting study in 1999 known as the
Tri- Area/Glen Cove Special Study. This study analyzed three land use alternatives over a twenty year
period and evaluated the impact on Jefferson County's roadways. Building on the work that was
completed for the Special Study; the goal of this effort is to produce a Transportation Plan that will serve
as a guide for future transportation improvements that will aid in maintaining an adequate level of
transportation services and facilities in the Irondale — Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area (UGA). This
Transportation Plan includes the following:
• Updated functional classification of county roads
• Updated traffic volume forecasts
• Intersection level of service analysis
• Potential transportation improvements
• Environmental Considerations
• Transportation improvement cost estimates
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -1 EXHIBIT "B" 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
Through this planning process, the intent is to recognize when and where deficiencies will occur and to
provide solutions to capacity needs. Viable solutions may include additional travel lanes, passing and
pull -out lanes, turn pockets and signalization of currently un- signaled intersections. The traffic forecasts
used in this plan will provide for adequate urban levels of public facilities and services in the Irondale -
Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Functional Classification
The roadways and highways in the Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA have been identified according to
functional classification. The functional classification system is based on a road's ability to provide either
mobility or access to adjacent land. There are five road classes used to describe roads: principal arterials,
minor arterials, major collectors, minor collectors, and local roads. These classes are further defined by
specifying whether the road is part of an urban or rural roadway system. Table 1 provides a brief
description of the roadway functional classification system. The table is based on WSDOT publication,
Guidelines for Amending Urban Boundaries, Functional Classifications and Federal Aid Systems.
As stated above, mobility is a key component in the functional classification system. When reviewing a
regional road system, it is important to note that arterials provide the most mobility in the functional
classification system. Arterials connect major destination points such as cities and communities.
Principal arterials and minor arterials are distinguished by the importance of the destination, and the
priority given to mobility. Collectors serve as the link between arterials and local streets. They gather (or
collect) traffic from the smallest streets (local access) and direct the traffic onto the arterial system. Local
streets are those which provide direct access to property and consequently provide more limited mobility.
For local streets, mobility is not considered as important as access to land uses.
Roadway spacing and design standards are directly related to the functional classification of the road. In
addition, right -of -way width requirements, lane widths, design speed and other similar characteristics are
all related to a roadway's functional classification. Figure 1 illustrates the updated functional
classification of roadways in the UGA. It is noted that SR19 has been designated as a Highway of
Statewide Significance (HSS) and the functional classification will change from a minor arterial to a
principal arterial. This change reflects the highway's increasing importance for the region and as an HSS
route that links SRI 04 to Port Townsend.
Traffic Volumes and Level of Service
Figure 2 illustrates existing average daily traffic '(ADT) volumes at several locations within the study
area. The most heavily traveled roadways within the UGA include SR19, SRI 16 and Irondale Road with
existing traffic volumes peaking on SR19 at about 14,000 vehicles per day (vpd). A very small section of
SR19 from Irondale Road to Four - Corners' Road carries a peak of 16,898 vpd. This is due to higher than
average Peak Hour volumes along this section of SR19. Given the relatively short period of time SR19
operates at this level and the short length, of roadway that experiences this higher volume of traffic, the
operational counts for the entire length of SR19 from Irondale Road to SR -20 were used in the level of
service analysis of SR19 as this provides a more accurate picture of existing operating conditions along
SR19.
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -2 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
Table 1
Roadway Functional Classification Descriptions
Jefferson County
Functional
Urban
Rural
Class
(5,000 population or more)
Principal
Serves regional major activity areas.
Carries statewide or interstate travel.
Arterial
Carries all inter -urban and significant intra-
Serves most urban areas with populations of at least
urban auto and transit trips.
25,000.
Offers most mobility, least land access.
Provides an integrated network.
Fully or partially controlled access.
Minor
Interconnects and augments principal
Links cities, larger towns and major activity areas
Arterial
arterials.
(e.g., resorts).
Distributes travel to areas smaller than those
Forms integrated network of providing interregional
associated with major arterials.
and inter- county service.
Places more emphasis on land access than
Spaced so that all developed areas are within
principal arterials.
reasonable distance of arterial highway.
Provide for high travel speed with minimum
interference to through movement.
Major
Provides both land access and traffic
Provides service to county seats and major towns.
Collector
circulation within residential area..
Links county seats and major towns with nearby
Provides intra - community continuity but
cities and arterials.
doesn't penetrate identifiable
Serves the more important intra - county travel.
neighborhoods.
Carries local bus routes.
Minor
Collects traffic from local system and
Collects traffic from local roads.
Collector
channels it to arterials.
Provides for all developed areas to be near collector
Provides both land access and traffic
road.
circulation within residential neighborhoods,
Provides service to smaller communities.
commercial areas, and industrial areas.
Link locally important traffic generators with their
rural hinterland.
Local
Provides direct access to abutting land and
Serves primarily to provide access to adjacent land.
access to higher classified cities.
Provides service to travel over relatively short
Offers least mobility.;
distances.
Usually contains no bus routes.
Through traffic deliberately discouraged.
Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative measure that combines the features of speed, safety, travel time,
comfort, convenience and traffic 'interruptions. Creation of the Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA changes the
UGA land use designation from rural to urban. One of the impacts of this change is a concurrent change
in the level of service standard for roadways in the urban growth area. See Table 2 for roadway level of
service definitions. The level of service standard in Jefferson County for rural roadways is LOS C. The
established level of service standard for Jefferson County roadways in an urban area is LOS D or better.
This difference reflects the understanding that higher volumes of traffic are expected in urban areas
because of a concentration of economic activities. These higher levels of congestion are considered
acceptable during peak hours.
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -3 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
In 1998 the Washington State legislature passed House Bill 1487 that separated state highways into two
categories: Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) and Regionally Significant Highways (RS). This
bill authorizes WSDOT to set level of service standards on Highways of Statewide Significance. SR19
was recently designated as a HSS. The Level of Service standards for SR19 are now set by WSDOT.
WSDOT will accomplish this goal through consultation with the Peninsula Regional Transportation
Planning Organization (PRTPO) which in turn will consult with Jefferson County. It should be noted that
LOS standards employed in this document for SR19 are consistent with PRTPO recommendations but
have not been established by WSDOT and are for County planning purposes.
SR19 currently operates at LOS D, an acceptable level for the Urban Growth Area. Outside of the UGA
boundary, SR19 continues to operate at LOS D. The PRTPO is currently looking to designate SR19 as a
Tourist Corridor. Jefferson County participates in the organization's planning process and will follow the
recommendations set forth by the PRTPO. The PRTPO has identified various roadways on the Olympic
Peninsula as Tourist Corridors to address the issues created by fluctuations in traffic volumes during
tourist seasons that cause some roadways to drop below the adopted County standard in rural areas. 2.2
million tourists visit the Port Townsend area every year with approximately 50% accessing the area by
way of SR19. As established by the PRTPO, Tourist Corridors are allowed to operate at LOS D, similar
to roadways in urban areas. Figure 3 shows current Level of Service designations for roadways within the
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA.
Planned Roadway Improvements
Jefferson County's Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for 2004 to 2009 plans non-
capacity related improvements ( channelization and pedestrian facilities) to the portion of Chimacum Road
from M.P. 0.41 to 0.98 (vicinity of the Jefferson County shop southerly to the East Fork Chimacum Creek
crossing). At this time, the Washington State Department of Transportation ( WSDOT) has proposed only
one signalization project for the State - owned facilities of SRI and SRI 16 (Ness's Corner) from 2004 to
2009.
Current Deficiencies
Under existing conditions and urban standards, there are no . current deficiencies in the UGA road system.
Intersection and toad segment Level of Service analysis was performed using the Transportation Research
Board's Highway Capacity Software (HCS). This software uses such information as functional class,
design hourly volume, free flow speed, road and shoulder widths and number of lanes to determine level
of service designations. HCS provides an average LOS designation for the entire intersection, averaging
the level of service of both the major and minor legs of the intersection. The minor leg of an intersection
is defined as the intersecting roadway that is stop controlled, while the major leg is the roadway which is
free flowing. It should be noted that although overall intersection analysis shows no current deficiencies,
roadways that intersect SR19 develop long queues and vehicle delays that approach unacceptable levels.
This is caused by relatively high volumes of traffic traveling along SR19 with few gaps to allow entering
traffic from intersecting roadways.
Non - motorized Transportation
Jefferson County has worked to provide a network of non - motorized transportation facilities to enhance
alternative modes to travel by automobile and for recreational purposes. On -road bicycle routes and lanes,
wide shoulders, sidewalks and multipurpose trails that link destinations are common examples. The
Jefferson County Non - motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails Plan contains a full and detailed
list of County owned facilities. Additionally, the Non - motorized Transportation and Recreational Trails
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -4 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
Plan found no capacity related deficiencies for the planning period based on the current level of service
(LOS) standards adopted in the County's Comprehensive Plan. The Non - motorized Transportation and
Recreational Trails Plan also contains a listing of non - capacity related potential projects and financing
alternatives.
Table 2
Roadway Level of Service Definitions
Jefferson County
LOS
Definition
CategoKy
Describes a condition of free flow with low volumes and high speeds. Freedom to select
Level of Service
desired speeds and to maneuver within the traffic stream is extremely high. Stopped delay at
A
intersections is minimal.
Represents reasonably unimpeded traffic flow operations at average travel speeds. The ability
Level of Service
to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and stopped delays are not
B
bothersome. Drivers are not generally subjected to appreciable tensions.
In the range of stable flow, but speeds and maneuverability are more closely controlled by the
higher volumes. The selection of speed is now significantly affected by interactions with
Level of Service
others in the traffic stream, and maneuvering within the traffic stream requires substantial
C
vigilance on the part of the user. The general level of comfort and convenience declines
noticeably at this level.
Represents high - density, but stable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely
Level of Service
restricted,' and the driver or pedestrian experiences a generally poor level of comfort and
D
convenience. Small increases in traffic flow will generally cause operational problems at this
level.
Represents operating conditions at or near the maximum capacity level. Freedom to maneuver
within the traffic stream is extremely difficult, and it is generally accomplished by forcing a
Level of Service
vehicle or pedestrian to "give way" to accommodate such maneuvers. Comfort and
E
convenience levels are extremely poor, and driver or pedestrian frustration is generally high.
Operations at this level are usually unstable, because small increases in flow or minor
disturbances within the traffic stream will cause breakdowns.
Describes forced or breakdown flow, where volumes are above theoretical capacity. This
condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount which
Level of Service
can traverse'the point. Queues form behind such locations, and operations within the queue are
F
characterized by stop- and -go waves which are extremely unstable. Vehicles may progress at
reasonable. speeds for several hundred feet or more, then be required to stop in a cyclic fashion.
Transit
The Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA is served by the Jefferson Transit Authority that provides regular
scheduled service to the UGA as well as Port Townsend, Port Ludlow and Poulsbo. Weekday service
operates from 6:45 AM to 7:10 PM with Dial -a -Ride available for qualified individuals. Transportation
Policy TRP 2.3 in the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan establishes a minimum level of service
based on Annual Transit Revenue Service Hours ( ATRSH). The level of service standard of 8400
ATRSH as established countywide by the County's Comprehensive Plan will continue to be met for the
planning period as Jefferson Transit continues to revise its service based on demand as appropriate.
Additionally, Jefferson Transit has increased regularly scheduled service to the UGA within the last two
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -5 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
years, and will continue to revise service to the UGA as appropriate. Jefferson Transit also provides
regular updates to its Operating and Capital improvement Plan.
TRANSPORTATION PROJECTIONS
Population Forecasts and Growth Rates
A range of population projections were presented by the Washington State Office of Financial
Management (OFM) for GMA planning purposes. Forecasts to be used in Jefferson County must fall
within the OFM's forecast range and the OFM's intermediate range forecast as endorsed by the Port
Townsend City Council's Community Development & Land Use Committee and adopted by the County
on August 25, 2003. This forecast proposes a 20 -year population projection for the Irondale -Port Hadlock
UGA of 2.76% compounded annually.
In addition to population growth, land development and intensification of land use creates additional
impacts to the transportation system that exceed that of the projected growth rates in the area. At this
time, a General Sewer Plan is under development to allow the County to provide sewer services to areas
targeted for public, commercial, industrial and multi - family residential land uses in the core Port Hadlock
commercial district as well as sections along SR19. Growth and development of the UGA commercial
district is currently limited by the lack of this infrastructure. The introduction of a sewer system will
increase land use densities and subsequently .impact transportation facilities in and around the UGA.
Assuming that the land within the UGA designated as commercial, industrial, and multi - family residential
will be developed during a 20-year. planning period, 2005 — 2024, the Jefferson County has developed
projected rates of development in acres per year, as shown in the following Table 3.
Table 3
Projected Development Rates
Commercial and Industrial Land
Time Period Projected Development Rate (acres / -Year)
2004 0.9
2005-2010 2.1
2011-2024 3.9
Multi-Family Residential
Time Period Projected Development Rate (units /year)
2005 28
2011-2024 66
Source: Jefferson County
This assumes that the availability of a sanitary sewer system will affect the rates of development. After
the UGA designation is completed and.prior to the development of a sewer system, urban commercial and
industrial development will be permitted, but only by those developments that can be served by an on -site
septic system. It is assumed that the sanitary sewer system will be available by 2011 to designated areas.
Using these development rates, 12.6 acres of commercial and industrial land are estimated to be
developed during the 2005 -2010 planning period and 54.3 acres developed from 2011 to 2024. This
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -6 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
growth scenario includes a 15% market reduction factor to account for land that will be unavailable for
development during this period.
Trip Generation
The impact of land development and intensification on the transportation system is determined through
the use of trip generation. Average daily traffic (ADT) rates are based on averages published in the
Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation e Edition. Daily trip generation estimates
for proposed land uses in the Irondale -Port Hadlock area were based primarily on the square footage of
floor space created by the development and to a lesser extent total acreage of developed land. Average
daily trip rates for multi - family residential housing are based on average trips per resident. When using
trips per square footage, assumptions were made on the approximate dimensions of the building in
question. Each study in Trip Generation records the gross floor area of each type of development and the
average of these was used to determine an appropriate size. The Jefferson County Unified Development
Code was also referred to as a functional standard from which to approximate acreage required for
development including parking lots, driveways and setbacks on the specific sites of development. Table 4
summarizes the trip generation rates, site acreage and ADT created by development in the UGA for the
2005 -2010 planning period.
Table 4
Average Daily Trip Rates for Various Land Uses
(2005 —2010)
An estimated 2,980 additional daily :trips- will be created by the development of these sites. The
distribution of the vehicle trips onto the roadway system was calculated by percentage characteristics of
existing traffic conditions. The majority of trips were distributed along SRI 9, SRI 16, Irondale Rd, and
Chimacum Rd, the key circulation routes throughout the area. Distribution percentages were estimated
based on the location within the UGA and the type of land use planned for the site. Land available for
development is generally situated along SR19 and SR116, in existing commercial districts. This trend
continues through 2010 creating the additional traffic volumes seen primarily on the State Routes and
Irondale Rd.
Traffic analysis for the planning period from 2011 through 2024 was based on the assumption that the
sewer system would be in place and the' intensification of land use adjacent to the sewer system would
continue at a higher rate than the 2005 -2010 period. Given 54.3 acres of developable commercial and
industrial land by the year 2024, it was assumed that the distribution of land use would be broken down
into the following uses:
• 20% (11 acres) light industrial
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -7 11/16/2006
2005 -2010
Land Use
code
Trip Rate
Site Acreaee
ADT
Multi - Family Residential
220
35 Residents
3.35 /resident
1.6
117
Boat School
140
5;4 acres
- 38.88 /acre
5.4
210
Credit Union
912
4,000 SF
265.2/1000 *
0.5
1061
Auto Sales
841
25,000 SF
37.5/1000 *
4.8
937
Building Supply
812
16,500 SF
39.7/1000 *
0.9
655
13.2
2980
* Trip rates are per 1000 square feet gross floor area
An estimated 2,980 additional daily :trips- will be created by the development of these sites. The
distribution of the vehicle trips onto the roadway system was calculated by percentage characteristics of
existing traffic conditions. The majority of trips were distributed along SRI 9, SRI 16, Irondale Rd, and
Chimacum Rd, the key circulation routes throughout the area. Distribution percentages were estimated
based on the location within the UGA and the type of land use planned for the site. Land available for
development is generally situated along SR19 and SR116, in existing commercial districts. This trend
continues through 2010 creating the additional traffic volumes seen primarily on the State Routes and
Irondale Rd.
Traffic analysis for the planning period from 2011 through 2024 was based on the assumption that the
sewer system would be in place and the' intensification of land use adjacent to the sewer system would
continue at a higher rate than the 2005 -2010 period. Given 54.3 acres of developable commercial and
industrial land by the year 2024, it was assumed that the distribution of land use would be broken down
into the following uses:
• 20% (11 acres) light industrial
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -7 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
• 80% (43 acres) commercial/retail
Furthermore, it was assumed that 80% of commercial and industrial development would be concentrated
in the existing Port Hadlock commercial district with the remaining commercial and industrial
development located throughout the SRI corridor. Trip generation estimates were developed based on a
weighted average of trip rates per gross floor area (GFA) for various, common types of commercial and
retail developments. In addition to trip rates, average values of GFA for each type of development were
taken from Trip Generation 6rh Edition. These values were used to generate average trip rates per acre of
developable land. by using the It was assumed ptie*-. that gross floor area is roughly 21% of total land
developed. The remainder is taken up by set backs, parking, driveways, landscaping etc. The 21% value
was reached through analysis of existing buildings of similar developments tie in areas comparable to
the UGA. The average ratio of gross floor area to total lot area €er- developed Mews in an or-ban area
came to roughly 21%. This figure was confirmed through calculations involving averages published in
Trip Generation. Table 5 indicates the types of anticipated development, trip rates and average gross floor
area.
Table 5
Trip Generation Rates
(2011— 2024)
Anticipated Development
Trip Rates Per
1000 SF GFA
.Avera a SF GFA
Total Trips
1. Quality Restaurant
89.95
9,000
810
2. Medical/Dental
36.13
15,000
542
3. Nursery
36.08
9,000
325
4. Tire Store
24.87
5,000
124
5. Mini - Warehouse
2.50
12,250
31
6. Super Market Expansion
111.51
20,000
2,230
7. Hardware Store
51.29
20,000
1,026
8. Fast Food Restaurant
496.12
3,000
1,488
9. Convenience Market
1 845.60
3,000
2,537
10. Bank
265.20
4,000
1,061
Total 100,250 10,173
Table 5 Notes:
Gross floor area (GFA) accounts for roughly 21 % of total acreage developed. The remainder is taken up by set
backs, parking, driveways, landscaping, etc. This relationship between gross floor area and total acreage of
development is derived from published averages in the ITE Trip Generation Manual.
Dividing the Average GFA by 0.21 results in the square feet required for the anticipated development:
Developed Square Footage =100,250 SF / 0.21 = 477,381 SF
Dividing Developed Square Feet by 43,560 Square Feet/Acre yields acres required for the anticipated development.
Total Acres of Development = 477,381 / 43,560 = 10.96 Acres
Dividing the Total Trips from the anticipated development by the developed acres producing trips yields the
Average Trip Generation per Acre.
Average Trip Generation per Developed Acre = 10,173 / 10.96 = 928 Trips /acre
Multiplying Average Trip Generation per Developed Acre by the total acres of commercial designation (provided by
DCD 3/8/2004) yields the projected total trips generated by commercial development for the 2011 -2024 planning
period.
Projected Commercial Trip Generation = 928 trips /acre x 43 Acres = 39,919 Trips
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -8 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
Using the data from Table 5 and the methodology described in the Table 5 Notes yields a rate of 4-73 928
trips per acre for bTical commercialil uses. When applied to the 43 acres proposed for commercial
designation, this yields 39,919 average daily trips (ADT) generated by commercial development for the
20011 -2024 planning period. Using_an&the rate of 52 trips per acre for 11 acres of industrial uses
designation. ATrip Generation 6t' Edition) yields 572 ADT_ Len was detefminea by ultiplyi t
atimber- of tfips per- aer-e by the develepable land available. A total of S�69 40,491 aver-age daily vehiele
trips-ADT are estimated to be generated by future commercial and industrial developments in the UGA
and distributed onto the road system for the 14 year- period 2011 -2024. Using the assumption that 80% of
this total will occur near the existing Port Hadlock commercial district, H,HI.S 32,393 ADT will be
generated from commercial and light industrial ,development in this area. The remaining 20% of
commercial and industrial development is assumed to occur throughout the SR19 corridor and create
"54 8,098 ADT.
Multi - Family Residential
Multi _ fFamily residential development will be permitted within the UGA prior to the development of the
sewer system but is not expected to develop greatly due to the restraints of on -site septic service. After the
assumed availability of the sewer system by 2011, multi - family residential development will proceed at
approximately 66 dwelling units per year. This assumption is based on anticipated population growth and
residential capacities described in the Irondale & Port Hadlock UGA Preliminary Buildout Analysis
(Personius, 3/4/2004). Zoning within the UGA has been updated to reflect this development with the
addition of nearly 80 acres of multi - family residential land. This development scenario produces
approximately 911 dwelling units during the 2011 -2024 planning period. Assuming an average of 2
persons per unit and 3.35 ADT per person, this creates 6104 trips. These trips typically begin near SR-
116, Chimacum Rd, and the Port Hadlock Intersection. They are then distributed based on existing traffic
patterns in the area.
The projected addition of this level of dense residential development will increase traffic and congestion
in areas near these dense developments. It will result in a proportionally decreased population locating in
the northern portion of the UGA and lower the traffic impacts in this area. The transportation model for
2004 -2010 assumed a traffic growth rate matching population growth at 2.76 %. This rate accounts for
increases in vehicles on all roadways within the UGA and is a figure to which trip generation is added.
From 2011 -2024, given that a large percentage of the population is being accounted for through Multi -
Family trip generation; it would be inaccurate to assume single- family traffic generation will continue to
increase at 2.76 %. During this time period, the traffic growth rate is adjusted to 2% annually with vehicle
trips added to describe traffic growth resulting from multi- family residential development. This method
more accurately predicts how traffic patterns will change in the UGA with the planned concentration of
the population.
Trip Distribution
Distribution of ADT was accomplished through a method of applying percentages from existing turn
movement counts. A total of-11,249 43,47,1 trips were assumed to be created through commercial and
light industrial development during the planning period. The concentration of population growth into the
projected Mmulti- Ffamily residential developments is accounted for through the 2.76% traffic growth rate
assumed throughout the 2005 -2024 period. To more accurately model this concentrated traffic,
distribution of the 6,104 Mmulti- Family residential trips was concentrated in the areas immediately
surrounding the expected development sites. Although these trips do not necessarily add to projected
traffic levels on a region -wide basis, they significantly impact these areas and were modeled accordingly.
The percentage of vehicles currently entering and exiting intersections was assumed to remain relatively
constant through 2024. The only deviation from this process was to increase the percentage of traffic
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -9 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
entering the Port Hadlock commercial district from SR19 along SRI 16. This was done to reflect the
desire to route traffic to SR19 along SRI 16 and the assumption that multi - family residential
developments will also be served primarily by SRI 16, putting a higher burden on this roadway and
related intersections. Figure 2 displays existing ADT and 2010 and 2024 projected ADT (including trip
generation) for impacted road segments. Tables 6 and 7 show vehicle delay and LOS designations for key
intersections in and immediately surrounding the Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA, as well as road segment
ADT and Level of Service designations. Five intersections situated outside of the UGA boundary have
been included in this analysis due to the potential effect the UGA designation and growth of the
surrounding area will have on the intersections. These intersections are:
• SRI9 /Chimacum Rd/Center Rd (Chimacum Intersection)
• SR19/Woodland Dr /Airport Rd
• SR19/Prospect Ave (Kala Point)
• SR19 /Anderson Lake Rd
• SRI9/West Valley Rd (Chimacum School Intersection)
Table 6
Intersection Delay and Level of Service.
INTERSECTION
EXISTING
DELAY
(seconds)
LOS
GROWTH
RATE
2010
VEHICLE
DELAY
2010 LOS
2
V
U ,
Chimacum2
12
B
2.76 %
19
C
COS
F
Port Hadlock3
12
B
2.76%
16'
C3'',
F
SR19 &Irondale
!14
B _
2.76%
18
C
2.76%
F
Irondale & Mont.
10
B
2.76%
11 _
B
i5
C
SR19 & FourCorners
17
C
2.76% -
26
D
17,
F
SR19 & SRI 16
16
B
2.76%
30
D
F
F
SRI 16 &Cedar
14
B
2.76%
17
C
9994
SRI 16 & OakBay
10
B
2.76%
11
B
182
1
SR19 & Woodland
14 '
B
2.76% '
18
C
718
1"
SR19 & Prospect
16
C
2.76%
19
C
F
SR19 & AndersonLk
18
C
2.76%
28
C
242
F
SR19 & WestValleY
18
C
2.76%
33
D
"04
F
The actual growth in traffic volumes is due to a base population growth rate of 2.76 percent per year and impacts to traffic
from new development in the Hadlock central core area and along SR19. The 2011 -2024 period assumes a rate of 2.00 %.
SR 19 and Chimacum/Center Road' intersection
SR 116 and Irondale /Chimacum Road intersection
Maximum values report by Highway Capacity L tware
Table 7
Road Segment Average Daily Trips and Level of Service
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -10 11/16/2006
Existing
2010 Forecast
2024 Forecast
ad
From
To
ADT
LOS
Growth
ADT
LOS
« DTI"
COS
SCR
Rate
SR19
Northoflrondale
SR20
14,000
D
2.76%
18,437
E
36
F
SR19
North of SRI 16
Irondale
12,470
D
2.76%
16,681
E
3,`8r
SR19
Center Road
SRI 16
9,878
D
2.76%
13,075
D
2OOO
F
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -10 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
hondale Road
SR19
Montgomery
4,248
C
2.76%
5,002
C
14„;
D
Irondale Road
Montgomery
Hadlock Intersection
4,276
C
2.76%
5,035
C
15,_5,9,4,
D
SRI 16
Irondale Rd
OakBayRd
5,550
C
2.76%
6,476
C
2t'344
SRI 16
SR19
Chimacum4rondaleRd
6,300
C
2.76%
8,049
C
_
E
Cedar Ave
SRI 16
Montgomery
1,937
B
2.76%
2,281
B
5,758
C
ChimacumRd
SR116
SR19
5,859
C
2.76%
6,899
C
1
t
* The actual growth in traffic volumes is due to a base population growth rate of 2.76 percent per year and impacts to traffic
from new development in the Hadlock central core area and along SR19. The 2011 -2024 period assumes a rate of 2.00 %.
Deficiencies
Under existing conditions, mobility on SR19 is . adequate. There are several unsignalized intersections
accessing SRI in the Irondale, Port Hadlock and Chimacutn areas. At this time, these roadways typically
experience moderate but acceptable delays as vehicles wait for gaps in traffic on SRI 9. As volumes build,
these gaps in traffic will decrease, creating greater delay on the minor legs of intersections. Long vehicle
queues will develop and safety may be compromised since vehicles will not have enough time to merge
onto SR19. To maintain mobility on SR1% a minimum number of interruptions to traffic flow (traffic
signals) should be pursued. The most appropriate way to avoid excessive signalization is to minimize the
number of locations of traffic access onto SR19 as well as control turn movements onto SR19. The
intersection of SR19 and SRI 16 (Ness's Corner) is the most obvious choice for signalization in the near
future. If signalized, traffic could be redirected to this intersection by way of further road improvements
to facilitate traffic circulation and mobility. The benefits of this would include the following:
• Limited access to SR19 would increase the mobility along SR19
• Minimize impacts of growth to the neighborhoods along Irondale Rd.
• Greater control of turn movements onto SR19
• Reduce existing delays on the minor leg of the intersection
• Provide safe, efficient route through the UGA for freight and other commercial traffic
It is likely that signalization of the SR19 /SR116 intersection would create sufficient gaps in traffic along
SR19 to allow safer, more comfortable turn movements onto SR19. Although this intersection will
r-epeAedly is projected to operate at LOS D by 2010, the minor leg control delay on SRI 16 approaches 62
seconds per vehicle and operates at LOS F. To reduce this delay, relieve congestion and enhance safety,
this intersection should be signalized within the next six years.
Several intersections experience similar problems to 'those of the SR19 /SR116 intersection. SR19
typically experiences acceptable flow while intersecting roadways begin to develop long delays as
vehicles attempt to turn onto SR19. At intersections with lower turn movements such as SR19 and
Woodland Dr, SR19 and Prospect Ave, SR19 and Anderson Lake Rd, minor leg delay and LOS
deficiency can be alleviated through the addition of flared -right turn pockets that allow right - turning
vehicles space to move around left - turning vehicles. While these intersections are located outside of the
UGA, their operational status is dependent on the operational characteristics of SR19 inside of the UGA.
As such, they are included in the transportation analysis for the UGA. Preliminary planning analysis of
these improvements and the potential gaps created by signalization at SR19 and SRI 16 show slight
increases in level of service through 2024.
If growth and development continues as planned over the next twenty years, further improvements to the
road system will be required to maintain adopted Level of Service standards. Signalization of additional
intersections will be required to handle significantly increased volumes projected to occur by 2024. In
addition, capacity improvements will be required on SR19 and SRI 16 to handle expected higher volumes
of traffic.
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -11 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
Based on projected volumes, signal improvements as shown in Table 8 will be required at the following
intersections by 2024:
Inside the UGA:
Hadlock Intersection
SRI and Irondale Rd
SRI 16 and Cedar Ave
Outside the UGA:
Chimacum Intersection
SR19 and West Valley Rd.
The suggested improvements discussed below are based solely on future Level of Service projections and
engineering assumptions and judgment. It is assumed these improvements will not be required during the
2005 -2010 planning period given estimated LOS projections. At this time, only estimates have been made
as to the satisfaction of State recognized Signal Warrants. Satisfaction is based on the following warrants:
• Warrant 1 - Eight Hour Vehicular Volume
• Warrant 2 - Four Hour Vehicular Volume
• Warrant 6 - Coordinated Signal System
• Warrant 8 - Roadway Network
The Washington State Department of Transportation recognizes the above warrants as listed in the
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Chapter 4C. These locations should be
monitored and an engineering study of traffic conditions at each location should be performed to
determine when installation of a traffic control signal is justified. The timing of intersection
improvements along SR19 must consider a balance between providing mobility along the arterial and
accessibility from the intersecting roadways.
Port Hadlock Intersection (Inside UGA). The Port Hadlock intersection is currently an all way stop
controlled intersection in the heart of the Port Hadlock commercial district. At current traffic volumes,
this intersection functions' extremely` well as a stop - controlled intersection. As volumes build toward
projected 2024 levels, service at this intersection begins to break down and signalization will be required
to handle the denser, urban conditions that are expected as growth occurs in the core Port Hadlock
commercial district.
SR19 and Irondale Rd (Inside UGA). Conditions at SR19 and Irondale Rd will become similar to that
of the intersection of SR19 and SRI 16. Possible widening of SR19 through the UGA to four lanes of
traffic would further increase the difficulty and danger of vehicles turning onto SR19. Signalization of
this intersection will be required to handle increased volumes on both legs.
Due to close proximity, it is possible that a signal at both SR19/1rondale Rd and SR19/Four- Corners Rd
(just outside of the UGA) could place unfavorable restrictions on the mobility of SR19. Signal Density on
SR19, as described in the Transportation Research Board's (TCB) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), is
borderline to recommended levels with two signals at these intersections. To minimize the number of
stops along SR19 and reduce financial costs, it is recommended that an alternate solution to signalization
of both intersections be studied.
SR116 and Cedar Ave (Inside UGA). Development along SRI 16 and in the Port Hadlock commercial
district will increase the importance of SRI 16 as a major collector of SR19. Both legs of this intersection
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -12 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
will experience increased volumes and an unacceptable level of service. It is desired and anticipated that
SR116 will continue to be the primary route to connect the Port Hadlock core and SR19. Signalization of
this intersection will facilitate safety and access to and from SR116 and Cedar Ave. Prior to signalization
the addition of right turn vehicle storage on the southbound leg of Cedar Ave should be considered. This
improvement will likely increase the functional capacity of this intersection and maintain an acceptable,
urban level of service until signal warrants are met.
Chimacum Intersection (Outside UGA). Increasing volumes at this all way stop controlled intersection
will require signalization to maintain mobility on SR19 and handle increasing volumes along Chimacum
Rd /Center Rd due to growth and development expected in the Port Hadlock commercial core.
SR19 and West Valley Rd (Outside UGA). Currently this intersection has both left and right turn lanes
with adequate storage in each. However, this intersection is the principal access to Chimacum School and
at peak times experiences long delays due to traffic to and from the school including numerous school
buses. Undesirable delays and safety concerns may dictate signalization of this intersection.
SR19 Roadway Level of Service capacity for SRI as a two -lane highway with turn lane median is a
maximum of 14,300 ADT for LOS threshold "D ". Figure 2 shows that existing conditions approach this
threshold. The projected -2024 volumes for all segments within the UGA are projected to of 29,292 APT
exceeds capacity and result in the roadway operating at LOS F. (See Figure 2 and Figure 3.) Capacity
improvements will have to be completed to increase the level of service of SR19 to acceptable standards
both inside and outside of the UGA. Typically this involves the addition of travel lanes in each direction
including illumination, stormwater mitigation, right -of -way acquisition, and wetland reparations.
Capacity (mobility) improvements for SR 19 are included in the Washington State Highway System Plan:
2003 -2022, Appendix K, page 24.
SR116 Roadway Level of Service capacity for SR116 as a two two -lane highway is a maximum of
12,900 ADT for LOS threshold "D ". The pr-ejeete 2024 volumes for the segments within the UGA are
projected to of 16,33' ADT exceeds this threshold and result in the roadway operating at LOS E.
Capacity improvements will have to be completed to increase the level of service of SR116 to acceptable
standards. Typically this would involve widening the roadway through the addition of a two -way left turn
lane, curb, gutter & sidewalk, illumination, stormwater mitigation, right -of -way acquisition, and wetland
reparations.
Growth and development in the Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA will have some impacts to the transportation
system. A significant portion of that impact will occur on SR19 and SR116. The Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has jurisdiction over these roads. Continued and increased
intergovernmental coordination between WSDOT and Jefferson County will become more important to
coordinate transportation improvements within and adjacent to the Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA. The
coordination will be necessary to accommodate future population growth and development while
mitigating the resulting impacts and increased congestion from both within and outside the UGA.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Human activity can have a major impact on vegetation, wildlife, and water resources. Land use policies
seek to protect the environment, conserve our resources, and permit future development only in areas that
can support it without significant adverse impact. Protecting the natural environment, including
environmentally sensitive lands in developed areas of the UGA requires the following:
• Preserving ecological balance
• Maintaining or improving air and water quality
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -13 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
• Retaining open space in its natural state
• Protecting groundwater from pollution
• Providing public access to and setbacks from environmentally sensitive land
New developments within the Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA sheuWwill be exeeumged -re uq ired to eesaf i�
minimize and mitigate adverse environmental impacts. The UGA designation
will halve little impact on the transportation system. This is not to say that there afe will not
transportation issues or needs associated with growth in and adjacent to the UGA, only that designation as
a UGA is not the overriding factor. The foremost effect the UGA will have on transportation will be when
the availability of sewers to the commercial / industrial / multi - family zoned designated areas allows them
to be developed more intensely densify and beeeme =Fxete intense generate higher traffic volumes
The analysis shows that a total of about 17,000 43,471 additional trips per day would be
generated during the twenty -year planning period and distributed onto the road system.
Transportation decisions are not, and should not be, exempt from environmental review. Impacts to the
natural and built environment need to be taken into consideration before any major transportation
improvement projects are made. Most transportation projects are subject to state and federal
environmental regulations as well as any local environmental laws that apply. County road projects
routinely follow NEPA \SEPA regulations unless they are specifically exempted.
CAPITAL FACILITIES
The concurrency requirement in the Growth Management. Act (GMA) states that "...public facilities and
services ... shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for
occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum
standards." [GMA, Section 2, Planning Goals (12)] This means that public facilities and services must be
in place to serve the proposed use at the level of service (LOS) set by the community. Some
improvements may be completed in whole or in part, by new development within the UGA. A program
should be established to complete construction of these projects in the succeeding time period.
Under current State law and Jefferson' County Comprehensive. Plan policies, highways owned by the State
(State Routes) are not bound by the constraints of concurrency requirements. In these instances, the
timing and prioritization of improvements is ultimately that of the Washington State Department of
Transportation. Typically, WSDOT coordinates with the local jurisdiction and regional transportation
planning organization to maintain a balance between the free -flow movement of people and goods, and
the needs of the local community.
Total transportation facility improvements for the complete 20 -year planning period (2005 -2024) are
summarized in Table 8. These improvements are directly or indirectly associated with development and
growth in the Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA.
WSDOT has to classifies SR19 as a principal arterial and Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS).
This G— hange in will likely qualify the roadway for more state and
federal funding to bring it into compliance with standards.
Transportation facility improvements for the six -year planning period, 2005 -2010, are included in Table
8. This estimate includes the Chimacum Rd improvements proposed in the Jefferson County Six -Year
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Proposed improvements to this roadway include:
• Intersection realignments and improvements
• .57 miles of reconstruction
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -14 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
Proposed funding sources for this project include $500,000 in Rural Arterial Program (RAP) funds and
$217,000 in local funding.
The SRI 9 /SR116 intersection (Ness's Corner) is a state owned facility. Improvements will likely be
funded by a combination of State and local funds. This intersection currently satisfies State warrants for
signalization but is well down on the priority list of proposed projects to receive funding. Project funding
options, including the application of local funding to this project, should be considered to insure this
project is completed at an appropriate time. Proposed improvements include reconstruction and
signalization of this intersection to urban standards.
Table 8 also shows transportation facility improvements associated with new development that should
require completion or participation by adjacent property owners either through private read construction
or through tea Road Improvement District
RequiredConstructing necessary transportation improvements to serve new developments tr-ansp
f4eilifies should be speeirequired by County Comprehensive Plan es-�h policies and Unified
Development Codezening standards to asensure completion.
. All costs shown in Table 8.include an assumed annual
inflation rate of 2.2 %.
:�11] MKIS IN61
The analysis in this portion of Chapter 2 shows that overall; impacts from the development of the UGA on
the transportation system and potential transportation needs in the UGA and adjacent areas are
manageable. While the UGA designation may impact transportation by increasing demand earlier than it
would have otherwise occurred, the impacts would still be likely to occur without UGA designation. The
primary concern has been and continues to be the SR19 Corridor and how future adjacent land use will
impact its ability to carry through - traffic.
While this analysis considers the overall growth of the UGA and is based on the land use assumptions
provided and known at this time, further analysis of the transportation system should be undertaken when
initial land use regulations are in place in order to determine impacts to individual neighborhoods within
the UGA. Further analysis should look at impacts to road segments based on zoning designations in a
more localized manner within the UGA. This could lead to changes in land use, to transportation
standards, or transportation improvements.
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -15 11/16/2006
TRANSPORTATION
Table 8
Transportation Improvements (2005 — 2024) — Regional and UGA Needs
Non-Cap citv Projects 2005 — 2010
Route
I.D.
Route
Name
Description
From
M.P.
To
M.P.
2005 -2010
Cost
Funding
Sources
Funding
Status
Inside UGA
932507
Chimacum Rd
County Shop to W. F. Chimacum C&
0.41
0.98
$ 720,000
RAP /Local
Pm posed
SR19 /116
SR19 @ SRI 16
Si 'on- ReconstructtoUrbanStds.
10.71
10.71
$ 334,484
WSDOT/I.ocal
Proposed
Total Non-Capacity Projects 2005 -2010 $ 1,054
Non -Ca acit Projects 2011 -2024 -T
Route
LD.
Route
Name
Description
From
M.P. -.
To
M.P.
20112024
Cost
Funding
Source(s)
Funding
Status
Inside UGA
SRI 16
Port Hadlock Intersection
Si 'on 2017 -18
$ 434,297
WSDOT/Local
Unfunded
SR19
SR19. @ Irondale Rd
Si alization 2018 -19
$ 346,500
WSDOT/Local
Unfunded
SRI 16
SRI 16. @ Cedar Ave.
Si 'on 2018 -19
$ 346,500
WSDOT/Local
Unfunded
Outside UGA
SR19
SR19. Prospect Ave.
Intersection Improvements 2011 -13
$ 243,270
WSDOT/Local
Unfunded
SR19
SRI @ Anderson Lk- Rd.
Intersection Improvernents 2014 -15
$ 254,091
WSDOT4Axzl
Unfimded
SR19
SR19 @ Woodland Dr.
Intersection hriprovernents (2014-15)
$ 254,091
WSDOT/Local
Unfunded
SR19
SR19 @West Valley Rd
Si 'on 2020 -21
$ 361,914
WSDOTA -oval
Unfimded
SR19
ChimacumIntersection
I Si 'on. 2020 -21)
$ 445,160
WSDOTA -ocal
Unfunded
Total Non-Capacity Projects 2011— 2024 $ 2,685,823
CaDacitvProiects 2005 -2024
Route
LD.
Route
Name
Description
From
M.P.
To
M.P.
2005 -2024
Cost
Funding
Sou s
Funding
Status
Inside UGA
SR19
SR19
Widen to Four Lanes 2020 -22
10.50
11.75
$ 5,978,800
WSDOT
Unfunded
SRI 16
SRI 16
Widen to Three Lanes TL) 2020 -22
0.0
1.11
$ 2,408,700
WSDOT
Unfunded
Outside UGA
SR19
SR19 Widen to Four Lanes 2020 -22 '
9.00
10.50
$ 7,174,600
WSDOT
Unfunded
SR19
SR19 Widen to Four Lanes 2020 -22
11.75
14.16
$ 11,527,100
WSDOT
Unfunded
Total Capacity Projects 2005 - 2024 $ 27,089,200
Private Develo er Projects 2005-2024
Route
LD.
Route
Name
Description
From
M.P.
To
M P.
2005 -2024
Cost
Funding
Source(s)
Funding
Status
Inside UGA
932507
Chimacuun Rd.
Reconstruction to Urban Stds.
0.41
0.64
$ 138,600
Developer
Unfunded
SRI 16
SRI 16
Reconstruction to Urban Stds.
0.12
0.47
$ 210,000
Developer
Unfunded
SRI 16
SRI 16
Reconstruction to Urban Stds.
.47
1.11
$ 164,000
Developer
Unfunded
658909
D Street
Reconstruction to Urban Stds.
0.00
0.10
$ 72,722
Developer
Unfunded
634509
Hunt Rd
I Reconstruction to Urban Srds
0.00
020
$ 115,000
1 Developer
Unfunded
933507
Irondale Rd
I Reconstruction to Urban Stds.
1.56
1 1.79
$ 284,545
Developer
Unfunded
Total Private Developer Projects 2005 - 2024 $ 984,867
Total All Projects 2005 - 2024 $ 31,814,374
Irondale -Port Hadlock UGA Transportation Plan 2 -16 11/16/2006