City of Airway Heights Transportation Circulation Plan

Transcription

1 I. INTRODUCTION Airway Heights is one of the most rapidly growing cities in Eastern Washington. The population has increased nearly 239 percent between 1990 to 2015, a 5 percent annual growth rate. This has settled into a consistent, near 2 percent annual growth rate in recent history (within last 10-years +/-). Growth within the City occurred initially in response to the service and housing needs of Fairchild Air Force Base and the Airway Heights Corrections Center. The City has evolved into a commercial center for the West Plains region of Spokane County, also for cities and townships located west along the U.S. Route 2 corridor. Airway Heights has also become a focal point for regional entertainment venues such as Northern Quest Resort and Casino and the new West Plains Casino currently under development. City officials anticipate additional land use growth in support of activities highlighted above. This includes the construction of new commercial businesses, residential housing, and the expansion of two casino sites. In response to land use growth and increasing City cut-through travel on U.S. Route 2 and Hayford Road, staff with the Public Works and Planning departments commissioned this (TCP) to recommend the infrastructure improvements needed to assure the safe and effective mobility of traffic, pedestrians, and bicycles within the City. Forecast street and intersection improvement needs are recommended primarily based on year 2024 and year 2040 traffic forecasts, as developed from land use projections. Missing links in pedestrian and bicycle facilities were identified to determine nonmotorized infrastructure needs. Primary goals of the Airway Heights TCP include: 1. Recommend the street and intersection improvements necessary to accommodate land use development growth. 2. Recommend improvements to enhance non-motorized mobility (pedestrian and bike) 3. Develop short-and long-range improvement plans. SCOPE & METHODOLOGY A principal emphasis of this TCP is analyzing the safe and effective movement of traffic, as measured through a review street capacity and intersection operations. The study area/focus for this Plan was developed in coordination with City engineering and planning staff, with arterials and collectors of emphasis summarized by Table 1. Table 1. Study Minor Arterials & Major Collectors Urban Principal Arterial Urban Major Collector U.S. Route 2 Hayford Road (north) Sprague Avenue Urban Minor Arterial McFarlane Road Hayford Road (south) Craig Road (south) Garfield Road (north) Russell Street (north) Deno Road Note: North and south are in relation to U.S. Route 2 Source: WSDOT Geoportal Functional Classification Map Intersections tend to experience congestion more rapidly versus street sections due to the number and complexity of turning conflicts. Planning practice is to review traffic operations and capacity through consideration of intersection operations first, using street capacity analysis as a secondary measure. Intersections reviewed for this study were identified in coordination with technical staff from the City and include: U.S. Route 2/Craig Road U.S. Route 2/Lundstrom Street U.S. Route 2/Lawson Street Page 1

2 U.S. Route 2/Garfield Road U.S. Route 2/Lyons Road U.S. Route 2/Hayford Road U.S. Route 2/Deer Heights Road Hayford Road/Deno Road Hayford Road/Northern Quest Avenue Hayford Road/Sprague Avenue Hayford Road/12 th Avenue Hayford Road/21 st Avenue Hayford Road/McFarlane Road Craig Road/Deno Road Craig Road/McFarlane Road Lawson Street/21 st Avenue Lawson Street/McFarlane Road Roadway Capacity Two methods were used to review traffic operations and capacity, both founded on methods obtained from the Highway Capacity Manual (TRB, 2010). The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) is a nationally recognized and locally accepted method of measuring traffic flow and congestion for streets and intersections. Criteria range from LOS A, indicating free-flow conditions with minimal vehicle delays, to LOS F, indicating congestion with significant vehicle delays (and operational failures). Streets. The TCP street capacity methodology measures current and forecast average daily traffic (ADT) volumes against levels-ofservice (LOS) thresholds recommended with the 2012 Quality/Level-of-Service Handbook (Florida DOT, 2012). The methodology presented by this Handbook uses street cross section/lane, speed/class, and travel assumptions to adapt Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology to volume capacity thresholds used for planning level analysis. Thresholds are based on the FDOT category which pertains to State Signalized Arterials within an urban environment. Per FDOT methodology, these volumes are reduced by 10 percent in application for City streets. Also, the City experiences high levels of turning traffic activity from two-way left-turn (TWLT) lanes, assumed to increase street capacity by 15 percent. The resulting capacity thresholds for the City are shown with Table 2. Number of Lanes Table 2. Roadway Capacity Thresholds City Streets U.S. Route 2 LOS C LOS D LOS C LOS D Two 6,600 13,300 7,300 14,800 Three 7,600 15,300 8,400 17,000 Four 13,100 29,200 14,500 32,400 Five 15,100 33,600 16,700 37,300 Six 21,000 45,000 23,300 50,000 Seven 24,100 51,700 26,800 57,500 Source: 2012 Quality/LOS Manual (Florida DOT, 2012) LOS C was the standard used in capacity review of City streets. LOS D was the standard used for U.S. Route 2, given travelers anticipate additional congestion and delay along the Highway. U.S. Route 2 is characterized by wider travel lanes and higher speed limits with signal or roundabout control provided at major intersections. Volume-to-capacity (v/c) was also calculated for street segments. Although thresholds highlighted above represent practical capacity limit of City streets, as to maintain a LOS C standard, v/c in excess of 0.75 was highlighted to denote roadways approaching standard. Note these generalized volume/los thresholds are used to help City officials understand whether roadways have general capacity Page 2

3 for travel demands, from a planning perspective, with adequate safety implied overall when thresholds are met. This analysis should not take precedence over specific operations and capacity analyses performed for individual streets as a function of a grant application, development traffic impact analysis, or design analyses, as performed on a per-project basis in the future. Specific traffic analysis is recommended when the conclusions for any specific roadway or road section must be established. Intersections. Operations/capacity for an intersection is defined by the average control delay experienced by drivers, as related to LOS thresholds. LOS for a signalized intersection is defined in terms of the average control delay experienced by all vehicles at the intersection, as measured over a specific period such as a peak hour. LOS for a one or two-way stop controlled intersection or driveway is the function of average control delays experienced by vehicles in an approach or approach movement over the peak hour. Typically, the stopped approach or movement experiencing the worst LOS is reported for the intersection. Finally, LOS at an all-way stop-controlled intersection is defined by the average control delays experienced by all vehicles at the intersection, as with signals, but the LOS thresholds are associated with delays for unsignalized intersections. Table 3 provides LOS criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections per the HCM. As shown, LOS thresholds vary between signalized and unsignalized intersections. This is because driver tolerances for delay are higher at signalized versus unsignalized intersections. Table 3. HCM Intersection Delay & LOS Thresholds Level of Service Signalized: Control Delay (sec/veh) Unsignalized: Control Delay (sec/veh) A B > C > D > E > F > Source: Highway Capacity Manual (TRB, 2010) LOS D is the desired threshold for intersections within the City, meaning traffic operations and capacity for intersections are adequate at LOS D or higher. LOS E is allowed situationally for unsignalized intersections, at the discretion of City officials, when reasonable improvement measures cannot be used to mitigate a LOS E condition without great cost. Thus, LOS E was used as the long-range threshold for stop-controlled intersections given the conservative approach forecasts and methodologies used for this TCP. LOS F is not allowed at study intersections. LOS was determined using Synchro 9.1 (Trafficware, 2014), a software module that generates operations/capacity results based on the methods of the HCM. Roundabouts. The analysis of future roundabouts was performed using SIDRA Intersection 601 (Akcelik, 2015.) This software is recommended by WSDOT officials for roundabout analysis and provides conventional traffic measures with LOS D being the minimum capacity threshold. However, WSDOT officials use the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio as a primary measure of capacity and operation for roundabouts, indicating a 1.0 v/c as the desired upper threshold for intersection conditions. Modification to roundabout design or alternative improvement measures is necessitated typically with a v/c that greatly exceeds 1.0. Page 3

4 A WSDOT prescribed SIDRA Policy Setting methodology was used as the basis for roundabout analysis, per a technical memo available through the DOT website. Pedestrians & Bicycles The Plan addresses essential pedestrian and bicycle facilities that would enhance commute and recreational activities. Pedestrian Planning. There were two major objectives of pedestrian analyses: 1) reviewing access to essential City services and land uses and 2) reviewing pedestrian crossing needs along primary study roadways. Recommendations for pedestrian facilities were developed based A Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities (AASHTO, 2004). The guideline identifies an Overlapping Priorities Method for the review of essential pedestrian connections. Essential community facilities and services are noted on a map. For the City, facilities and services include schools, parks, the community center, City Hall, and transit; essentially all centers where walking activity is anticipated to/from homes, businesses, etc. A ¼-mile boundary or circle is then inscribed around these centers. The adequacy of pedestrian connectivity is studied to determine whether additional sidewalk or paths would be needed to assure adequate access. In addition, marked pedestrian crossings of minor arterials and major collectors were identified on a City map. Crossings are recommended between primary land uses along these roadways on a ¼-mile basis. The map was reviewed to determine if: 1) crossings are provided between primary land uses and 2) crossings meet the ¼-mile spacing criteria. Additional crossings would be considered where these criteria are not met. Bicycle Facilities. Review of bicycle facilities was qualitative and reviewed based on coordination with City officials. This helped confirm the location of existing dedicated or shared bicycle lanes or shared facilities and identify where new facilities may be needed. Direction for this process was obtained from A Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (AASHTO, 2012). The guide recommends types of bicycle facilities that can be developed given data such as street width and ADT. Summary criteria is as follows: Shared lanes with no special provision can be developed on roadways with less than 1,000 ADT, typically designated as an alternative route to busier arterials. Shared lanes on streets with wider shoulders, but where width is insufficient for bike lanes. Typically used on streets with approximate 3,000 ADT (and sometimes higher) with posted speeds that exceed 25 mph. Marked shared lanes can be developed on narrow roads where speed limit is 35 mph or less, typically used on variable volume streets with high turnover in parking. Paved shoulders can be designated along roadways that connect town centers and major attractions. Bike lanes can be developed on roadways with sufficient width, used for commute and recreational activities. No speed or volume criteria are provided. Shared use paths are linear ROWs along greenways, waterways, freeways, abandoned rail lines, unused rightof-way, etc. They are used primarily for recreation; although short sections are often used to provide connection/continuity between other bicycle rights-of-way. Bicycle boulevards are often located along local roadways used as an alternative to busy streets. Typically developed along roadways with 25 mph speeds or less with roadways less than 3,000 ADT. Collision Histories Collision histories were considered to determine whether safety problems occur because of operational or design issues, such as inadequate signal phasing, sight distance issues, channelization Page 4

5 misalignment, etc. A location where numerous incidents occur could indicate a high accident location (HAL). Any collision is important to consider and is relevant in safety analyses. However, collisions are reviewed based on severity rates to help determine whether remediation is needed to address persistent, reoccurring collisions within the context of traffic densities. An intersection may have a high number of collisions, but this is not as statistically significant if high traffic volumes are also experienced. Calculating collision rates is a means for statistically quantifying collision density. An intersection collision rate (ICR) quantifies severity based on the number of average accidents occurring per year compared to entering ADT, as calculated by the equation of Table 4. Table 4. Summary Collision Rates & Equations Collision Rates Equation Intersection Collision Rate (ICR) (Collisions/million entering vehicles Source: Traffic Engineering Handbook (ITE, 6 th Edition, 2009) Average Accidents per Year * 1,000, * Total Entering Intersection ADT Typically, jurisdictions like Airway Heights have no set thresholds for identifying a HAL. However, a typical industry recommendation is that further evaluation/analysis should be considered if accident rates exceed 1.0 collisions per million entering vehicles. Page 5

6 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS This section summarizes existing street conditions. Discussed is the TCP street network, traffic volumes, operations/capacity, collision histories, pedestrian/bicycle facilities, transit, and heavy vehicle conditions. PRIMARY PLAN ROADWAYS The City encompasses 2,000 acres and has 40 miles of roadway. About 30 miles of roadway is paved with the balance gravel or unimproved. Figure 1 shows City streets delineated in terms of functional classification (e.g. minor arterial, collector, local street). The map also highlights present urban growth areas (UGAs). The Plan reviews capacity primarily for eight arterial and collector streets. A description of these streets is as follows: U.S. Route 2. A five-lane urban principal arterial between the east and west City limits. The road provides access to most businesses within the City and bisects the north and south halves of town. The posted speed limit ranges between 35 and 45 mph within City limits and increases to 55 mph just outside the City limits in both directions. Hayford Road. An urban major collector north and urban minor arterial south of U.S. Route 2; although, a process is underway to reclassify the entire street to urban minor arterial throughout Airway Heights. The street has a fivelane section from Northern Quest Avenue to approximately 350 feet south of U.S. Route 2; otherwise Hayford Road has a two-lane cross section. The road provides an approach to services such as Northern Quest Resort and Casino, the Airway Heights Corrections Center, Walmart, commercial areas, and residential housing. The posted speed limit ranges from 35 mph to 45 mph within City limits. Craig Road. A two-lane roadway providing access to residential areas and light industrial businesses to the north and south of U.S. Route 2. Craig Road extends north/south at the western edge of the City and switches from a major collector south to a local road north of U.S Route 2. The speed limit is 35 mph near U.S. Route 2, and 45 mph further north and south, respectively. McFarlane Road. A major collector from Hayford Road to Craig Road. It provides access to light industrial areas at the southern limits of the City. The two-lane road extends approximately 2 miles and has a speed limit of 45 mph. 21 st Avenue. A proposed two-lane minor arterial that extends approximately 2 miles east/west from Hayford Road to Craig Road. The street provides access to light industrial businesses and some single-family units and is primarily gravel pavement. The posted speed is 25 mph. Lawson Street. A two-lane major collector extending north from McFarlane Road across U.S Route 2 into residential areas at the north end of the City. The intersection with U.S. Route 2 is one of three signalized intersections within City limits. The posted speed is 25 mph. Garfield Road. North of U.S. Route 2, this road is a threelane major collector that accesses a few businesses and single- and multi-family residences before continuing to West 6 th Avenue. The speed limit is 35 mph. To the south of U.S. Route 2, the road is two lanes with a 35-mph speed limit and accesses primarily light industrial businesses. Sprague Avenue. A three/five lane major collector that spans from Hayford Road west to Russell Street. The road provides the primary access to Airway Heights Corrections Center, Spokane County Raceway, and Airway Motocross Park. The posted speed is 35 mph along its length. Several local streets were considered in relation to intersections. These are two and three lane roadways that provide access to properties throughout the City and have posted speeds of 25 mph. Page 6

7

8 Plan intersections are summarized by Table 5. Shown is the number of turn lanes for each intersection, as denoted by the number given (1 for a lane, 2 for two lanes, etc.). If no specific lane is shown, then turns are performed from adjacent, shared throughlane. Also shown are traffic control conditions (signal, one-way, two-way, or all way stops). Controls and lanes are denoted with an X. This information was used in intersection LOS analyses. Table 5. Intersection Traffic Control & Turn Lane Identification Intersection Traffic Control Traffic Signal One-Way Stop Two-Way Stop Intersection Geometrics U.S. Route 2/Craig Road X U.S. Route 2/Lundstrom Street X U.S. Route 2/Lawson Street X U.S. Route 2/Garfield Road X U.S. Route 2/Lyons Road X U.S. Route 2/Hayford Road X U.S. Route 2/Deer Heights Road X Hayford Road/Deno Road X Hayford Road/Northern Quest Ave X Hayford Road/Sprague Avenue X Hayford Road/12 th Avenue X Hayford Road/21 st Avenue X Hayford Road/McFarlane Road X Craig Road/Deno Road X Craig Road/McFarlane Road X Lawson Street/21 st Avenue X Lawson Street/McFarlane Road X All-Way Stop NB Left Turn Lane NB Right Turn Lane SB Left Turn Lane SB Right Turn Lane WB Left Turn Lane WB Right Turn Lane EB Left Turn Lane EB Right Turn Lane TRAFFIC COUNTS ADT and PM peak hour turning movement counts were obtained from various sources. ADT counts for six locations along U.S. Route 2, two locations on Hayford Road, and a location on Deno Road was secured from WSDOT and Spokane County. ADT counts were performed for eight locations in June 2017 to support the TCP. Finally, ADT volumes were estimated at five locations using ADT-to-peak hour ratios established from other same-street count locations. ADT counts support the street capacity analysis. PM peak hour turning movement counts were obtained to capture the travel patterns of the evening work commute, the timeframe of highest travel demands in the City. Counts were gathered for seven intersections from a May 2016 TIA conducted by David Evans and Associates, Inc for the new West Plains Casino. Eight traffic counts were performed specifically for this Plan in June and July, Finally, turn movements were estimated from peak hourly tube counts at two lessor volume intersections. Summary ADT and turn movement counts are shown with Figure 2. The intent is to address primary intersections impacted by traffic growth, and/or to help assess geometric and traffic control needs for intersections located along potential new or improved corridors. Obviously, this is not an all-inclusive list of notable City intersections. However, given the range of intersection types and scenarios studied, it is anticipated engineering and planning staff could draw parallels to make assessment of other intersections, as needed, based on volume versus geometric and control data. Weekday and PM peak hour count resources is provided with Technical Appendix A. ROADWAY & INTERSECTION CAPACITY A summary of existing transportation conditions is summarized through a review of roadway capacity and intersection operations. Page 8

9

10 Roadway Capacity The roadway capacity analysis was performed based on a review of Florida DOT volume thresholds versus street cross-sections and existing ADT volumes. A summary of the capacity analysis is provided on Table 6. Estimated ADT is highlighted with an *. Table 6. Existing Roadway Capacity Analysis Num. Lanes Capacity Threshold ADT Volume Criteria Exceed Roadway Segment V/C Principal Arterial Sections U. S. Route 2 E/of Craig Road 5 37,300 20,000 No 0.54 U. S. Route 2 W/of Garfield Road 5 37,300 24,000 No 0.64 U. S. Route 2 E/of Garfield Road 5 37,300 25,000 No 0.67 U. S. Route 2 W/of Hayford Road 5 37,300 26,000 No 0.70 U. S. Route 2 E/of Hayford Road 5 37,300 28,000 No 0.75 Minor Arterial Sections (Assumes Hayford Road as an Arterial) Hayford Road S/of Deno Road 2 13,300 9,250 No 0.70 Hayford Road N/of U.S. Route ,600 17,965 No 0.53 Hayford Road S/of U.S. Route ,600 11,090 No 0.33 Hayford Road S/of McFarlane Rd 2 13,300 5,550 No 0.42 Major Collector Sections Craig Road N/of U.S. Route ,300 1,100* No 0.08 Craig Road S/of U.S. Route ,300 3,390 No 0.25 Lawson Street N/of U.S. Route ,300 2,470* No 0.19 Lawson Street S/of U.S. Route ,300 2,565 No 0.19 Garfield Road N/of U.S. Route ,300 3,690* No 0.28 Garfield Road S/of U.S. Route ,300 2,350 No 0.18 Sprague Ave W/of Hayford Road 5 33,600 2,545 No 0.08 McFarlane Rd W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 2,680 No 0.20 Deno Road W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 2,950 No 0.22 Other Roadway Section Northern Quest W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 3,770* No th Avenue E/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 1,890* No st Avenue W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 1,180 No 0.09 As shown, all ADT counts are below HCM volume thresholds indicating study streets currently function at LOS C or better. The v/c analysis indicates count locations along U.S. Route 2 are also above the LOC D threshold; although existing volumes approach capacity limits along the Highway east of Hayford Road. This is evidenced by a the v/c of Field observation confirms assessments for Plan streets. Traffic moves consistently at posted speed limits along U.S. Route 2 and Hayford Road, save minor delay and queue issues approaching the Hayford Road/U.S. Route 2 intersection. Even then, most traffic can clear this intersection within a signal cycle. All other streets have minimal congestion, as apparent traveling within the City. Intersection Operations/Capacity LOS and operations analyses were performed based on a review of existing traffic volumes versus current geometric and traffic control conditions noted in the field. For Plan modeling purposes, signal timing and phase settings were modeled after timing card data available from WSDOT for the Hayford Road/U.S. Route 2 intersection, and based on field observation. Table 7 provides summary LOS for the PM peak hour. Also shown are average control vehicle delays for each intersection. Again, LOS and control delays for stop controlled intersections are the function of the worst approach or movement, whereas LOS for signalized intersections and all-way stops are a function of overall delay. Page 10

11 Signal Unsignalized Table 7. Existing Intersection LOS & Delay Existing Delay Intersection LOS (sec) U.S. Route 2/Lawson Street B 10.8 U.S. Route 2/Garfield Road B 11.6 U.S. Route 2/Hayford Road D 50.1 Hayford Road/Northern Quest Ave A 9.5 U.S. Route 2/Craig Road F 94.7 U.S. Route 2/Lundstrom Street F 76.3 U.S. Route 2/Lyons Road F >250 U.S. Route 2/Deer Heights Road F Hayford Road/Deno Road B 12.1 Hayford Road/Sprague Avenue C 15.4 Hayford Road/12 th Avenue E 39.9 Hayford Road/21 st Avenue C 18.0 Hayford Road/McFarlane Road C 16.2 Craig Road/Deno Road A 9.5 Craig Road/McFarlane Road B 10.5 Lawson Street/21 st Avenue* A 7.2 Lawson Street/McFarlane Road A 9.3 * Indicates an all-way stop LOS D is the capacity threshold for intersections under the existing conditions analysis. As shown, LOS D is maintained throughout most of the City with exception of unsignalized intersections along U.S. Route 2, also for the Hayford Road/12 th Avenue intersection. Stop-controlled intersections along U.S. Route 2 function at LOS F. The Hayford Road/12 th Avenue intersection functions at LOS E. Field observations confirm LOS analyses. Travelers must wait for extended timeframes prior to finding gaps for turning movements along the Highway. High delays can be experienced along Hayford Road from U.S. Route 2 to 12 th Avenue adjacent to Walmart. Travel through remaining signalized and unsignalized intersections is sufficient throughout the City. LOS results are shown graphically on Figure 3. LOS worksheets are provided in Technical Appendix B. COLLISION/SAFETY ANALYSIS Collision histories were considered for all roads within the City of Airway Heights, including intersections, driveways, and mid-block locations. Collisions were reviewed for a timeframe extending between January 4, 2013 to February 24, WSDOT provided all collision data used in the analysis. A total of 334 recorded collisions occurred from January 4, 2013 to February 24, 2017, averaging 80.6 collisions per year. Overall, 56 percent of collisions involved vehicle property damage only with 34 percent involving injuries and fatalities. Three fatalities occurred within the City: one head-on collision between two vehicles along U.S. Route 2, one a motorcycle colliding with a concrete barrier along Russell Street, and the last a pedestrian stuck by a vehicle at a midblock location along U.S. Route 2. The top five intersection locations are shown with Table 8. Also summarized are average annual collisions and severity data. Intersection Table 8. Intersection & Driveway Collision Summary Traffic Control 4.1-Year Total Average Annual Severity Prop. Damage Injury Fatal U.S. Route 2/Hayford Road U.S. Route 2/Garfield Road U.S. Route 2/Lawson Street U.S. Route 2/Private Drive (east) U.S. Route 2/Private Drive (west) * private driveways access the Crosspointe Plaza Page 11

12

13 The highest collision locations were reviewed in further detail, summarized with the corresponding ICR provided as follows: 1. U.S. Route 2 & Hayford Road. There were 101 collisions noted over the analysis timeframe with an average of 24.4 collisions occurring per year. There is 41,530 ADT that enters the intersection each day, calculating to an ICR of 1.61 collisions per million entering vehicles. 2. U.S. Route 2 & Garfield Road. There were 20 collisions noted over the analysis timeframe with an average of 4.8 collisions occurring per year. About 27,520 ADT enter the intersection per day, with a resultant ICR of 0.48 collisions per million entering vehicles. 3. U.S. Route 2 & Lawson Street. There were 17 collisions occurred over the analysis timeframe for an average of 4.1 collisions occurring per year. About 24,520 ADT enter the intersection per day, calculating to an ICR of 0.46 collisions per million entering vehicles. 4. U.S. Route 2 & Private Drives. Two private driveways on U.S. Route 2 access Crosspointe Plaza immediately east of Hayford Road and had a combined total of 33 collisions. The east driveway experiences 4.1 collisions per year and west 3.9 collisions per year, on average. Assuming a conservative ICR analysis, each driveway was assumed to support 25,000 entering vehicles each day. This results in an ICR of 0.45 for the east driveway and 0.43 for the west. Collision data reflects only recorded collisions identified through evidentiary reports provided by WSDOT. Unreported collisions likely occur throughout the City; however, safety studies can only be performed based on recorded data. Typically, unreported collisions involve only minor property damage with no injuries. There were 229 collisions noted for U.S. Route 2 within the City during the study timeframe, for an average of 57.3 collisions per year. This is a 2.5-mile section with counts that range between 20,000 and 28,000 ADT. A corridor collision rate (CCR) for this street section is based on the number of average accidents per year as compared with ADT and the length of the corridor. Given this equation, a CCR of 2.1 to 3.1 would be noted for U.S. Route 2 within the City. The 2014 Annual Collision Summary report available from WSDOT, the most current volume available, indicates Spokane County experiences a system-wide collision rate of collisions per 100 million miles of travel or collisions per million miles of travel. Thus, the collision rate for U.S. 2 well exceeds trends for Spokane County. Collision summaries are provided in Technical Appendix C. TRANSIT, PEDESTRIANS, & BICYCLES This section describes existing transit, pedestrian, and bicycle conditions for the City. Transit Transit within Airway Heights is operated by Spokane Transit Authority (STA) out of the main downtown Spokane hub. There is one bus route that operates between the City and Spokane, through the Airway Heights, and beyond the western City limits to Fairchild Air Force Base. The STA line that serves Airway Heights is Route 61. The bus stops at various sites along U.S. Route 2 and Hayford Road, including Northern Quest Casino, the Department of Corrections, West Plains Industrial Park, and Fairchild. Airway Heights Park and Ride is one of the busiest stops in the City with an average of 65 persons boarding per weekday, as indicated in the Annual Performance Report Passenger Facilities (STA, 2016). STA. STA Route 61 Highway 2 via Browne s Addition accesses the City on weekdays and weekends throughout the year. Rotation times vary depending on weekday versus weekends. The weekday Page 13

14 route operates on a 30-minute rotation, increasing to a 1-hour rotation on weekends/holidays. The weekday route from Spokane operates from approximately 5:50 AM until 12:20 PM. The weekday route to Downtown Spokane from Fairchild operates from about 5:35 AM until 9:30 PM. The Route operates along U.S. Route 2, Hayford Road, Northern Quest Avenue, Sprague Avenue, Russell Street, and Lawson Street within the City. Figure 4 shows STA Route 61 with primary stops within the City. Pedestrians Safe walking routes are dedicated pedestrian rights-of-way, such as sidewalks and paved pathways, that extend between essential community facilities and services, along streets, and provide for recreation. For forecast analyses, essential facilities for Airway Heights were anticipated to include schools, parks, the community center, City Hall, primary shopping areas, and transit; essentially all centers where walking activity is anticipated to/from homes, businesses, etc. A summary of primary centers and services within the City was assumed to include, but is not necessarily limited to: Sunset Elementary City Hall Police Department Library Community Center Sunset Park/Martella Field Northern Quest Aspen Grove Park Cleveland Park Shorty Combs Park Crosspointe Plaza Hayford Crossing Yokes Fresh Market Village Center Cinemas Figure 5 shows principal pedestrian facilities within the City, inroute to public centers, including sidewalks and striped pedestrian crossings. This is not an all-inclusive summary; rather, just the more major pedestrian corridors highlighted within the City. Crossings. There are about 33 striped crosswalks in Airway Heights along City streets. There are also several crosswalks located along local streets, especially near Sunset Elementary and newer residential developments in the northern areas of the City. US Route 2 is a barrier for pedestrian activity between the north and south halves of the City. Striped crossings are currently located at the signalized Lawson Street, Garfield Road, and Hayford Road intersections. Midblock crossings are aligned east of Ziegler Street, King Street, and Campbell Street, respectively. Bicycles Figure 5 also shows designated bicycle facilities. Only one portion of U.S Route 2 has a designated bike lane, but most roadways have shared bicycle use with vehicle travel. These facilities are used for Airway Heights commute and recreational activities. TRUCKS & RAIL WSDOT officials specify five tonnage classes for roadways within the State, ranging from T5 with at least 20,000 tons in 60 days up to T1 with over 10,000,000 tons annually. There are several truck routes within and around Airway Heights, specified with tonnage class listings as follows: U.S. Route 2 = T2 (4,000,000 to 10,000,000 tons/year). Hayford Road = T3 (300,000 to 4,000,000 tons/year). Craig Road = T3 (300,000 to 4,000,000 tons/year). Rambo Road = T3 (300,000 to 4,000,000 tons/year). Flint Road = T3 (300,000 to 4,000,000 tons/year). There are two rail lines in the Airway Heights vicinity. One is owned by Burlington Northern-Santa Fe (BNSF) and runs just outside the northwest limits of the City. The other is part of the Eastern Washington Gateway line (Geiger Spur) and is owned by WSDOT. This spur parallels the southern limits of the City and provides rail access to the industrial businesses along McFarlane Road. Figure 6 shows City truck routes and rail lines. Page 14

15

16

17

18 III. FUTURE CONDITIONS This section summarizes forecast transportation conditions for roadways identified for analysis by City officials. Provided is a description of the forecast traffic, operations/capacity, and future pedestrian/bicycle facilities. TRAFFIC FORECASTS The City has an estimated resident population of 6,672 as of Per US Census data and projections, City population has been increasing at growth rates of between 1.7 and 8.7 percent annually since year 1990, as measured in ten year increments (4.8 percent annually overall). The City has nearly acres of vacant land for future development. City officials indicate population growth trends should continue in the range of a 1.5 to 2.0 percent annual growth rate, with a population of up to 10,500 persons anticipated by year A comparison of historical population trends is provided on Table 9. Table 9. Historical Population Change for Airway Heights Incremental % Growth Year Population Total Annual , , % 8.7% , % 3.1% Est , % 1.7% The discussion above confirms population growth is will occur within Airway Heights, with associated land use and traffic growth anticipated as well. The following sections discuss land use development potentials, trip generation, and resulting year 2024 and year 2040 traffic forecasts developed for this Plan. Future Land Use Traffic forecasts were developed principally based on land use projections. There are 750-acres of undeveloped property zoned for residential, commercial, and industrial growth within the City. Year 2024 and 2040 land use forecasts were developed in coordination with City officials, per discussion with staff and via review of development documentation (studies, site plans, etc.). There are about 1,080 single and multi-family homes currently programmed for development, as identified via site/development plans. This housing will develop over the next 20-plus years. Per U.S. Census data, the City had 1,547 homes in year 2010 and 958 in year This calculates to 4.9 percent annual growth in housing over 10 years with 60 to 65 homes developed per year. City staff anticipate housing growth will continue at comparable rates. Thus, development of 65 homes was assumed annually through year 2024, a total of 455 homes. The balance was assumed for year 2040, a total of 625 homes. Several hundred acres of commercial, warehousing, light industry, office, and public facilities are anticipated for development over the next 20-plus years. The staging of developments was generally well defined for the year 2024 and year 2040 analysis horizons, as per development documentation highlighted as follows: Pacific NW Technology Park, Phase I and II (Hahn, 2001) Kalispel Master Plan TG&D Letter (USKH, 2007) West Plains Development TIA (DEA, 2011). West Plains/Hayford Hardware TIA (MMI, 2013) West Plains/U.S. 2 Retail Threshold Study (MMI, 2014) West Plains Plaza TG&D Letter (WCE, 2015) West Plains Plaza Phase 1a TIA (DEA, 2016) Tomczak Commercial TG&D Letter (WCE, 2017) Page 18

19 Airway Community Center TG&D Letter (MMI, 2017) U.S. 2-Flint Road Commercial TG&D Letter (WCE, 2017) Phase I Kalispel TG&D Letter (Gibson, 2017) From residential assumptions and development documentation, the resulting land use assumptions were used for year 2024 and year 2040 for the Plan is therefore as follows: Year 2024 Land Use Assumptions Single Family Homes, 105 units Multifamily Homes, 350 units Casino, 725 gaming positions Shopping center/commercial, 485,000 square-feet Airway Heights Community Center, 33,000 square-feet Kalispel Community Center, 14,000 square-feet RV Park, 91 Spaces General Office, 7,000 square-feet Warehousing, 100,000 square-feet Year 2040 Land Use Assumptions (Additional) Single Family Homes, 285 units Multifamily Homes, 340 units Shopping center/commercial, 700,000 square-feet Restaurants, 10,000 square-feet General Office, 345,000 square-feet Research and Development, 325,000 square-feet Light Industrial, 120,000 square-feet Resort Casino, 500 rooms Business Park, 4 Acres These reflect land uses by way of new construction and not businesses that trade hands and/or are reoccupied. The location and allocation of land uses proposed currently within the City are shown by Figure 7. The location and boundaries of TCP land uses is approximate, illustrated to show where trips are generated in context to City streets and intersections. Site plan information should be sought from the City to identify specific boundary data. Trip Generation Residential trip generation was forecast using the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual (9 th Edition, 2012). Trip Generation is a nationally recognized and locally accepted approach for forecasting trips for a range of commercial, retail, residential, and institutional land uses. ITE Land Use Codes 210 and 220 was used to forecast trips for single family homes and apartments, as based on rates versus unit/home counts. The trip generation associated with commercial development was based on the previously described documentation. These documents provide trip generation from which forecasts could help be prepared for year 2024 and year The emphasis of this Plan was weekday and PM peak hour. As described, the weekday analysis helps establish the capacity of roadways while the PM peak hour analysis reviews efficiencies during the high travel hour of the weekday. Trip generation summaries are provided by Table 10. Table 10. Airway Heights Year 2024 & Year 2040 Trip Generation Weekday PM Peak Hour Trips Horizon Year Trip Totals Inbound Outbound Total ,240 1,134 1,167 2, ,040 2,832 3,430 6,262 As shown, 18,240 weekday trips are forecast by year 2024 with 2,301 trips generated during the PM peak hour. Approximately 41,040 weekday trips are projected during the typical weekday by 2040, with about 6,262 trips generated during the PM peak hour. Page 19

20

21 Note pass-by and internal trip capture was not addressed with this Plan as they impact finite areas of the City. Site specific traffic impact analyses should be used to review the impact of these trips. Trip generation summary worksheets are provided with Technical Appendix D. The worksheets detail developments, development assumptions, and trip generation specifics. Trip Assignments Synchro was used to develop land use trip forecasts for the City, via the TIA module add-on. Minor arterials and major collectors were modeled with number of lanes, intersection controls, speed limits, and other impediment factors such a peak hour factors, parking lane data, etc. modeled in the program. The software program then assigns trips via travel time assessments between internal and external origins and destinations, as based distribution guidance/direction provided by the user. In this case, project trips were assumed to access the City primarily via the external connections of U.S. Route 2 to the west and east, Hayford Road to the north and south, and Craig Road. The external distribution of trips was based upon the relative review of existing count/volume densities, as these indicate how commuters are approaching and departing Airway Heights. The distribution of project trips internally and externally was assumed as follows: U.S. Route 2 West, 20 percent U.S. Route 2 East, 50 percent Hayford Road North, 15 percent Hayford Road South, 10 Percent Craig Road South, 5 percent Initially, all trips highlighted with Table 10 were assigned to the primary study street and intersection network discussed with the existing conditions section. The City experiences a high level of commuter activities between homes and businesses located within the City with homes and businesses located outside of the City (i.e. such as with the work commute). Thus, it is reasonable to assume City arterials and collectors will support most commute traffic. However, this assumption overlooks the use of local streets in supporting travel between businesses and homes within the City. The trip assignments from Synchro were reduced by 15 percent for year 2024 and 30 percent for year 2040 to capture local travel, to reduce travel demand for arterials and collectors to expected levels. The increased adjustment for year 2040 was applied because of the elevated residential and business land uses that will share travel activities. This adjustment factor also helps forecasts become more comparable with those generated by the SRTC forecast travel demand model prepared for the region. Trip assignments are shown with Technical Appendix E. Traffic Forecasts Trips projected from land use development comprise the bulk of forecast traffic volumes for the City, predominantly impacting major arterials and minor collectors. However, moderate traffic growth is anticipated from factors such as: through traffic growth due to development outside the City, construction of individual homes and small business on lots within the City (outside developments identified previously), and anticipated growth of Fairchild Air Force. A 0.5 percent baseline annual growth rate was applied to existing traffic volumes to address the considerations described with the previous paragraph. This results in approximately 3 percent total baseline growth by year 2024 and 13 percent baseline growth by year 2040, calculating to between 900 to 1,100 ADT growth along U.S. Route 2 by year 2024 and 3,600 to 4,900 ADT by year 2040, depending upon location. Baseline forecasts and land use trip assignments were combined to develop year 2024 and year 2040 traffic forecasts for the City. Page 21

22 Forecasts are shown, respectively, on Figure 8 and Figure 9 for the weekday and PM peak hour. A resulting 2.2 to 2.4 percent annual growth rate was noted versus counts for U.S. Route 2 by year 2040, pending location. This growth is consistent with historical trends noted throughout the last ten years east of Hayford Road, where the impact of development is most evident (i.e. due to Northern Quest, Crosspointe, Tech Park, etc.). The growth of Airway Heights in the next several years is forecast to rival that experienced east of Hayford Road over the last ten years. Thus, a resultant 2.2. to 2.4 percent annual traffic growth rate is realistic through year ROADWAY & INTERSECTION CAPACITY A summary of forecast transportation conditions is summarized through a review of roadway capacity and intersection operations. Roadway Capacity The roadway capacity analysis was performed based on a review of forecast ADT volumes. The comparison assumes existing street cross-sections with no improvements, as to assess or confirm system capacity needs. Summary capacity analyses are provided on Table 11 for year 2024 and Table 12 for year The year 2024 street capacity analysis concludes most roadways have sufficient capacity to accommodate forecast traffic volumes. Exceptions are noted on U.S. Route 2 east of Garfield Road where forecast traffic exceeds capacity by 3 to 11 percent and v/c is in excess of 1.0. In addition, the v/c analysis indicates capacity is approaching standard along U.S. Route 2 between Craig Road and Garfield Road, and on Hayford Road within vicinity of Deno Road. Roadway Table 11. Year 2024 Roadway Capacity Analysis Segment Num. Lanes Capacity Threshold ADT Volume Criteria Exceed Principal Arterial Sections U. S. Route 2 E/of Craig Road 5 37,300 27,620 No 0.74 U. S. Route 2 W/of Garfield Road 5 37,300 34,200 No 0.92 U. S. Route 2 E/of Garfield Road 5 37,300 37,220 No 1.00 U. S. Route 2 W/of Hayford Road 5 37,300 38,340 No 1.03 U. S. Route 2 E/of Hayford Road 5 37,300 41,520 No 1.11 Minor Arterial Sections (Assumes Hayford Road as an Arterial) Hayford Road S/of Deno Road 2 13,300 11,500 No 0.86 Hayford Road N/of U.S. Route ,600 23,910 No 0.71 Hayford Road S/of U.S. Route ,600 14,800 No 0.44 Hayford Road S/of McFarlane Rd 2 13,300 8,330 No 0.63 Major Collector Sections Craig Road N/of U.S. Route ,300 5,710 No 0.43 Craig Road S/of U.S. Route ,300 5,330 No 0.40 Lawson Street N/of U.S. Route ,300 3,060 No 0.23 Lawson Street S/of U.S. Route ,300 2,630 No 0.20 Garfield Road N/of U.S. Route ,300 5,110 No 0.38 Garfield Road S/of U.S. Route ,300 5,480 No 0.41 Sprague Ave W/of Hayford Road 5 33,600 3,750 No 0.11 McFarlane Rd W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 4,060 No 0.31 Deno Road W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 4,880 No 0.37 Other Roadway Section Northern Quest W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 4,940 No th Avenue E/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 3,120 No st Avenue W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 1,220 No 0.09 V/C The year 2040 analysis indicates street capacity issues for most of U.S. Route 2, specifically Lundstrom Street to Deer Heights Road. Forecast traffic is 6 to 40 percent more than capacity thresholds, pending location, with v/c ranging from 1.07 to Additionally, Page 22

23

24

25 volumes surpass the thresholds on Hayford Road with v/c of Volumes are approaching two-lane capacity thresholds on U.S Route 2 east of Craig Road, and on Hayford Road at Deno Road and McFarlane Road, respectively, with v/c greater than Roadway Table 12. Year 2040 Roadway Capacity Analysis Segment Num. Lanes Capacity Threshold ADT Volume Criteria Exceed Principal Arterial Sections U. S. Route 2 E/of Craig Road 5 37,300 33,320 No 0.89 U. S. Route 2 W/of Garfield Road 5 37,300 39,740 No 1.07 U. S. Route 2 E/of Garfield Road 5 37,300 42,050 No 1.13 U. S. Route 2 W/of Hayford Road 5 37,300 43,100 No 1.16 U. S. Route 2 E/of Hayford Road 5 37,300 52,350 No 1.40 Minor Arterial Sections (Assumes Hayford Road as an Arterial) Hayford Road S/of Deno Road 2 13,300 13,460 No 1.01 Hayford Road N/of U.S. Route ,600 30,950 No 0.92 Hayford Road S/of U.S. Route ,600 17,470 No 0.52 Hayford Road S/of McFarlane Rd 2 13,300 10,550 No 0.79 Major Collector Sections Craig Road N/of U.S. Route ,300 9,820 No 0.74 Craig Road S/of U.S. Route ,300 6,970 No 0.52 Lawson Street N/of U.S. Route ,300 3,100 No 0.23 Lawson Street S/of U.S. Route ,300 2,950 No 0.22 Garfield Road N/of U.S. Route ,300 5,260 No 0.40 Garfield Road S/of U.S. Route ,300 5,500 No 0.41 Sprague Ave W/of Hayford Road 5 33,600 3,960 No 0.12 McFarlane Rd W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 5,530 No 0.42 Deno Road W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 5,660 No 0.43 Other Roadway Section Northern Quest W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 8,130 No th Avenue W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 4,540 No st Avenue W/of Hayford Road 2 13,300 1,360 No 0.10 V/C Intersection Operations/Capacity LOS and operations analyses were performed based on a review of year 2024 and year 2040 traffic forecasts versus current geometric and traffic control conditions noted in the field. For Plan modeling purposes, phase settings for signalized intersections were also based on field observations. Signal timing and phasing parameters were maintained from the existing condition as to better gauge the impact of development growth. Table 13 provides summary LOS for the PM peak hour. Also shown are average control vehicle delays for each intersection. Signal Unsignalized Table 13. Forecast Intersection LOS & Delay Intersection LOS Year 2024 Year 2040 Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) U.S. Route 2/Lawson Street B 13.7 B 17.2 U.S. Route 2/Garfield Road D 38.5 E 68.9 U.S. Route 2/Hayford Road F F Hayford Road/Northern Quest Ave B 10.6 B 16.4 U.S. Route 2/Craig Road F >250 F >250 U.S. Route 2/Lundstrom Street F >250 F >250 U.S. Route 2/Lyons Road F >250 F >250 U.S. Route 2/Deer Heights Road F >250 F >250 Hayford Road/Deno Road E 41.8 F Hayford Road/Sprague Avenue C 21.0 D 28.3 Hayford Road/12 th Avenue F >250 F >250 Hayford Road/21 st Avenue D 26.4 D 31.8 Hayford Road/McFarlane Road E 36.1 F Craig Road/Deno Road B 10.2 B 10.3 Craig Road/McFarlane Road B 13.2 C 18.3 Lawson Street/21 st Avenue* A 7.2 A 7.2 Lawson Street/McFarlane Road B 10.1 B 10.9 * Indicates an all-way stop Page 25

26 As shown, the signalized Hayford Road/U.S Route 2 intersection and all unsignalized intersections along U.S. Route 2 operate at LOS F through year 2024 during the PM peak hour. In addition, Hayford Road/12 th Avenue also functions at LOS F. These are failing and unacceptable conditions within the City. The Hayford Road intersections with Deno Road and McFarlane Road are forecast to function at LOS E by year 2024, a marginal capacity issue for the City. The Hayford Road and Garfield Road signals along U.S. Route 2 will function below accepted LOS standards by year 2040, within the LOS E/F range (LOS E is unacceptable for signals). All unsignalized intersections along U.S. Route 2 are forecast to operate at LOS F, at the Deno Road, 12 th Avenue, and McFarlane Road intersections with Hayford Road. Figure 10 and Figure 11 visually summarize resulting roadway and intersection LOS for the City of Airway Heights. TRANSIT, PEDESTRIANS, & BICYCLES This section describes forecast transit, pedestrian, and bicycle conditions planned within Airway Heights. Transit As indicated, there are 6 transit stops in the City, including a Park and Ride lot, served by STA Route 61. STA is moving to enhance service to the City via implementation of a Rapid Transit route, to reduce ridership time between Airway Heights and Spokane. In addition, the West Plains Transit Center, proposed off the Medical Lake Interchange on I-90, will provide a hub and transfer station that will allow Airway Heights residents to more quickly access other areas of Spokane County, in addition to downtown Spokane. Pedestrians The need for pedestrian accommodation becomes more prevalent as the City continues to grow. Current City street design standards include the requirement of sidewalk and/or paved pathways as street frontage improvements of private development. However, historic design standards did not highlight need for pedestrian improvements, especially at the local street level. As such, several streets throughout the City lack sidewalk or paved paths. The provision of pedestrian facilities is a priority for City officials. However, the construction of missing sidewalk or paths throughout the City would be cost restrictive to the taxpayers, especially as right-of-way is not available on many streets. Given this situation, this Plan limits recommendations to pedestrian accommodation needs for essential public facilities, and/or along City arterials and collectors lacking pedestrian access residential developments. Public Facilities Analysis. The Overlapping Priorities Method is used to identify safe walking routes within ¼ mile of community facilities and services. Safe walking routes consist of dedicated pedestrian rights-of-way between areas, as served by sidewalks and paved pathways. This method is also used to identify the need for crosswalks at primary intersections. Essential facilities were recognized in the existing conditions section. This was not an all-inclusive list, but was sufficient as the walking/influence areas within ¼-mile of these facilities. A review using the Overlapping Priorities Method confirms most community facilities and services have sufficient pedestrian access via sidewalk or paved pathways for one or more approaches. However, the following are highlighted as community facilities considered to lack sufficient pedestrian access: Page 26

27

28

29 City Hall, Library, and Community Center. Sidewalk is missing in sections along both sides of Lundstrom Street between City facilities and U.S. Route 2, considered a primary pedestrian route for these facilities. About 625 feet of sidewalk is missing along Lundstrom Street in this area. Shorty Combs Park. Lawson Street provides pedestrian access via sidewalk between U.S. Route 2 about a quarter south to 18 th Street. Given this route, 18 th Street becomes a viable pedestrian route between Shorty Combs Park and Lawson Street, currently lacking sidewalk (also a paved street surface). About 1,200 feet of sidewalk along the north side of 18 th Avenue would establish this route, including the southern park frontage. Village Center Cinemas. The Cinemas and apartments aligned south of U.S. Route 2 lack a safe pedestrian access from Hayford Road and the core of the City. A stretch of about 1,950 feet is missing between existing sidewalk near Hayford Road and sidewalk at Deer Heights Road. Aspen Grove Park. Sidewalks are aligned along streets throughout newer, developed neighborhoods. However, pedestrian facilities to access this Park are missing within older neighborhoods, and to U.S. Route 2. There are several potential routes that could be extended to provide missing access. However, providing 1,400 feet of sidewalk along 10 th Avenue and then Lundstrom Street would tie the park into City facilities and U.S. Route 2, by extension. Community Center. Sidewalk currently ends on Hayford Road at the north boundary of the Northern Quest Resort and Casino property. The gap could be addressed by continuing sidewalk north along the west side of Hayford Road to Deno Road, then west along the south side of Deno Road to the future Recreation Center. This represents about 6,500 feet of separated sidewalk. Public Streets. Pedestrian facilities were reviewed for arterials and collectors to determine pedestrian accommodation needs. The criteria for this analysis was identification where sidewalk may be missing, on one or both sides of these streets, to provide access to established residential properties (without pedestrian access). A summary of conclusions from this review is as follows: Garfield Road. This collector extends from U.S. Route 2 to provide access through a commercial/industrial area, eventually providing access to residential homes north of 6 th Avenue and west of Russell Street. The development of about 4,500 feet, along the west side of Garfield Road and Russell Street, respectively, would tie residential developments (and a local street sidewalk network) into the Highway, and by extension the City. Note there may be some duplicity in accessing this are as Lawson Street does have sidewalk between U.S. Route 2 and 6 th Avenue. U.S. Route 2 Missing Southerly. A paved pedestrian path is aligned through the City along the north side of this Highway. However, sidewalk is missing for about 3,200 feet along the south side between Inland Northwest Bank and Hayford Road. Crossing the Highway can be an issue given widths, a lack of crossings, and heavy traffic. Sidewalk would improve safety by providing designated pedestrian facilities between existing (and potential future) crossings along the south side of the Highway. Russell Street/Sprague Avenue. Northern Quest is an entertainment center with additional property development anticipated (shopping, etc.). Separated sidewalk/paths are currently aligned along the northern area side of Sprague Avenue to approximately 750 feet west of Industrial Street, but there is no tie into the City. The development of 5,200 feet of paved path or separated sidewalk would tie the City into entertainment venues, as developed along the west side of Russell Street and north side of Sprague Avenue. Page 29

30 6 th Avenue East. This street will evolve into a primary eastwest pedestrian route for the City providing an approach to entertainment venues within northeast areas of the City, also providing for recreational routes for newly developed neighborhoods. About 4,200 feet of sidewalk is missing between Ziegler Street and Russell Road in promotion of these activities. 6 th Avenue West. Again, this street will be a primary eastwest pedestrian route, connecting with entertainment venues within northeast areas of the City. About 1,100 feet of sidewalk should be developed along both sides of the new roadway between Craig Road and Aspen Street in promotion of these activities. 12 th Avenue West. Craig Road will evolve as a primary north-south pedestrian corridor within the City. There is a lack of sidewalk connectivity to this route via 12th Avenue, a notable east-west corridor. Sidewalk is recommended along the north side of the street to tie into the Craig Avenue, a missing extent of about 280 feet. 12 th Avenue East. Development is anticipated within the area, with 12 th Avenue providing access to Tribe properties west of Hayford Road. Also, this section of 12 th Avenue is expected to provide congestion relief for U.S. Route 2 as well as comprise a pedestrian corridor. The provision of 5,300 feet of sidewalk is warranted with future construction of 12 th Avenue. Hayford Road South. Hayford Road will eventually be developed with commercial businesses from U.S. Route 2 to 21 st Avenue over time. Also, this street will provide a pedestrian route to tie into 21 st Avenue, which will have bike lanes and separated sidewalk. As such, the need for about 4,500 feet of separated sidewalk is recommended to provide for pedestrian needs along the corridor. This also provides pedestrian access to a large apartment complex located along the east side of Hayford Road about ¼ mile south of U.S Route st Avenue. The 21 st Avenue congestion relief route for U.S. Route 2 provides an opportunity for City officials to promote a pedestrian and bike corridor for the community. Separated sidewalk is recommended along both sides of this 2.5-mile corridor, a total of 26,000 feet of sidewalk along both sides of the street. Craig Road. An existing residential development is located south of U.S. Route 2 along the east side of Craig Road lacks pedestrian access. About 2,550 feet of sidewalk along the east side of the roadway, at a minimum, would tie the development into Highway and the City. Pushing sidewalk further south would tie into the 21 st Avenue corridor, a primary pedestrian route planned for the City. Crossings. As indicated, there are 33 marked crosswalks on main streets in Airway Heights. The location and spacing of crosswalks are typically provided per the discretion of a local agency, in this case the City engineers office. Typical considerations for crosswalk installation include block length/distance between crossings, the location of pedestrian generators, traffic signal locations, access to transit, the alignment of other major intersections, and/or where pedestrian activities are being promoted. Industry practice has progressed to the point of highlighting when crossing treatments should be considered, in terms of warrants. These are based on factors such as pedestrian crossing density, roadway volume, crossing distance, and 85 th percentile vehicle speeds. However, the density/spacing of crosswalks along a roadway has yet to be firmly established and is left to the discretion of the local agency. A review of crossing locations was performed for Airway Heights roadways to help identify potential locations for additional marked crossings. Local streets were neglected in the review of marked Page 30

31 crossings because: 1) the presumption is these are low volume roadways with reduced pedestrian crossing volumes, 2) these roadways have reduced crossing widths (requiring less time to cross); and 3) vehicles will be traveling at lower speeds with reduced stopping distances and better perception/reaction time. Studies indicate pedestrian crossings along such roadways can negatively impact safety. Pedestrians can develop a false sense of security and incidents have occurred because drivers do not anticipate crossings along local roadways. Again, a summary of existing crossing locations is provided with Figure 5. The desire is to have safe crossings provided in-route along arterials to/from activity centers previously mentioned, accounting for general factors such as distance, major intersection location, transit access, and pedestrian generators. In addition, information provided with the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) website indicates the typical pedestrian will walk about five minutes to find a crosswalk before risking an unmarked location. This equates to a linear distance of approximately ¼-mile in an active community such as Airway Heights. Given this relaxed criteria, the City may wish to review crossing warrants for the following arterial locations: U.S. Route 2, Loffler-West. Residential areas and businesses are aligned opposite the Highway between Craig Road and the nearest crossing east of Ziegler Street Street, a gap of nearly 2,200 feet. A pedestrian crossing may be warranted Loffler Street to West Drive to split up this distance. Given high speeds and high traffic volumes, a crossing should not be considered without high the highest levels of traffic control. U.S. Route 2, Lyons-Hayden. There are no crossings of U.S. Route 2 between Garfield Road to Hayford Road, a distance of 4,000 feet. A crossing is desirable to break up this long stretch. Given high speeds and high traffic volumes, a crossing should not be considered without high the highest levels of traffic control. The lack of crossing could be mitigated with a signalized Lyons Road/U.S. Route 2 intersection, if constructed by the Kalispel Tribe. U.S. Route 2/Deer Heights Road. Due to existing and proposed multifamily and commercial developments in the immediate vicinity of this intersection, a pedestrian crossing should be considered. It is assumed a pedestrian crossing will be included at this intersection in the future when a signal or roundabout is constructed. Given high speeds and high traffic volumes, a crossing should not be considered without the highest levels of traffic control. Hayford Road/12 th Avenue. Residential development is occurring west of Hayford Road north of U.S. Route 2. Given this development and existing/proposed commercial businesses located east of the arterial, an improved crossing would be appropriate at the 12 th Street/Hayford Road intersection. High speeds and high traffic volumes dictate the crossing should be improved with some form of rapid flashing beacons or even a HAWK signal. Hayford Road/6 th Avenue. An existing, marked crossing is located at the Hayford Road/6 th Avenue intersection. Further development will push north and likely increase the use of this crossing as people travel between homes and businesses. High speeds and high traffic volumes dictate the crossing should be improved with some form of rapid flashing beacons or even a HAWK signal. Hayford Road/21 st Avenue. The 21 st Avenue corridor will provide a vehicle and pedestrian crossing of Hayford Road. A crossing is warranted to provide for the safe crossing of pedestrians and bicycles at the intersection. High speeds and high traffic volumes dictate the crossing should be improved with elevated traffic controls. Again, planning level guidelines were used to identify potential crossing locations within Airway Heights. Engineering warrants and analyses should be used to support any decisions. Page 31

32 As inferred, the highest control and safety measures are warranted with any crossing of U.S. Route 2 or Hayford Road. These are high speed and volume streets where pedestrian safety would be enhanced with crossings and the most stringent improvements are necessitated for safety purposes. Bicycles There is a notable lack of bicycle routes within Airway Heights. The Spokane Regional Bike Map from the SRTC GIS web designates U.S. 2 as a shared roadway where bicycles and traffic can both operate along the roadway. The Map also indicates an approximate 1.3-mile section of the Highway has a shared use path for bike and pedestrian activity between Russell Street and nearly Deer Heights Road. Designated bike lanes are currently aligned along Hayford Road and Northern Quest Avenue. Bikes may also share existing sidewalk within Airway Heights; although this is not always desirable. Bicycle route improvements were confirmed in coordination with City technical staff. Improvement to bicycle mobility is a priority of City officials. Safety is of significant concern for bicyclists sharing a high-speed highway such as U.S. Route 2, also along arterial routes such as Hayford Road. Providing for commute and recreational routes for circulation around the City will provide alternatives to automobile travel and promote healthy lifestyles. The proposed strategy of City staff is summarized in Section IV of the TCP, as it regards City transportation improvements, developed with purpose of meeting the goals highlighted by the preceding paragraph. Page 32

33 IV. IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS This section provides recommendations to improve transportation safety, capacity, and pedestrian/bicycle activity within Airway Heights. Recommendations are provided in order of approximate descending priority with planning level cost estimates provided. ROADWAY CAPACITY & SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS Street and intersection improvements were recommended with the TCP to enhance capacity and safety within the City. Project cost estimates were either developed specifically for this study or were provided by City technical staff for specific projects. Planning level construction cost estimates were developed based upon bid quantity/material information obtained from the WSOT website. Planning level cost estimates developed for this Plan are provided with Technical Appendix F. Costs are provided in present worth dollars. Note costs assume available right-of-way and neglects the potential for environmental remediation. 1) U.S. Route 2, Boulevard Safety Project The capacity analysis confirms stop-controlled intersections along U.S Route 2 function within the LOS F range. It is reasonable to assume other unsignalized intersections and driveways along the Highway operate poorly as well. In addition, safety analysis indicates U.S. Route 2 is likely a high accident corridor with high ratios of left-turn accidents noted at unsignalized intersections. A median island is recommended to span U.S. Route 2 in sections throughout the City for about two miles between Craig Road to Hayford Road. Less breaks in the median for signalized and roundabout intersections (location Craig Road, Lawson Street, Garfield Road, Lyons Road, and Hayford Road), and assuming reasonable spacing, about 5,500 linear feet of median islands is recommended in sections along the Highway. The intent of this island is to restrict northbound and southbound left-turn and through movements. The median would improve Highway mobility and eliminate turning conflicts, improving driver safety. The median can be landscaped with trees and/or street art to add visual appeal. At the discretion of City officials, the median can be designed to allow eastbound or westbound left-turns from U.S. Route 2 onto major interconnecting streets or driveways. The island developed along Spokane Falls Boulevard west of Division Street in Spokane provides an example of this proposal. This project is recommended as a top priority for the City Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). The improvement would mitigate LOS issues noted for the Lundstrom Street and Lyons Road intersections through year 2040, as well as for intersections and driveways not reviewed with the Plan. A planning level cost was developed to support this study, summarized below. Approximate Project Costs = $1,235,300 6-Year Capacity and Safety Improvement Project 2) Craig Road/U.S. Route 2 Roundabout The City has long planned and programmed a roundabout for the Craig Road/U.S. Route 2 intersection. The improvement would not only address an existing traffic deficiency, but would provide capacity to allow for future development within the area. The intersection improvement would support an approach to the West Plains Casino and residential developments proposed off Page 33