Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSUP2022-00001 Traffic Impact Analysis - PLN General - 12/30/2021 RECEIVED 615 W. Aicfer StrPef Traffic Impact Analysis Puget • • West Industrial Belfair, WA Prepared For: Washington State Department of Transportation and Mason County Prepares! By: SO Alliance 8730 Tallon Lane NE, Suite 200 Lacey, WA 98516 360.352.1465 December 2021 -�44W SC,J ALLIANCE CONSULTING SERVICES t = Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis Traffic Impact Analysis Project Information Project: Puget Sound West Industrial Development Prepared for: Rush Development Company, Inc Steve Yester, Development Manager 6622 Wollochet Drive NW Gig Harbor, WA 98335 Reviewing Agency Jurisdiction: Washington State Department of Transportation Mason County Project Representative Prepared by: SO Alliance 8730 Tallon Lane NE, Suite 200 Lacey, WA 98516 360.352.1465 scjalliance.com Contact: Aaron Knight, PE, Project Manager Project Reference: SO #21-000111 Path:\\ad.scj.io\Global\Projects\2306 Rush Residential, Inc\21-000111 Rush Puget Sound West Industrial\Phase 01-Traffic Scoping Report\Report\2021-1116 Puget Sound West Industrial TIA.docx SCJ Alliance December 2021 I i � _ J � t Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis Signature The technical material and data contained in this document were prepared under the supervision and direction of the undersigned, whose seal, as a professional engineer licensed to practice as such, is affixed below. Prepared by George Hilen, PE, Project Engineer O,CHAr<,f O� OF WA S'�I Q � 0 52136 wk44 Ylo L ���� ►�cO��� N Approved by Aaron Knight, PE, Project Manager SCJ Alliance December 2021 I ii v. 1 Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis Table of Contents 1 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Description........................................................................................................................1 2 Background................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Study Roadways and Intersections...............................................................................................2 2.2 Previous Intersection Control Analysis.........................................................................................2 2.3 Belfair Bypass Project(SR 3 Freight Corridor)...............................................................................2 2.4 Crash Data.....................................................................................................................................2 2.5 Traffic Volume Data ......................................................................................................................3 3 Project Traffic Characteristics........................................................................................ 4 3.1 Site Generated Traffic Volumes....................................................................................................4 3.2 Site Traffic Distribution and Assignment......................................................................................5 4 Future Traffic Volumes.................................................................................................. 6 5 Traffic Operations Analysis............................................................................................ 8 5.1 Level of Service .............................................................................................................................8 5.2 Intersection Analysis Results.........................................................................................................9 6 Summary and Conclusion............................................................................................ 10 SO Alliance Dcccrnbci 2021 1 iii � T Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis List of Tables Table 1. ITE Trip Generation Rate for Industrial Park...................................................................................4 Table 2. Project Trip Generation...................................................................................................................4 Table 3. Level of Service Criteria for Intersections.......................................................................................8 Table 4. PM Peak Hour Intersection Operational Analysis Summary...........................................................9 List of Figures Figure1. Site Vicinity Map............................................................................................................................1 Figure 2. Existing 2021 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes................................................................................3 Figure 3. PM Peak Hour Site Generated Traffic Volumes.............................................................................5 Figure 4. Projected 2023 PM Peak hour Traffic Volumes without Project...................................................6 Figure 5. Projected 2023 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with Project...............................................................7 List of Appendices Appendix A Site Plan Appendix B Traffic Volume Calculation Worksheets Appendix C Operational Worksheets Appendix D Mason Transit Authority Intersection Control Analysis �('J Allianrc December 2021 1 iv T Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 1 Introduction Rush Development Company, Inc. (Rush) plans to develop a project east of SR 3 and north of Log Yard Road in Mason County near Belfair, WA.This Traffic Impact Analysis(TIA) has been prepared to provide the traffic analysis and project information to assist Mason County and WSDOT in reviewing this project development. Operational analysis has been prepared for the existing 2021 PM peak hour conditions and the forecasted 2023 PM peak hour conditions both with and without completion of the development. The site vicinity is shown Figure 1. Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map N ova e� a Project Area Belfa r 9 J h F 1.1 Project Description The full build out of the proposed Puget Sound West Industrial project includes four warehouse buildings totaling approximately 326,540 square feet.Access for the project is provided by one driveway located on NE Log Yard Road, east of the roundabout at SR 3 and Log Yard Road.All traffic produced from the site will be distributed via the roundabout at the intersection of SR 3 and Log Yard Road. The preliminary site plan is provided in Attachment A. SU Alhi)rjce December 2021 1 1 Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 2 Background 2.1 Study Roadways and Intersections SR 3 runs north-south between Shelton and Bremerton and is classified by WSDOT as a NHS principal rural arterial (R1) and is a Highway of Statewide Significance, under Class 2 managed access control. In the study area SR 3 is rolling terrain and has a single lane in each direction, with left-turn lanes and right- turn lanes present at some intersections.The travel lanes are twelve feet wide, with 5-foot shoulders. The speed limit is 50 mph. LoR Yard Road is a two-lane road that intersects SR 3 in the study area. Log Yard Road west of SR 3 provides access to industrial uses and some residential uses on the west side of SR 3. Log Yard Road east of SR 3 is a new 2 lane road that was constructed as part of the Mason County Transit Authority park- and-ride. The speed limit is 25 mph. SR 3 at Log Yard Road intersection is currently a four-leg intersection with roundabout control.The configuration is one travel lane in each direction.There are sidewalks on only the east side of SR 3 and one crosswalk serving the north-south pedestrian route on the east side of SR 3. 2.2 Previous Intersection Control Analysis The Mason County Transit Authority (MTA) is nearing completion of construction for a park-and-ride facility south of Log Yard Road, on the east side of SR 3. The Log Yard Road at SR 3 Intersection Control Analysis (ICA)was completed as part of the MTA project to recommend a control alternative for the intersection to serve the MTA park-and-ride.The ICA was approved by WSDOT in 2018.The ICA data was utilized in the Puget Sound West Industrial project TIA and can be referenced for additional information.The ICA is provided in Attachment D. 2.3 Belfair Bypass Project (SR 3 Freight Corridor) WSDOT and Mason County plan to construct a new corridor that connects SR 302 south of Belfair to SR 3 north of Belfair that will allow for vehicles to bypass downtown Belfair and help relieve congestion downtown.The bypass project is expected to be constructed after the competition of the Puget Sound West Industrial project, and therefore was not included in this TIA. 2.4 Crash Data Crash data was collected as part of this TIA; however, the historical crash data is not relevant since it was all collected prior to the recent roundabout constructed at this intersection.There have been no recorded crashes at the new intersection as of July 2021. A complete discussion of collisions at the intersection is included in the ICA included in Appendix D. SCJ /�Iliancc December 2021 1 7 1 r Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 2.5 Traffic Volume Data The traffic volumes used in the Puget Sound West Industrial project TIA were taken from the MTA park- and-ride ICA.The original counts were collected in 2017 and grown to projected 2020 volumes as part of the ICA. The ICA projected 2020 volumes included build out of the park-and-ride and a gas station to be located on the southeast corner of SR3 and Log Yard Road (see Figure 3 and Figure 4 of the ICA report for volumes).This project took the projected 2020 volumes from the ICA, excluding the gas station trips as it has not been built yet, and grew the volumes one more year to get 2021 volumes.The volumes were grown using a growth rate of 2.0 percent that was established in the ICA. The calculated existing 2021 traffic volumes for the study intersection for the PM peak hour are presented in Figure 2. Figure 2. Existing 2021 PM Peak Hour Traffic.. Volumes F Aw � dip, oOcl - r rb �� a, . ' o 1) SR 3 at Log Yard Road SO Alliance December 2021 3 Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 3 Project Traffic Characteristics The project related characteristics having the most effect on area traffic conditions are peak hour trip generation and the direction distribution of traffic volumes on the surrounding roadway network. 3.1 Site Generated Traffic Volumes Vehicle trip generation was estimated using the trip generation rates contained in the 11th edition of the Trip Generation Manual by the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE). The land-use category "Industrial Park" (land-use code 130) was used. Table 1 shows the trip generation characteristics for the Industrial Park land use category. Table 1. ITE Trip Generation Rate for Industrial Park Peak Period Unit Trip Rate Enter% Exit% AM Peak Hour 1000 scl ft 0.34 81% 19% PM Peak Hour 1000 scl ft 0.34 22% 78% Daily' 1000 scl ft 5.60 50% 50% 1. Trip Rate was determined using the ITE specified fitted curve equation The total trip generation expected from this project is calculated by applying the unit measure for the land use category to the appropriate trip generation rate.The trip generation for the proposed Puget Sound West Industrial is shown in Table 2 below. Table 2. Project Trip Generation Peak Period Size Total Trips Enter Exit AM Peak Hour 327 ksf ill 90 21 PM Peak Hour 327 ksf ill 24 87 Daily 327 ksf 1,737 868 869 SO Alliance December 2021 14 Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 3.2 Site Traffic Distribution and Assignment The directional distribution of traffic to and from the proposed project was estimated based on the locations of residential areas and the likely destinations of freight. The regional traffic distribution percentages and site traffic distribution and assignment for the PM peak hour are shown in Figure 3. Figure 3. PM Peak Hour Site Generated Traffic Volumes a r. xx--* x.GenPrxMO TrxNic voh+mBf R� . X X% Legend �nmary Tnp Drstrrb.nK.«n..r,w brn ot WWI Project Trips 1) SR 3 at Log Yard Total Trips Road SG Alliance Dccernber 2021 I S J S � Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 4 Future Traffic Volumes Traffic volume forecasts were prepared for the PM peak hour conditions for the 2023 opening year.The future traffic volume forecast includes non-specific background traffic growth, pipeline development traffic and estimated traffic generated by the proposed Puget Sound West Industrial project. For the non-specific background traffic growth, a 2.0 percent annual growth rate (non-compounded) was used.This growth rate was identified in the MTA Park-and-Ride project ICA,which referenced historic volume data on SR 3. There are two identified pipeline development projects included in the forecast: • Olympic Ridge Residential Subdivision and Olympic Sunset View Apartments • Gas Station with Convenience Store The gas station pipeline project was identified in the MTA Park-and-Ride ICA as a future development projected to open in 2020 but has not currently started construction. It is unknown when this development will be open, but it was included in this study to provide a conservative analysis. The projected 2023 traffic volumes without the Puget Sound West Industrial project are shown in Figure 4.The projected 2023 traffic volumes with the project are shown in Figure 5.The traffic volume calculations for the study intersection are included in Attachment B. Figure 4. Projected 2023 PM Peak hour Traffic Volumes without Project Pr 09 5� » A 1) SR 3 at Log Yard Road SO Alliance December 2023. 1 6 I Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis Figure S. Projected 2023 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with Project W 9� 0�, a 1) SR 3 at Log Yard Road SG Alliance December 2021 17 Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 5 Traffic Operations Analysis Traffic analyses were conducted to identify any deficiencies within the study area for the PM peak hour in the 2021 base year and the 2023 project opening year. 5.1 Level of Service The acknowledged source for determining overall capacity for arterial segments and independent intersections is the current edition of the Highway Capacity Manual(HCM) published by the Transportation Research Board (TRB). The analysis for the intersection with roundabout control were performed using the SIDRA software package (version 9.0). Intersection analysis results are described in term of Level of Service (LOS). LOS is a qualitative term describing operating conditions a driver will experience while traveling on a street or highway during a specific time interval. LOS ranges from A(very little delay)to F (long delays and congestion). WSDOT has a LOS C standard for State Route 3 within the project area. Table 3 shows the Level of Service criteria for roundabout intersections. Table 3. Level of Service Criteria for Intersections Level of Roundabout Intersection Average Service Control Delay(seconds/vehicle) A <_10 B >10-20 C >20-35 D >35-55 E >55-80 F >80 SO Alliance December 2021 18 Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 5.2 Intersection Analysis Results The analysis was conducted for the following scenarios: • Existing 2021 traffic volumes • Projected 2023 background traffic volumes without the Puget Sound West Industrial project • Projected 2023 background traffic volumes with the Puget Sound West Industrial project The operational analysis results for the study intersection for the PM peak hour are provided in Table 4. The LOS analysis worksheets are included in Attachment C. Table 4. PM Peak Hour Intersection Operational Analysis Summary Projected 2023 Base Year 2021 Without With Project Project LOS Worst LOS Worst LOS Worst Control LOS (delay) V/C (delay) V/C (delay) V/C Intersection Type Standard Approach Ratio Ratio Ratio WB A 0.03 A 0.16 A 0.25 SR 3/Log 1 EB A 0.05 A 0.06 A 0.08 Yard Road RAB C NB A 0.39 A 0.49 A 0.69 SB A 0.52 A 0.66 A 0.69 1. Roundabout The roundabout is currently operating at a LOS A and is expected to operate at a LOS A in the future years with and without the project. This LOS is well above the standard for the intersection. SO Alliance December 2021 1 9 Puget Sound West Industrial Development Traffic Impact Analysis 6 Summary and Conclusion Rush Development Company, Inc. (Rush) plans to develop a project east of SR 3 and north of Log Yard Road in Mason County near Belfair, WA.The full build out of the proposed Puget Sound West Industrial project includes four warehouse buildings totaling approximately 326,540 square feet. Access for the project would be provided by one driveway located on NE Log Yard Road east of the roundabout at SR 3 and Log Yard Road. All traffic produced from the site will be distributed via the roundabout at the intersection of SR 3 and Log Yard Road. Once completed, the project is estimated to generate approximately 111 trips during the PM peak hour. This report has been prepared to provide the project information and traffic analysis for Mason County and WSDOT to use in review of the project. Based on the analysis described in this report,the study intersection is projected to operate within the established intersection level of service standard, and no off-site mitigations are necessary. SO Alliance Decernber 2021 1 10 m , D =23.22 Acres(1,011,614 SF) =1232141000D0,123211400001 = =GC,LGeneral Commercial C F =16.92 Acres(736,896 SF) u \ XXX State Route 3 W 0 Belfair,WA-Mason County c =324,434 SF H Ce =32,443 SF(10%) POTENTIAL PARKING, =291,991 SF YARDAREA verage =80% ,r =SB =Sprinklers Throughout I - s p^O =109 Stalls S W� 196 Stalls c s rr 'o u<„ i CC =305 Stalls \ S V- =80 Stalls I =165 Stalls U =103 Stalls �— I =96Stalls cC = 444 Total Stalls Id of providing for warehouse stalls at a market It is common place for distribution to be at a �[ + cturing or smaller warehouse tenants to be at ' f an average of 1:1,500 has been utilized to Q ing requirements.This rate of parking will a V governing jurisdiction. -� Z A Q I ^ W ul M N o a e W +.,et _ f RT la = z Uj a w ; n t CL O o � 0 1 F J Jm WoCC � KE FLORA Q Q ' 0 e t9 Q oect � 0 00 to m W co C"T CO) I GHT MONUMENT E I W Z SIGN ..aJ.)� a 'Y MAP J W _ p U y^ .....- ....., _. '.._ ATE SEALED LV ANN S WAR Cl ITE r� `Ci ON PL E� j � Y• Stormwater Note: Site runoff conveyed to area pond to PROJECT MANAGER the south(Parcel 123214300130) 0 KIMBERLY SAVAGE I � I '.r1 DESIGN KRS DRAWN KRS CHECKED �f1 SEC T 39N RNW /" FILE NO DWGW DATE 0S12' SCALE I SHEET 1 OF-! PILE NO 35685 0 _ O APEX ENGINEERING LlC 2021 Attachment B Traffic Volume Calculation Worksheets �►� Puget Sound West Industrial SCJ ALLIANCE Trip Generation CONSULTING SERVICES PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Distribution Total Trips Site Plan Description LUC ITE Description VariabletValdueTrip RateIn Out In Out Total Industrial Park 130 Industrial Park 1000 sq ft0.34 22% 1 78% 24 87 111 AM Peak Hour Trip Generation-Not Current Site Plan Description LUC ITE Description Variable Value Trip Rate Distribution Total Trips In Out In Out Total Industrial Park 130 Industrial Park 1000 sq ft 327 0.34 81% 19% 90 21 111 Daily Distribuil Total Trips Site Plan Description LUC ITE Description Variable Value Trip Rate In In Out Total Industrial Park 130 Industrial Park 1000 sq ft 327 5.32 50% 868 1 869 1 1,737 Industrial Park (130) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 34 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA: 956 Directional Distribution: 81%entering, 19%exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.34 0.06-2.13 0.33 Data Plot and Equation 2000 , / x x N � r C / UJ / S F 1000 / II � , / X x / / x // x x / x ,/ X X // XX ,�c )Q x X X X sL < >s< x x 0 0 2000 4000 dp00 RAC X=1000 Sq Ft.GFA X Study Site - - - -- Average Rah Fitted Curve Equation:Not Given It',0" General Urban/Suburban and Rural(Land Uses 000-399) 49 Industrial Park (130) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Ft. OFA On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 35 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA: 899 Directional Distribution: 22%entering, 78%exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0 34 0.09-2.85 0.36 Data Plot and Equation W , N X g 1000 u , i i i X � X/X X X X ,' X XX ' X X X X X �V W X ol X X 00 2000 4000 e000 A0' X=1000 Sq.Ft.GFA X Study Ske - -- -- Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation:Not Given R2=•• 50 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition - Volume 3 _ I Industrial Park (130) Vehicle Trip Ends vs: - ,00 Sq. Ft. GFA On a: Weekday Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies: 27 Avg. 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA: 762 Directional Distribution: 50%entering, 50 r6 exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 3.37 1.41 - 14.98 2.60 Data Plot and Equation 8000 X X ..... �� '.. .. ..... .. .... ;, ............. ... .'X X c ' W X X,' aX. _ ._... _. . ... .... .. .. .. H 4000 u , ~ ' X X X X ' i X 2000 X X __. . .. .........._. .. � X ' X x' X X X ' X X� 0 0 1000 2000 3000 X=1000 Sq.Ft GFA X Study SRO Flftd Cuero ----- Average Rats Fhbd Curve Equation:Ln(T).0.52 Ln(X)+4AS R'-0.58 48 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition-Volume 3 Puget Sound West Industrial .°"ICJ ALLIANCE PM Peak Hour Volumes Growth Rate: 2.00% Forecasted Background E"pg Background Pipeline site p-jectfo Intersection movement :A" 020 2021 =I 2023 Apartments Gas station'fir. 2M Generated 2M j" J_' L 12 0 12 0 0 0 12 0 12 PM Peak Hour EB T 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 R 23 0 23 1 0 0 24 0 24 1 L 18 0 18 1 0 70 89 48 137 SR WB T 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 S Log Yard Rd R 5 0 5 0 U s0SS 35 90 L 7 0 7 0 0 0 7 0 7 NB T 534 11 545 22 64 48 S83 0 S83 R 7 0 7 0 0 60 67 13 80 4:00-5:00 L 2 0 2 0 0 61 63 10 73 PHF:0.97 SB T 707 14 721 29 106 -59 797 0 797 R 7 0 7 0 0 0 7 0 7 1.Per MTA park-and-ride ICA(Attachment D).See section 2.5 Traffic Volume Data of the Puget Sound West Industrial TIA for more information. Attachment C Operational Analysis Worksheets MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 1 [Existing 2021 (Site Folder: General)] Puget Sound West Industrial PM Peak Hour Site Category: (None) Roundabout Vehicle Movement Performance Mov Turn INPUT DEMAND :. Aver. Level of 95%BACK OF .. . Effective Aver. Avw_- ID VOLUMES FLOWS Satn Delay Service QUEUE Que Stop No. Speecl- Total HVI Total HVJ f Veh. Dist I Rate Cycles - SouthEast:WB Log Yard Road 3x L2 20 2.0 21 2.0 0.026 2.3 LOS A 0.1 3.3 0.53 0.35 0.53 34.6 8x T1 1 2.0 1 2.0 0.026 2.3 LOS A 0.1 3.3 0.53 0.35 0.53 34.5 18x R2 5 2.0 5 2.0 0.026 2.3 LOS A 0.1 3.3 0.53 0.35 0.53 33.4 Approach 26 2.0 27 2.0 0.026 2.3 LOS A 0.1 3.3 0.53 0.35 0.53 34.4 NorthEast:SB SR 3 1x L2 5 1.0 5 1.0 0.520 0.2 LOSA 4.3 108.6 0.19 0.06 0.19 38.0 6x T1 720 1.0 742 1.0 0.520 0.2 LOS A 4.3 108.6 0.19 0.06 0.19 37.8 16x R2 5 1.0 5 1.0 0.520 0.2 LOS A 4.3 108.6 0.19 0.06 0.19 36.5 Approach 730 1.0 753 1.0 0.520 0.2 LOS A 4.3 108.6 0.19 0.06 0.19 37.8 NorthWest:EB Log Yard Road 7x L2 10 9.0 10 9.0 0.047 3.9 LOS A 0.3 6.7 0.65 0.50 0.65 35.0 4x T1 1 9.0 1 9.0 0.047 3.9 LOS A 0.3 6.7 0.65 0.50 0.65 35.0 14x R2 25 9.0 26 9.0 0.047 3.9 LOS A 0.3 6.7 0.65 0.50 0.65 33.8 Approach 36 9.0 37 9.0 0.047 3.9 LOS A 0.3 6.7 0.65 0.50 0.65 34.2 SouthWest: NB SR 3 5x L2 5 1.0 5 1.0 0.392 0.1 LOS A 2.7 68.6 0.12 0.03 0.12 38.2 2x T1 545 1.0 562 1.0 0.392 0.1 LOS A 2.7 68.6 0.12 0.03 0.12 38.1 12x R2 5 1.0 5 1.0 0.392 0.1 LOS A 2.7 68.6 0.12 0.03 0.12 36.8 Approach 555 1.0 572 1.0 0.392 0.1 LOS A 2.7 68.6 0.12 0.03 0.12 38.0 All Vehicles 1347 1.2 1389 1.2 0.520 0.3 LOS A 4.3 108.6 0.18 0.07 0.18 37.7 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & Degree of Saturation (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog(Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method:Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio(degree of saturation)per movement. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements(v/c not used). Roundabout Capacity Model:SIDRA Standard. Delay Model:SIDRA Standard(Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model:HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity:SIDRA Standard(Akgelik M31)). HV(%)values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 1 Copyright©2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd 1 sidrasolutions.com Organisation:SCJ ALLIANCE I Licence:PLUS/1 PC I Processed:Wednesday,November 17,2021 10:35:49 AM Project: N:\Projects\2306 Rush Residential,Inc\21-000111 Rush Puget Sound West Industrial\Phase 01 -Traffic Scoping Report\Operations\Log Yard Rd.sip9 MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 1 [Projected 2023 Baseline (Site Folder: General)) Puget Sound West Industrial PM Peak Hour Site Category: (None) Roundabout Vehicle Movement Performance Mov Turn INPUT DEMAND _ Aver. Level of 95%BACK OF .. VOLUMESID • QUEUE Que Stop No. Speed [Total HV] Total HV] f Veh. Dist Rate Cycles SouthEast:WB Log Yard Road 3x L2 90 2.0 93 2.0 0.159 2.8 LOS A 0.9 22.9 0.63 0.51 0.63 34.8 8x T1 1 2.0 1 2.0 0.159 2.8 LOS A 0.9 22.9 0.63 0.51 0.63 34.7 18x R2 55 2.0 57 2.0 0.159 2.8 LOS A 0.9 22.9 0.63 0.51 0.63 33.6 Approach 146 2.0 151 2.0 0.159 2.8 LOS A 0.9 22.9 0.63 0.51 0.63 34.3 NorthEast:SB SR 3 1 x L2 65 1.0 67 1.0 0.656 0.8 LOS A 6.7 169.4 0.49 0.26 0.49 36.7 6x T1 795 1.0 820 1.0 0.656 0.8 LOS A 6.7 169.4 0.49 0.26 0.49 36.5 16x R2 5 1.0 5 1.0 0.656 0.8 LOS A 6.7 169.4 0.49 0.26 0.49 35.3 Approach 865 1.0 892 1.0 0.656 0.8 LOS A 6.7 169.4 0.49 0.26 0.49 36.5 NorthWest: EB Log Yard Road 7x L2 10 9.0 10 9.0 0.063 6.4 LOS A 0.4 10.8 0.81 0.67 0.81 33.7 4x T1 1 9.0 1 9.0 0.063 6.4 LOS A 0.4 10.8 0.81 0.67 0.81 33.7 14x R2 25 9.0 26 9.0 0.063 6.4 LOS A 0.4 10.8 0.81 0.67 0.81 32.7 Approach 36 9.0 37 9.0 0.063 6.4 LOS A 0.4 10.8 0.81 0.67 0.81 33.0 SouthWest: NB SR 3 5x L2 5 1.0 5 1.0 0.486 0.5 LOS A 3.6 91.7 0.32 0.15 0.32 37.5 2x T1 585 1.0 603 1.0 0.486 0.5 LOS A 3.6 91.7 0.32 0.15 0.32 37.3 12x R2 65 1.0 67 1.0 0.486 0.5 LOS A 3.6 91.7 0.32 0.15 0.32 36.1 Approach 655 1.0 675 1.0 0.486 0.5 LOS A 3.6 91.7 0.32 0.15 0.32 37.2 All Vehicles 1702 1.3 1755 1.3 0.656 1.0 LOS A 6.7 169.4 0.44 0.25 0.44 36.5 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & Degree of Saturation (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog(Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method:Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio(degree of saturation)per movement. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements(v/c not used). Roundabout Capacity Model:SIDRA Standard. Delay Model:SIDRA Standard(Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard(Akgelik M31D). HV(%)values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 1 Copyright©2000-2020 Akcellk and Associates Pty Ltd I sidrasolutions.com Organisation:SCJ ALLIANCE I Licence:PLUS/1 PC I Processed:Wednesday,November 17,2021 10:35:51 AM Project: N:\Projects\2306 Rush Residential,Inc\21-000111 Rush Puget Sound West Industrial\Phase 01 -Traffic Scoping Report\Operations\Log Yard Rd.sip9 MOVEMENT SUMMARY V Site: 1 [Projected 2023 With Project (Site Folder: General)] Puget Sound West Industrial PM Peak Hour Site Category: (None) Roundabout Vehicle Movement Performance Mov Turn INPUT DEMAND D:. Aver. Level of 95%BACK OF .. VOLUMESID • QUEUE Que Stop [Total HVJ f Total HVI Veh. Dist I Rate Cycles SouthEast:WB Log Yard Road 3x L2 135 2.0 139 2.0 0.253 3.1 LOS A 1.5 38.9 0.67 0.56 0.67 34.8 8x T1 5 2.0 5 2.0 0.253 3.1 LOS A 1.5 38.9 0.67 0.56 0.67 34.6 18x R2 90 2.0 93 2.0 0.253 3.1 LOS A 1.5 38.9 0.67 0.56 0.67 33.6 Approach 230 2.0 237 2.0 0.253 3.1 LOS A 1.5 38.9 0.67 0.56 0.67 34.3 NorthEast: SB SR 3 1x L2 75 1.0 77 1.0 0.691 1.3 LOSA 7.2 181.9 0.61 0.35 0.61 36.2 6x T1 795 1.0 820 1.0 0.691 1.3 LOS A 7.2 181.9 0.61 0.35 0.61 36.0 16x R2 5 1.0 5 1.0 0.691 1.3 LOS A 7.2 181.9 0.61 0.35 0.61 34.9 Approach 875 1.0 902 1.0 0.691 1.3 LOS A 7.2 181.9 0.61 0.35 0.61 36.0 NorthWest: EB Log Yard Road 7x L2 10 9.0 10 9.0 0.079 7.3 LOS A 0.5 14.1 0.86 0.73 0.86 33.4 4x T1 5 9.0 5 9.0 0.079 7.3 LOS A 0.5 14.1 0.86 0.73 0.86 33.3 14x R2 25 9.0 26 9.0 0.079 7.3 LOS A 0.5 14.1 0.86 0.73 0.86 32.3 Approach 40 9.0 41 9.0 0.079 7.3 LOS A 0.5 14.1 0.86 0.73 0.86 32.7 SouthWest: NB SR 3 5x L2 5 1.0 5 1.0 0.504 0.6 LOS A 3.9 99.4 0.36 0.19 0.36 37.3 2x T1 585 1.0 603 1.0 0.504 0.6 LOS A 3.9 99.4 0.36 0.19 0.36 37.1 12x R2 80 1.0 82 1.0 0.504 0.6 LOS A 3.9 99.4 0.36 0.19 0.36 35.9 Approach 670 1.0 691 1.0 0.504 0.6 LOS A 3.9 99.4 0.36 0.19 0.36 37.0 All Vehicles 1815 1.3 1871 1.3 0.691 1.4 LOS A 7.2 181.9 0.53 0.32 0.53 36.1 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & Degree of Saturation (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog(Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method:Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio(degree of saturation)per movement. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements(v/c not used). Roundabout Capacity Model:SIDRA Standard. Delay Model: SIDRA Standard(Geometric Delay is not included). Queue Model:HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity:SIDRA Standard(Ak�elik M3D). HV(%)values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 1 Copyright©2000.2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd I sidrasolutions.com Organisation:SCJ ALLIANCE I Licence:PLUS/1 PC I Processed:Wednesday,November 17,2021 10:35:52 AM Project: N:\Projects\2306 Rush Residential,Inc\21-000111 Rush Puget Sound West Industrial\Phase 01 -Traffic Scoping Report\Operations\Log Yard Rd.sip9 Attachment D Mason Transit Authority Log Yard Road ICA Log Yard Road at SR 3 SR 3 MP 27.96 Intersection Control Analysis July 2018 Region Traffic Engineer Approval: Steve Kim Date Olympic Region Traffic Engineer HQ Traffic Approval: 7 27 Zp!B Brian Walsh Date State Traffic Design & Operations Manager Intersection Control Anal sis v • • Yard ' • . • Mason July 2018 AW SCJ �.LLIANCE � CONSULTING SERVICES This Page Intentionally Blank Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Project Information Project: Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Prepared for: WSDOT Dale Severson, Development Services Manager Reviewing Agency Jurisdiction: WSDOT Project Representative Mason Transit Authority Prepared by: SO Alliance 8730 Tallon Lane NE, Suite 200 Lacey, WA 98516 360.352.1465 scjalliance.com Contact: Patrick Holm, Project Manager Ryan Shea,Transportation Planner Project Reference: SO #738.05 Path:N:\Projects\0738 Mason Transit Authority\0738.05 MTA Park and Ride Development\Phase 5-Traffic Analysis\ICA\2018.0713 Intersection Control Analysis.docx SO Alliance May 2018 This Page Intentionally Blank r Log yard Road Intersection Control Analysis TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................1 1.1 Background............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Purpose of This Memorandum.............................................................................................. 1 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................................................1 2.1 Study Roadways .................................................................................................................... 1 2.2 Study Intersections................................................................................................................2 2.3 Existing Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................3 2.4 Existing Crash History............................................................................................................3 2.4.1 Crash Analysis Process.................................................................................................3 2.4.2 Four-Year Crash Summary...........................................................................................4 2.4.3 Crash Severity..............................................................................................................4 2.4.4 Types of Crashes..........................................................................................................4 3. TRAFFIC VOLUME FORECAST........................................................................................5 3.1 Opening Year 2020................................................................................................................5 3.1.1 Development Traffic....................................................................................................5 3.1.2 Trip Distribution and Assignment................................................................................6 3.1.3 Background Traffic Growth..........................................................................................7 3.1.4 Commercial Development...........................................................................................8 3.1.5 Sensitivity Analysis.......................................................................................................9 3.2 Long-Range 2040 Forecast....................................................................................................9 3.2.1 Belfair Bypass...............................................................................................................9 4. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES............................................................................10 4.1 Project Objectives................................................................................................................10 4.2 Improvement Alternatives..................................................................................................10 S. INTERSECTION DELAY ANAYSIS ..................................................................................11 5.1 Level of Service Standards...................................................................................................11 5.2 Operational Analysis............................................................................................................11 5.2.1 2020 Opening Year Analysis Results..........................................................................12 5.2.2 2025 Horizon Year Analysis Results...........................................................................12 5.2.3 Long-Range 2040 Analysis Results.............................................................................14 5.2.4 Operational Analysis Summary..................................................................................14 5.3 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis............................................................................................15 5.3.1 Warrant 1—Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume................................................................15 5.3.2 Warrant 2—Four-Hour Vehicular Volume.................................................................15 5.3.3 Warrant 3—Peak Hour Vehicular Volume.................................................................15 SG Alliance May 2018 Page i Log Yard Rood Intersection Control Anolysis TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.3.4 Warrant 7—Crash Experience ...................................................................................16 5.4 Predictive Safety Analysis....................................................................................................16 6. CONTEXT SENSITIVE/SUSTAINABLE DESIGN ...............................................................17 7. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT......................................................................................17 7.1 March 7, 2018, Public Open House..................................................................................... 17 7.2 April 24, 2018, Public Open House...................................................................................... 19 8. RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................19 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. 2013-2016 Crashes and Crash Rates by Location........................................................................4 Table 2. 2013-2016 Crashes by Year........................................................................................................4 Table 3. 2013-2016 Crash Severity by Location........................................................................................4 Table 4. 2013-2016 Crashes by Type ........................................................................................................4 Table 5. Trip Generation Characteristics...................................................................................................5 Table 6. 2020 Trip Generation—AM Peak Hour.......................................................................................6 Table 7. 2020 Trip Generation—PM Peak Hour.......................................................................................6 Table 8. Level of Service Criteria............................................................................................................. 11 Table 9. 2020 Operational Analysis Summary—SR 3 and Log Yard Road............................................... 12 Table 10. 2025 Operational Analysis Summary—SR 3 and Log Yard Road............................................. 12 Table 11. 2025 Roundabout Sensitivity—SR 3 and Log Yard Road......................................................... 13 Table 12. 2025 Traffic Signal Sensitivity—SR 3 and Log Yard Road........................................................ 13 Table 13. Long-Range 2040 Analysis Results—SR 3 and Log Yard Road................................................. 14 Table 14. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary...............................................................................16 Table 15. 2025 Horizon Year Predictive Crash Summary........................................................................17 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Intersection and Area Map ........................................................................................................2 Figure 2. SR 3 and Log Yard Road—Existing 2017 Peak Hour Volumes....................................................3 SO Alliance May 2018 Page ii Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3. Estimated Project Trips—Distribution and Assignment ............................................................7 Figure 4. SR 3 and Log Yard Road—2020 Peak Hour Volumes.................................................................8 Figure 5. SR 3 and Log Yard Road—2025 Peak Hour Volumes.................................................................8 Figure 6. SR 3 and Log Yard Road—2040 Peak Hour Volumes............................................................... 10 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Traffic Count Worksheets Appendix B Crash Data Worksheets Appendix C Trip Generation Calculations Appendix D Traffic Volume Calculations Appendix E Intersection Geometry and Control Details Appendix F Capacity Analysis Worksheets Appendix G Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets Appendix H Predictive Crash Analysis Worksheets Appendix I Public Comments SCJ Alliance May 2018 Page iii This Page Intentionally Blank Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND In 2016, Mason Transit Authority (MTA) received Regional Mobility and Multimodal grant funds to enhance their existing park-and-ride program.The Belfair/North Mason service area was a priority of this park-and-ride project.There is no official park-and-ride lot in this area. Safeway and QFC committed to towing MTA users who parked in their lots starting in Spring of 2016. Currently, MTA relies on leasing space from the Assembly of God church and a gravel lot off of Roy Boad Road behind Safeway.The usage of these lots has been steadily increasing. In 2016 and 2017, MTA went through a park-and-ride site selection process with a group of stakeholders including: MTA staff, Mason County staff, a Mason County Transit Advisory Board member, an MTA Worker-Driver, North Mason School Board Member, and a County Commissioner. The site selected was an undeveloped parcel just east of the existing Log Yard Road/State Route (SR 3) intersection. MTA purchased this lot in July of 2017. The intersection of SR 3 and Log Yard Road is a three-way intersection with stop control on Log Yard Road. A fourth leg of the intersection exists as a gravel road for logging and for access to Belfair Water District facilities and the Belfair Sewage Treatment plant. Development of the MTA Belfair park-and-ride will pave this fourth leg, making the intersection a four-way intersection. 1.2 PURPOSE OF THIS MEMORANDUM The purpose of this technical memorandum is to present an Intersection Control Analysis (ICA)for proposed improvements on SR 3 at Log Yard Road in Belfair.The intent of the analysis is to recommend an alternative that provides the best intersection control at this modified intersection to serve the new MTA park-and-ride and anticipated community growth,while minimizing impacts to SR 3 and nearby intersections. 12. EXISTING CONDITIONS 2.1 STUDY ROADWAYS For the purposes of this analysis, SR 3 is considered the north-south roadway and Log Yard Road is considered the east-west roadway. SR 3 runs north-south between Shelton and Bremerton and is designated a "Rural Other Principal Arterial." In the study area SR 3 is rolling terrain and has a single lane in each direction, with left-turn lanes and right-turn lanes present at some intersections.The travel lanes are twelve feet wide,with 5- foot shoulders. A northbound hill-climbing lane ends approximately 1,500 feet south of Log Yard Road. In the study area the existing (2016) average annual daily traffic (AADT) is 17,900 and the speed limit is 55 mph. This portion os SR 3 is designated a T2 freight corridor, an existing truck percentage of 8%, and is identified as a National Highway System route. . Log Yard Road is a two-lane road that provides access to industrial uses on the west side of SR 3,located approximately at milepost 27.96. Log Yard Road is a private roadway not controlled or maintained by SO Alliance May 2018 Page 1 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Mason Countythat provides access to other private industrial access roadways west of SR 3, but does not provide any other outlet besides the intersection with SR 3. 2.2 STUDY INTERSECTIONS SR 3/Log Yard Road The intersection of SR 3 and Log Yard Road is currently a three-leg intersection with stop control on the minor approach. The existing intersection configuration is one travel lane in each direction on SR 3 with a left-turn-only lane on the northbound approach, a northbound acceleration lane for vehicles turning left onto SR 3 from Log Yard Road, and a right-turn-only lane on the southbound approach. On the eastbound approach, Log Yard Road has one left-turn lane and one right-turn lane. Existing Land Use and Zoning The intersection of SR 3 and Log Yard Road is in unincorporated Mason County within the Belfair Urban Growth Area (UGA). The existing land use near the study intersection is a mix of heavy industrial uses located on the west side of SR 3. On the east side of SR 3,the land is mostly vacant and undeveloped with a few businesses and a church located north and south of Log Yard Road.The current zoning of the MTA project site is General Commercial, while west of SR 3 is zoned for General Commercial and Business Industrial uses. Figure 1 shows the site area and existing intersection geometry. Fi ure 1. Intersection and Area Map • • r 1 Future Gas Station with Convenience Store Z Proposed MTA Park-and-Ride Lot SO Alliance May 2018 Page 2 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis 2.3 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES A PM peak hour turning movement count was collected by Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. on March 8, 2017, between 4:00 pm and 6:00 pm. At the same time, a three-day tube count of each approach of the intersection was also collected. The PM peak hour was observed to occur between 4:00 pm and 5:00 pm.The AM peak hour was determined to occur between 7:00 am and 8:00 am.Turning movements on Log Yard Road were estimated for the AM peak hour based on the tube counts and PM peak hour turning movement counts.The existing peak hour volumes are summarized in Figure 2. The traffic count worksheets are included in Appendix A. Figure 2. SR 3 and Log Yard Road—Existing 2017 Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak PM Peak h �1h 2.4 EXISTING CRASH HISTORY This section includes a discussion of crash data resources, analysis methods,and crash history at the study intersection.A discussion of predictive crashes is included in Section 5—Intersection Delay Analysis. 2.4.1 Crash Analysis Process Crash data was obtained and compiled for a four-year period between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016.This information was obtained from the Washington State Department of Transportation's Crash Data and Reporting Branch. A statistical analysis of the crash data in the study area was used to identify typical crash patterns and magnitude including identification of: • Crash location and frequency • Severity of crashes (i.e., fatal, serious injury, evident injury, possible injury, and non-injury or property damage only) • Crash type (i.e., rear-end, sideswipe,turning, etc.) SO Alliance May 2018 Page 3 _J Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis In addition to the statistical assessment of "Under Section 409 of Title 23 of the United States Code, crashes, crash rate calculations were developed any collision data furnished is prohibited from use in any and reviewed for the study intersection. Crash litigation against state,tribe or local government that data worksheets are included in Appendix B. involves the location(s)mentioned in the collision data." 2.4.2 Four-Year Crash Summary The crashes reported for the four-year period between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016,were reviewed. During this period,there were ten total crashes reported involving 16 vehicles and seven apparent or possible injuries. Of the ten crashes, four were single vehicle crashes,five were rear-end crashes, and one involved a vehicle turning left being struck by a vehicle going straight in the opposite direction. Table 1. 2013.2016 Crashes and Crash Rates by Location Total 2013-2016 Average Annual Crash Rate per Intersections Crashes Crashes MEV* SR 3 @Log Yard Road 10 2.5 0.39 Table 2 presents a summary of crashes by year. Table 2. 2013.2016 Crashes by Year Intersections 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total SR 3 @Log Yard Road 2 0 5 3 10 2.4.3 Crash Severity As shown in Table 3, a summary of four-year crash experience for the study intersection has been prepared by severity.There were no crashes involving fatalities or serious injuries in the study area during the analysis period. There were five crashes with possible injuries and only one crash with evident(non-disabling) injuries.The remaining crashes all involved property damage only. Table 3. 2013.2016 Crash Severity by Location Property Serious Evident Possible Damage Intersections Fatal Injury Injury Injury Only Total SR 3 @Log Yard Road 0 0 1 5 4 10 2.4.4 Types of Crashes As shown in Table 4, the prevalent crash type (rear-end crashes) all involved vehicles headed southbound on SR 3 and all occurred between 3:45 PM and 6:00 PM.This seems to be symptomatic of the rolling slowdowns that occur on SR 3 through Belfair during the peak period. Table 4. 2013-2016 Crashes by Type Rear Fixed Intersections Angle End Object Other Total SR 3 @Log Yard Road 1 5 2 2 10 SCJ Alliance May 2018 Page 4 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis TRAFFIC3. • FORECAST was cod in a o 2020 iz 2 Analysisn ucted for the opening year f and the horizon year of 20 5. Both AM and PM peak hours were evaluated for three intersection control alternatives, enhanced two-way stop control, roundabout, and traffic signal.This section documents the development of future-year forecasts for both time periods and analysis alternatives. Additional volume scenarios were prepared for sensitivity testing, including a 2040 forecast that included completion of the Belfair Bypass and an alternate 2025 horizon evaluating a peak seasonal and truck traffic scenario. A description of the travel forecasting methods and assumptions and projected turning movements for the SR 3/Log Yard Road intersection is provided below: 3.1 OPENING YEAR 2020 Traffic volume forecasts for the project completion year of 2020 were prepared that include the estimated traffic generation from the proposed park-and-ride and gas station with convenience store as well as background traffic growth. 3.1.1 Development Traffic Vehicle trip generation was calculated using the trip generation rates contained in the current edition of the Trip Generation Report (91' Edition) as published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Trip rates associated with a Park-and-Ride Lot with Bus Service (LU 090) and a Gasoline/Service Station with Convenience Market (LU 945)were used to estimate peak hour trip generation. Trip generation for a park-and-ride lot is based on the number of occupied stalls. For this study,the number of occupied stalls for the new park-and-ride location was estimated using historical data on park-and-ride lot occupancy of the two existing lots in Belfair. Summing the occupancy of the two lots, the 85th percentile value, 40 vehicles,was used as the estimated occupancy of the new park-and-ride lot.The park-and-ride trip generation calculations are included in Appendix C. The AM and PM peak hour trip rates, inbound/outbound percentages, and daily trip rates used for this analysis are shown in Table 5. Table 5. Trip Generation Characteristics AM PEAK HOUR, PM PEAK HOUR TRIP TRIP LAND USE (LU) UNIT RATE ENTER EXIT RATE ENTER EXIT Park-and-Ride Lot with Bus Occupied Stalls 1.26 69% 31% 0.81 28% 72% Service ILL)090) Gasoline/Service Station with Vehicle Fuel Pumps 10.16 50% 50% 13.51 50% 50% Convenience Market(LU 945) Some of the trips associated with the new gas station are expected to be pass-by trips and diverted trips, or trips made as an intermediate stop during another trip passing by or near the site. Non-primary rates (pass-by and diverted)for gas stations are particularly high, since buying gas is not often the primary purpose of a trip. The ITE Trip Generation Handbook (3rd Edition) indicates an occurrence of 82% SCJ Alliance May 2018 Page 5 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis non-primary trips during the AM peak hour and 88% during the PM peak hour for a gas station. Park- and-ride lots are assumed to have a pass-by rate of zero.The overall trip generation calculations are included in Appendix C. The AM and PM peak hour trip generation and pass-by rate calculations used for the study are shown in Table 6 and Table 7. Table 6. 2020 Trip Generation—AM Peak Hour NEW-TO-NETWORK TOTAL NOW NON- TRIPS PRIMARY PRIMARY TOTAL ENTER EXIT LAND USE (LU) S17F RATE TRIPS Park-and-Ride Lot with Bus 40 50 0% 0 50 34 16 Service(LU 090) Gasoline/Service Station with 18 183 82% 150 33 17 16 Convenience Market(LU 945) Project Total 233 - 150 83 51 32 Table 7. 2020 Trip Generation—PM Peak Hour NEW-TO-NETWORK NOW NON- TOTAL PRIMARY PRIMARY TOTAL ENTER EXIT LAND USE (LU) S17F TRIPS RATE TRIPS Park-and-Ride Lot with Bus 40 32 0% 0 32 9 23 Service(LU 090) Gasoline/Service Station with 18 243 88% 214 29 15 14 Convenience Market(LU 945) Project Total 275 - 214 61 24 37 3.1.2 Trip Distribution and Assignment The trip distribution and assignment for the new developments were estimated separately based on the characteristics of each individual use. The predicted distribution of park-and-ride traffic was based on the usage characteristics of the Belfair park-and-ride lots.The primary user base is south of Log Yard Road, and 80%of the traffic would be predicted to arrive from and depart to the south;the remaining 20%would arrive from and depart to the north. For the gas station, the primary trips were assumed to be relatively evenly distributed to the north (50%) and south (45%), with an estimated 5%to/from Log Yard Road,west of SR 3.The pass-by trips were estimated based on the existing directional splits on SR 3.The pass-by trips for the AM were calculated to be 70%entering and exiting northbound and 30%southbound. For the PM peak hour, the split was estimated to be 45%entering and exiting northbound and 55%southbound.These splits reflect the prevailing commute traffic characteristics of the area toward Bremerton in the morning and returning from the Bremerton area in the evening. The estimated project traffic distribution and assignment for the MTA park-and-ride lot and the gas station are shown in Figure 3.The traffic volume calculations are included in Appendix D. SO Alliance May 2018 Page 6 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Figure 3. Estimated Project Trips — Distribution and Assignment AM Peak PM Peak Gas Station 1 ���Jss r �i Je\ b s Park-and-Ride •� ��' �s �A 41 IV Al titi hg Total Project Trips ti V& lkp 3.1.3 Background Traffic Growth It is assumed background traffic growth will occur within the study area. An annual growth rate (uncompounded) of 2% per year was applied to the existing volumes on SR 3 to represent the background traffic growth.This growth represents the historic average over the last 20 years. An annual growth rate (uncompounded) of 1%was assumed on the existing west leg of Log Yard Road. The forecasted 2020 peak hour volumes for the intersection including existing traffic, development traffic, and background traffic growth are shown in Figure 4 for the AM and PM peak hours. SG Alliance May 2018 Page 7 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Figure 4. SR 3 and Log Yard Road—2020 Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak PM Peak t .r Horizon Year 2025—The 2025 forecast was generated using the historic growth rates along SR 3 and Log Yard Road for the background growth and additional commercial development along the east leg of Log Yard Road. The additional development elements are described in more detail below: 3.1.4 Commercial Development In addition to the background growth rates along SR 3 and the west leg of Log Yard Road, development of the commercially zoned properties in the immediate vicinity of the proposed east leg of Log Yard Road was assumed. A preliminary plat of this property includes 90 acres of potential development. It was assumed that half of this property would develop by 2040.A trip generation of this property was done usingthe ITE land use Shopping Center LU 820 . It was assumed that the 45 acres would have a pp g ( ) 15% building coverage, which would equal 295,000 square feet of commercial development. It was then assumed that this growth would occur gradually between 2020 and 2040, with 25%of the development included in the 2025 horizon year forecast. The forecasted 2025 peak hour volumes for the intersection are shown in Figure 5 for the AM and PM peak hours. Figure 5. SR 3 and Log Yard Road —2025 Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak PM Peak .f CP r v 0 y SO Alliance Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis 3.1.5 Sensitivity Analysis During the first public open house, concerns were raised over how this intersection would operate during peak summer conditions and during peak freight times. The analysis also includes sensitivity testing for both a summer peak and a summer peak with a truck peak to see how much additional capacity might remain during both peak periods in the 2025 horizon. To analyze a peak summer condition an adjustment factor of 1.12 was calculated using WSDOT seasonal adjustment data for SR 3. Additional truck trips were added to the analysis based on conversations with local business owners. Business owners estimated in the height of summer operations that Log Yard Road might see up to 600 truck hauls in a day. This represents approximately 1,200 truck trips (600 entering and 600 exiting). Eighty truck trips (40 trips in and 40 trips out) were added to the documented traffic counts in each peak hour to evaluate how these trucks would impact the intersection. The sensitivity volumes for peak summer conditions and peak freight times are provided in the forecast calculation table in Appendix D. 3.2 LONG-RANGE 2040 FORECAST In addition to analysis of each of the control alternatives in the 2025 horizon, an analysis of the modern roundabout and traffic signal control alternatives in the long-range 2040 horizon was performed. For the 2040 forecast the same background growth percentages were used, and the 20-year buildout potential of the commercial properties as described above. Also included in the 2040 forecast is an estimate of the traffic shift associated with completion of the Belfair Bypass. 3.2.1 Belfair Bypass The Belfair Bypass is a planned parallel north-south route to provide an alternative to SR 3 in the Belfair area.This project is funded and expected to be constructed within the next ten years. For this study the bypass was assumed to intersect SR 3 south of SR 106 on the south end and at Lake Flora Rd on the north end. Based on information contained in the SR 3 Belfair Bypass Transportation Discipline Report, we estimated the bypass would draw 625 vehicles off SR 3 in the AM and PM peak hours offsetting most of the anticipated traffic growth in the area. The forecasted 2040 peak hour volumes for the intersection are shown in Figure 6 for the AM and PM peak hours. SG Alliance May 2018 Page 9 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Figure 6.SR 3 and Log Yard Road—2040 Peak Hour Volumes AM Peak PM Peak O IVO >� 11101 4. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES 4.1 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The development and evaluation of improvement alternatives that accommodate traffic growth in the study area is intended to accomplish several specific objectives including: • Provide functional access to the MTA park-and-ride lot proposed for construction east of SR 3 • Provide safe and efficient access to existing and future businesses along Log Yard Road • Accommodate the geometric and capacity requirements of the large truck traffic that uses Log Yard Road • Maintain good progression of through-traffic on SR 3 Improvement alternatives were assessed based on success in achieving these objectives. 4.2 IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES Three alternatives have been considered in the context of this ICA. They are: 1) Two-way stop control with left-turn lanes and acceleration lanes on SR 3 2) Single-lane roundabout 3) Traffic signal The WSDOT Design Manual requires that the analysis of any intersection on a limited access highway must evaluate if a single-lane roundabout will successfully meet performance objectives given the expected traffic volumes forecasted for the area.The analysis documented in this ICA demonstrates that a single-lane roundabout or traffic signal would operate at an acceptable level of service much further into the future than a two-way stop-controlled intersection. During the first public open house, concerns were raised over how this intersection would operate during peak summer conditions and during peak freight times.The analysis also included sensitivity testing for both a summer peak and a summer peak with a truck peak to see how much additional capacity might remain during both peak periods in the 2025 horizon. SO Alliance May 2018 Page 10 • Log yard Road Intersection Control Analysis 5. INTERSECTION DELAY ANAYSIS This section resents the results of delay analysis for the 2020 opening year and 2025 horizon year p Y Y p gY conditions for the three intersection control alternatives.This section also identifies the relevant traffic operational performance standards. 5.1 LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS In this study, signalized and stop sign-controlled intersection analysis was performed using Synchro/SimTraffic 10, while roundabout analysis was conducted using Sidra Intersection 6.The analysis was performed using the parameters outlined in the WSDOT Traffic Analysis Guidebook. Capacity analysis results are described in terms of Level of Service (LOS). Level of service calculations for intersections determine the amount of"control delay" (in seconds)that drivers will experience while proceeding through an intersection. Control delay includes all deceleration delay, stopped delay and acceleration delay caused by the traffic control device.The LOS is directly related to the amount of delay experienced. For signalized and roundabout controlled intersections, the LOS grade is provided for each approach and the intersection as a whole. Table 8 shows the Level of Service criteria for the different control types assessed in this report. Table 8. Level of Service Criteria Stop-Controlled Intersection Signalized/Roundabout Intersection Level of Service Average Control Delay Average Control Delay (seconds/vehicle) (seconds/vehicle) A <_10 510 B >10-15 >10-20 C >15-25 >20-35 D >25-35 >35-55 E >35-50 >55-80 F >50 >80 WSDOT has established Level of Service C during the peak hour as the minimum LOS standard of acceptable operation for any intersection approach on state highways outside of Mason County's only incorporated urban growth area in Shelton[ 5.2 OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS For the operational analysis, three different intersection control alternatives were evaluated as follows: 1) Two-way stop control with left-turn lanes and acceleration lanes on SR 3 2) Single-lane roundabout 3) Traffic signal SCJ Alliance May 2018 Page 11 Log yord Rood Intersection Control Analysis For the two-way stop-controlled alternative it is assumed that NB and SB right-turn lanes would be required on SR 3. Intersection geometry and channelization details of control alternatives 1, 2, and 3, are included in Appendix E. 5.2.1 2020 Opening Year Analysis Results For the 2020 opening year, each of the intersection control alternatives would operate at LOS D or better, with the roundabout and traffic signal operating at LOS B or better.The results of the operational analysis are summarized in Table 9.The capacity analysis worksheets are included in Appendix F. Table 9. 2020 Operational Anal sis Summary-SR 3 and Log Yard Road PROJECTED 2020- LOS (Delay) by intersection control alternative Two-way Stop I I APPROACH w/Left-turn and Single-lane Traffic Signal Acceleration Lanes Roundabout (1 EB C(23.2) A(10.0) C(28.5) WB C(18.6) B(12.2) C(28.4) AM NB A(8.0) A(5.8) B(16.4) SB A(9.8) A(5.4) A(7.3) Intersection C(23.2) A(6.3) B(15.3) EB C(19.3) B(11.3) B(14.8) WB D(25.2) B(10.1) B(15.8) PM NB A(8.9) A(5.3) B(10.8) SB A(8.8) A(6.1) B(10.3) Intersection D(25.2)) A(6.3) B(11.2) 5.2.2 2025 Horizon Year Analysis Results For the 2025 horizon year, the roundabout and traffic signal alternatives are forecasted to continue to operate at LOS B or better for both peak periods. The stop control alternative would operate at LOS D for the AM peak period and LOS F for the PM peak period.The results of the operational analysis are summarized in Table 10. Table 10. 2025 Operational Analysis Summary-SR 3 and Log Yard Road PROJECTED 2025 - LOS (Delay) by intersection control alternative PEAK Two-way Stop Single-lane APPROACH w/Left-turn and Roundabout Traffic Signal PERIOD Acceleration Lanes EB D(30.3) A(9.7) C(27.1) WB C(22.1) B(12.6) C(27.5) AM NB A(8.1) A(5.8) B(14.7) SB B(10.4) A(5.5) A(7.9) Intersection D(30.3) A(6.5) B(14.4) EB C(24.2) B(13.3) B(18.4) WB F(62.4) B(10.5) C(20.6) PM NB A(9.0) A(5.5) B(14.4) SB C(15.4) A(7.4) B(13.1) Intersection I F(62.4) A(7.3) B(14.9) SG Alliance May 2018 Page 12 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis As discussed above, concerns were raised during the first public open house regarding how this intersection would operate during peak summer conditions and during peak freight conditions. Sensitivity analysis volumes were created to assess peak summer conditions and peak summer conditions with peak freight conditions. This sensitivity analysis was performed for both the roundabout and traffic signal alternatives. Because the stop-control alternative operates at a LOS F during the PM peak hour, it was not carried into this sensitivity analysis. The roundabout is projected to remain at a LOS A during both peak periods for the summer peak and the summer peak with freight peak scenarios.The traffic signal is projected to remain at a LOS B for the summer peak scenario and operate at LOS C for the summer peak plus freight peak scenario. The operational results for both sensitivity scenarios are provided below in Table 11 and Table 12. Table 11. 2025 Roundabout Sensitivity-SR 3 and Log Yard Road PROJECI ED 2025 - LOS (Delay) Sensitivity Analysis PEAK APPROACH Average Non Peak Summer Peak Summer Plus PERIOD seasonal Peak Truck EB A(9.7) B(10.0) B(12.4) WB B(12.6) B(14.1) B(16.8) AM NB A(5.8) A(6.2) B(10.3) SB A(5.5) A(5.5) A(5.8) Intersection A 6.5 A 6.8 A 9.7 EB B(13.3) B(14.8) C(23.3) WB B(10.5) B(10.9) B(11.6) PM NB A(5.5) A(5.6) A(6.2) SB A(7.4) A(8.3) B(11.2) Intersection I A 7.3 A 7.8 A 9.9 Table 12. 2025 Traffic Si nal Sensitivit -SR 3 and Log Yard Road PROJECTED 2025 - LOS (Delay) Sensitivity Analysis PEAK Average Non Peak Summer Plus PERIOD APPROACH seasonal Peak Summer Peak Truck EB C(27.1) C(31.2) C(32.1) WB C(27.5) C(31.6) C(31.4) AM NB B(14.7) C(20.6) C(32.1) SB A(7.9) A(8.0) A(9.4) Intersection B 14.4 B 18.3 C 25.8 EB B(18.4) C(20.3) C(26.7) WB C(20.6) C(22.8) C(29.4) PM NB B(14.4) B(15.7) D(36.1) SB B(13.1) B(13.8) C(22.1) Intersection 1 8(14.9) B(16.0) C(28.6) SO Alliance May 2018 Page 13 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis - 5.2.3 Long-Range 2040 Analysis Results In addition to the 2025 horizon year analysis, WSDOT requested that a long-term assessment be performed to predict if the recommended intersection control alternative could be expected to function acceptably long-term. The 2025 horizon year analysis indicates that the stop-control alternative will not operate sufficiently, so just the roundabout and traffic signal alternatives were assessed for 2040 conditions. The roundabout is projected to remain at a LOS A during the AM peak hour and operate at a LOS C during the PM peak hour. The traffic signal is projected to operate at a LOS C in the AM peak hour and a LOS F in the PM peak hour. The operational results for the long-range 2040 analysis are provided below in Table 13. Table 13. Long-Range 2040 Anal sis Results-SR 3 and Log Yard Road PROJLCJ LD PROJLC"I LD 2040- LOS 2040- LOS (Delay) (Delay) PEAK PERIOD APPROACH Roundabout Traffic Signal EB A(9.5) C(28.6) WB B(10.8) C(29.2) AM NB A(5.6) B(19.9) 5B A(5.6) B(14.7) Intersection A 6.3 C 20.5 EB B(19.2) B(14.8) WB C(24.1) C(26.9) PM NB B(13.2) F(192.1) SB C(24.9) D(39.3) Intersection C 20.1 F 91.3 5.2.4 Operational Analysis Summary The following is a summary of the anticipated operation of each of the intersection control alternatives: 1) Two-way stop control with left-turn lanes and acceleration lanes on SR 3 This alternative would provide NB and SB left-turn lanes on SR 3 as well as acceleration lanes for vehicles turning left from Log Yard Road onto SR 3. For the 2020 opening year the intersection is forecasted to operate at a LOS D in the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour.The service standard for the intersection is LOS C, so this alternative does not provide acceptable operation during the AM peak hour; however, the LOS C and D conditions indicate that the intersection will function. For the 2025 horizon the intersection is projected to operate at LOS D in the AM peak hour and LOS F in the PM peak hour, indicating that this control alternative will not function well at or beyond the 2025 horizon. 2) Single-lane roundabout SO Alliance May 2018 Page 14 • Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis As a single circulating lane roundabout with single lane approaches,the intersection would operate at an LOS A during the AM and PM peak hours for both the 2020 opening year and 2025 horizon year. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the horizon year during peak summer conditions and peak summer conditions with peak freight activity. The roundabout remained at LOS A for both peak periods under both sensitivity scenarios. 3) Traffic signal Under traffic signal control, with minimal geometric changes, the intersection would operate at an LOS B condition during the AM and PM peak hour for both the 2020 opening year and 2025 horizon year. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the horizon year during peak summer conditions and peak summer conditions with peak freight activity. The traffic signal remained at LOS B for both peak periods for the peak summer scenarios and operated at LOS C for the peak summer plus peak freight scenario. 5.3 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS A preliminary traffic signal warrant was prepared for the intersection for projected 2020 conditions.The analysis was based on criteria identified in the FHWA Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).The forecasted traffic volumes on the new westbound approach of Log Yard Road were the higher minor approach volumes and were used in the analysis. Based on the three-day tube counts collected at the intersection,the fourth-hour and eighth-hour volumes were estimated as 88.6%and 78.5%of the PM peak hour volumes, respectively. There are nine traffic signal warrants provided in the MUTCD. Of these nine warrants,four were selected for consideration for the study location and are the predominant warrants that WSDOT considers.These warrants focus on the volume of vehicles and accident data. Below is a description of each warrant analyzed for this location.The traffic volumes and results of warrants 1, 2, and 3 are shown on Table 14. The signal warrant analysis summary is included in Appendix G. 5.3.1 Warrant 1 — Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume "The Minimum Vehicular Volume, Condition A, is intended for application at locations where a large volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal. The Interruption of Continuous Traffic, Condition B, is intended for application at locations where Condition A is not satisfied and where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or conflict in entering or crossing the major street." Based upon the volumes shown in Table 14, Warrant 1 Condition A and Condition B are met. 5.3.2 Warrant 2 —Four-Hour Vehicular Volume "The Four-Hour Vehicular Volume signal warrant conditions are intended to be applied where the volume of intersecting traffic is the principal reason to consider installing a traffic control signal." Based upon the forecasted volumes shown in Table 14, Warrant 2 is met based upon Table 4C-2. 5.3.3 Warrant 3 — Peak Hour Vehicular Volume "The Peak Hour signal warrant is intended for use at a location where traffic conditions are such that for a minimum of 1 hour of an average day, the minor-street traffic suffers undue delay when entering or crossing the major street." SO Alliance May 2018 Page 15 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Using the forecasted 2020 PM peak hour volumes shown on Figure 4, Warrant 3 is met based upon the criteria in Table 4C-4. Table 14. Traffic Si nal Warrant Analysis mary PROJLC.I I (l2_2 U U WITH PROJECT 02 WARRANT 1 WARRANT 1 WARRANT 2 WARRAN-1 4th Hour 8th Hour 8-Hour 8-Hour (VPH) (VPH) Vehicular Vehicular Peak Volume Volume 4-Hour Peak Hour Hour Vehicular Vehicle 88.6% 78.5% Volume Volume (VPH) Factor Factor Condition A Condition B STATE ROUTE 3 Southbound 698 618 548 Northbound 545 483 428 - - See Table 4C-2 See Table 4C-4 Combined 1243 1101 976 350 525 LOG YARD ROAD Eastbound 36 32 28 - - See Table 4C-2 See Table 4C-4 Westbound 144 128 113 105 53 Minimum Volume Warrants Satisfied? Yes Yes Yes Yes 5.3.4 Warrant 7— Crash Experience "The Crash Experience signal warrant conditions are intended for application where the severity and frequency of crashes are the principal reasons to consider installing a traffic control signal." Accident data was obtained from the Washington State Department of Transportation, and ten recorded accidents occurred at the intersection within the past four years. Most of the crashes were not intersection related and were caused by driver error, equipment failure, or congestion on SR 3. The MUTCD Traffic Signal Warrant 7 identifies that a warrant is met if five or more reported crashes, of types susceptible to correction by a traffic control signal, have occurred within a 12-month period. Based on the analysis of crash history, Warrant 7 is not met. 5.4 PREDICTIVE SAFETY ANALYSIS In addition to an operation analysis of the intersection control alternatives, a predictive crash analysis was performed. This analysis was conducted using the methods described in the Highway Safety Manual (HSM). For this portion of SR 3 the rural two-lane highway spreadsheet model was used to assess each of the intersection control alternatives for the 2025 horizon year volume scenario.The stop-control and traffic signal conditions were assessed using the spreadsheet model.To assess the roundabout alternative the stop-control alternative was adjusted using crash modification factors taken from WSDOT's crash modification factor"short list".The predictive crash results for each control alternative are provided in Table 15.The predictive crash analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix H. SO Alliance May 2018 Page 16 1 • Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Table 15. 2025 Horizon Year Predictive Crash Summary Stop-Control Alternative Roundabout Alternative Traffic Signal Alternative Property Damage Only 4.3 2.1 2.0 Crashes Fatal and Injury 6.5 0.7 1.8 Crashes Total 10.9 2.8 3.8 Crashes As shown in Table 15, the signalized and roundabout control types are both expected to operate with fewer crashes than the stop-control condition, with the roundabout predicted to have the fewest crashes. The existing crash data indicates rear-end crashes are the most common crash type, with five (50%) of the crashes rear-ends. Of these,three were classified as possible injury. These are often related to congestion, and all five of these crashes occurred between the hours of 3:30-6:00 pm. Installation of intersection control at this location is not expected to impact the corridor congestion, likely leaving these rear-end crashes largely unaffected. However, the roundabout control type will reduce speed at this intersction, which should reduce the occurrence of injuries in rear-end crashes. CONTEXT6. A:LE DESIGN The intersection of SR 3 and Log Yard Road is in unincorporated Mason County within the Belfair Urban Growth Area (UGA).The current zoning of the MTA project site is General Commercial while west of SR 3 is zoned for General Commercial and Business Industrial uses. The proposed intersection improvement is consistent with the planned growth of commercial and industrial uses and supports proposed community development plans and economic vitality activities. The proposed project offers an improvement in the multimodal transportation system in this area by adding a larger park-and-ride lot with improved security features. While construction of this new facility will be disruptive to the existing corridor traffic, a Traffic Management Plan will be developed during design that will seek to minimize impacts, particularly to commuters,freight movement along the highway, and nearby businesses. COMMUNITY17. Any change of access on SR 3 requires community engagement, which is consistent with WSDOT requirements.This engagement is being achieved with public open houses in the Belfair community. 7.1 MARCH 7, 2018, PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE A public open house was held on March 7, 2018. Notice of the meeting was distributed by MTA. Flyers were sent to the community, MTA displayed flyers at facilities and on buses,the meeting was advertised in news media, and notice of the meeting was emailed to everyone on the project's distribution list. About 22 people attended the meeting, including residents, business owners, and property owners. SG Alliance May 2018 Page 17 Log yard Road Intersection Control Analysis • • Information provided at the open house included details of the proposed new intersection alternatives and generic information about the benefits of roundabouts. The opportunity for public comment and questions was provided. Public comments are compiled in Appendix I. Attendees shared concerns about the potential intersection alternatives. Concerns raised by attendees ranged as follows: • The corridor is congested. • The corridor is dangerous. • The project is costly. Will it take away money from the Bypass/Freight Mobility Corridor? • There are many trucks traveling the corridor and using Log Yard Road. • The timing of the project. Can this be done after or at the same time as the Bypass/Freight Mobility Corridor? • WSDOT coordination and inclusion. • Input from adjacent business and property owners. • Process of the decision. A summary of comments and concerns received was compiled and distributed back to the community. Information and analysis is included below to review each concern and outline how it is addressed within the ICA or ICA process.This information flyer is included in Appendix I. The majority of the concerns were focused around congestion, freight, and relationship of the future Bypass/Freight Mobility corridor. Congestion SR 3 and the Belfair area does suffer from regional congestion.The scope of this project is to create a safe and operational intersection at Log Yard Road and SR 3. The construction of a controlled intersection at Log Yard Road and SR 3 will not address or impact this regional congestion. A controlled intersection at Log Yard Road and SR 3 will split or break up the queue that currently builds at the Clifton Road signal. There are no large traffic generators between Clifton Road and Log Yard Road that would add cars to the queue. Traffic in the summer increases due to tourism and to seasonal business/industrial contracts.This summer increase was evaluated in the Operational Analysis above. Both a traffic signal and roundabout would continue to perform well with the increase in summer traffic. Freight Any controlled intersection that is constructed would be designed for the truck/freight traffic that uses the intersections. Signals and roundabouts can both be designed for large trucks. Property and business owners have shared the type of trucks that frequent this intersection with SCJ Alliance. Once an intersection control type is selected, SCJ Alliance will work with the business owners to confirm the proper design vehicle to ensure the design will work with the current business/industrial traffic. Adjacent business owners had concerns about how an intersection would address spikes in freight traffic during the summer. Increased freight traffic was evaluated in the Operational Analysis above. Both a traffic signal and roundabout could accommodate spikes in freight trips, with the roundabout operating at an LOS A and a signal operating at LOS C. SCJ Alliance May 2018 Page 18 Log Yard Road Intersection Control Analysis Relationship to the Belfair Bypass/Freight Mobility Corridor MTA is scheduled to construct a park-and-ride near this intersection in 2019. This new park-and-ride will consolidate their two existing lots in Belfair and address increased park-and-ride use. Buses and users will be using this location, and it is important that it has safe and functioning ingress and egress.The Bypass/Freight Mobility Corridor is not scheduled for completion until 2023-2025. Waiting to provide a safe intersection until that time is not an option. This project is an MTA project and not a Mason County or WSDOT project. Priority of Mason County and WSDOT projects sit with those agencies. MTA cannot provide funding or priority to projects that are not theirs and not transit related. WSDOT is intending to begin design of the Belfair Bypass/Freight Mobility Corridor in 2019. In a 2007 Alternatives Analysis for that project all of the north end alternatives were either a traffic signal or a roundabout. A traffic signal or roundabout at Log Yard Road would be forward compatible as a bypass terminus or connection at that location. 7.2 APRIL 24, 2018, PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE A second open house was held on April 24, 2018. At this meeting, SG Alliance outlined public concerns received, showed how the ICA process addresses those concerns, and presented the recommendation in the ICA: a single-lane roundabout. At this meeting,the public raised similar concerns mentioned above.There were no new concerns presented from the public at this meeting.This ICA provides additional analysis beyond what is typically required to review and address particular public concerns, specifically regarding summer peak hour and freight/truck trips. 8. RECOMMENDATIONS Development of the MTA Belfair park-and-ride will modify the existing Log Yard Road and SR 3 intersection to include a fourth leg, making the intersection a four-way intersection.The new traffic of this fourth leg will warrant revised intersection control for safety and operations. WSDOT requires an ICA to evaluate revised intersection control on a state route.The WSDOT Design Manuals states that a roundabout is the preferred intersection control type and is required to be evaluated.Three alternatives were evaluated:two-way stop control with left turn lanes and accelerations lanes, a single-lane roundabout, and a traffic signal. The roundabout and traffic signal would both operate effectively in the 2025 horizon year; whereas, the two-way stop control would fail.The single lane roundabout will reduce the overall severity of crashes.The roundabout is the recommended intersection control type based on a comprehensive analysis including operations, safety, cost, contexts, and public concerns. SO Alliance May 2018 Page 19