Final Report June 2015 - Spokane Valley, Washington · Prepared by: HDR Engineering, Inc. 1401 E....

Prepared by:

HDR Engineering, Inc. 1401 E. Trent Avenue, Suite 101

Spokane, WA 99202

Final Report

June 2015

Project Number: 9932045

Prepared for: City of Spokane Valley 11707 East Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99206

This page intentionally left blank.

Sullivan Road Corridor Study

Acknowledgements

City of Spokane Valley Council Members

Dean Grafos, Mayor

Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor

Ed Pace

Ben Wick

Bill Bates

Rod Higgins

Charles E. "Chuck" Hafner

City Staff:

Sean Messner, PE, Project Manager/Senior Traffic Engineer

Eric Guth, PE, Public Works Director

Steve Worley, PE, Capital Projects

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Representatives:

Charlene Kay, PE, WSDOT

Barry Greene, PE, Spokane County

Mike Hynes, Spokane Transit Authority

Ryan Stewart, Spokane Regional Transportation Council

Project Consulting Team:

HDR Engineering, Inc.

Don Sims, PE

Ross Kelley, PE

Scott Marshall, PE

Tony Wang, PE, PTOE

Haiyan Zhen, PE

Aziz Rahman, PE, PTOE

Christopher DeLorto, EIT


Final| 1

This page intentionally left blank.


Final| 2

Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 7

1.0 Project Description ............................................................................................................... 12 1.1 Project Background ................................................................................................... 12 1.2 Report Organization ................................................................................................... 13 1.3 Project Goal and Objectives .................................................................................... 14 1.4 Study Methodology and Public Outreach ............................................................. 14

2.0 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................ 10 2.1 Existing Land Use ......................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Existing Transportation Conditions ............................................................................ 12

2.2.1 Roadway Characteristics, Traffic Volumes and Intersection Level of Service ......................................................................................................... 12

2.2.2 Safety Analysis ................................................................................................. 20 2.2.3 Access Management .................................................................................... 24 2.2.4 Transit ................................................................................................................ 28 2.2.5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities .................................................................. 31 2.2.6 Summary of Existing Deficiencies ................................................................. 33

3.0 Future Conditions and Improvements .............................................................................. 35 3.1 Local and Regional Transportation Plans ............................................................... 35 3.2 Travel Demand Forecast ........................................................................................... 37 3.3 Traffic Analysis .............................................................................................................. 44 3.4 Improvement Alternatives ......................................................................................... 50

3.4.1 Roadway and Intersection Improvements ................................................ 50 3.4.2 Access Management Related Improvements .......................................... 60 3.4.3 Transit Improvements ..................................................................................... 62 3.4.4 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Improvements ......................................... 63

4.0 Recommendations and Implementation ........................................................................ 67 4.1 Implementation Priority .............................................................................................. 67 4.2 Planning Level Cost Estimate .................................................................................... 69 4.3 Funding Strategies ...................................................................................................... 70

5.0 References ............................................................................................................................ 72


Final| 3

List of Exhibits Exhibit ES-1. Sullivan Corridor Improvements ............................................................................ 11

Exhibit 1-1. Study Area Map ......................................................................................................... 12

Exhibit 1-2. Key Study Elements and General Process ............................................................ 15

Exhibit 2-1. Existing Land Use ........................................................................................................ 11

Exhibit 2-2. Roadway Classifications .......................................................................................... 13

Exhibit 2-3. Typical Cross Sections ............................................................................................... 14

Exhibit 2-4. Existing Geometry and Traffic Control ................................................................... 15

Exhibit 2-5. Sullivan Road Hourly Distribution of Traffic ............................................................. 16

Exhibit 2-6. Existing Intersection AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes ......................................... 17

Exhibit 2-7. Estimated Existing ADT (both directions) along Sullivan Road ........................... 18

Exhibit 2-8. Peak Hour Truck Percentages at Euclid Avenue and Sullivan Road ................ 18

Exhibit 2-9. LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections ................................................................. 19

Exhibit 2-10. LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections .......................................................... 19

Exhibit 2-11. Existing Intersection LOS ......................................................................................... 20

Exhibit 2-12. Crash Data Summary – 2007 to 2011 ................................................................... 20

Exhibit 2-13. Crash Data Summary - Severity ............................................................................ 21

Exhibit 2-14. Historical Crash Spatial Distribution along Sullivan Road .................................. 21

Exhibit 2-15. Sullivan Road Corridor and Eastern Region Crash Rates ................................. 22

Exhibit 2-16. Intersection Crash Rates and Rankings ............................................................... 22

Exhibit 2-17. Crash Data Summary – Crash Types .................................................................... 23

Exhibit 2-18. Crash Data Summary – Lighting Conditions ....................................................... 24

Exhibit 2-19. Functional Classification and Access Management ........................................ 25

Exhibit 2-20. Minimum Intersection Spacing For Local Access Streets ................................. 25

Exhibit 2-21. Driveway Approach Spacing-Same Side of Street ........................................... 26

Exhibit 2-22. Access Points and Driveway Spacing North of SR 290 ..................................... 27

Exhibit 2-23. STA Route 96 Transit Route Map and Bus Stops .................................................. 29

Exhibit 2-24. Sampled 2013 Weekday Route 96 Boarding Activity by Stop ......................... 30

Exhibit 2-25. Missing and Non-standard Sidewalks .................................................................. 32

Exhibit 2-26. Examples of Shared-use Paths .............................................................................. 32


Final| 4

Exhibit 3-1. HORIZON 2040 Guiding Principles ........................................................................... 36

Exhibit 3-2. Traffic Analysis Zones ................................................................................................. 39

Exhibit 3-3. Spokane Valley Recent Permit Activities............................................................... 40

Exhibit 3-4. Forecasted 2040 Traffic Volumes ............................................................................ 42

Exhibit 3-5. AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Increases (2013-2040) .......................................... 43

Exhibit 3-6. PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Increases (2013-2040) .......................................... 43

Exhibit 3-7. 2040 Estimated ADT (both directions) along Sullivan Road ............................... 44

Exhibit 3-8. 2040 No-Improvement Condition Intersection LOS ............................................. 45

Exhibit 3-9. 2040 Lane Configuration Changes with Planned and Programmed Improvements ....................................................................................................................... 46

Exhibit 3-10. 2040 Intersection LOS with Planned and Programmed Improvements ......... 46

Exhibit 3-11. 2040 Lane Configuration Changes with Additional Improvements ............... 47

Exhibit 3-12. 2040 Intersection LOS with All Proposed Improvements ................................... 47

Exhibit 3-13. Sullivan Road Corridor Signal Warrants ............................................................... 48

Exhibit 3-14. Lane Configurations for roundabout at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue .................................................................................................................................. 49

Exhibit 3-15. Roundabout Operations Analysis Results ............................................................ 49

Exhibit 3-16. Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Project .............................................. 51

Exhibit 3-17. Bridging the Valley Improvements at Sullivan Road/BNSF/SR 290 .................. 53

Exhibit 3-18. Revised Lane Configurations at Sullivan Road and SR 290 .............................. 54

Exhibit 3-19. Roundabout Configurations at Sullivan Road and SR 290 ............................... 55

Exhibit 3-20. Signalized Intersection Concept .......................................................................... 56

Exhibit 3-21. Roundabout Concept at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue .................... 57

Exhibit 3-22. Interim Single Lane Roundabout Concept ......................................................... 58

Exhibit 3-23. Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Intersection Improvement ......................... 59

Exhibit 3-24. Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Intersection Improvement .................... 60

Exhibit 3-25. Comparison of Types of Midblock Left-Turn Treatments ................................... 61

Exhibit 3-26. Pedestrian Network along the Sullivan Road Corridor ..................................... 64

Exhibit 3-27. Recommended Bikeway Network along the Sullivan Road Corridor ............ 65

Exhibit 4-1. Sullivan Corridor Improvement Plan ....................................................................... 67

Exhibit 4-2. Sullivan Corridor Improvements and Costs ........................................................... 69


Final| 5

Appendices Appendix A Targeted Business and Stakeholder One-on-One Meetings Appendix B Traffic Operational Analysis Results Appendix C Intersection Geometry and Traffic Control Notes Appendix D Bus Stop Inventory Field Notes Appendix E Existing Right-of-Way Map along Sullivan Road Appendix F Design Year (2040) Travel Demand Forecast


Final| 6

Acronyms ADT Average Daily Traffic AWSC All-way stop-controlled BPMP Bike and Pedestrian Master Program BTV Bridging the Valley EB Eastbound HCM Highway Capacity Manual LOS Level of Service MEV Million entering vehicles MUTCD Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices NB Northbound NSC North Spokane Corridor PDO Property damage only SB Southbound SRTC Spokane Regional Transportation Council STA Spokane Transit Authority STP Surface Transportation Program SVCP Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan TAC Technical Advisory Committee TAZ Transportation Analysis Zone TWLTL Two-way left-turn lane VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled VPD Vehicles Per Day VPH Peak hour volumes WB Westbound WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation


Final| 7

Executive Summary The Sullivan Road Corridor is a regionally significant corridor serving local, regional, and interstate traffic connections. This corridor is a vital arterial link providing service to the Spokane Industrial Park, Central Pre-Mix, Inland Asphalt, Inland Empire Distribution Systems and many other industrial and freight companies. This corridor is also the terminus of the Spokane County’s Bigelow Gulch Road Improvement Project, which will provide an improved route for traffic to get from north Spokane to Interstate 90 (I-90) through the Spokane Valley.

The City of Spokane Valley was awarded Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding for the planning analysis of the Sullivan Road Corridor. The City retained the services of HDR Engineering, Inc., to conduct this Sullivan Road Corridor Study. This study compiled, validated, and recommended short-term and long-term improvement plans for the Sullivan Road Corridor. Implementation of these recommendations will allow the Sullivan Road Corridor to continue to serve the adjacent industrial businesses, the region, and the state by accommodating existing and future traffic volumes, freight traffic, non-motorized, and transit needs.

Study Purpose The primary purpose of this corridor study was to analyze future traffic growth of the Sullivan Road Corridor between I-90 and Wellesley Avenue and determine whether future improvements are needed on the corridor due to continued regional growth and uncertainty regarding the timing of the completion of the US 395 North Spokane Corridor. This study also provides a comprehensive look at the Sullivan Road Corridor by integrating past planning transportation projects with newly identified projects into a comprehensive corridor plan that addresses multimodal transportation, community, and system preservation needs through the most current transportation planning practices.

Public Outreach The public outreach process included Targeted Business and Stakeholder One-on-One meetings and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings. Eleven targeted business and stakeholder one-on-one meetings were conducted from September 2013 to November 2013 to better understand transportation issues, safety and operational concerns and future development plans.


Final| 8

The TAC (made up of Spokane Valley, the Washington State Department of Transportation [WSDOT], Spokane County, Spokane Transit Authority, and the Spokane Regional Transportation Committee [SRTC]) met formally twice during the study process. The TAC provided the technical review and guiding direction for the study. Key involvement included assisting in identification of issues, identifying potential future development, review and input on documents prepared by the project team and providing input on study recommendations. The TAC provided a forum for project review, issue discussion, and played an integral part in establishing a connection between the project team and the community.

Technical Analysis A detailed technical analysis was completed to evaluate the existing conditions and the future land use and transportation network conditions. Key elements include the following:

Roadway and intersection safety;

Land use;

Planned infrastructure and programmed improvements;

Forecast traffic volumes;

Traffic operations analysis;

Identification of roadway/intersection deficiencies;

Gaps in pedestrian/bicycle trail connections, and

Future multimodal transportation.

Roadway, intersection and multimodal improvement alternatives were recommended to address the deficiencies identified through the technical analysis process.

A technical analysis strategy was developed for this study in order to specifically address the following questions raised by City of Spokane Valley staff at the commencement of this study:

1. How will the Sullivan Road Corridor be impacted by regional projects such as the US 395 – North Spokane Corridor (NSC) project and the Bigelow Gulch Road/Forker Road project?

Utilizing the region’s latest travel model (SRTC’s adopted 2040 model), it was determined that completion of the remaining US 395 – NSC project does not have a significant or measurable impact on both hourly and daily traffic volumes that use the Sullivan Corridor. However, completion of the final phase of the Bigelow Gulch Road project between Forker Road and the proposed new connection to Sullivan Road will have a measurable impact to traffic volumes on Sullivan Road between State Route 290 (SR 290)/Trent and the Wellesley intersection.


Final| 9

This study assumed that both Bigelow Gulch Road and US 395 – NSC projects will be completed by 2040. On the north end of the study area, traffic volumes are predicted to increase more significantly on Sullivan Road between SR 290 and Wellesley Avenue by 2040. One-half (1/2) of the increased traffic will use SR 290 in the AM peak hour while about two-thirds (2/3) of the increased traffic will use SR 290 in the PM peak hour. On the south end of study area, traffic increases will be relatively moderate. A worst-case travel demand analysis was also performed with the assumption that the US 395 – NSC project will not be extended down to I-90 by 2040. This worst-case assumption revealed only a modest increase in additional traffic using the Sullivan Corridor of less than 200 vehicles per hour (both directions) in AM or PM peak hour.

2. Should the Sullivan Road Corridor be widened to a 7-lane arterial or kept as a 5-lane arterial?

Based on the travel demand forecasts, using again the latest SRTC 2040 model along with additional traffic operational analysis, this 2-mile-long Sullivan Road Corridor between I-90/Indiana Avenue and Wellesley Road will not need to be widened to a 7-lane arterial to meet forecasted 2040 traffic demand. All future capacity improvements for the Sullivan Road Corridor will be focused on individual intersections, the interchange at SR 290, and the connection with Bigelow Gulch Road project at Wellesley Avenue.

3. Should the Bridging the Valley (BTV) improvements on the Sullivan Road overpass at SR 290 be built before the Bigelow Gulch Road /Forker Road project completed?

Yes, BTV improvements at Sullivan (and associated interchange capacity improvements of the SR 290/Sullivan Road Interchange) should ideally be constructed before the completion of Bigelow Gulch Road/Forker Road. Traffic operations of closely spaced ramp terminal intersections are very sensitive to left turn traffic volume increases. Based on the modeling results, the Bigelow Gulch Road/Forker Road project will increase traffic volumes on Sullivan Road between SR 290 and Wellesley Avenue by more than 1,000 peak-hour trips. The majority of the increased traffic is predicted to access Sullivan using the SR 290/Trent interchange. These increased trips will create additional traffic congestion and potential safety issues at this location – particularly during the peak periods – if some level of investment is not made at the existing Sullivan Road/SR 290/Trent interchange in advance of the completed Bigelow Gulch Road/Forker Road project.

4. Confirm/validate that the BTV improvement plans (developed in 1997) for the Sullivan/SR 290 interchange are appropriately scoped to accommodate 2040 demand based on updated regional traffic model.

The Spokane Bridging the Valley Steering Committee approved modifying the grade separation to accommodate an increased number of tracks and projected traffic on Sullivan Road at the SR 290 interchange. The section of Sullivan Road


Final| 10

between the two ramp terminal intersections is proposed to be expanded to 6 lanes, with two through lanes and a left turn lane in each direction. The bridge crossing over the BNSF is currently proposed to be seven lanes wide to accommodate a right turn pocket for north-to-eastbound traffic. The proposed intersection control for the two ramp terminals was signal control with dedicated left turn lanes serving the on-ramps. The probable construction cost was estimated to be $12.1 million (in 2003 dollars) for the entire crossing using conceptual quantities based on the Bridging the Valley project information.

As evaluated in this corridor study, the right turn pocket for north-to-eastbound traffic is not necessary based on the latest 2040 traffic forecast and operations analysis. However, consideration should be given to repurposing that additional bridge width for a multiuse (pedestrian and bike) shared-use path in this area.

Additionally, this study evaluated two multilane roundabouts at each ramp terminal vs. the proposed traffic signals and concluded the following:

1. Due to elimination of dedicated left turn lanes required for a signalized intersection, it is possible to improve interchange ramp terminal operations and corridor throughput without replacing the bridge over the BNSF tracks (see Exhibit 3-19) for proposed concept.

2. This alternative could result in a $5.0 million savings by not replacing the bridge over BNSF as part of a Sullivan/Trent interchange improvement, while at the same time, not precluding that from happening at a later date.

3. This alternative may also require modifications to Trent Avenue under the bridge to allow for vertical clearance. Further coordination with WSDOT would occur if this alternative were to advance to the design stage.

5. Confirm that the Sullivan Road Bridge Project as is currently scoped and designed will adequately meet 2040 traffic demand. More specifically, confirm that only two northbound lanes are required on the bridge.

Yes; the widened Sullivan Road West Bridge will significantly improve the traffic operations at the intersection of Indiana Avenue and Sullivan Road and the proposed channelization of four (4) southbound lanes at the traffic signal and two (2) northbound lanes will accommodate 2040 traffic demands.

Findings and Recommendations Recommendations were developed based on the input from City staff, TAC, and the results of the technical analysis completed as part of the study process. A prioritized implementation plan has been developed, including a schedule for the infrastructure and multimodal recommendations, to denote the anticipated timeline and associated “triggers” of when the improvements might be necessary.

Table ES-1 illustrates the recommended improvements to accommodate future traffic growth and provide desirable operations for auto, freight, transit, and non-motorized


Final| 11

travel through 2040. A detailed discussion and description of each improvement measure are presented in Chapter Four.

Exhibit ES-1. Sullivan Corridor Improvements Description of Improvements

Short Term (0-6 Years) 1. Sullivan Road West Bridge: Replace and widen the existing Sullivan Road West Bridge from

2-lane to 4-lane. 2. Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Intersection Improvement

3. Corridor Signal Coordination and ITS Investments

4. Intersection Improvement at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue

5. Install Continuous Roadway Lighting between Wellesley and SR 290 (Trent)

6. Shared-use path from Marietta Avenue and Euclid Avenue

7. ADA Sidewalk Upgrades

8. Bridging the Valley - Sullivan Road/BNSF Grade Separation Improvements

Long Term (>6 Years) 1. Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Intersection Improvement

2. ADA Sidewalk Upgrades (carry-over from short term)

3. Transit Stop Improvements 4. Implement Access Management Strategies between Wellesley Ave. and the SR 290 WB

Ramp 5. New park-and-ride facility in the vicinity of the SR 290

6. Completion of shared use path between from SR 290 to Sullivan Road Bridge

Source: City of Spokane Valley, HDR


Final| 12

1.0 Project Description 1.1 Project Background The Sullivan Road Corridor between I-90 and SR 290/Trent is one of the busiest freight routes in the city. The road is classified as a T-1 freight route from Indiana Avenue to Euclid Avenue, a T-2 freight route from Euclid Avenue to SR 290, and a T-3 route from SR 290 to Wellesley Avenue. Sullivan Road connects Spokane Valley’s largest industrial district to two regional transportation corridors. The City of Spokane Valley was awarded Surface Transportation Program (STP) funding for a planning analysis of the Sullivan Road Corridor to analyze future traffic growth of the Sullivan Road Corridor from Wellesley Avenue to I-90 and determine whether future improvements are needed in the corridor due to regional growth and partial completion of the North Spokane Corridor. A map of the study area and the Sullivan Road Corridor is illustrated in Exhibit 1-1.

Exhibit 1-1. Study Area Map

Source: HDR


Final| 13

Sullivan Road is a federally classified principal arterial. Sullivan Road within the study area extends approximately 2 miles within the City of Spokane Valley, from I-90/Indiana Avenue at the south end to Wellesley Road at the north end. This Sullivan Road Corridor is a vital north-south arterial link providing service to the Spokane Industrial Park, Central PreMix, Inland Asphalt, Inland Empire Distribution Systems and many other industrial and freight companies. It directly serves industrial zoned parcels that include multimodal connections to both BNSF and Union Pacific (UP) railroad lines. Sullivan Road is also one of only a few City of Spokane Valley crossings of the Spokane River and the UP and BNSF railroads.

A few locations within the Sullivan Road Corridor are currently experiencing traffic congestion. As this area continues to develop and additional traffic accesses an improved Bigelow Gulch corridor, congestion is expected to increase. Over the last eight to ten years, several individual studies and projects along the Sullivan Road Corridor have been proposed, planned, evaluated, designed and/or partially funded, including:

Sullivan Road Bridging the Valley project

Improvements to the overpass at SR 290 and the BNSF railroad crossing

Bigelow Gulch Road/Forker Road project

Replacement of the Sullivan Road West Bridge (southbound bridge) over the Spokane River

Spokane County’s previous Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan (prior to Spokane Valley incorporation) proposed to widen Sullivan Road from five lanes to seven lanes between Euclid Avenue and Wellesley Avenue.

1.2 Report Organization The Sullivan Road Corridor Study provides an analysis of existing conditions and future improvements, documented in the following five chapters.

First, Chapter One introduces the project background, project goals, and objectives, as well as the study methodology and planning process. Chapter Two discusses the existing conditions and needs assessment, including the integration of information from local and regional plans, along with an assessment of existing land use, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, transit service, traffic conditions, and access management. Chapter Three provides a summary of travel demand modeling, assessment of planned improvements, and recommendations for multimodal transportation such as corridor-wide pedestrian, transit, access management, and intersection capacity improvements. Chapter Four summarizes the recommended near-term and long-term improvements and planning-level cost estimation. Lastly, Chapter Five acknowledges references used during the course of the study, and is followed by appendices that present background information and analyses used in the study.


Final| 14

1.3 Project Goal and Objectives The goal of the Sullivan Road Corridor Study is to comprehensively evaluate how the previously mentioned studies and projects, along with any new projects identified in the study, can be integrated into a corridor plan that addresses transportation, community, and system preservation needs and practices.

In recognition of existing and future land development, road improvement activities, and future transportation plans, this study compiled, validated and integrated a comprehensive plan with recommendations of transportation improvements that fulfill the following study objectives:

Maximize the safe and efficient movement of residents, commuters, and freight traffic to destinations throughout the Sullivan Road study area;

Promote the safe and efficient movement of goods to and from the commercial, manufacturing, and industrial areas of the corridor without degrading the traffic level-of-service along the Sullivan Road Corridor;

Provide facilities that support and promote walking and bicycling; and

Enhance transit services by improving transit amenities/access and identifying opportunities for potential park-and-ride facilities.

1.4 Study Methodology and Public Outreach Study Methodology This study methodology is to assess existing and future travel conditions, review previous planned projects, and identify corridor improvement strategies for traffic (auto and trucks), transit, pedestrians and bike facilities. The key elements and the process of this study are illustrated in Exhibit 1-2 and involve the following tasks:

An assessment of the existing traffic conditions in the study area including an inventory of roadway geometrics, observations of traffic flow, the review of historical collision data and daily and peak period traffic counts.

A public outreach process including Targeted Business and Stakeholder One-on-One meetings and TAC meetings.

A traffic analysis of forecasted 2040 traffic volumes from SRTC travel demand models including identification of future corridor deficiencies, and future operational analysis.

High-level analyses of transit, non-motorized traffic, and access management strategies.

An assessment of various improvements including previous planned projects and newly identified projects.


Final| 15

A corridor plan that addresses operational deficiencies and safety concerns identified from the analyses of the existing and future traffic conditions, while taking public input into consideration.

Exhibit 1-2. Key Study Elements and General Process

The study was guided by inputs from Targeted Business and Stakeholder One-on-One meetings and the TAC. Their inputs were not only important in gaining a clear idea of the issues, but were critical in developing support for the recommended strategies. Periodic project progress meetings were also held to review project status, discuss issues, and obtain input with the City staff and participating agencies.

Public Outreach The public outreach process included Targeted Business and Stakeholder One-on-One meetings and TAC meetings. Eleven targeted business and stakeholder one-on-one meetings were conducted from September 2013 to November 2013 to better understand transportation issues, safety and operational concerns and future development plans. The targeted business and stakeholder one-on-one meeting summary is included in Appendix A. As a result of the meetings, some specific improvements were suggested on the Sullivan Road Corridor. These suggested included the following items:

1. Consider roundabouts where appropriate. 2. Improve the Sullivan/Indiana intersection, with emphasis on southbound turn

lanes. 3. Construct larger curb radii at intersections experiencing high right-turn truck

volumes. 4. Improve lighting at Kiernan so that the northbound right turn lane will be more

visible. 5. Construct the Bridging the Valley recommendations at the Sullivan Road/Trent

Avenue interchange. 6. Widen Mission Avenue to allow better truck access to the I-90/Barker Road

interchange.

Improvement ideas (items 1, 2, 4, and 5) were screened to the next level and evaluated as part of this study from both a traffic operation and/or safety prospective.

Some improvement ideas (items 3 and 6) were already a part of the latest Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program.

Data Collection

StakeholderMeetings

SRTC Model and Traffic

Analysis

TAC Meetings

Recommendations and Final Report


Final| 16

The entire TAC met formally a of couple times throughout the study process and individual meetings were scheduled with TAC representatives as needed. The TAC provided the technical review and guiding direction for the study. Key involvement included assisting in identification of issues, identifying potential future development, review and input on documents prepared by the project team, and providing input on study recommendations. The TAC provided a forum for project review and issue discussion, and played an integral role in establishing a connection between the project team and the community.

The technical advisory committee is comprised of the following state and local government entities: City of Spokane Valley, Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC), Spokane County, Spokane Transit Authority (STA), and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT).


Final| 10

2.0 Existing Conditions This chapter presents an assessment of the existing land use and transportation conditions along the Sullivan Road Corridor. Specifically, it describes unique land use conditions and confirms the importance of the Sullivan Road Corridor to adequately serve the adjacent industrial businesses. This chapter also focuses on roadway geometrics, traffic controls, and existing traffic volumes and includes a discussion of how the roadway accommodates current traffic demands. Lastly, the chapter also summarizes current safety issues, existing transit service, pedestrian and bicycling conditions.

2.1 Existing Land Use The study area contains the largest heavy industrial area in Eastern Washington. As illustrated on Exhibit 2-1, the heavy industrial area is predominant, with small portion of community commercial area from SR 290 (Trent Avenue) to the Spokane River. Heavy industrial uses include manufacture and construction businesses such as Kaiser, Honeywell, Degerstrom, and OrePac. This area is also home of the Spokane Business and Industrial Park which is one of the largest business and industrial parks in the country. The Spokane Business and Industrial Park is the region's largest employment center with more than 4.5 million square feet of space and 120 resident companies employing in excess of 4,500 people. The other industrial businesses, including CXT/ Central Premix Concrete and Inland Asphalt/Aggregate, are located in the study area. In addition to the private enterprises, there are some public facilities such as Spokane County Flora Maintenance Yard and Regional Solid Waste Transfer Station.

At the north end of the study area, from SR 290 to Wellesley Avenue, there are various land use developments including low and medium density residential, corridor mixed use, and light industrial. Two schools, East Valley High School and East Valley Middle School, are located immediately north of Wellesley Avenue. Further north of the study area is part of unincorporated Spokane County.


Final| 11

Exhibit 2-1. Existing Land Use

Legend

Source: City of Spokane Valley


Final| 12

At the south end of the study area, large blocks of land use include regional commercial and mixed use centers. The Spokane Valley Mall is located on the north side of I-90 and the southwest quadrant of the intersection at Indiana Avenue and Sullivan Road. The Hanson Industries development is located east of Sullivan Road along Indiana Avenue.

2.2 Existing Transportation Conditions The analysis of existing traffic conditions addresses issues related to roadway characteristics, safety, and access controls along the study corridor.

2.2.1 Roadway Characteristics, Traffic Volumes and Intersection Level of Service

Roadway Characteristics Sullivan Road is generally a 5-lane principal arterial with a speed limit of 35 miles per hour (mph) within the study area. It traverses the city of Spokane Valley in a north-south direction and connects to SR 290 and I-90. Exhibit 2-2 illustrates the roadway classifications of major streets along Sullivan Road within the study area.

At major intersections south of Kiernan Avenue/B Street, northbound right-turn lanes take the form of additional turn bays or as dropped through lanes to accommodate turning movement volumes and truck traffic. Center turn lanes and/or narrow median are common from I-90 to Kiernan Avenue along Sullivan Road. From the Sullivan Road and SR 290 interchange to Wellesley Avenue, Sullivan Road is a 4-lane roadway without left turn lanes. Typical cross sections are presented in Exhibit 2-3.

Within the study area, Sullivan Road has one all-way stop controlled intersection, three one-way stop controlled intersections, and eight signalized intersections as shown in Exhibit 2-4:

1. Wellesley Avenue and Sullivan Road (all-way stop)

2. Upland Drive and Sullivan Road (one-way stop)

3. SR 290 (Trent Avenue) Westbound Off-Ramp and Sullivan Road (signal)

4. SR 290 (Trent Avenue) Eastbound Off-Ramp and Sullivan Road (signal)

5. Kiernan Avenue and Sullivan Road (signal)

6. D-Street and Sullivan Road (one-way stop)

7. Euclid Avenue and Sullivan Road (signal)

8. Fairview Lane and Sullivan Road (one-way stop)

9. Marietta Avenue and Sullivan Road (signal)

10. Pre-Mix and Sullivan Road (signal)

11. Indiana Avenue and Sullivan Road (WSDOT signal)


Final| 13

12. I-90 Westbound Ramps and Sullivan Road (WSDOT Signal)

Exhibit 2-2. Roadway Classifications

Legend



Final| 14

Exhibit 2-3. Typical Cross Sections South of Kiernan Avenue

North of Kiernan Avenue

Source: HDR

Existing intersection geometry, traffic control, and pedestrian crosswalks along the Sullivan Road Corridor are presented in Exhibit 2-4.


Final| 15

Exhibit 2-4. Existing Geometry and Traffic Control

Source: HDR


Final| 16

Existing Traffic Volumes As shown in Exhibit 2-5, hourly traffic distributions at the locations of SR 290/Trent Avenue and south of Euclid Avenue reveal typical commuter traffic patterns near an employment center.

Exhibit 2-5. Sullivan Road Hourly Distribution of Traffic Between SR 290/Trent Avenue and Euclid (4/15/2013)

Between Euclid Avenue and I-90 (6/25/2012)

Source: City of Spokane Valley and HDR

The AM and PM peak hours were found to be 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM and 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM. The balanced intersection volumes for AM and PM peak hours are presented in Exhibit 2-6.


Final| 17

Exhibit 2-6. Existing Intersection AM and PM Peak Hour Volumes

Source: HDR


Final| 18

Estimated existing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes were also developed based on PM peak hour volumes and the proportions to daily traffic counts at selected locations along Sullivan Road. Exhibit 2-7 presents estimated ADT along Sullivan Road.

Exhibit 2-7. Estimated Existing ADT (both directions) along Sullivan Road

Location PM Peak Hour Volumes (vph)

Daily Volume / PM Peak Hour Volume Ratio

Estimated ADT Round

to 100 (vpd)

Between Wellesley and SR 290 1150 9.8 [1] 11300

Between SR 290 Ramps 1426 11.6 [2] 16500

Between SR 290 Eastbound ramps and Kiernan 1726 11.6 [2] 20000

Between Kiernan and Euclid 1708 11.6 [2] 19800

Between Euclid and Marietta 1774 12.2 [3] 21600

Between Marietta and Pre-Mix 2127 12.2 [3] 25900

Between Pre-Mix and Indiana 2170 12.2 [3] 26500

Source: City of Spokane Valley and HDR analysis. [1]Based on 24-hour traffic counts just south of Wellesley Avenue. [2]Based on 24-hour traffic counts just south of SR 290. [3]Based on 24-hour traffic counts just south of Euclid Avenue.

Classified as a T-1 freight route, Sullivan Road between SR 290 and I-90 is the busiest truck route in Spokane Valley connecting the Spokane Valley’s largest industrial district to two regional transportation corridors. Exhibit 2-8 presents truck percentages on all approaches of the intersection at Euclid Avenue and Sullivan Road during AM and PM peak hours in June 2012.

Exhibit 2-8. Peak Hour Truck Percentages at Euclid Avenue and Sullivan Road

Time Period Sullivan Road Northbound

Sullivan Road Southbound

Euclid Avenue Eastbound

Euclid Avenue Westbound

AM Peak 15% 21% 31% 32%

PM Peak 13% 11% 19% 22%

Source: ATR counts on 6/25/2012 (City of Spokane Valley). ATRs were located on Sullivan Road south of Euclid Avenue and on Euclid Avenue east of Sullivan Road.

Existing Level of Service The traffic operational conditions within the study area were evaluated using Level of Service (LOS) analysis. Based on the methodologies provided in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), LOS A represents free-flow conditions (motorists experience little or no delay and traffic levels are well below roadway capacity), LOS F represents forced-flow conditions (motorists experience very long delays and traffic levels exceed roadway


Final| 19

capacity), and LOS B to E represent decreasing desirable conditions. The City of Spokane Valley generally uses LOS D as an acceptable condition for signalized intersection and LOS E as an acceptable condition for unsignalized intersections. Exhibit 2-9 and 2-10 present LOS criteria for signalized intersections and unsignalized intersections, respectively.

Exhibit 2-9. LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections Level of Service Control Delay Range (second)

A <=10 B >10 and <=20 C >20 and <=35 D >35 and <=55 E >55 and <=80 F >80 or v/c > 1.0

Source: 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board

Exhibit 2-10. LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections Level of Service Control Delay Range (second)

A <=10 B >10 and <=15 C >15 and <=25 D >25 and <=35 E >35 and <=50 F >50 or v/c > 1.0

Source: 2010 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board The intersection traffic operations analysis was completed for the existing conditions for both the AM and PM peak hours using the Synchro 7 software package. The AM and PM Synchro models were calibrated using the existing signal timing plans provided by the City of Spokane Valley and WSDOT. The LOS for individual intersections was calculated from the Synchro output.

Exhibit 2-11 summarizes the existing LOS for the study area intersections. As shown, nearly all intersections within the study area are currently operating at or better than acceptable conditions except for the intersection at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue. Further analysis of individual lane groups at individual intersections found that the Sullivan Road southbound approach at Indiana Avenue also operated at LOS E with a long 95th percentile queue of 730 feet during the PM peak hour. Detailed Synchro calculation sheets for the existing AM and PM peak hours analyses were included in Appendix B.


Final| 20

Exhibit 2-11. Existing Intersection LOS

Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour Intersection LOS

PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS

Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue All- Way Stop E F

Sullivan Road and SR 290 WB Off-Ramp Signal B B

Sullivan Road and SR 290 EB Off-Ramp Signal B B

Sullivan Road and Kiernan Avenue Signal B B

Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Signal C D

Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Signal B C

Sullivan Road and Pre-Mix Signal B B

Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue Signal B D

Sullivan Road and I-90 WB Ramps Signal B B

Source: HDR

2.2.2 Safety Analysis Historical crash data was provided by the City of Spokane Valley. In order to identify accident trends, safety concerns, and roadway deficiencies within the study area, further data analysis was conducted on this information.

As shown in Exhibit 2-12, a total of 130 crashes occurred in the five-year time period from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2011, on the Sullivan Road Corridor.

Exhibit 2-12. Crash Data Summary – 2007 to 2011 Year Number of Crashes Percentage 2007 25 19%

2008 35 27%

2009 27 21%

2010 17 13%

2011 26 20%

Total 130 100% Source: City of Spokane Valley and JUB

As shown in Exhibit 2-13, the majority of crashes were property damage only, which comprised 88 crashes of 130 in the study area from 2007 to 2011. There were 2 major injury crashes (1 disabling injury crash and 1 serious injury crash) and 39 minor injury crashes. There were no fatal crashes within this time period.


Final| 21

Exhibit 2-13. Crash Data Summary - Severity

Severity Number of Crashes Percentage

Fatality 0 0%

Major Injury[1] 2 1.5%

Minor Injury 39 30%

Property Damage Only 88 67.7%

Other 1 0.8%

Total 130 100%

Source: City of Spokane Valley and JUB [1] Major injury includes disabling and serious injuries.

Spatial distribution of historical crashes as shown in Exhibit 2-14 showed that majority of the crashes occurred at or near intersections. Calculations of intersection crash rates also showed that the highest crash concentration location was the intersection of Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue and the second highest crash concentration location was the intersection at the interchange of Sullivan Road and SR 290.

Exhibit 2-14. Historical Crash Spatial Distribution along Sullivan Road

Source: City of Spokane Valley and HDR

Intersections

Segment between Intersections


Final| 22

Crash rates, normalizing different locations with varying traffic volumes, were calculated for the overall corridor and individual intersections. Crash rates for roadway segments are defined as crashes per million vehicle-miles of travel (VMT). Intersection crash rates are defined by the number of crashes occurring per million entering vehicles (MEV).

As shown in Exhibit 2-15, the crash rate for the 2-mile Sullivan Road has a crash rate of 1.69 crashes per Million VMT, which is slightly higher than the average crash rate (1.54) for all principle arterials in eastern region of the state. Crash rates for individual intersections are presented in Exhibit 2-16, together with ranking of 1 to 7 for crash rates, from the highest to the lowest.

Exhibit 2-15. Sullivan Road Corridor and Eastern Region Crash Rates

Crash Rate (Number of Crashes per Million VMT)

Sullivan Road 5-year Average 1.69

Eastern Region 2011 Average – Principal Arterial Rural Areas 0.95

Eastern Region 2011 Average – Principal Arterial Urban Areas 2.55

Eastern Region 2011 Average – Principal Arterial All Areas 1.54

Source: WSDOT and HDR

Exhibit 2-16. Intersection Crash Rates and Rankings

Crash Rate (Number of Crashes per MEV) Ranking

Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue 5.05 1

Sullivan Road and SR 290 Interchange 4.35 2

Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue 3.79 3

Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue

2.47 4

Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue 2.42 5

Sullivan Road and Kiernan Avenue 2.19 6

Sullivan Road and Pre-Mix 2.01 7

Source: HDR


Final| 23

As shown in Exhibit 2-17, the majority of the highest number of crashes (50) were rear-ends, which are typically attributed to congestion related conditions.

Exhibit 2-17. Crash Data Summary – Crash Types

Crash Type Number of Crashes Percentage

Rear-Ends 50 38.5%

Angles 23 17.7%

Left Turn 17 13.1%

Side-Swipe 16 12.3%

Fixed Objects 8 6.2%

Other 8 6.2%

Right Turn 4 3.1%

Bicycle/Pedestrian 4 3.1%

Total 130 100%

Source: City of Spokane Valley and JUB

Twenty-three crashes were angles crashes and over 16 of them were results from driver behavior or impairment (i.e., disregarding stop and go light, failure to yield, speeding, or under influence of alcohol).

Seventeen crashes were left-turn crashes and most of them were results from driver behavior or impairment (i.e., speeding, driver inattention, failure to yield, or improper lane change/passing), which represented another 13 percent of total crash in the corridor.

Eight crashes were fixed-object crashes, which represented only 6 percent of the total crashes in the corridor. Fixed-object crashes could result from drivers losing control because of roadway conditions or excessive speed, the close proximity of roadside barriers to moving traffic, and the avoidance of other traffic. They could also result from driver behavior or impairment (i.e., fatigue, illness, or under influence of alcohol). In the study area, most of the fixed-object crashes are results from driver behavior or impairment (i.e., speeding, driver inattention, improper turn/passing, fatigue, illness, or under influence of alcohol).

Four crashes were right-turn crashes, and 3 of them were results from driver behavior (improper turn).

There were a total of 4 accidents involving bicycle/pedestrians. Three of these occurred at the Indiana intersection and one occurred at the SR 290/Trent westbound ramp entrance.


Final| 24

Additional analysis on lighting conditions revealed that lack of continuous illumination could impact the traffic safety along the corridor. As shown in Exhibit 2-18, 21 percent of the crashes occurred during the dark conditions (with or without lighting) for overall corridor. A disproportionally high percentage of crashes—35 percent—occurred during dark conditions (with or without lighting) for the sections from SR 290 to Wellesley Avenue.

Exhibit 2-18. Crash Data Summary – Lighting Conditions

Lighting Conditions Overall Corridor

Number of Crashes / Percentage

Sections from SR 290 to Wellesley Avenue

Number of Crashes/Percentage

Daylight 96 (74%) 23 (62%)

Dust or Dawn 5 (4%) 1 (3%)

Dark with or without lighting 28 (21%) 13 (35%)

Other 1(1%) 0 (0%)

Source: HDR

2.2.3 Access Management Access management is defined as the systematic control of the location, spacing, design, and operation of driveways, median openings, interchanges and street connections to a roadway for accessing adjacent land uses and reducing the frequency of traffic conflicts in a safe and efficient manner. The relationship of roadway functional classification, accessibility, and mobility functions is shown in Exhibit 2-19.

Sullivan Road is classified as a principal (or Major) arterial roadway; therefore accessibility should be limited to enhance the mobility function of the corridor.


Final| 25

Exhibit 2-19. Functional Classification and Access Management

Source: FHWA

Access management and development standards within the City of Spokane Valley are guided by regulatory codes outlined in Ordinance 09-033 (Street Standards). The minimum spacing criteria for intersections and driveways provided in Ordinance 09-033 are presented in Exhibits 2-20 and 2-21.

Exhibit 2-20. Minimum Intersection Spacing For Local Access Streets

Source: City of Spokane Valley Note: Minimum intersection spacing is measured from centerline to centerline.


Final| 26

Exhibit 2-21. Driveway Approach Spacing-Same Side of Street


The distances between existing intersections and driveways were measured along Sullivan Road. The spacing of intersections is greater than the minimum distance of 660 feet specified for principal arterials for all intersections except for the following locations:

Spacing between ramp terminal intersections at the SR 290 interchange is only about 280 feet; however, this is common for a diamond interchange and their close spacing can be operationally mitigated through good signal timing plans.

Spacing between Wellesley Avenue and Upland Drive is about 550 feet.

The spacing for driveways along Sullivan Road south of SR 290 is greater than the desirable separation distance of 120 feet specified for principal arterials. However, many locations along Sullivan Road north of SR 290 have smaller driveway spacing than the desirable separation distance of 120 feet specified for principal arterials. Some of them are even less than 80 feet, the distance for limited conditions. Exhibit 2-22 presents the driveway spacing issues along Sullivan Road from SR 290 to Wellesley Avenue. Although some driveways have low traffic volumes, they are potential locations that will impact traffic operations and safety along Sullivan Road as traffic on Sullivan Road increases in the future.


Final| 27

Exhibit 2-22. Access Points and Driveway Spacing North of SR 290

Source: HDR

Sullivan Road north of SR 290 is different from Sullivan Road south of SR 290 in both adjacent land use and roadway configurations. The access management practices also seemed significantly different. It looked like there were not any considerations of access management for segments north of SR 290. It is most likely due to historical land use patterns, unmanaged access points, and a narrow right-of-way. Existing right-of-way along Sullivan Road is illustrated in Appendix E.

It was also found that Sullivan Road south of SR 290 has good practices of access management that enhance the mobility of Sullivan Road as a key freight mobility corridor for the area. In this segment, the access management techniques and the highlights are as follows:

Intersection and driveway spacing exceeds design standards.

Corner clearance (driveway to intersection distance) generally meets city requirements.

Median treatments are appropriately used such as two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL), raised median, and Type “C” curb.


Final| 28

2.2.4 Transit The Spokane Transit Authority (STA) operates Route 96 along Sullivan Road in the study area. As shown in the following Exhibit 2-23, STA Route 96 runs between Valley Transit Center which is located on East 4th Avenue between South University Road and South Felts Road, and the intersection of Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue. STA Route 96 provides the connection between the study area and the southwest portion of the city. It provides the service through Sullivan Road Corridor from East Valley Middle School and East Valley High School to Mirabeau Park & Ride, Valley Hospital & Medical Center, North Pines Middle School, Spokane Valley Library, University Shopping Center, and Valley Transit Center. In the study area, STA Route 96 intersects with STA Route 97 on Indiana Avenue.

STA Route 96 operates on fixed schedules, generally within 30 minutes headway before 6:30 PM on weekdays, and 60 minutes headway on Saturday, Sunday, holiday, and off-peak weekday nights. It does not provide 24-hour service within the study area. The operation hours are summarized as follows:

Weekday: 5:32 AM – 11:11 PM

Saturday: 6:21 AM – 10:11 PM

Sunday/Holiday: 7:21 AM – 8:11 PM


Final| 29

Exhibit 2-23. STA Route 96 Transit Route Map and Bus Stops

Source: STA and HDR


Final | 30

In addition to STA route 96, there is paratransit service provided in this area as well as the rest of Spokane Valley and the region. Paratransit service conforms to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and is comparable to a fixed route bus service area for individuals when the effects of their disabilities prevent them from using the regular fixed route buses. The service area extends three-quarters of a mile on each side of and around each fixed route.

In the study area, STA Route 96 does not currently have high ridership. Exhibit 2-24 presents the combined boarding and alighting activities of all routes that serve individual bus stops during one weekday in 2013. The bus stop identification numbers shown correspond with the numbering system used for customer information.

Exhibit 2-24. Sampled 2013 Weekday Route 96 Boarding Activity by Stop Bus Stop ID Bus Stop Name Direction Boarding Alighting

2791 Sullivan Road @ Central Pre-Mix SB 0 0

3215 Sullivan Road @ Marietta Avenue SB 10 0

3506 Sullivan Road @ Marietta Avenue NB 0 2

2782 Sullivan Road @ Fairview Lane NB 0 0

2783 Sullivan Road @ Euclid Avenue NB 2 0

4216 Sullivan Road @ Tire-Rama (D Street) NB 0 8

4090 Sullivan Road @ Kiernan Avenue SB 13 0

3211 Sullivan Road @ Kiernan Avenue NB 0 7

4179 Sullivan Road @ Trent Avenue SB 2 0

4228 Wellesley Avenue @ Sullivan Road EB 3 15

4157 Sullivan Road @ Wellesley Avenue SB 13 2

Source: STA Within the study limits, currently there are a total of 15 bus stops. All of those stops are associated with STA Route 96. There are 6 northbound stops, 6 southbound stops on Sullivan Road, 2 northbound stops at Progress Road, and 1 eastbound stop at Wellesley Avenue.

Field visits were conducted at all 15 bus stops. Bus stops along the corridor contain lower levels of amenities (signs, covered shelters, benches, route information, and trash receptacles). Of the 15 bus stops in the study area, none had any shelters. Only 7 of 15 bus stops have a bench. Only the Route 96 northbound stop at Sullivan Road south of Marietta Avenue has a trash can. Most bus stop signs share the post with speed limit sign, stop sign or traffic signal post. Existing bus stop inventory field notes summarized the


Final | 31

field observation of existing amenities at bus stops and photographs are presented in Appendix D.

It was further noted that the Route 96 northbound stop at Progress Road at Wellesley Avenue is located where there is no paved sidewalk. The other two northbound bus stops at Sullivan Road at Fairview Avenue and Sullivan Road at Tire-Rama don’t have the connection to the paved sidewalk. These three bus stops are not currently compliant with ADA requirements.

2.2.5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Sidewalks exist on both sides of Sullivan Road, including a 6-foot off-street walkway on the east side of Sullivan Road from Marietta Avenue to Kiernan Avenue. Some existing sidewalks on Sullivan Road are non-standard, and side streets generally do not have sidewalks. Exhibit 2-25 shows the missing and non-standard sidewalks along the corridor. There are no existing bike facilities on Sullivan Road. Bicycle lanes were recently striped on Indiana Avenue east of Sullivan (in 2014). The I-90 Centennial Trail crosses under Sullivan Road along the south side of the Spokane River.

With few exceptions, sidewalk is required on both sides of the street for all street classifications in the City of Spokane Valley. Minimum sidewalk width in the Street Standards is 6 feet. Additional width may be required for bus stops or for corridor continuity.

The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 11) lists Sullivan Road as one of six routes where citizens want improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities. In surveys for the Comprehensive Plan, Sullivan Road ranked as the city’s third most difficult roadway for bicycles and pedestrians. There are two of the three most desired destinations for cycling or walking (the Centennial Trail and Spokane Valley Mall) along the Sullivan Road Corridor.


Final | 32

Exhibit 2-25. Missing and Non-standard Sidewalks

Source: HDR

As defined in the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, the minimum width of a shared path is given as 10 feet, with 12 to 14 feet preferred. There should also be an additional 2 feet of clearance on each side. As a general rule, shared-use paths should have no more than 8 road crossings per mile. Examples of shared-use paths as shown in Exhibit 2-26 were taken from the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan.

Exhibit 2-26. Examples of Shared-use Paths

Source: Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan


Final | 33

2.2.6 Summary of Existing Deficiencies Review of the existing conditions indicated that there are no major roadway deficiencies in the existing corridor except for two intersections on the Sullivan Road Corridor as follows:

Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue. Although this intersection operates at acceptable LOS for the overall intersection according to Synchro analysis, the southbound approach experiences significantly long queues due to high traffic volumes and short (less than 160 feet) turn lanes. The City will replace the existing 2-lane southbound bridge to a new 4-lane bridge. The replacement of the bridge will provide more capacity at this intersection and address this existing deficiency.

Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue. Based on the Synchro analysis, this intersection operates at LOS F during 2013 PM peak hour. A signal warrant analysis also showed that existing traffic volumes at this intersection meet warrant 2 (Four-Hour Vehicular Volume) and warrant 3 (Peak Hour) specified in MUTCD 2009. Prior to this study commencing, the city has identified this intersection as potential location for a future signal installation.

A review of 5-year crash data indicated that the crash rate for the 2-mile Sullivan Road corridor has an average crash rate that is higher than the average crash rate for all principle arterials in the eastern region according to the 2011 Washington State Collision Data Summary. The crash data analysis showed that the following three locations on this corridor have a higher than the average crash rate compared to the statewide average:

Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue

Sullivan Road and SR 290 Interchange

Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue

Review of access management along the corridor indicted that the driveway or approach spacing varied significantly on each side of Trent (SR 290) due to the respective existing land uses. It was also concluded that Sullivan Road south of SR 290 has good practices of access management that enhance the mobility of Sullivan Road as a key freight mobility corridor for the area. However, there are driveways/approaches north of SR 290 that don’t meet current guidelines due to historical land use patterns, unmanaged access points, and narrow right-of-way.

Review of transit and non-motorized traffic indicated the following observations::

There is currently transit service along Sullivan Road within the study area.

Existing amenities at bus stops are limited or in less than desirable condition.


Final | 34

Due to low ridership, STA currently has no plans to make improvements along Sullivan Road and adjacent roadways since bus stops do not presently meet minimum warrants of 25 boarding per day for amenity improvements.

There are incomplete and non-standard sidewalks along the corridor.

There is no existing bike facility on Sullivan Road or crossing streets.


Final | 35

3.0 Future Conditions and Improvements This chapter presents future land use, transportation network conditions, and an assessment of planned/programmed improvements and recommendations for the Sullivan Road Corridor, both for vehicular traffic and multimodal facilities. This chapter first discusses the planning context such as local and regional plans and projects, future development activities, as well as housing and employment growth along the Sullivan Road Corridor, followed by a summary and travel demand modeling with selected study scenarios. Results of traffic operations analysis and findings are presented at the end of this chapter.

3.1 Local and Regional Transportation Plans The planning context for the Sullivan Road Corridor includes the local and regional plans, planned growth, and planned/programmed improvements.

The Spokane Metropolitan Transportation Plan – HORIZON 2040 was adopted by SRTC's Board on December 12, 2013.

“Horizon 2040 is a long-term, multimodal “blueprint” for transportation aimed at meeting the mobility needs of the area through the year 2040. It is based on projections for growth in population, housing and jobs and takes into consideration every mode of transportation, such as private vehicles, public transit, bicycling, walking, freight movement, rail and air travel.” – SRTC

The Sullivan Road Corridor Study followed the seven (7) guiding principles identified in HORIZON 2040 as shown in Exhibit 3-1. The first guiding principle and its policies matched with the purpose of this study seamlessly. The results of this study will continue to support freight movement, improve traffic safety, and enhance the multimodal transportation system. The plan will help to promote economic vitality and transportation connectivity along the Sullivan Road Corridor for the City of Spokane Valley and the Spokane Metropolitan Region.


Final | 36

Exhibit 3-1. HORIZON 2040 Guiding Principles

GUIDING PRINCIPLE 1: ECONOMIC VITALITY

POLICIES - To promote economic vitality and prioritize transportation investments, Horizon 2040 will:

1a. Prioritize transportation investments by mode that enhance accessibility and connections between city centers, regional centers, attractions, towns and areas of regional employment.

1b. Create an environment that supports new and expanding business opportunities.

1c. Make transportation investments that support both maintaining existing jobs and creating new jobs.

1d. Improve transportation quality and efficiency in areas of existing development.

1e. Support the efficiency of freight movement.

Source: SRTC, HORIZON 2040

Regional planned transportation projects within the Sullivan Road Corridor are as follows:

Sullivan Road North Extension (Bigelow Gulch): Reconstruct and widen the Sullivan Road extension north, also known as Bigelow Gulch Road, to a 4-lane roadway with 8-foot shoulders and a 12-foot, 2-way left turn lane

Sullivan Road/BNSF Grade Separation Improvements: Upgrade and widen grade separation at Sullivan/BNSF/Trent (SR 290).


Final | 37

Greenacres Trail – Sullivan to east city limits: Construct shared-use pathway on abandoned railroad right-of-way.

The Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan (SVCP) is also a guiding document for the Sullivan Road Corridor Study. The SVCP lays out a vision for the future of Spokane Valley during a 20-year period. One key objective for the SVCP is to help the preservation and growth of the economic and commercial job base of the community. The latest SVCP revisions were amended in 2014 including 6-year transportation improvement projects from 2014 to 2019 for the Sullivan Road Corridor. The Sullivan Road Corridor Study was also part the project list to help determining the future configuration for Sullivan Road and required improvements.

City programmed and planned capacity projects within the Sullivan Road Corridor are as follows:

Sullivan Road West Bridge: Replace and widen the existing Sullivan Road West Bridge from 2-lane to 4-lane.

Sullivan Corridor ITS – Indiana to Trent (SR 290)

Sullivan/Euclid Concrete Intersection: Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement.

Sullivan/Kiernan Concrete Intersection: Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement (without local match).

Sullivan/Marietta Concrete Intersection: Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement (without local match).

A comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan was also developed as part of recent SVCP update. Sullivan Road was identified as one of the six routes where improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities are desired. Sullivan Road is also the most difficult road to include bike facilities due to heavy traffic and high truck volumes. A long-term bike facility plan includes a shared-use path along Sullivan Road from the Centennial Trail and Wellesley Avenue. The shared-use path is typically 10 to 14 feet wide with a 2-foot buffer on both sides.

3.2 Travel Demand Forecast To forecast the design year traffic volumes and identify required improvements, the Travel Demand Models developed by SRTC were utilized. The travel demand model is based on Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZs) which incorporate employment and household data. Both 2010 existing year and 2040 future base year models were provided by SRTC. The 2040 future year interim model included the projects planned in the SRTC Metropolitan Transportation Plan and the SRTC approved 2040 land use. The following steps were followed to develop the travel demand forecast.

a) 2010 Base Model Analysis b) 2040 Modeled Raw Volumes c) Volume Post-Processing(NCHRP 255 Method)


Final | 38

d) 2040 Post-processed Volumes Reviewed by the City e) Address City’s Comments f) Rebalance 2040 Forecasted Volumes

The following sections highlight the land use and growth along the Sullivan Road Corridor, planned improvements, study scenarios, and forecasted traffic volumes. Detailed demand model development methodology, model volume post-processing techniques, and forecasted traffic volumes are presented in Appendix F.

Land Use and Growth TAZs along the Sullivan Road Corridor in the travel demand models are highlighted in Exhibit 3-2. The housing and employment growth in these TAZs from 2010 to 2040 was analyzed based on the land use data from SRTC travel demand models. Along the Sullivan Road Corridor there were three distinctive land use groups for both existing conditions and future forecast. The following is a summary of their growth from 2010 to 2040:

The north-end zones (314, 315, 394, and 535) are predominantly residential development and two schools. Single-family dwelling units are projected to grow by 53 percent. The education employment will be doubled.

The middle zones (316, 317, and 324) are predominantly industrial land use. The industrial employment growth is projected to be slightly more than 50 percent, from 4150 employees to 6250 employees.

The south-end zones (321, 323, 332, 333, and 338) have growth on a variety of land uses. Single-family dwelling units are projected to grow by 74 percent. Multi-family dwelling units, with five or more residential units on a parcel, are projected to grow dramatically from 28 units to 1709 units. The TAZs with significant multi-family residential development are TAZs 321, 333, and 388. TAZ 388 also has plans to build hotels, medical facilities, retail, and offices.


Final | 39

Exhibit 3-2. Traffic Analysis Zones

Source: SRTC and HDR

As shown in Exhibit 3-3, recent development permit activities have shown the same trend of potential growth along the Sullivan Road Corridor.

TAZs along the Corridor


Final | 40

Exhibit 3-3. Spokane Valley Recent Permit Activities

Legend


Travel Demand Modeling Scenarios The travel demand modeling scenarios were designed to answer the following specific questions:

1. How will the Sullivan Road Corridor be impacted by regional projects such as the US 395 - NSC project and the Bigelow Gulch Road/Forker Road project?


Final | 41

2. Should the Sullivan Road Corridor be widened to a 7-lane arterial or remain in its current (mostly) 5-lane configuration?

3. Should the BTV improvements on the Sullivan Road overpass at SR 290 be built before the Bigelow Gulch Road/Forker Road project is completed?

4. Will both directions of the Sullivan Road Bridge over the Spokane River accommodate 2040 traffic demand?

The following three scenarios were modeled using the SRTC’s VISUM travel demand models:

Scenario 1: This scenario assumed that there will be 5-lane configuration along Sullivan Road and all other regional projects are built in 2040 including NSC to I-90, the Bigelow Gulch extension to Sullivan Road, and BTV improvements on Sullivan Road.

Scenario 2: This scenario assumed that there will be a 5-lane configuration along Sullivan Road and all other regional projects are built in 2040, including the Bigelow Gulch extension to Sullivan Road and BTV improvements on Sullivan Road, except for the completion of NSC to I-90.

Scenario 3: This scenario assumed that there will be a 5-lane configuration along Sullivan Road and NSC to I-90 will be completed. The other regional projects such as Bigelow Gulch extension to Sullivan Road and BTV improvements on Sullivan Road are NOT built in 2040.

Scenario 2 generated the highest traffic volumes along Sullivan Road. The Bigelow Gulch Road connection to Sullivan resulted in measurable peak hour volume deltas along Sullivan between SR 290/Trent and Wellesley. However, scenario testing revealed volume differences between the completion of the NSC to I-90 versus its current terminus at East Francis Avenue resulted in less than a 3 percent volume change in 2040. It was concluded that the completion of the NSC to I-90 project has a low volume impact to the overall Sullivan Road Corridor.

Forecasted 2040 Traffic Volumes Exhibit 3-4 presents forecasted 2040 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes using scenario #1 as the baseline condition since the completion of both the Bigelow Gulch connection and the completion of the NSC to I-90 is consistent with the adopted and approved SRTC 2040 Build model As forecasted in 2040, the Bigelow Gulch Road connection with Sullivan Road will have more traffic volumes in AM peak hour than PM peak hour. About two-thirds of the traffic volume coming from Bigelow Gulch Road will either go to SR 290 or industrial areas before I-90 and SR 290 instead of going through the whole corridor. The traffic volumes entering the interchange of SR 290 and Sullivan Road will have significant increases, especially for the left turn movements on the bridge. The increase of traffic volumes will require the BTV improvements on Sullivan Road to be built before or at the same time as the Bigelow Gulch Road connection with Sullivan Road.


Final | 42

Exhibit 3-4. Forecasted 2040 Traffic Volumes

Source: HDR


Final | 43

Exhibit 3-5. AM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Increases (2013-2040)

Source: HDR

Exhibit 3-6. PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume Increases (2013-2040)

Source: HDR


Final | 44

Exhibits 3-5 and 3-6 present the increases from 2013 to 2040 on key segments along Sullivan Road in AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Exhibit 3-7 also presents 2040 estimated ADT based on 2040 PM peak hour volumes and existing daily volume over PM peak hour volume ratio.

Exhibit 3-7. 2040 Estimated ADT (both directions) along Sullivan Road

Location

2040 PM Peak Hour Volumes

(vph)

Daily Volume / PM Peak Hour Volume Ratio

Estimated ADT Round

to 100 (vpd)

Between Wellesley and SR 290 2230 9.8 [1] 21900

Between SR 290 Ramps 2158 11.6 [2] 25000

Between SR 290 and Kiernan 2137 11.6 [2] 24800

Between Kiernan and Euclid 2083 11.6 [2] 24200

Between Euclid and Marietta 2214 12.2 [3] 27000

Between Marietta and Pre-Mix 2685 12.2 [3] 32800

Between Pre-Mix and Indiana 2751 12.2 [3] 33600

Source: City of Spokane Valley and HDR Analysis [1]Based on 24-hour traffic counts just south of Wellesley Avenue. [2]Based on 24-hour traffic counts just south of SR 290. [3]Based on 24-hour traffic counts just south of Euclid Avenue. Traffic increases on Sullivan Road between SR 290 to Wellesley Avenue are significant. The AM peak direction (southbound) will increase by 125 percent. The PM peak direction (southbound) will increase by 98 percent. The ADT will be doubled at this segment. There will be increased conflicts for accessing driveways and local streets along this 4-lane segment. From the access management prospective, it is preferred to add a center turn lane with consolidated driveways to minimize the traffic conflicts and improve corridor safety and reliability.

The segment with highest volumes in 2040 is the segment just north of I-90, the same as in the existing condition. Based on the principal roadway capacity of 1,100 vehicles per hour per lane in the SRTC models for the corridor, the roadway capacity is adequate to accommodate the future traffic volumes.

3.3 Traffic Analysis This section describes the results of traffic operations analysis for 2040 along the Sullivan Road Corridor. Traffic analyses were conducted for 2040 no improvement condition (No Build), 2040 with planned and programmed improvements, and 2040 with additional improvements using Synchro (version 7). In addition, a signal warrant analysis was completed for the intersection of Sullivan Road and Wellesley, as well as a SIDRA


Final | 45

roundabout analysis at the same intersection. Intersection geometry and traffic control notes are provided in Appendix C.

Intersection Analysis The 2040 No-Improvement condition assumed that existing geometry and signal timing will not change, which provided a worst case scenario. Exhibit 3-8 summarizes LOS of all intersections for the 2040 No-Improvement scenario. Detailed Synchro calculation sheets for the 2040 No-Improvement scenario were included in Appendix B.

The following intersections would operate at unacceptable LOS during 2040 AM or PM peak hour under no-improvement conditions.

Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue Sullivan Road and SR 290 WB Off-Ramp Sullivan Road and SR 290 WB Off-Ramp Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue

Exhibit 3-8. 2040 No-Improvement Condition Intersection LOS



Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue All- Way Stop F F

Sullivan Road and SR 290 WB Off-Ramp Signal C F

Sullivan Road and SR 290 EB Off-Ramp Signal F F

Sullivan Road and Kiernan Avenue Signal C D

Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Signal E F

Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Signal C F

Sullivan Road and Pre-Mix Signal B C

Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue Signal E E

Sullivan Road and I-90 WB Ramps Signal E C

Source: HDR The 2040 with planned and programmed improvements assumed lane configuration changes as presented in Exhibit 3-9. The Sullivan Road West Bridge project will also improve the intersection configurations at the Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue by increasing the left turn and right turn storage lengths to approximately 590 feet and 650 feet, respectively. The intersection of Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue was also


Final | 46

assumed to be signalized. Signal timing plans for these intersections were also optimized using Synchro.

Exhibit 3-9. 2040 Lane Configuration Changes with Planned and Programmed Improvements

Intersection Approaches 2013 Existing with Planned and

Programmed Improvements

Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue

Wellesley Avenue EB LT,R L,TR Wellesley Avenue WB LTR L,TR

Sullivan Road NB LT,R L,T,TR Sullivan Road SB LTR L,T,TR

Sullivan Road and SR 290 WB Off-Ramp

SR 290 WB Off-Ramp LTR LT,R Sullivan Road NB LT,T L,T,T

Sullivan Road and SR 290 EB Off-Ramp

SR 290 EB Off-Ramp LTR LT,R Sullivan Road NB T,TR T,T,TR Sullivan Road SB LT,T L,T,T

Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Euclid Avenue EB LTR L,TR

Source: HDR L=Left, T=Through, R=Right (no comma between signifies shared lane) Exhibit 3-10 summarizes LOS of all intersections for this 2040 scenario with planned and programmed improvements. With planned and programmed improvements, all intersections would operate at acceptable LOS in 2040 except for the intersection at Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue. Detailed Synchro calculation sheets for the 2040 scenario with planned and programmed improvements were included in Appendix B.

Exhibit 3-10. 2040 Intersection LOS with Planned and Programmed Improvements



Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue Signal C C

Sullivan Road and SR 290 WB Off-Ramp Signal B C


Sullivan Road and Kiernan Avenue Signal C C

Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Signal C C

Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Signal B E

Sullivan Road and Pre-Mix Signal C B

Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue Signal C D


Final | 47

Exhibit 3-10. 2040 Intersection LOS with Planned and Programmed Improvements



Sullivan Road and I-90 WB Ramps Signal C C

Source: HDR At the intersection of Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue, the 2040 PM peak hour WB left turn volume was projected to be 388 vph. Typically, two left turn lanes are required for accommodating this level of left-turning demand. Therefore, additional improvements were proposed at the intersection of Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue as shown in Exhibit 3-11.

Exhibit 3-11. 2040 Lane Configuration Changes with Additional Improvements

Intersection Approaches 2013 Existing With Planned and

Programmed Improvements

Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Marietta Avenue WB L,TR L,LTR

Source: HDR Exhibit 3-12 summarizes LOS of all intersections for the 2040 scenario with all proposed geometry improvements provided in Exhibits 3-9 and 3-11 and optimized signal timing plans using Synchro. Detailed Synchro calculation sheets for the 2040 scenario with all proposed geometry improvements were included in Appendix B.

Exhibit 3-12. 2040 Intersection LOS with All Proposed Improvements



Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue Signal C C


Sullivan Road and SR 290 EB Off-Ramp Signal B C

Sullivan Road and Kiernan Avenue Signal C C

Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Signal C C

Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Signal B D

Sullivan Road and Pre-Mix Signal C B

Sullivan Road and Indiana Avenue Signal C D

Sullivan Road and I-90 WB Ramps Signal C C

Source: HDR


Final | 48

Signal Warrant Analysis A signal warrant analysis for the intersection of Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue was conducted using the signal warrants module of HCS 2010 software. The basis of the analysis is the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, 2009 Edition (MUTCD). The warrant analysis report was generated using estimated existing hourly traffic volumes from (7 AM to 7 PM) turning movement volumes. Three warrant standards were reviewed as follows:

Warrant 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume: o Condition A - Minimum Vehicular Volume o Condition B – Interruption of Conditions

Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Warrant 3: Peak Hour

As shown in Exhibit 3-13, warrants 2 and 3 were met under existing traffic conditions. A warrant summary and a warrant volume report are presented in Appendix B.

Exhibit 3-13. Sullivan Road Corridor Signal Warrants

Warrant Traffic Volumes Meet Warrant

1A – Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume: Condition A – Minimum Vehicular Volume

No

1B – Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume: Condition B – Interruption of Continuous Traffic

No

2 – Four-Hour Vehicular Volume Yes

3 – Peak Hour Yes

Source: HDR

Roundabout Analysis A roundabout is an alternative to both the all-way stop-controlled (AWSC) and signalized intersection. For this analysis, the installation of a modern roundabout was also evaluated at the AWSC intersection of Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue using both existing traffic volumes and forecasted 2040 traffic volumes. The lane configurations for individual roundabout approaches are presented in Exhibit 3-14. The before and after lane scenarios correspond to before and after the Bigelow Gulch Road and connection is completed. As shown in Exhibit 3-15, under both existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes and 2040 forecasted traffic demand, the operations of a two-lane roundabout are acceptable based on calculations using SIDRA 5.1.


Final | 49

Exhibit 3-14. Lane Configurations for roundabout at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue Intersection Approaches Before Bigelow After Bigelow

Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue

Wellesley Avenue EB LTR LTR

Wellesley Avenue WB LTR LTR

Sullivan Road NB L,TR LT,TR

Sullivan Road SB LTR LT,TR Source: HDR

Exhibit 3-15. Roundabout Operations Analysis Results at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue

Scenario Approaches V/C Ratio Delay (second) LOS

95% Back of Queue Length

(feet)

2013 AM Peak Hour Volumes

with Interim Configuration

Wellesley Avenue EB 0.84 13.5 B 389

Wellesley Avenue WB 0.52 9.2 A 84

Sullivan Road NB 0.32 6.2 A 54

Sullivan Road SB 0.31 7.1 A 49

2013 PM Peak Hour Volumes with

Interim Configuration

Wellesley Avenue EB 0.65 5.9 A 179

Wellesley Avenue WB 0.44 11.5 B 70


Sullivan Road SB 0.46 17.7 B 95

2040 AM Peak Hour Volumes with Final

Configuration

Wellesley Avenue EB 0.84 23.0 C 195

Wellesley Avenue WB 0.44 9.2 A 61


Sullivan Road SB 0.63 5.3 A 159

2040PM Peak Hour Volumes with Final

Configuration

Wellesley Avenue EB 0.79 15.7 B 171

Wellesley Avenue WB 0.81 20.1 C 159


Sullivan Road SB 0.64 10.9 B 187 Source: HDR


Final | 50

3.4 Improvement Alternatives The improvement strategies and alternatives for the Sullivan Road Corridor were identified to address existing deficiencies and anticipated future changes. The following sections discuss improvement measures regarding roadway geometry, intersection configurations, traffic control devices, access management and multimodal facility planning.

3.4.1 Roadway and Intersection Improvements As determined in the travel demand forecast and traffic analysis sections, Sullivan Road will not need to be widened to 7 lanes along the study area. The section of Sullivan Road between Wellesley Avenue and SR 290 could be widened from 4 lanes to 5 lanes in order to install a TWLTL to address future traffic safety and access management issues.

Many projects have been programmed or planned to address capacity and/or safety deficiencies along the Sullivan Road Corridor, such as the SR 290 interchange, and the intersections at Indiana Avenue and Euclid Avenue. In addition, this Sullivan Road Corridor Study also identified some intersection improvement projects and a potential roadway widening project requiring additional right-of-way to address future deficiencies. The following summarizes future roadway and intersection capacity improvement projects along Sullivan Road from Wellesley Avenue and Indiana Avenue.

Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Project The Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Project will replace the southbound Sullivan Road Bridge across the Spokane River. The funding of about $15.3 million has been secured from the Federal Bridge Program, the Washington State Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB), the Washington State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) and the City of Spokane Valley. With funding now in place, construction is expected to begin in late summer of 2014 and be completed in 2016. As shown in Exhibit 3-16, this project will also improve the north leg of the intersection at Indiana Avenue and Sullivan Road by fully utilizing the 4-lane cross section on the new southbound bridge. As part of this project, a 10-foot-wide multi-use path will also be constructed on the west side of the bridge connecting the centennial trail on the south side of the Spokane River and Sullivan Park on the north side of the Spokane River.

As evaluated in this corridor study, it was confirmed this project would significantly reduce the traffic congestion at this key intersection and reduce the number of crashes related to traffic congestions in the future. In addition, the traffic analysis also showed the traffic operations at intersections on both ends of the bridge will be acceptable in 2040 without additional lanes on the northbound bridge (Sullivan Road West Bridge).


Final | 51

Exhibit 3-16. Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Project

Source: City of Spokane Valley, Sullivan Road West Bridge Replacement Project

Bridging the Valley - Sullivan Road/BNSF Grade Separation Improvements As the Spokane Bridging the Valley Steering Committee approved modifying the grade separation to accommodate an increased number of tracks and projected traffic on Sullivan Road at the SR 290 interchange, there is opportunity to further evaluate and confirm with BNSF the current needed improvements. As shown in Exhibit 3-17, the section of Sullivan Road between two ramp terminal intersections in the BTV analysis was planned to provide 6 lanes, with 2 through lanes and a left turn lane in each direction. The crossing over the tracks was planned to provide 7 lanes wide to accommodate a right turn pocket for north-to-eastbound traffic with signals reconstructed at both eastbound and westbound ramps. The probable construction cost was estimated to be $21 million for the entire crossing using conceptual quantities and in 2005 dollars, based on BTV project information.

As evaluated in this corridor study, the right turn pocket for north-to-eastbound traffic is not necessary based on latest 2040 traffic forecast and operations analysis. The northbound left turn lane could be designed to extend over the upstream intersection that could accommodate left turn traffic volumes without spill into through lanes. The revised lane figurations are presented in Exhibit 3-18.

As documented in existing conditions in Chapter 2, the SR 290 interchange has the second highest crash rate along the Sullivan Road corridor. Lack of turn lanes could be one critical contributing factor for many of the crashes. As predicted using the SRTC travel demand model, the southbound to eastbound left turning traffic volume will


Final | 52

increase significantly in addition to the background traffic increase due to the development along the Sullivan Road Corridor. As such, in order to improve the safety and operations through the SR 290 interchange, the Sullivan Road/BNSF Grade Separation and the SR 290 interchange improvement should be constructed earlier and completed sooner than the opening year of the Bigelow Gulch Road connection with Sullivan Road.

Additionally, this study evaluated two multilane roundabouts at each ramp terminal vs. the proposed traffic signals and concluded the following:

1. Due to elimination of dedicated left turn lanes required for a signalized intersection, it is possible to improve interchange ramp terminal operations and corridor throughput without replacing the bridge over the BNSF tracks (see Exhibit 3-19) for proposed concept.

2. This alternative could result in a $5.0 million savings by not replacing the bridge over BNSF as part of a Sullivan/Trent interchange improvement, while at the same time, not precluding that from happening at a later date.

3. This alternative may also require modifications to Trent Avenue under the Sullivan Road Bridge to allow for vertical clearance. Further coordination with WSDOT would occur if this alternative were to advance to the design stage.

The two-multilane roundabout option is presented in Exhibit 3-19.


Final | 53

Exhibit 3-17. Bridging the Valley Improvements at Sullivan Road/BNSF/SR 290

Source: SRTC


Final | 54

Exhibit 3-18. Revised Lane Configurations at Sullivan Road and SR 290

Source: HDR


Final | 55

Exhibit 3-19. Roundabout Configurations at Sullivan Road and SR 290

Source: HDR

Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue Intersection Improvement The intersection at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue should be improved based on existing traffic conditions. As evaluated in the traffic analysis of Section 3.3, this intersection meets two warrants for installation of a traffic signal based on existing traffic volumes. Although this improvement is planned to be constructed as part of the Spokane County’s Bigelow Gulch Road project, it is currently failing from a LOS perspective during the PM peak hour and therefore could be improved ahead of the Bigelow Gulch project.

As an alternative, a 2-lane roundabout could also serve both existing and forecasted 2040 traffic volumes very well, based on the traffic operations analysis. Illustrations of a signalized intersection concept and a roundabout concept for this intersection are presented in Exhibit 3-20 and Exhibit 3-21, respectively.

Additionally, it is recommended that a single lane roundabout (that is forward compatible to the ultimate 2-lane roundabout) be programmed by the City as short term solution to address this intersection’s existing peak hour delay and LOS


Final | 56

deficiencies. An Illustration of a single lane interim roundabout is presented in Exhibit 3-22. A single lane roundabout would improve existing LOS of this intersection from a LOS E/F to a LOS A/B in 2020 for the a.m./p.m. peak hours, respectively.

All three concepts will require additional right-of-way on Sullivan Road and the size of additional right-of-way required depends on whether Sullivan Road between Wellesley Avenue and SR 290 will be widened to 5 lanes and accommodate the needs of pedestrian and bicycle facilities. An alternative analysis and preliminary design effort could help finalize the selection of intersection type, cost, and the right-of-way impacts.

Exhibit 3-20. Signalized Intersection Concept at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue

Source: HDR Note:

1. The graphic is not to scale. 2. The skewed north leg is a worst case condition. 3. The width and placement of sidewalk/shared-use path are illustration only. 4. Landscapes along Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue are illustration only.


Final | 57

Exhibit 3-21. Roundabout Concept at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue

Source: HDR Note:

1. The graphic is not to scale. 2. The width and placement of sidewalk/shared-use path are illustration only. 3. Landscapes along Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue are illustration only. 4. Interim striping when the Bigelow Gulch Road connection is not built is presented in

Exhibit 3-22.


Final | 58

Exhibit 3-22. Interim Single Lane Roundabout Concept at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue

Source: HDR

Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Intersection Improvement As part of City’s six-year transportation improvement projects, the City planned to reconstruct the intersection in concrete pavement and restripe the west leg to include an eastbound left turn lane on Euclid Avenue. As shown in Exhibit 3-23, the proposed lane configurations on the west leg have been revised to a left turn lane and a shared through and right turn lane. This intersection configuration does not include the future shared-use trail.


Final | 59

Exhibit 3-23. Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Intersection Improvement

Source: HDR Note: 1. Sidewalk improvements may be built as part of future development along Euclid Avenue.

Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Intersection Improvement The City plans to reconstruct the intersection in concrete pavement as an unfunded project. Per traffic analysis documented in Section 3.3, two left turn lanes are required for accommodating westbound left turn volumes on Marietta Avenue. As shown in Exhibit 3-24, lane configurations on the east leg have been revised to a left turn lane and a shared left-through right turn lane. This intersection configuration does not reflect a future shared-use trail. If available right-of-way exists on this east leg, a dedicated westbound right turn lane at this location would be preferable, however, modeling reveals that the proposed channelization plan will address 2040 volumes.

This intersection should be monitored for the potential increase of left turning traffic volumes as the parcels along Marietta Avenue are developed. This intersection will be reconstructed to allow trucks turning safely from all approaches. The traffic signal should use split phasing for Marietta Avenue east and west approaches.


Final | 60

Exhibit 3-24. Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Intersection Improvement

Source: HDR Note:

1. Sidewalk improvements may be built as part of future development along Marietta Avenue.

3.4.2 Access Management Related Improvements There has been very little systematic access control to Sullivan Road north of SR 290 due to historical land use patterns and narrow right-of-way. Implementing any future access management strategies to this segment will require working closely with adjacent land owners for appropriate solutions such as adding additional local streets and blocking some driveway accesses. A few improvement options have been provided as follows (from a least to greatest impact/cost perspective):

No action – continue to monitor access-related safety as volumes increase. Given the relatively low volume of most access points along this segment, this option provides for continued monitoring of the segment. As parcels redevelop, access considerations should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Keep existing 4-lane roadway configuration and construct a narrow median. This option will have the least right-of-way impacts with only widening at Upland Driver and Wellesley Avenue to add left turn pockets. It will force right-in and right-out at all driveways. It will increase U-turn traffic at the north end intersection of Wellesley Avenue and the south end intersection of SR 290


Final | 61

westbound ramp. This alternative would be the preferred access management strategy if roundabouts are built at both the Wellesley intersection as well as the SR 290/Trent interchange as roundabouts would accommodate required U-turns at each end of this segment needed to support the right-in and right-out’s for all driveways.

Widen to 5 lanes and install two-way left-turn lane (TWLTL). In general, traffic volumes in excess of 10,000 to 12,000 vpd would warrant consideration of a TWLTL on a 4-lane facility similar to the Sullivan Road between SR 290 and Wellesley. This option will require approximately 14 feet of additional right-of-way in addition to potential right-of-way required for a shared-use path. It could reduce vehicular crashes if driveway consolidation is properly designed. It works better than a non-traversable median in considering the need of snow removal.

Widen to 5 lanes and install non-traversable median with controlled openings. This option could support the level of traffic demand of 24,000 vpd to 28,000 vpd. It has similar right-of-way as a TWLTL. As shown in Exhibit 3-25, it will provide the best safety effects in comparison with the other options of three types of midblock left-turn treatments. However, current land use along this segment does not support this type of treatment due to lack of higher volumes approaches where controlled openings would occur.

Together with the intersection improvements on both ends of this segment, an alternative analysis and preliminary design effort could help finalize the selection of midblock left-turn treatments, cost, and the right-of-way impacts.

Exhibit 3-25. Comparison of Types of Midblock Left-Turn Treatments

Comparison

Non-traversable Median

TWLTL

Undivided

Operational Effects

1. Reduced delay to major roadway traffic

2. Enhanced capacity 3. Reduced delay to major roadway left turns 4. Reduced delay to minor roadway left turns

a. Low-volume major roadway b. High-volume major roadway

Safety Effects


Final | 62

Exhibit 3-25. Comparison of Types of Midblock Left-Turn Treatments

Comparison

Non-traversable Median

TWLTL

Undivided

1. Reduced vehicular crashes 2. Pedestrian refuge 3. Positive guidance

Other Effects 1. Aesthetics 2. Snow removal 3. Construction cost

Source: TRB, The Access Management Manual 2003

Note: = most effective/preferable; = somewhat effective; = least effective.

As presented in existing conditions, access management practices on Sullivan Road south of SR 290 are appropriate for enhancing Sullivan Road as a key freight mobility corridor. The segments requiring potential median treatments are identified as follow:

Sullivan Road north of the intersection at Central PreMix. Two access points on the west side of Sullivan Road just north of the intersection at Central PreMix could be consolidated when future development occurs. The existing TWLTL could be changed to a raised median with controlled access.

Sullivan Road between Kiernan Avenue/B Street and D Street. There are several existing access points and curb cuts on the west side of Sullivan Road at this segment. These access points could be consolidated when future development occurs. The existing TWLTL could be changed to a raised median with controlled access.

3.4.3 Transit Improvements STA currently does not currently have plans to improve transit service due to the low ridership along the Sullivan Road Corridor. However, as the number of employees and population increases, enhanced transit service in the area may need to be re-evaluated in the future. One option that may warrant further study is:

The possibility of a park-and-ride facility in the vicinity of the SR 290 interchange. With the Bigelow Gulch Road connection to Sullivan Road and the improvements at the SR 290 interchange, the development on both sides of


Final | 63

Sullivan Road could significantly increase. A park-and-ride facility will provide the community with another travel choice and improve transit ridership. It could reduce numbers of auto traffic going into or through the City of Spokane Valley. This project will require contributions of public funds from the City, WSDOT, SRTC, and STA.

With future transit ridership increases, the following improvements could be implemented:

Bus stop improvements including shelters and other amenities

Bus turnout stops and other safety improvements

Increase bus operation frequency

Increase bus routes and coverage

The City of Spokane Valley will need to work together with STA, other agencies and local businesses to initiate these future transit improvements.

3.4.4 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Improvements The City of Spokane Valley has developed a Bike and Pedestrian Master Program (BPMP). The BPMP guides the planning, development, and management of existing and future multi-modal connections within the City. The BPMP is included as an element of the Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan expanding on the Transportation Element to focus on non-motorized transportation.

Exhibit 3-26 presents the City’s recommended pedestrian network in the vicinity of the Sullivan Road Corridor.


Final | 64

Exhibit 3-26. Pedestrian Network along the Sullivan Road Corridor

Legend


Exhibit 3-27 presents the City’s recommended bikeway network in the vicinity of the Sullivan Road Corridor.


Final | 65

Exhibit 3-27. Recommended Bikeway Network along the Sullivan Road Corridor

Legend



Final | 66

Given the existing facilities and current standards along the Sullivan Road Corridor, the improvements for pedestrians and bikes are summarized as follows:

Update all non-standard sidewalks along Sullivan Road to be consistent with the BPMP.

Upgrade the existing path on the east side of Sullivan Road between Marietta Avenue and Euclid Avenue to a shared-use path to 10 feet wide with 2-foot buffers on both sides.

A shared-use path from Indiana Avenue and Wellesley identified in the BPMP will need to be studied further and built in stages. The shared-use path for the whole corridor will involve partnership with land owners and significant cost for the structures over railroad crossings and SR 290. As part of the plan to widen the section of Sullivan Road between Wellesley Avenue and SR 290, a shared-use path will be part of the concept. As part of the SR 290 interchange improvements, a section of shared-use path could be built as part of the design.


Final | 67

4.0 Recommendations and Implementation 4.1 Implementation Priority Exhibit 4-1 below summarizes both near-term (less than 6 years) and long-term (greater than 6 years) recommended improvements for the Sullivan Corridor. Their order and suggested year of implementation represent general priority based on modeling results; however, actual year of need can be difficult to calculate because increased traffic volumes on this corridor are highly dependent on not only the timing of other regional projects, but also regional economic factors associated with timing of land development and redevelopment surrounding this corridor.

These proposed improvements will still require additional vetting through the SRTC Congestion Management Process (CMP) and through that process additional lower cost CMP strategies may surface as the projects compete for future funding opportunities.

Exhibit 4-1. Sullivan Corridor Improvement Plan

Description of Improvements Recommended Actions Notes Implementation

Year

Short Term (0-6 Year)

1. Sullivan Road West Bridge: Replace and widen the existing Sullivan Road West Bridge from 2-lane to 4-lane.

Continue planned construction and traffic management during the construction to minimize traffic impacts.

Funding Secured. 2015

2. Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Intersection Improvement

Reconstruct intersection in concrete pavement and restripe the west leg to include an eastbound left turn lane on Euclid Avenue.

Part of current six-year transportation improvement projects.

2015

3. Signal Coordination and ITS

Interconnect signals along Sullivan Road and upgrade necessary hardware.

Consistent with the City’s ITS infrastructure plan.

2018


Final | 68



Year

4. Design and reconstruct intersection at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue

Determine intersection type and reserve connection with the Spokane County’s Bigelow Gulch Road project.

Apply funding from Spokane County, SRTC with City match.

2018

5. Install Continuous Roadway Lighting between Wellesley and SR 290 (Trent)

Evaluate LED lighting options

Safety Funding opportunity 2018

6. Shared-use path from Marietta Avenue and Euclid Avenue to

Upgrade the existing path on the east side of Sullivan Road between Marietta Avenue and Euclid Avenue to a shared-use path.

Need to work with adjacent land owner.

2018

7. Sidewalk Improvements

Update all non-standard sidewalks along Sullivan Road.

Consistent with the City’s Bike and Pedestrian Master Program.

2015-2020

8. Bridging the Valley - Sullivan Road/BNSF Grade Separation Improvements

Widen Sullivan Road from SR 290 to the BNSF Crossing and improve the SR290 interchange. Add width for future shared-use path.

Apply for funding from SRTC and WSDOT. Build this project before or/at the same time as the Bigelow Gulch Road project.

2020

Long Term (>6 Year)

1. Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Intersection Improvement

Reconstruct intersection with two westbound left turn lanes are on Marietta Avenue.

Monitor traffic increase as the parcels along Marietta Avenue are developed.

2021

2. Sidewalk Improvements (carry-over from short term)

Update all non-standard sidewalks along Sullivan Road.

Consistent with the City’s Bike and Pedestrian Master Program.

2020-2025

3. Transit Stop Improvements Bus stop improvements including shelters and other amenities.

Apply for funding from SRTC and STA 2021

4. Implement Access Management Strategies between Wellesley Avenue and SR 290 WB Ramp

Determine the cross section and driveway consolidation scenarios.

Work closely with land owners and potential developers.

2022

5. New park-and-ride facility in the vicinity of the SR 290

Determine needs and potential site

Apply for funding from SRTC, STA and WSDOT.

2024


Final | 69



Year

6. Shared-use path from SR 290 to Sullivan Road Bridge

Design the Shared-use path from SR290 to Sullivan Road Bridge.

Need to work with adjacent land owners as redevelopment occurs.

2025


4.2 Planning Level Cost Estimate Exhibit 4-2 reflects high level planning cost estimates for recommended solutions (except where noted otherwise). These values are reported in 2014 dollars with no escalation for inflation. It is recommended that as project opportunities present themselves, these cost estimates be scoped to a 5 percent design level before funding requests are finalized. Short-term solutions have been estimated to approximately a 2 percent design level.

Exhibit 4-2. Sullivan Corridor Improvements and Costs Description of Improvements Cost

Short Term (0-6 Year) 1. Sullivan Road West Bridge: Replace and widen the

existing Sullivan Road West Bridge from 2-lane to 4-lane.

$15.3 Million

2. Sullivan Road and Euclid Avenue Intersection Improvement $100,000

3. Signal Coordination and ITS $800,000

4. Design and reconstruct intersection at Sullivan Road and Wellesley Avenue $500,000

5. Shared-use path from Marietta Avenue and Euclid Avenue $100,000

6. Sidewalk Improvements $200,000

7. Bridging the Valley - Sullivan Road/BNSF Grade Separation Improvements $18 Million

Long Term (>6 Year)

1. Sullivan Road and Marietta Avenue Intersection Improvement $200,000

2. Sidewalk Improvements (carryover from short-term) $200,000

3. Transit Stop Improvements $50,000

4. Implement Access Management Strategies betweenWellesley Avenue and SR 290 WB Ramp $3 Million


Final | 70

Exhibit 4-2. Sullivan Corridor Improvements and Costs Description of Improvements Cost

5. Install Continuous Roadway Lighting between Wellesley and SR 290 (Trent) $600,000

6. New park-and-ride facility in the vicinity of SR 290 $5 Million

7. Shared-use path from SR 290 to Sullivan Road Bridge $2 Million


4.3 Funding Strategies As with many cities, Spokane Valley has limited funds with which to pursue its transportation improvements. Focused and prioritized resources will aid the City in having a positive impact on non-motorized transportation infrastructure. The City strives to make strategic investments of the limited resources available and where possible, leverage resources in cooperation with other governmental and private agencies.

The following federal, state, and local funding sources represent a list of potential funding for recommended solutions for this corridor. Sources for transportation funding vary year to year and as new opportunities become available and others expire:

FEDERAL:

Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (Tiger 6)

MAP 21 Surface Transportation Program (STP)

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)

Federal Transit Administration Funding (FTA)

STATE:

New Washington State Transportation Package

Washington State Department of Transportation - Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Grants

State of Washington - Transportation Improvement Board

(TIB) TIB Funding Programs for Urban Customers - Urban Sidewalk Program

Safe Routes to School Mini-grants

Local

Private Sector funding Sources

Local Organizations

Land Trusts


Final | 71

Businesses

Community Fundraising & Partnering


Final | 72

5.0 References 1. Highway Capacity Manual, December 2010, Transportation Research Board.

2. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, December 2009, Federal Highway Administration.

3. Access Management Manual, 2003, Transportation Research Board.

4. Highway Safety Manual, 2010, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.

5. Horizon 2040 Spokane Metropolitan Transportation Plan, adopted by Spokane Regional Transportation Council on December 12, 2013.

6. Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the City of Spokane Valley Council on April 25, 2006.

7. Spokane Valley Pedestrian and Bike Master Plan, City of Spokane Valley.

8. Bridging the Valley, 2006, Spokane Regional Transportation Council.

9. WSDOT Development Service Manual, Washington State Department of Transportation.

10. Transit Development Plan, Spokane Transit Authority.

Date post:	13-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Final Report June 2015 - Spokane Valley, Washington · Prepared by: HDR Engineering, Inc. 1401 E....

Documents