sr 3/sr 304 bremerton interchange improvements

SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements

Feasibility Study

MP 37.86 to MP 34.85 Dec

October 21, 2015

Olympic Region Planning P. O. Box 47440 Olympia, WA 98504-7440 Phone: 360-357-2644

Intro ii SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Project Revised October 21, 2015

Title VI Notice to Public It is the Washington State Department of Transportation's (WSDOT) policy to ensure no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin or sex, as provided by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise discriminated against under any of its federally funded programs and activities. Any person who believes his/her Title VI protection has been violated, may file a complaint with WSDOT's Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO). For Title VI complaint forms and advice, please contact OEO's Title VI Coordinator at 360 705-7082 0r 509-324-6018.

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information Materials can be made available in an alternate format by emailing the WSDOT Diversity/ADA Affairs Team at [email protected] or by calling toll free, 855-362-4232. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may make a request by calling the Washington State Relay at 711.

mailto:[email protected]

Intro iii SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Project Revised October 21, 2015

SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Feasibility Study

Table of Contents_____________________________________

Executive Summary .................................................................................................. Page ES-3

Chapter 1: Study Overview .......................................................................................... Page 1-1

Study Description ............................................................................................... Page 1-5

Existing Roadway Configuration ......................................................................... Page 1-6

Existing Traffic Operations .................................................................................. Page 1-9

Collision History ................................................................................................. Page1-10

Travel Demand Management ........................................................................... Page 1-11

Chapter 2: Reasonable Alternatives ........................................................................... Page 2-1

Alternative 1: Southbound SR 3 Hard Shoulder Running ................................... Page 2-3

Alternative 2: Restripe Southbound SR 3 to 2 Lanes ......................................... Page 2-4

Alternative 3: Construct Southbound SR 3 to 2 Lanes ........................................ Page 2-5

Alternative 4: Southbound SR 3 Add a Third Lane from SR 304 to Gorst ........... Page 2-6

Alternative 5: Travel Demand Management (TDM) ............................................. Page 2-7

Chapter #3: Operational and Collision Analysis ........................................................ -1

Summary ............................................................................................................ Page 3-3

Study Limits ........................................................................................................ Page 3-5

Existing Year (2013) No Build ............................................................................. Page 3-8

Opening Year (2020) No Build .......................................................................... Page 3-11

Opening Year (2020) Build Alternatives ............................................................ Page 3-12

Design Year (2040) No Build Operations .......................................................... Page 3-18

Design Year (2040) Build Operations ............................................................... Page 3-20

Collision Forecast Methodology ........................................................................ Page 3-23

Matrices ............................................................................................................ Page 3-27

Screening Results & Conclusion ....................................................................... Page 3-32

SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Feasibility Study

Table of Contents_____________________________________

Chapter 4: Access Connections and Design ............................................................. -1

Proposed Intersection Modification ..................................................................... Page 4-3

Conceptual Interchange Drawings ...................................................................... Page 4-5

Chapter 5: Land Use and Transportation Plans ......................................................... Page 5-1

Is the proposed access point revision compatible with all land use and transportation plans for the area? ................................................................ Page 5-3

Kitsap County land use map graphic .................................................................. Page 5-4

2007-2026 HSP Solutions .................................................................................. Page 5-5

Chapter 6: Future Interchanges .................................................................................. Page 6-1

Is the proposed access point revision compatible with a comprehensive network plan? ..................................................................................................... Page 6-3

Chapter 7: Coordination .............................................................................................. Page 7-1

Are all coordinating projects and actions programmed and funded? ................... Page 7-3

Chapter 8: Environmental Processes ......................................................................... Page 8-1

Environmental Issues ......................................................................................... Page 8-3

Appendices

Appendix A – Methods and Assumptions Document Page A1 – 30

Appendix B – SR 3/SR 304 Additional Traffic Information Page B1 – 52

Appendix C – Collision Data Analysis for SR 3 Freeway Alternatives Safety Analysis Documentation Page C1 – 25

Appendix D – SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Page D1 – 31

Intro v SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Project Revised October 21, 2015

Acronyms__________________________________________

EB Eastbound

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

GP General Purpose

HCM Highway Capacity Manual

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

HQ WSDOT’s Headquarters Office

HSP Highway System Plan

IJR Intersection Justification Report

LEAP Legislative Evaluation and Accountability Program

LOS Level of Service

M/A Methods and Assumptions Document

MOE Measures of Effectiveness

NB Northbound

OR Olympic Region

PSNS Puget Sound Naval Shipyard

SB Southbound

SR State Route

TDM Transportation Demand Management

WSF Washington State Ferries

WB Westbound

Intro vi SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Project Revised October 21, 2015

This page was intentionally left blank.

ES-1 SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Project Revised October 21, 2015

Executive Summary___________________________________


Executive Summary

The purpose of the feasibility study is to assess the impacts associated with the modification at the SR 3/SR 304 interchange in accordance with FHWA regulations. The modifications proposed as part of the SB SR 3 Restripe to 2 Lanes alternative include: providing two continuous lanes on SB SR 3 from the Loxie Eagans interchange to Gorst; and the reconfiguration of the SR 304 on-ramp to SB SR 3 as a parallel ramp connection that ends approximately 900 feet south of the existing merge. This study identified problems at the SR 3/SR 304 interchange and analyzed solutions that improve the traffic operations and safety for SR 3 and SR 304 and supports the adopted local and regional land use plans, encourages regional economic vitality, and enhances overall mobility of all users in the study area.

With the current corridor geometric configurations, the following locations cause congestion during the PM commute period:

• SB SR 3 at the merge from two lanes to one lane

• WB SR 304 at the merge from two lanes to one lane

With the anticipated growth in traffic volumes in the opening year (2020) and future year (2040), congestion levels are anticipated to increase, and travel time in the corridor would worsen.

A short-term preferred solution to the congestion and queuing is a Restripe alternative. However after Year 2020, there also will be a need to consider a longer term solution for both the PM congestion on SB SR 3 at the parallel SR 304 on-ramp merge; and the AM congestion on NB SR 3 from Gorst to Bremerton

The ultimate solution for this location is the Add Lane alternative which would add a third lane SB between Gorst and Bremerton for the PM peak congestion. For the AM peak congestion (6:15 to 7:15 AM) an added third lane NB between Gorst and Bremerton should also be considered to alleviate congestion after Year 2020. Though this alternative provides better

mobility, it does have a number of environmental mitigation and cost benefit issues that need to be addressed. Therefore, the study members selected the Restripe alternative in order to address the immediate situation.

The purpose of the SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements study is to improve mobility by eliminating the bottleneck along SB SR 3 in the vicinity of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange where two lanes merge into one. The 2012 Supplemental Transportation Budget identified a proviso as part of Legislative Evaluation & Accountability Program (LEAP) to begin environmental documentation and preliminary design to expedite project delivery

Five alternatives were identified to improve the traffic flow along SB SR 3 at the SR 3/ SR 304 interchange.

1. Hard Shoulder Running.

2. Restripe to 2 Lanes

3. Construct to 2 Lanes

4. Add 3rd Lane from the SR 304 on-ramp to Gorst

5. Transportation Demand Management (TDM)

The TDM alternative was dropped as a stand-alone alternative. Since transit expressed the difficulty and the prohibitive cost of implementing an additional 5-10% vehicle reduction over the current 30 percent of vehicles carrying two or more people. The main motivation to this high figure is the result of a combination of the rideshare programs being sponsored by Kitsap Transit and Mason Transit Authority and the restrictive parking at the region’s defense facilities (Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Navy Supply Center, Naval Base Kitsap at Bangor and Kitsap Keyport Naval Base). Instead, the preferred alternatives are assumed to include TDM strategies.


Executive Summary continued

Both SB SR 3 and WB SR 304 are currently and will continue to be fully directional (except for SB SR 3 to EB SR 304), connected to public roads, and designed to full WSDOT design standards. With the planning level design completed, one deviation was identified. The SB SR 3 inside left shoulder could be reduced from 6 feet to 2 feet for approximately 0.38 mile from MP 36.37 to MP 36.75. Instead of reducing the inside left shoulder, the outside right shoulder or even the through lanes may be modified using practical design in the restripe alternative.

It also appears that the SR 3/SR 304 interchange was built in a manner largely consistent with the intent of having two SB traffic lanes under the existing bridge. As a result, the implementation of the restripe alternative is expected to primarily be on existing pavement (except in the existing gore where WB SR 304 merges onto SB SR 3. Before the gore is restriped into a new parallel on ramp, it will need additional surfacing depth.

However, the original (1989) design did not use a parallel on connection, so some minor widening may be necessary.

Improvements in the vicinity of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange are consistent with the current WSDOT’s 2007-2026 Highway System Plan and are consistent with and would support the land use and the development plans for the area.

The following environmental information was based on the 1996 Bremerton Ferry Terminal to Vicinity of Gorst Final EIS.

• Nine wetlands were identified in the study area.

• One cultural resource site was identified and is located along southbound SR 3 between Sherman Heights Road & Gorst.

• One endangered species was identified in the study area. There is a Purple martin bird habitat near Wright Creek.

• Two fish passages were identified and are in need of replacement. Site ID 991994 and Site ID 991995 fish passages are located near Wright Creek and within the SR 3/SR 304 interchange respectively.

Based on the Environmental Scan of the study area, no significant constraints were identified that would prohibit or affect the implementation of the preferred alternative.

Both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation will be prepared during the preliminary and design phase of the project.

For the NEPA documentation, it is assumed that the Restripe 2 Lanes improvement along southbound SR 3 will be classified as a Documented Categorical Exclusion (DCE).

For SEPA documentation, it is anticipated that the Restripe 2 Lanes improvement along southbound SR 3 will receive a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance.

The NEPA Environmental Classification Summary and the SEPA Checklist will be supported by the following discipline reports:

• Wetlands and Streams • Biological Assessment • Cultural and Historic Resources • Air Quality • Noise • Hazardous Materials • Stormwater • Geotechnic

Chapter 1-1 SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Project Revised October 21, 2015

Chapter 1________________________________________

Study Overview


Chapter #1 – Study Overview

Project Purpose

The purpose of this study is to improve mobility by eliminating the bottleneck along SB SR 3 in the vicinity of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange where two lanes merge into one.

The 2012 Supplemental Transportation Budget identified a proviso for the SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements project as part of Legislative Evaluation & Accountability Program (LEAP) to begin environmental documentation and preliminary design to expedite project delivery.

The WSDOT 2007-2026 HSP (Appendix J, Page J-75, Key 162 and Page J-77, Key 344) identifies the SR 3/SR 304 interchange as a bottleneck where congested conditions currently occur in the PM peak hours along SB SR 3 in the vicinity of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange where the two lanes merge into one.

The SR 3/SR 304 interchange was also identified as a 2013 unfunded system investment by WSDOT. The mobility LOS is also below the adopted service objective in the PM peak period at this location. The resulting congestion increases delay and travel time affecting safety and imposes inconvenience for motorized travelers, and creates challenges for non-motorized travelers using the state highway

Stakeholders

Project leads, proponents, and other team members

As sponsors of the project, the following individual groups set the goals and requirements for the project and its deliverables. WSDOT’s Olympic Region Planning office is the study lead. The study’s structure consisted of a working group and an internal technical team.

The working group committee is comprised of technical level representatives from the following communities and WSDOT:

Communities • Bremerton

• Kitsap County

• Kitsap Transit

• Naval Base Kitsap

• Port Orchard

WSDOT • HQ Design

• HQ Highway Access

• HQ Traffic

• OR Project Development

• OR Planning

• OR Traffic

The internal technical team consisted of members from WSDOT’s HQ and OR Traffic Operations, and OR Planning with VISSIM traffic analysis consultant support from Parametrix.

The study team also coordinated with the Suquamish Tribe and the West Sound Cycling Club.



Study Area and Project Limits

The study area includes; SR 3 in Kitsap County and SR 304 in Bremerton. SR 3 southbound between Werner Road/Loxie Eagans interchange to the north, and the W. Sam Christopherson Avenue intersection to the south; the SR 3/SR 16 interchange; and SR 304 between Farragut Avenue and SR 3. A map of the study area is shown in Figure 1: SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Study Area graphic below.

Figure 1: SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Study Area

MAP LEGEND

Numbered Key Locations

1. Werner Road/Loxie Eagans Blvd. & Auto Center Way/Oyster Bay Ave.

2. Loxie Eagans Blvd. & SR 3 SB Ramps 3. Loxie Eagans Blvd. & SR 3 NB Ramps 4. Farragut Ave/ Cambrian Ave. & SR 304 5. Charleston Beach Road & SR 304 6. W. Sam Christoperson Ave. & SR 3

Loxie Eagans Blvd.


Chapter 1: Study Overview

Project Description

The SR 3/SR 304 interchange is located in Bremerton; and provides an important freeway to freeway connection between two major highways. This interchange moves people and goods via commuter, freight, and other multimodal traffic through the City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, and the communities and regions beyond. SR 3 is a north-south highway approximately sixty miles in length that runs between the City of Shelton in Mason County and SR 104 in the vicinity of the Hood Canal in Kitsap County. SR 3 provides a critically important link in the regional transportation system serving as a primary regional transportation principle arterial, a key freight route and a commuter highway.

SR 304 is an east-west highway three miles in length, located within the City of Bremerton, connecting SR 3 with downtown Bremerton and the Washington State Ferries’ (WSF) Bremerton ferry terminal. SR 304 also provides access to the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS). The naval shipyard with its intermediate maintenance facility is the Pacific Northwest’s largest naval shore facility, and one of Washington State’s largest industrial installations. Besides the WSF terminal, the major traffic generator along this route is the PSNS. While serving as a major regional freight corridor, SR 3 is also a vital link for the urban communities of Silverdale, Chico and Gorst along the corridor as well as the primary commuter route for the three naval bases on the Kitsap Peninsula (PSNS, Bangor and Keyport).

The current corridor geometric configurations contribute to the PM peak congestion that is being experienced along these corridors. Both SR 3 SB prior to the interchange and SR 304 WB merge from two lanes to one lane. SR 3 continues as a 2-lane facility, after the SR 3/SR 304 merge. With the anticipated growth in traffic volumes in 2020 and 2040, congestion levels are anticipated to increase, and travel time in the corridor will worsen.

Horizontal Stopping Sight Distance

The August 2011, Scoping Estimate Package for the SR 3/SR 304 Interchange Improvements project highlights the concern of a sub-standard sight distance. “When continuing a second lane on southbound SR 3 at the SR 304 ramp structure will result in a sub-standard sight distance (June 2011 WSDOT Scoping Estimate Package

SR 3/SR 304 I/C Interchange Improvements).” The horizontal stopping sight distance currently meets the 50 MPH design speed for the -3% (446 feet) and -6% (474 feet) downgrade.

The actual sight distance was measured by the Port Orchard Project Engineer’s Office. The methodology used was to set a series of traffic cones 20 feet apart and 4 feet outside the edge line, at the downstream end of the section. This location was just beyond the abutment of the overcrossing ramp. The crew went back up the shoulder to the point where the farthest cone disappeared from view. Crews could see by the angle that this would be the minimum sight distance. Crews measured the distance, with a measuring wheel, along a line approximately 4 feet outside of the edge line. The distance was 611 feet. According to Chapter 1260 Sight Distance of the WSDOT’s Design Manual dated July 2013, the design speed with stopping sight distance and downgrades are listed below:

Design Speed Stopping Distance Downgrade: -3% -6%

50 MPH 446 ft. 474 ft. 60 MPH 598 ft. 638 ft.

The current speed limit in this area is 50 MPH with a 611 foot measured sight distance. With the removal of the two lane merge into one conflict, there is a possibility that the speed limit may increase in this area. There is also a possibility that queuing on the SR 3 SB off ramp into the Loxie Eagans stop-controlled intersection may reduce speeds on the downgrade after Year 2020.



Existing Roadway Configuration

SR 3 is a four-lane (two lanes each direction) divided highway in the vicinity of the Loxie Eagans Boulevard interchange. However, within the SR3/SR 304 interchange, the highway reduces down to 3 lanes with the two SB lanes merging into one.

In the vicinity of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange, SR 3 in the NB direction features two lanes with a double dedicated off ramp exit to EB SR 304. SR 304 WB provides access via single lane on-ramps to both NB and SB SR 3. However from SB SR 3 no access to WB SR 304 is provided. Note: The WB SR 304 on-ramp connects to SB SR 3 as an add-lane and SB SR 3 maintains two lanes between SR 304 and SR 16.

North of Farragut Avenue, SR 304 is four-lane arterial with a landscaped center median. South of Farragut Avenue to Charleston Boulevard, SR 304 is a six-lane arterial with a landscaped

center median. In the WB direction, the inside lane is a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane.

The HOV lane designation ends east of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange, and the right lane drops at the on-ramp to SR 3 NB. The two remaining WB lanes merge to one lane prior to the SR 304 WB undercrossing.

Baseline Transportation Networks

The infrastructure within Kitsap County supports an economy based on public sector Department of Defense jobs, as well as over 10,000 uniform service personnel. The balance of the economic activity in the county includes a thriving gaming industry with a large casino located on tribal properties, a major medical center and a regional retail hub attracting shoppers from Kitsap County as well as the surrounding rural counties; Clallam, Jefferson and Mason.

In Kitsap County, job numbers are starting to rebound, but have yet to make up for losses occurring from 2007 to 2014. Specifically, there were 84,800 non-farm jobs in the county, in June 2014. This figure reflects a net loss of approximately 3,200 jobs since June 2007.

The chart in Figure 2: 2010 Census Population Projections table below depicts the 2010 Census population projections. This chart also includes consideration of the current recession’s effect on migration and fertility behavior, which impacts many counties’ projections. The preliminary projections (low, middle and high series) are highlighted. The economic and demographic forecast estimates are for total employment, including uniformed military personnel in Kitsap County

YEAR POPULATION LOW POPULATION MEDIUM POPULATION HIGH

2015 232,674 262,032 297,455

2020 236,712 275,546 326,510

2030 243,931 301,642 383,613

2040 244,467 320,475 432,873

Figure 2: 2010 Census Population Projections



Funded Transportation Improvement Projects

Currently, there are no programmed or funded local, regional, or state transportation improvement projects within the study area.

However, Naval Base Kitsap is trying to secure construction funding for a truck only entrance to the base, which may significantly reduce morning congestion in the vicinity of the shipyard near the Charleston intersection. Currently, delivery trucks are queuing onto EB SR 304 while waiting for access to the shipyard in the AM peak. The Navy’s proposed truck only entrance would provide a space for the delivery trucks to queue inside the shipyard’s parking lot instead of the highway. This project includes pavement widening for a new deceleration lane leading directly into the Navy’s shipyard, and also proposes an adjacent 4-foot paved shoulder for a section of roadway along SR 304.

Traffic Model Analysis Years

Existing year traffic volumes for the 5-hour PM peak period (2-7 PM) were developed for all roadways and intersections in the study area using information from turn movement and tube counts collected between 2010 and 2014. Volumes were also developed for the 1:30 – 2:00 PM time period. This 30 minute period is included in the model to allow vehicles time to populate the network. The existing year for this study was assumed to be 2013, and collected traffic volumes were factored to match traffic volumes for 2013.

Opening Year (2020) and future year (2040) traffic volumes were developed by assuming a 1.5% annual growth rate in traffic volumes between 2013 and the respective analysis year.

The annual growth rate was based on a review of the following:

• Kitsap County’s 2010 and 2025 Travel Demand Models

• Puget Sound Regional Council’s 2006 and 2040 Travel Demand Models

• Bremerton’s Economic Development Study (WSDOT, 2012)

• City of Bremerton’s Comprehensive Plan

Note: Adjustments to the traffic data counts were considered due to the following impacts:

• The Bremerton Shipyard expects to increase personnel by 20% over the next year or so.

• No aircraft carriers were in port, during the traffic data collection. A typical aircraft carrier brings 3,000 sailors and up to 10,000 private contractors to perform maintenance on the carriers.

However, after discussions with the Technical Team and the consultant, WSDOT decided that additional traffic wouldn’t change the No Build throughput results, since the PM volumes were already at or near capacity.

Origin & Destination (O&D) Study Results

An O&D study was conducted to determine how much traffic originating from the Naval Base Kitsap’s Bangor site passes through the SR 3/SR 304 interchange and where the Naval Base Kitsap’s shipyard traffic travels on SR 3.

During the traffic data collection, crews installed 4 cameras:

1. At the Naval Base Kitsap’s Bangor gate;

2. At the SR 310 interchange;

3. Outside the Bremerton Shipyard at the Farragut Ave entrance;

4. At the SR 3/SR 304 merge to capture origin and destination data as depicted in Figure 3: SR 3/SR 304 Origin & Destination Results graphic on Page 1-8.

Of all the SB SR 3 traffic originating north of SR 310 (Kitsap Way), 58-68% traveled through the SR 3/SR 304 merge.

At the Bangor Gate, 1,867 vehicles were recorded:

• 25% of the drivers travel through the SR 310 (Kitsap Way) interchange.

• 25% exited at Loxie Eagans Blvd.

• 10-20% traveled though the SR 3/ SR 304 merge.


Chapter 1 – Study Overview

Origin & Destination (O&D) Study Results continued

Along SR 304, 5,891 vehicles were recorded during this period:

• 90% of those vehicles were traveling south on Farragut Ave. traveled thru the SR 3/SR 304 merge.

Figure 3: SR 3/SR 304 Origin & Destination Results



Existing Traffic Operations

Findings from the analysis demonstrate that there are two locations in the study area where vehicle volumes exceed available roadway capacity during the PM commute period as follows:

• Where SR 3 SB merges from two lanes to one lane south of the Loxie Eagans interchange; this location is congested for approximately 2 hours 45 minutes, and queuing extends through the Loxie Eagans interchange.

• Where SR 304 WB merges from two lanes to one lane east of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange: This location is congested for approximately 1 hour 45 minutes. Queuing in the GP lane extends back to the Charleston Beach Road intersection.

The HOV lane allows transit, vanpools and carpools to bypass the congested GP lane, but HOV vehicles experience congestion once the HOV lane terminates. There is no substantial congestion on SR 3 NB or SR 304 EB in the PM peak.

All intersections operate at a LOS D or better with the following two exceptions:

1. Loxie Eagans Boulevard and SR 3 SB ramps – the SB approach to this stop-controlled intersection operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour.

2. SR 3 and W. Sam Christopherson Ave. (MP 34.23) – This signalized intersection operates at LOS E during the PM peak hour.

Note: In some cases, congestion extends beyond the limits of the model, and vehicles are effectively queuing outside of the model.

Intersection Level of Service (LOS)

Figure 4: Intersection Level of Service graphic below depicts the LOS for the existing, opening and future years for the No Build option. The Opening Year intersection LOS is anticipated to remain the same as compared to the existing conditions at all six study intersections with the exception of the Loxie Eagans Boulevard and SR 3 SB ramps intersection. The stop-controlled SR 3 SB off ramp worsens from LOS E to F, and is over capacity during the peak hour. The resulting queue is anticipated to extend to the SR 3 mainline auxiliary lane.

In the Future Year, the intersection LOS is anticipated to worsen compared to existing conditions and Opening Year conditions at all study intersections, except for the Loxie Eagans Boulevard and SR 3 SB ramps intersection which is already operating at LOS F in the Opening Year. The resulting queue spills back to the SR 3 mainline auxiliary lane.

Figure 4: Intersection Level of Service



Collision History

“Under 23 U.S. Code §, 409, safety data, reports, surveys, schedules, lists compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of potential crash sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway crossings are not subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or state court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”

This section provides a summary and a planning level analysis of collision data for the SR 3 and SR 304 study area. A 5-year collision analysis was conducted. No locations within the study area were identified as an area of concern. However, an Intersection Analysis Location (IAL) was noted at MP 37.31, the ramp terminal at Werner Road.

The pie chart below depicts the five year (2009-2013) crash history results along SR 3 in the study area. The 273 recorded collisions were broken down into the follow collision type categories:

• 212 Property Damage Only • 37 Possible Injury • 17 Evident Injury • 3 Serious Injury • 4 Fatalities

SR 3 Fatality Details:

• Feb. 24, 2012: Vicinity of Sherman Heights Rd., in the NB direction – Rear End Collision.

• Sept. 16, 2011: Vicinity of Auto Center Way, in the SB direction – Sideswiped with vehicle stopped.

• June 23, 2010: Vicinity of Gorst, in both directions – Head-on Crash from opposite directions.

• April 10, 2010: Vicinity of Gorst, in the SB direction – Hit concrete jersey barrier (driver inattention).

The pie chart above depicts the five year (2009-2013) crash history results along SR 304 in the study area. The 125 recorded collisions were broken down into the follow collision type categories:

• 95 Property Damage Only • 24 Possible Injury • 4 Evident Injury • 2 Serious Injury • 0 Fatalities

Note: A detailed review of the collision data is provided under Chapter 3



Travel Demand Management

For two decades, commute trip reduction has proven an effective tool for easing congestion and operating our transportation system efficiently. Kitsap Transit was ahead of their time when they created the Worker/Driver bus program. This unique program was developed during WWII out of a need to transport thousands of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard employees to and from work. The Worker/Driver bus program currently operates thirty buses; twenty-eight buses travel to PSNS and Naval Station Bremerton and two routes travel to Sub Base Bangor. Mason Transit also operates four buses traveling to PSNS. The worker/driver buses are driven by full time employees of the military facilities who are also part time employees of Kitsap Transit or Mason Transit. Buses operate much like a large carpool. The driver boards their bus near their home in the morning and travels to work, picking up co-workers along the way. After work, they hop back in their bus and reverse the process.

Thanks in part to the Worker/Driver bus program SR 3 and SR 304 currently experiences up to 30 percent of vehicles carrying two or more people. This results in a 51 percent of total person-trips during peak traffic periods. The main incentive for this high figure is the result of a combination of the rideshare programs being sponsored by Kitsap and Mason Transits and the restrictive parking at the region’s defense facilities (Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Navy Supply Center, Naval Base Kitsap at Bangor and the Kitsap Keyport Naval Base).

The focus of the traffic analysis was not on the specific strategies used, but on the effect of removing trips from the transportation network. The opening year analysis assumed a 5% reduction in traffic volumes, and the future year analysis assumed a 10 percent reduction in traffic volumes. The TDM alternative was modified from a 2% reduction of vehicles to a proposed 5% reduction in 2020 and a 10 % reduction in 2040. The preliminary 2% reduction

of vehicles matched the growth rate of 1.5%. TDM was dropped as a stand-along alternative due to the difficulty and the prohibitive cost of implementing an additional 5-10% vehicle reduction. Instead, all proposed alternatives were assumed to include TDM strategies.

Facilities that will be affected by the project The SR 3 and SR 304 interchange and the Loxie Eagans Boulevard SB on-ramp will be directly affected by this project.


Chapter 2________________________________________

Reasonable Alternatives


Chapter #2 Reasonable Alternatives

Describe the reasonable alternatives that have been evaluated.

The following five alternatives were identified to improve the traffic flow at the SR 3/SR 304 interchange.

Alternative 1: Southbound SR 3: Hard Shoulder Running

This alternative investigates opening the SB SR 3 shoulder to traffic on weekdays from 3-6 PM. Those hours often see the heaviest traffic volumes. The shoulder along SR 3 SB would be open to traffic during those hours in the vicinity of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange where the two SB lanes merge into one. This alternative would also add an HOV lane to the SR 304 on-ramp ending 100 feet after the bridge. The Planning cost estimate for this alternative is $3,4 million.

The Hard Shoulder Running alternative was removed from further consideration because it doesn’t provide a 24-hour solution; it moves the merge points further downstream; and bike capacity is lost through the SR 3/SR 304 interchange curve.



Describe the reasonable alternatives that have been evaluated continued

Alternative 2: Restripe to 2 Lanes

This alternative restripes the existing roadway to create two lanes on SR 3 SB in the area where two lanes currently merge into one. This alternative would also add an HOV lane to the SR 304 on-ramp ending 100 feet after the bridge. The current SR 304 WB add lane on-ramp merge to SR 3 SB would be reconfigured into a parallel on-ramp merge. The second SR 3 SB lane would be a permanent fix that is available around the clock. This alternative was identified as the low cost and short term solution with a planning level cost of $3.8 million.




Alternative 3: Construct to 2 Lanes

This alternative demolishes and rebuilds the SR 304 on-ramp over SR 3 to accommodate two lanes on SR 3 SB in the area where two lanes merge into one. It will also add an HOV lane on the SR 304 on-ramp ending 100 feet after the bridge. One fish passage culvert will be replaced at the SR 3/SR 304 interchange, one wetland at the interchange may be affected by construction and construction may require a temporary railroad detour. This alternative has a planning level cost estimate of $60.8 million. However, Alternative 2 is more cost effective for the same benefit.

Note: Once it was identified that there was enough room under the SR 304 ramp to accommodate two lanes, this alternative was dropped in favor of the least cost alternative.




Alternative 4: Southbound SR 3: Add Third Lane from SR 304 to Gorst

This alternative would add a 3rd Lane from the SR 304 on-ramp to Gorst. SB SR 3 from the SR 304 on-ramp to Gorst would be widened to create three at-grade lanes. At Gorst the 3rd lane would tie into the existing three lane section leading to SR 16. Crews would also restripe SR 3 SB to two lanes in the area where two lanes merge into one.

This alternative is the ultimate solution, however it’s expensive. The planning level cost estimate is $158 million.



Describe the reasonable alternatives that have been evaluated. continued

Alternative 5: Transportation Demand Management (TDM)

This alternative assumed a reduction in future traffic volumes through the implementation of TDM strategies. The focus of the traffic analysis was not on the specific strategies used, but on the effect of removing trips from the transportation network. The opening year (2020) analysis assumed a five percent reduction in traffic volumes, and the future year (2040) analysis assumed a 10 percent reduction in traffic volumes.

The TDM alternative was modified from a 2% reduction of vehicle to a proposed 5% reduction in 2020 and a 10% proposed reduction in 2040.

The graphic below depicts the number of vehicles that would need to be removed from the network. The preliminary 2% reduction of vehicle matched the growth rate of 1.5%. Also noted was that the SR 3 SB and SR 304 WB may experience up to a 30 percent of vehicles carrying two or more people resulting in 51% of total person-trips during peak traffic periods. The main reason for this high figure may be the result of a combination of the rideshare programs being sponsored by Kitsap Transit and the restrictive parking at the region’s defense facilities.

Note: TDM was dropped as a stand-alone alternative due to the difficulty and the prohibitive cost of implementing an additional 5-10% vehicle reduction. Instead, the proposed alternatives are assumed to include TDM strategies.


Chapter 3________________________________________

Operational and Collision Analysis


Chapter #3 – Operational and Collision Analysis

How will the proposal affect safety and traffic operations at year of opening and design year?

Summary

The preferred Restripe Alternative, Year 2020 (opening year) and Year 2040 (design year) includes the SB SR 3 mainline becoming 2 lanes and the WB SR 304 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) merge being relocated to 100 ft. west of Bridge 304/001W-S. Future mainline predicted collisions/crashes would be close or similar to a No Build condition.

The possible ultimate solution Add Lane Alternative, Year 2020 and 2040 includes the SB SR 3 mainline becoming 3 lanes between Gorst and Bremerton and WB SR 304 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) merge being relocated to the beginning of the SB add lane merge. Predicted collisions/crashes would be less than the Restripe Alternative (Approximately seven vehicles per year difference). There would also be a need for an added lane NB (or reversible lane) on SR 3 between SR 16 and SR 304 to address AM peak congestion.

This analysis also evaluates other proposals and their effects on the operation and safety of the surface streets and freeway systems. A 10% TDM reduction was determined to be an unrealistic alternative after discussions with local transit agencies and WSDOT’s Public Transportation.

Constructing the Restripe alternative, would address short-term needs. The purpose of this study is to improve mobility by eliminating the bottleneck along SB SR 3 in the vicinity of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange where two lanes merge into one. The proposed statement of purpose and statement of deficiencies/needs are:

This project will advance initial development of interchange improvements by beginning environmental documentation and preliminary design to expedite project delivery. The purpose of this project is to improve mobility by reducing

delay and providing consistent travel time through the SR 3/SR 304 Interchange for travelers using State Route 3 at this location, while maintaining or improving the safe operation of both State Route 3 and State Route 304 in the process.

Mobility level of service is below the adopted service objective during the PM peak commute periods along State Route 3 in the SB direction where the travel lanes narrow down from two to one lane under the SR 304 WB Ramp (Bridge Undercrossing Number 304/1W-S). The resulting congestion increases delay and travel time affecting safety and imposing inconvenience for motorized travelers, and creates challenges for non-motorized travelers using the state highway.

Analysis Methods and Assumptions for Traffic Volume Development

The methodology for developing traffic forecasts included comparing various growth rates. Tube counts are used for current year analysis and were performed in April of 2013 during the weekday (Wednesday, April 17). Intersection turning movement counts were also done in 2013. The Loxie Eagans Boulevard turning movements and tube counts were conducted in May 2014. Other counts between February 2010 and May 2014 were also used and factored to Year 2013 volumes.

Traffic Count Adjustments

When WSDOT performed the traffic data collection in April 2013, no aircraft carriers were in port at the Bremerton Shipyard. WSDOT in consultation with the consultant and Technical Team members decided that no adjustments to the traffic count data were needed to capture the additional traffic demand out of the Bremerton Shipyard when one or two aircraft carriers are in port.

Excerpts from the Navy’s 2012 Vehicle and Pedestrian Safety Study indicates that one aircraft carrier in port may produce between 173-221 additional vehicles leaving the Charleston Boulevard gate turning onto WB SR 304.



Analysis Methods and Assumptions for Traffic Volume Development

Traffic Count Adjustments continued

Because the existing year (2013) PM peak volumes on SR 304 WB toward SR 3 SB is already approaching or at capacity for the SR 3/SR 304 interchange, the additional traffic from one or more aircraft carriers will not significantly change the No Build throughput results.

For example, the GP lane queuing on WB SR 304 blocks the signalized SR 304/ Charleston intersection from about 4-4:14 PM in the 2013 simulation. When this signalized intersection is blocked by the WB SR 304 queue, no additional GP left turn traffic can proceed out of Charleston Gate intersection.

Even though the data indicates one additional carrier will generate about 200 additional left turn vehicles out of the Charleston Gate towards WB SR 304, not much more GP traffic can “get through” in a one hour PM peak under the No Build scenario(s).

However, an exception would be an extended SR 304 WB HOV lane on-ramp into an add lane build scenario. A WB SR 304 HOV lane may attract additional HOV traffic, but up to 30% measured HOV volumes on WB SR 304 already appears to be a high percentage.

Travel Demand Forecasting

Forecasts of travel demand for the various mainline alternatives used April 2013 traffic counts with network modifications to create opening and design year build alternatives (2020 and 2040). There were no aircraft carriers in the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS) during the 2013 counts. The existing year mainline counts were based upon April 17, 2013, Wednesday. A straight line annual growth rate of 1.5% was decided upon for the forecast by the technical team after considering the following information:

• Kitsap County Land Use Model 2010 to 2025 PM

• Short Duration Counts (Historical AADT)

• Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Land Use Model 2006 to 2040

• Bremerton Economic Development Study (BEDS) 2008 to 2030

• City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan 2001 to 2030 PM

• WSDOT Highway Analysis Program Trend Line Growth Rates


Chapter #3 – Operational & Collision Analysis

Study Limits Discussion

The decision to expand the study area was made by the Technical Team on September 17, 2013 in a meeting held from 1:00 to 2:30 PM.

During this meeting, the proposed study limits were expanded to include one interchange and their ramps prior to and after the SR 3/SR 304 interchange.

Figure 5 below depicts the study area which includes SR 3 in Kitsap County and SR 304 in Bremerton, SR 3 between Werner Road/Loxie Eagans interchange to the north, and the Sam Christopherson Avenue intersection to the south, the SR 3/SR 16 interchange, and SR 304 between Farragut Avenue and SR 3.

Numbered Locations

1. Werner Road/Loxie Eagans Blvd & Auto Center Way/Oyster Bay Ave.

2. Loxie Eagans Blvd & SR 3 SB Ramps

3. Loxie Eagans Blvd & SR 3 NB Ramps

4. Farragut Ave/Cambrian Ave & SR 304

5. Charleston Beach Road & SR 304

6. Sam Christopherson Ave & SR 3

Figure 4: SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Study Area



Operational and Safety Analysis

The traffic operational methodology is the same as used for the No Build analysis, as documented in Chapter 1. Freeway and ramp configurations were modified as appropriate to account for the preferred Restripe Alternative. The implementation of this alternative would provide for a short term build configuration. SB SR 3 would be restriped from a one lane configuration into two through lanes at the SR 3/ SR 304 Interchange, the WB SR 304 add lane on ramp merge would be restriped into an approximate 1500-ft parallel on ramp merge, and the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane restriped to end about 100 feet beyond the beginning of the SR 304 Bridge. The preferred SB SR 3 rebuild/restripe proposal is not forecasted to have significant queuing impacts on SB SR 3 until after 2020. WB SR 304 is forecasted to have queuing impacts at both intersections (Charleston and Farragut) with or without the Restripe project in 2020.

The following traffic models were used to analyze traffic operations:

1. Synchro (version 8.0) is a deterministic model used to calculate peak hour vehicle delay and LOS at intersections, similar to the methodologies outlined in the HCM.

2. VISSIM (version 5.4-9 and/or 5.4-10) is a stochastic model (microsimulation) that accounts for variability in driver behavior and is used to calculate travel times, speeds, and congestion levels for multiple modes of travel over long periods of time. VISSIM was used for the PM peak period.

3. Highway Capacity Manual Software (HCM 2010) was used for the AM peak on SR 3 and SR 304 for mainline basic, merge and diverge ramp influence areas, and weaving in the study area.

A VISSIM model was used to analyze the mainline sections of SR 3 from just north of

Werner Road/Loxie Eagans Blvd. interchange to the SR 16 ramp in Gorst to account for mainline queuing and SR 304 from the interchange with SR 3 to Farragut Avenue in the PM peak.

A Synchro model was used to evaluate intersection operations at Sam Christopherson (SR 3), Charleston Blvd (SR 304), Farragut Avenue (SR 304), Loxie Eagans/Auto Center (SR 3), Loxie Eagans (SR 3) SB ramp terminal, and Loxie Eagans (SR 3) NB ramp terminal in AM and PM.

Traffic Operations

The operational analysis results are reported for average weekday AM and PM peak hour condition. Traffic data collection was performed along SR 3 and SR 304 during the week of April 15-18, 2013 (Traffic data was also collected for 5.5 hours from 1:30 to 7:00 PM). Twenty roadway tube counters were placed measuring rolling slow-downs, license plate reader cameras were placed at 4 locations to measure travel time, and manual turning movement counts were recorded along SR 304 at Charleston and Farragut Avenue gates. Traffic conditions were analyzed for the 2013 No Build volumes, 2020 Opening Year volumes, and 2040 Design Year volumes. They represent the completion and full operation of the various alternatives. The freeway basic, merge, diverge, and weaving mainline segments were analyzed for the No Build conditions and the short-term preferred Restripe SB SR 3 and WB SR 304 alternative in the AM peak hour using Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010) software.

During the AM peak hour the No Build SR 3 freeway segments operate at LOS D or better in 2040, except for NB SR 3 between SR 16 and SR 304 and at the existing SB SR 3 bottleneck where two lanes merge into one. During the AM peak hour, the SR 304 arterial segments will operate at LOS D or better in 2040, except where SR 304 merges from two lanes (HOV inside lane) into one at the WB on ramp.



Traffic Operations continued

The alternatives analyzed in this study are not assumed to change existing traffic patterns on a regional scale or how people travel. Traffic volume forecasts were developed separately for the AM opening year (2020) and AM design year (2040) analysis and reflect a one hour weekday peak and level of service.

The PM peak period was analyzed using VISSIM modeling over a 5.5 hour period from 1:30 to 7:00 PM. This allowed for a conservative comparison describing how well each alternative performed with a given set of volumes in the PM weekday period. The PM analysis includes the following No Build and Build Alternatives:

• No Build • Hard Shoulder Running • Construct or Restripe • Add Lane • TDM

The following pages show Existing Year (2013) No Build for the AM and PM peak period freeway and arterial mainline results.



Existing 2013 AM Peak Hour (SR 3 SB & NB, SR 304 WB & EB)

Gorst to Bremerton SR 3:

SB SBVolume

LOS11:00 AM 11:00 AM

to to Noon NoonSpeed SpeedSpeed Speed

Speed SpeedSpeed Speed

6:15 AM 6:15 AMto SR 16 mainline to

7:15 AM 7:15 AMVolume

LOSNB NB

Speeds > 42.5 mph Level of Service D

85% to 70% of Posted Speed = 42.5 to 35 mph Level of Service E

70% of Posted Speed or < 35 mph Level of Service F

Preliminary 2013 Existing State Route 3 Mainline AM Annual Weekday Peak Hour LOS ResultsSR 3 and SR 304 Corridor StudyWSDOT Olympic Region Planning

Multilane Arterial

B62 697

B

52.0 (Posted 50 mph) 55.055.0

Basic

825E

Merge - On

SR 3 NB On SR 3 NB mainline

Diverge - Off

SR 3 NB mainline

C2050

E3010

43.7 (Posted 40 mph)43.7 (Posted 40 mph)

3835E

1353E

SR 3 SB mainline

40.4

70 2211

47.547.5 52.0 (Posted 50 mph)

SR 3 SB mainlineSherman Heights45.0 (Posted 40 mph)

49.449.4

47.247.2

SR 304 NB On44.6

1694B

55.055.0

SR 3 NB mainline

1656

Basic

50.950.9

Basic

49.249.2

145

49.850.0

C1801190

B

1106B

SR 310 On SR 3 SB mainline(Rolling 1740 feet weave)

55.055.0

49.850.0

49.850.0

49.2

BToo short for a mainline

Loxie Eagans Off

Diverge - Off

44.6

47.645.5

49.2 49.2

1721801098

55.055.0

SR 3 SB mainline

51.0

B

45.547.6

44.645.547.6

55.055.0

1278

55.055.0

Basic

51.055.0 (Posted 50 mph)55.0 (Posted 50 mph)

Multilane Arterial1988

B

45.0 (Posted 40 mph)45.0 (Posted 40 mph)

SR 3 SB mainline

Basic (Analyzed Using Directional Two-Way Facility Software)

51.451.4

Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On

Loxie Eagans On

255B

Merge - On

SR 304 WB On

Merge - OnBasic Weaving Segment

Basic

SR 310 Off

BasicB

1611D

7% Grade (1900 feet weave)

C

SR 304 Off Loxie Eagans On

BMerge - On

C2141 600

SR 3 NB mainline

Merge - OnDiverge - OffWeaving Segment

Too short for a mainline Loxie Eagans Off Too short for a mainline

Diverge - Off

SR 3 to Farragut:

WB WBVolume

LOS6:15 AM 6:15 AM

to to 7:15 AM 20.0 7:15 AMSpeed 40.0 SpeedSpeed Speed


6:15 AM 6:15 AMto to


LOSEB EB

Speeds > 38.2 mph based upon 45 mph Level of Service D

85% to 70% of Posted Speed = 38.2 to 31.5 mph Level of Service E

70% of Posted Speed or < 31.5 mph Level of Service F


average delay

Signal SignalMultilane

SR 304 EB Farragut

Multilane

Transition

70N/A

SR 3 NB On Ramp SignalMultilane Multilane

50.0 (45 mph posted)

SR 304 WB mainline

A475


Signal538A


SR 3 NB mainline

1155

Multilane

ofaverage delay

45.0 (30 mph posted)45.0 (30 mph posted)

ofaverage delay


45.0 (30 mph posted)of

17.4 seconds

Multilane

SR 304 EB45.0 (30 mph posted)

SR 304 WB

B B B1694

40.7 (40.0 design speed)

C1583

Charlestonaverage delay

A


SR 304 WB mainlineSR 304 WB45.0 (30 mph posted)

B A B

45.0 (30 mph posted)Charleston

16.2 secondsFarragut

D

17.4 seconds

50.0 (45 mph posted speed)50.0 (45 mph posted speed)

One lane405



540

16.2 secondsof



2013 Existing No Build PM Peak Period for SB & NB SR 3

LEGEND NOTE: THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT FOR SR 3 IS 50 MPH FROM GORST TO SR 304.



2013 Existing No Build PM Peak Period for WB & EB SR 304

LEGEND NOTE: THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT FOR SR 304 IS 45 MPH FROM SR 3 TO

CHARLESTON BEACH AND 30 MPH FROM CHARLESTON BEACH TO FARRAGUT AVE.



SB SBVolume

LOS11:00 AM 11:00 AM





LOSNB NB

Speeds > 42.5 mph Level of Service D 1.5% Straight Line Growth Rate




2197 68 2265 770 1495Multilane Arterial Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On Basic (Analyzed Using Directional Two-Way Facility Software)

282 1213 199 1412 190 1222Basic Diverge - Off Weaving Segment Merge - On BasicMerge - On

B B BToo short for a mainline

SR 3 SB mainline Sherman Heights SR 3 SB mainline SR 304 WB On SR 3 SB mainline Loxie Eagans On

C C C B E B

SR 3 SB mainline Loxie Eagans Off (Rolling 1740 feet weave) SR 310 On SR 3 SB mainline45.0 (Posted 40 mph) 49.0 49.0 49.0

49.4 49.4 49.4 55.045.0 (Posted 40 mph) 49.3 55.0 (Posted 50 mph) 51.2 39.7 51.045.0 (Posted 40 mph) 49.3 55.0 (Posted 50 mph) 51.2 51.0 55.0

55.0 49.5 49.5 49.5 55.0

42.5 (Posted 40 mph) 45.5 46.9 (Posted 50 mph) 47.0 55.042.5 (Posted 40 mph) 45.5 46.9 (Posted 50 mph) 47.0 55.0 44.6 44.6 44.6

47.3 47.3 47.355.0 50.7 55.0 49.2 55.0

43.5 43.5 43.5

49.2 55.055.0 50.7 55.0

Loxie Eagans Off SR 3 NB mainline Loxie Eagans On Too short for a mainline SR 310 Off SR 3 NB mainlineSR 3 NB On SR 3 NB mainline SR 304 Off SR 3 NB mainline SR 304 NB On Too short for a mainline

663 1780 210 1990 160 18307% Grade (1900 feet weave)

3326 912 4238 1872 2366 77 2443

Multilane Arterial Merge - On Basic Diverge - Off BasicE F F F C

Diverge - Off BasicMerge - On Weaving Segment Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On BasicC C C C CC


Opening Year (2020) No Build Alternative Traffic Operations

Vehicle congestion is anticipated where SB SR 3 merges from two lanes to one, and where WB SR 304 merges from two lanes to one. The increased traffic volume modeled for the opening year (2020) results in more congestion compared to 2013 existing conditions in the PM peak.

On SB SR 3 the PM duration of congestion is anticipated to increase from 2 hours 45 minutes with existing conditions to 4 hours 15 minutes with the No Build Alternative. Congestion would also extend beyond the limits of the study area, leaving approximately 460 unserved vehicles This

PM queuing also results in the Loxie Eagans on-ramp to SB SR 3 being blocked. Queuing along the on-ramp would extend back onto Loxie Eagans Boulevard.

SR 3 to Farragut:

WB WBVolume

LOS6:15 AM 6:15 AM





LOSEB EB





Multilane Signal Multilane Signal Multilane

SR 3 NB mainline

C B B B B1872 1749 1276

50.0 of 45.0 (30 mph posted) of

SR 304 EB Charleston SR 304 EB Farragut

45.0 (30 mph posted)average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted) average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted)


50.0 17.4 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted) 20.0 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted)

40.4 (40.0 design speed) Transition 50.0 (45 mph posted) average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted) average delay

50.0 (45 mph posted) 17.4 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted) 20.0 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted)50.0 (45 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted)

A

SR 304 WB SR 304 WB mainline Charleston SR 304 WB Farragut SR 304 WB mainline

D N/A A B A B

Multilane448 77 525 597 594

One lane SR 3 NB On Ramp Multilane Signal Multilane Signal

Year 2020 No Build AM (SR 3 SB & NB, SR 304 WB & EB)



Opening Year (2020) Build Traffic Operations

At the Loxie Eagans Boulevard and the SB SR 3 ramps intersection, the stop-controlled SB approach would be over capacity due to left turn delay, and the resulting queue is anticipated to extend back to the auxiliary lane on SB SR 3.

The duration of congestion on WB SR 304 would increase from 1 hour 45 minutes with existing conditions to 2 hours 30 minutes with the No Build Alternative, and congestion would extend beyond the limits of the study area, leaving approximately 175 unserved vehicles. Congestion on NB SR 3 and EB SR 304 in the PM peak would not change with the No Build Alternative compared to existing conditions. NB SR 3 between SR 16 and SR 304 would change from LOS E to LOS F in the AM peak (6:15 to 7:15 AM).

Since the roadway configuration for the build alternatives on NB SR 3 and EB SR 304 do not change compared to the No Build Alternative, the traffic operations focus on the PM peak alternatives that reduce the bottleneck along SB SR 3 where two lanes currently merge into one lane.

Note: The following alternatives are anticipated to experience congestion similar to the No Build alternative. This is due to the alternatives maintaining the merge condition from two lanes to one that is the source of PM peak congestion on SB SR 3.

• SB SR 3: Hard Shoulder Running: The merge location would be moved south, reducing the number of unserved vehicles compared to the No Build Alternative.

• Transportation Demand Management (TDM): the number of unserved vehicles would be reduced, because the traffic volumes will be 5% lower compared to the No Build Alternative.

Travel times on SB SR 3 with the Hard Shoulder Running and TDM alternatives are similar to the No Build alternative.

For the Construct or Restripe and the Add Third Lane preferred alternatives, the merge condition on

SB SR 3 would be eliminated, and congestion on SB SR 3 would be reduced.

The Construct or Restripe Two Lanes alternatives with no ramp meter is anticipated to result in some congestion at the SR 304 on-ramp merge area due to the high volume of vehicles on the ramp. Average travel times on SB SR 3 with the Construct or Restripe, and Add Third Lane alternatives are modeled at over two minutes, compared to almost 10 minutes with the No Build alternative.

With all build alternatives, the queue from the SB off-ramp to Loxie Eagans Boulevard is anticipated to extend into the auxiliary lane on the SB SR 3 mainline, similar to the No Build Alternative.




SB SBVolume

LOS11:00 AM 11:00 AM





LOSNB NB




Preliminary 2020 Build Restripe Scenario State Route 3 Mainline AM Annual Weekday Peak Hour LOS ResultsSR 3 and SR 304 Corridor StudyWSDOT Olympic Region Planning

2197 68 2265 770 1495Multilane Arterial Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On Basic




C C C B B B



55.0 49.5 49.5 49.5 55.0

42.5 (Posted 40 mph) 45.5 46.9 (Posted 50 mph) 47.0 55.0 49.2 55.042.5 (Posted 40 mph) 45.5 46.9 (Posted 50 mph) 47.0 55.0 44.6 44.6 44.6

47.3 47.3 47.3 55.0 50.7 55.0

SR 310 Off SR 3 NB mainlineSR 3 NB On SR 3 NB mainline SR 304 Off SR 3 NB mainline SR 304 NB On Too short for a mainline

55.0 50.7 55.0 49.2 55.043.5 43.5 43.5

3326 912 4238 1872 2366 77 2443

Loxie Eagans Off SR 3 NB mainline

Multilane Arterial Merge - On Basic Diverge - Off BasicE F F F C

Diverge - Off Basic

55.0

Merge - On Weaving Segment Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On BasicC C C C CC

663 1780 210 1990 160 18307% Grade (1900 feet weave)

Loxie Eagans On Too short for a mainline

Opening Year 2020 AM Build (SR 3 SB & NB, SR 304 WB & EB)

SR 3 to Farragut:

WB One lane WBVolume 448

LOS D6:15 AM 6:15 AM

to SR 304 WB to 7:15 AM 20.0 7:15 AMSpeed 45.0 SpeedSpeed Speed




LOSEB EB




Preliminary 2020 Build Restripe SR 304 Mainline AM Annual Weekday Peak Hour LOS ResultsSR 3 and SR 304 Corridor StudyWSDOT Olympic Region Planning

Multilane77 525 597 594

SR 3 NB On Ramp Multilane Signal Multilane Signal

A

SR 304 WB mainline Charleston SR 304 WB Farragut SR 304 WB mainline

N/A A B A B

17.4 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted) 20.0 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted)50.0 (45 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted)


50.0 17.4 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted) 20.0 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted)


of 45.0 (30 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted)average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted) average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted)

Charleston SR 304 EB Farragut SR 3 NB mainline

1749 1276C B B B B

Multilane448A

40.0

1872

SR 304 EB

50.0





Opening Year 2020 PM Build (SR 3 SB and SR 304 WB)



Opening Year (2020) Build Traffic Operations continued

On WB SR 304, the Add Third Lane Alternative would maintain two travel lanes to an add lane connection with SB SR 3. This would relocate the HOV merge location, the main source of congestion in the No Build Alternative, and substantially reduce congestion compared to the No Build alternatives. The GP and HOV travel times would improve compared to the No Build alternative due to the reduced congestion levels and the relocated HOV merge occurring at the add lane merge.

The Hard Shoulder Running and Construct or Restripe alternatives (no meter) would have similar congestion levels, congestion duration and unserved vehicles similar to the No Build Alternative with the WB SR 304 HOV merge relocated to 100 ft. west of the bridge.

With the Construct or Restripe alternative (with ramp meter), the duration of congestion would increase to 5 hours, and the number of unserved vehicles would increase to over 1,300 as the ramp meter restricts the number of vehicles able to pass through to well below the vehicle demand. The on-ramp meter was modeled to be activated for 5.5 hours for a worst case scenario.

Vehicle Hours of Delay and Throughput

Vehicle Hours of Delay provides a simple comparison across alternatives by summing the delay experienced by each driver in the network. In the opening year (2020), the Construct, or Restripe without a ramp meter and the Add Third Lane alternatives perform the best. The remaining alternatives perform similar to the No Build alternative. Vehicle throughput just south of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange is over 90 percent for all alternatives.

Intersection Operations

Opening year (2020), intersection LOS is anticipated to be better than a LOS D Urban threshold with the exceptions of the Loxie Eagans Boulevard/SB SR 3 off-ramp intersection. The stop-controlled SB SR 3 off-ramp worsens from LOS E to F, and is over

capacity during the PM peak hour. The resulting queue is anticipated to extend into the SR 3 mainline auxiliary lane. The Sam Christopherson intersection located at the end of the study area in Gorst is LOS E in 2020.

Detailed Synchro (Version 8) Intersection LOS results for 2013, 2020, and 2040 in the AM and PM peak hour are included in Appendix B.

LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections:

• LOS A is less than or equal to 10 seconds

• LOS B is greater than 10 seconds and equal to or less than 20 seconds

• LOS C is greater than 20 seconds and equal to or less than 35 seconds.

• LOS D is greater than 35 seconds and equal to or less than 55 seconds.

• LOS E is greater than 55 seconds and equal to or less than 80 seconds.

• LOS F is greater than 80 seconds.

LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections:

• LOS A is less than or equal to 10 seconds

• LOS B is greater than 10 seconds and equal to or less than 15 seconds

• LOS C is greater than 15 seconds and equal to or less than 25 seconds.

• LOS D is greater than 25 seconds and equal to or less than 35 seconds.

• LOS E is greater than 35 seconds and equal to or less than 50 seconds.

• LOS F is greater than 50 seconds.



See the following page for a summary of AM and PM peak hour level of service (LOS) results.

Signalized Intersections - LOS Summary AM Peak Hour

IntersectionWSDOT LOS Threshold Standard

No Build Synchro 2013 AM LOS

Intersection Report (Average Delay in

Seconds)

No Build Synchro 2020 AM LOS Intersection

Report (Average Delay in Seconds)

No Build Synchro2040 AM LOS Intersection Report (Average Delay in

Seconds)

Comments

SR 3/Sam Christopherson-SR 16 Spur D C (26.7) C (30.8) D (46.0)

6:45 AM to 7:45 AM Peak (Closely matches 6:15 to 7:15 AM and a prior 2010 AM Count). In year 2040 NET queue exceeds 1355 feet.

SR 304/Charleston D B (16.2) B (17.4) C (28.5)

Averaged a WSDOT 6:15 AM to 7:15 AM count and PSNS 6:00 AM to 7:00 AM count which included carrier(s) in port

SR 304/Farragut N/A B (17.4) B (20.0) C (31.2) 6:15 AM to 7:15 AM peakLoxie Eagans/Auto Center N/A C (21.3) B (19.5) C (24.1) 7:45 AM to 8:45 AM peak

SR 3/Loxie Eagans NB off and on terminal D A (9.4) A (9.9) B (14.9) 7:45 AM to 8:45 AM peak

Unsignalized Intersection - LOS Summary AM Peak Hour

IntersectionWSDOT LOS Threshold Standard

No Build HCM 2010 Report for Year

2013 AM LOS (Average Delay in

Seconds)

No Build HCM 2010 Report for

Year 2020 AM LOS (Average Delay in

Seconds)

No Build HCM 2010 Report for 2040 AM LOS (Average Delay

in Seconds)

Queue (in vehicles)

SR 3/ Loxie Eagans SB off and on terminal D F (465) F (739) F (3043)

38 vehicles in Year 2013 for SBL, 49 vehicles in Year 2020 for SBL, 76 vehicles in

Year 2040 for SBL

SR 3/304 Bremerton Interchange Improvement Project





Intersection Operations continued

PM peak hour Intersection Level of Service (LOS)



Design Year (2040) No Build Traffic Operations

The No Build Alternative is anticipated to experience congestion and queuing beyond the study limits where SB SR 3 merges from two lanes to one, and where WB SR 304 merges from two lanes to one. The assumed increase in traffic volumes for the future year (2040) would result in increased congestion compared to existing conditions and the opening year (2020).

On SB SR 3, the duration of congestion is anticipated to increase to 5 hours with the 2040 No Build alternative. Congestion would also extend beyond the study area, leaving over 4,500 unserved vehicles. It is likely that congestion would not reach such severe conditions, as people would divert or eliminate trips to avoid congestion. Note: This study assumed traffic volumes and traffic patterns to be the same across all alternatives. This allows for a conservative comparison that describes how well each of the alternatives performs with a given set of volumes.

At the Loxie Eagans Boulevard and SB SR 3 ramps intersection, the stop-controlled SB left turn approach would be over capacity, and the resulting queue would extend back to the auxiliary lane on SB SR 3, and impact the through travel lanes as drivers slow to enter the queue in the auxiliary lane (and shoulder).

The duration of congestion on WB SR 304 would also increase to 4 hours 45 minutes with the No Build alternative, and congestion would extend beyond the limits of the study area, leaving approximately 1,900 unserved vehicles. Congestion in the non-peak direction, on NB SR 3 and on EB SR 304, is not anticipated to change with the No Build Alternative compared to existing PM peak conditions. However, the level of service performance and congestion on NB SR 3 between SR 16 and SR 304 in the AM peak is anticipated to drop from LOS E in 2013 to LOS F in 2020 in the NB SR 3 on ramp merge influence, SR 3 basic freeway segment, and the EB SR 304 off ramp diverge influence area. There will be a need to address this congestion between 2020 and 2040. The following pages show Year 2040 No Build AM peak hour results.



Design Year (2040) Build Traffic Operations continued


SB SBVolume

LOS11:00 AM 11:00 AM





LOSNB NB





2793 87 2880 979 1901Multilane Arterial Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On Basic (Analyzed Using Directional Two-Way Facility Software)




C C D C F B



55.0 48.5 48.5 48.5 55.0

< 40.0 (Posted 40 mph) 30.1 18.5 (Posted 50 mph) 46.3 55.0< 40.0 (Posted 40 mph) 30.1 18.5 (Posted 50 mph) 46.3 55.0 42.0 42.0 42.0

46.5 46.5 46.555.0 50.3 55.0 49.2 55.0

40.4 40.4 40.4

49.2 55.055.0 50.3 55.0

Loxie Eagans Off SR 3 NB mainline Loxie Eagans On Too short for a mainline SR 310 Off SR 3 NB mainlineSR 3 NB On SR 3 NB mainline SR 304 Off SR 3 NB mainline SR 304 NB On Too short for a mainline

843 2263 267 2530 204 23267% Grade (1900 feet weave)

4229 1159 5388 2380 3008 98 3106

Multilane Arterial Merge - On Basic Diverge - Off BasicF F F F D

Diverge - Off BasicMerge - On Weaving Segment Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On BasicC C D C CD

SR 3 to Farragut:

WB WBVolume

LOS6:15 AM 6:15 AM





LOSEB EB






SR 3 NB mainline

D C C C B2380 2224 1623

50.0 (45 mph posted speed) of 45.0 (30 mph posted) of

SR 304 EB Charleston SR 304 EB Farragut

45.0 (30 mph posted)average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted) average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted)


50.0 (45 mph posted speed) 28.5 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted) 31.2 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted)


50.0 (45 mph posted) 28.5 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted) 31.2 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted)50.0 (45 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted)

A

SR 304 WB SR 304 WB mainline Charleston SR 304 WB Farragut SR 304 WB mainline

E N/A A C A C

Multilane569 98 667 759 756

One lane SR 3 NB On Ramp Multilane Signal Multilane Signal


Year 2040 No Build AM Peak (SB & NB SR 3 and WB & EB SR 304)

SR 3 to Farragut:

Year 2040 No Build AM Peak (SB & NB SR 3 and WB & EB SR 304)



Design Year 2040 Build Alternatives

With all build alternatives, the roadway configuration on NB SR 3 and EB SR 304 would not be modified compared to the No Build Alternative, and traffic operations in the PM peak would not change.

The following two alternatives are anticipated to experience congestion similar to the No Build Alternative since each alternative maintains the source of congestion which is the merge condition from two lanes to one lane along SB SR 3.

• SB SR 3 Hard Shoulder Running moves the merge location south, reducing the number of unserved vehicles compared to the No Build alternative.

• TDM alternative reduces the number of unserved vehicles because traffic volumes are assumed to be 10% lower in 2040 (Verses 5% lower in 2020).

The Construct or Restripe (with and without a ramp meter), and the Add Third Lane alternatives would eliminate the merge condition on SB SR 3, and reduce congestion on SB SR 3 compared to the No Build Alternative. The Construct or Restripe Two Lanes (both with and without a ramp meter) would result in congestion and queuing at the SR 304 on-ramp merge due to the high expected vehicle volume on the ramp. The average travel times on SB SR 3 SB with the Construct or Restripe, and Add Third Lane alternatives are anticipated to range from approximately 3 to 7 minutes, compared to over 14 minutes with the No Build alternative.

With all build alternatives, the queue from the SB off-ramp to Loxie Eagans Boulevard is anticipated to extended into the auxiliary lane on the SB SR 3 mainline similar to the No Build alternative.


SB SBVolume

LOS11:00 AM 11:00 AM





LOSNB NB




Preliminary 2040 Build Restripe Scenario State Route 3 Mainline AM Annual Weekday Peak Hour LOS ResultsSR 3 and SR 304 Corridor StudyWSDOT Olympic Region Planning

2793 87 2880 979 1901Multilane Arterial Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On Basic




C C D C C B



55.0 48.5 48.5 48.5 55.0

< 40.0 (Posted 40 mph) 30.1 18.5 (Posted 50 mph) 46.3 55.0 49.2 55.0< 40.0 (Posted 40 mph) 30.1 18.5 (Posted 50 mph) 46.3 55.0 42.0 42.0 42.0

46.5 46.5 46.5 55.0 50.3 55.0

SR 310 Off SR 3 NB mainlineSR 3 NB On SR 3 NB mainline SR 304 Off SR 3 NB mainline SR 304 NB On Too short for a mainline

55.0 50.3 55.0 49.2 55.040.4 40.4 40.4

4229 1159 5388 2380 3008 98 3106

Loxie Eagans Off SR 3 NB mainline

Multilane Arterial Merge - On Basic Diverge - Off BasicF F F F D

Diverge - Off Basic

55.0

Merge - On Weaving Segment Diverge - Off Basic Merge - On BasicC C D C CD

843 2263 267 2530 204 23267% Grade (1900 feet weave)

Loxie Eagans On Too short for a mainline

Year 2040 AM Build Restripe SB & NB SR 3 and WB & EB SR 304




SR 3 to Farragut:

WB One lane WBVolume 569

LOS E6:15 AM 6:15 AM

to SR 304 WB to 7:15 AM 20.0 7:15 AMSpeed 45.0 SpeedSpeed Speed




LOSEB EB




Preliminary 2040 Build Restripe SR 304 Mainline AM Annual Weekday Peak Hour LOS ResultsSR 3 and SR 304 Corridor StudyWSDOT Olympic Region Planning

Multilane98 667 759 756

SR 3 NB On Ramp Multilane Signal Multilane Signal

A

SR 304 WB mainline Charleston SR 304 WB Farragut SR 304 WB mainline

N/A A C A C

28.5 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted) 31.2 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted)50.0 (45 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted)


50.0 (45 mph posted speed) 28.5 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted) 31.2 seconds 45.0 (30 mph posted)


of 45.0 (30 mph posted) of 45.0 (30 mph posted)average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted) average delay 45.0 (30 mph posted)

Charleston SR 304 EB Farragut SR 3 NB mainline

2224 1623D C C C B

Multilane569A

40.0

2380

SR 304 EB

50.0 (45 mph posted speed)



Year 2040 PM Build Restripe SB & NB SR 3 and WB & EB SR 304




SR 304 Build Alternatives

On SR 304, the Add Third Lane alternative would maintain two travel lanes to the connection with SB SR 3. This would relocate the HOV merge which is the main source of congestion in the No Build alternative.

The Hard Shoulder Running and Construct or Restripe without a ramp meter have similar congestion levels, congestion duration, and unserved vehicles similar to the No Build alternative since the HOV merge location is extended to the beginning of the bridge. Since the ramp meter restricts throughput of GP lanes below the vehicle demand, the duration of congestion increases to 5 hours and the number of unserved vehicles increases to approximately 4,400.

Intersection LOS is anticipated to worsen compared to existing and opening year conditions at all study intersections. Vehicle hours of delay increases substantially compared to the opening year (2020) for all alternatives except for the Add Third Lane. Vehicle throughput just south of the SR 3/SR 304 interchange drops below 90 percent with all alternatives except the Add Third Lane alternative.

Collision Forecast Methodology

SR 3 mainline was analyzed using the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) freeway model Interchange Safety Analysis Tool enhanced (ISATe) excel software and SR 304 was analyzed with the HSM Urban and Suburban arterial excel software. To analyze short-term build and no build effects, the traffic volumes were assumed to not change over a 5 year forecast period. Predicted crashes along SR 3 mainline were compared for the No Build and Build alternatives. Predicted and expected crashes along SR 304 were compared for the No Build and Build alternatives. The 5-year historical crash record was from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2013.

Federal highway safety laws require the state to create this crash database for use in obtaining federal safety improvement funds.

Crash Data Disclaimer

“Under 23 U.S. Code § 409, safety data, reports, surveys, schedules, lists compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of potential crash sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway crossings are not subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”

The above disclaimer applies to the following pages where collisions/crashes are identified.

SR 3: Summary and Assumptions

The alternatives likely to impact the safety performance of SR 3 from SR 16 to SR 310 are:

• Transportation Demand Management (TDM)

• All Day Hard Shoulder Running (Restripe early merge into late merge on SR 3 SB and SR 304 WB lane reductions)

• Restripe or Widen to create WB SR 304 parallel on ramp merge and 2 lanes SB under the WB SR 304 bridge

• Add lane on SB SR 3 between SR 16 and SR 304



Collision Forecast Methodology continued

SR 3 was analyzed using the Highway Safety Manual freeway model Interchange Safety Analysis Tool enhanced (ISATe) software. It was divided into the following eight segments totaling 3.46 miles:

• Segment 1: SR 3/SR 16 Interchange to Sherman Heights Road/Railroad Bridge Vicinity (0.30 mile)

• Segment 2: Sherman Heights Road/Railroad Bridge to Sinclair Inlet Vicinity (0.65 mile)

• Segment 3: Sinclair Inlet Vicinity to Wright Creek Vicinity/WB SR 304 merge (0.64 mile)

• Segment 4: WB SR 304 Merge Vicinity (0.34 mile)

• Segment 5: SR 3/SR 304 Interchange Vicinity (0.29 mile)

• Segment 6: SR 3/SR 304 Interchange to Werner/Loxie Eagans Interchange (0.30 mile)

• Segment 7: Werner/Loxie Eagans Interchange Vicinity (0.58 mile)

• Segment 8: Werner/Loxie Eagans Interchange to SR 310 Interchange (0.36 mile)




Assumptions:

Reducing existing 2013 volumes by 10% and 5% and assuming traffic volume will not change over a 5 year analysis period, will simulate a ranged effect of the TDM alternative(s).

To analyze short-term build and no build effects, the build analyses was performed with a 10% and 5% reduction and no traffic growth over a 5-year period even though traffic may increase at a rate of 1.5% straight line. Subsequent discussions with public transportation mentioned obtaining a 10% TDM reduction is unrealistic.

The 5-year historical crash record (January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2013) had a total of 273 crashes which would average out to 54.6 crashes per year. There was a total of 119 multiple rear-ends and 70 sideswipe crashes on the 3.46 mile mainline.

The predicted crash results are summarized below in the table (more detailed report summaries are attached). The “Predicted Widen or Restripe Crashes” would be most similar to a “Predicted No Build” Scenario (4-lane verses existing 3-lane in Segment 5).

The build alternatives ranked in relative order by total predicted crashes are:

1. 10% TDM Alternative.

2. Add Lane Alternative(s).

3. 5% TDM Alternative.

4. Widen or Restripe Alternative (and Hard Shoulder Alternative)

Predicted and Observed Crashes for the TDM and Add Lane Alternatives Predicted 10%

TDM Crashes Predicted 5% TDM Crashes

Predicted Widen or Restripe Crashes

(Close to No Build)

Predicted Add Lane Crashes

5-Year Total Estimated Crashes

420.6 449.5 478.7 436.3

Estimated Average Crashes/Year 70.1 74.9 79.8 72.7

Estimated Multiple rear-ends 147.3 164.0 181.0 157.5

Estimated Multiple sideswipes 49.8 55.5 61.3 53.2




SR 304: Summary and Assumptions

The build alternative likely to impact the safety performance of the SR 304 Urban Arterial from SR 3 to Farragut intersection is the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) alternative. SR 304 was analyzed as a 4-lane divided urban arterial with no commercial access breaks using Highway Safety Manual (HSM) Urban and Suburban arterial software. In addition to five lanes for GP, SR 304 has one inside High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane WB. SR 304 is segmented into two parts with each having one signalized intersection. The first segment is from SR 3 to Charleston intersection with 45 mph posted speed (Milepost 0.00 to Milepost 0.75). The second segment is from Charleston to Farragut intersection with 30 mph posted speed (Milepost 0.75 to Milepost 1.25).

To analyze short-term and no build effects, the build analysis was performed with a 10% and 5% reduction and assumed no traffic growth over a 5-year period even though traffic may increase at a

rate of 1.5% straight line. The 5-year historical crash record (January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2013) averaged 25 crashes per year. The total average crashes per year results are summarized below in the table. Detailed report summaries are in Appendix C.

The TDM Alternative(s) would reduce crashes, but since SR 304 is already experiencing more crashes than predicted for similar type facilities the crash reduction would be low. Because the prior 5-year crash history and expected crashes over the next 5 years with zero traffic growth are greater than the predicted crashes (other similar facilities), the TDM alternatives will likely experience more crashes than predicted.

Below are charts showing time and number of collisions/crashes over a 5-year history, which are concentrated at Charleston Beach Rd (MP 0.73) and Farragut St (MP 1.15) in the PM peak.

Summary of total anticipated safety performance (average crashes per year) Predicted

10% TDM

Crashes per Year

Predicted 5% TDM Crashes per Year

Predicted No Build Crashes per Year

Expected No Build Crashes per Year

Potential for No Build Safety

Improvement

Actual 5-Yr Averaged Crashes per Year History

12.5 13.4 14.3 22.1 7.8 25.0



Collision Forecast Methodology

SR 304: Summary and Assumptions continued

Matrices The following matrices were used to demonstrate how each alternative would accomplish its stated objectives in the PM peak period.

• Vehicle Throughput

• Travel Time

• Vehicle Hours of Delay

• Duration of Congestion

• Unserved Vehicles

Vehicle Throughput Southbound SR 3 south of the SR 304 On-Ramp



Matrices continued

Travel Time

SR 3 Southbound – North of Loxie Eagans to south of SR 304



Matrices continued

Travel Time

SR 304 Westbound – North of Farragut to SR 3 south of SR 304



Matrices continued



Screening Results

The table above represents the Stakeholder’s Screening Results performed on August 6, 2014:

Conclusions

Constructing the preferred Restripe Alternative would meet the short-term (Year 2020) purpose and need to improve mobility by eliminating the bottleneck along SB SR 3 in the vicinity of the SR 3/SR 304 Interchange where two lanes merge into one. This Alternative is anticipated to be a least cost, practical design project with an estimated cost below $4 million ($3.77 million)

Constructing the ultimate solution Add Lane Alternative would meet the short-term needs (Opening Year 2020) and begin to address the long-term needs (Design Year 2040) for SB SR 3. However this alternative comes with an estimated cost of over $158 Million and is Unfunded. It also comes with a number of environmental mitigation and cost benefit issues that need to be addressed including the replacement of at least two fish barrier culverts, and the existing railroad bridge with mitigation that would require high cost railroad detours among other issues identified during the study.

Both the Restripe Alternative and the ultimate solution Add Lane Alternative would not meet LOS standards (LOS D Urban) for the AM peak hour on

NB SR 3 between Gorst and Bremerton (SR 16 to SR 304). NB SR 3 is forecast to fail prior to Year 2020 in the SR 3 on ramp merge segment, SR 3 Basic Freeway segment, and EB SR 304 off ramp diverge segment.

A subsequent study may consider the following additional alternatives for the long-term (Design Year 2040) AM and PM peak hour where WSDOT’s LOS D urban threshold target is exceeded:

• Additional NB lane on SR 3 between SR 16 and SR 304 to create a six-lane facility.

• Convert the inside SB lane on SR 3 between SR 16 and SR 304 into a reversible lane for NB traffic in AM and SB traffic in PM (Assumes five-lane facility).

• Intersection control (signal or roundabout) at Loxie Eagans/SR 3 SB ramps. A single point urban interchange may also be considered depending upon additional analysis.

• Intersection control (signal or roundabout) at SR 3/Sam Christopherson Intersection.

• SR 3 SB flyover to SR 304 EB which would reduce queuing at Loxie Eagans/SR 3 SB ramps. This interchange alternative was identified in the prior City of Bremerton’s Bremerton Ferry Terminal to the Vicinity of Gorst Final Environmental Impact Statement, dated May 1996.

• Sinclair Inlet Alternative.

Criteria Element Restripe 2 Lanes

Add Lane to Gorst

Construct 2 Lanes Ramp

Meter

Hard Shoulder Running

Mobility 3.6 5.0 2.9 1.0 Safety 3.4 5.0 3.4 3.0 Environmental 4.1 2.7 3.6 3.6 Constructability 4.0 1.1 2.4 4.6 Maintenance/Operations 4.3 4.1 2.7 1.0

Total Score 19.4 17.9 15.0 13.2


Chapter 4________________________________________

Access Connections and Design


Chapter #4 – Access Connections & Design

WILL THE PROPOSAL PROVIDE FULLY DIRECTIONAL INTERCHANGES CONNECTED TO PUBLIC STREETS OR ROADS, SPACED APPROPRAITELY, AND DESIGNED TO FULL DESIGN LEVEL GEOMETRIC CONTROL CRITERIA?

Both SB SR 3 and WB SR 304 are currently and will continue to be fully directional, connected to public roads, and designed to full WSDOT design standards. The proposed interchange modification, changing the existing add lane merge to a parallel on-ramp merge, will not affect the existing interchange spacing. With the planning level design completed to date, one deviation was identified. The SB SR 3 inside left shoulder could be reduced from 6 feet to 2 feet for approximately 0.38 mile from MP 36.37 to MP 36.75 for the following justifications:

• This deviation would provide an effective 9 to 10 foot shoulder (11-ft) from the outside fog stripe to the face of the retaining wall supporting SR 304 WB ramp for bicycle use.

• This deviation should increase the horizontal stopping sight distance at or near the existing retaining wall.

• This deviation would provide an 8-foot outside shoulder for the SR 304 SW “parallel on-ramp (Along the 900 foot parallel auxiliary lane and 600 foot 50:1 high speed taper).

• This inside 2-foot shoulder deviation from face of the jersey barrier to fog line is consistent or “matches” the downstream condition which already exists between Gorst and Bremerton.

• This deviation most closely matches the GIS shapefile map assumptions for the restripe alternative with an SR 304 parallel on ramp merge.

Note: The preliminary cross-section assumptions were taken from Contract 7288, the 2007/2008 “As-Built” paving plans, and the last paver which occurred in this vicinity. These “As-Built” plans do not match the existing bridge plans for the roadway sections at or near the

WB SR 304 retaining wing wall. Paving Plans for Contract 7288 show an existing 14 foot travel lane with a 16 foot shoulder rather than a 16 foot travel lane with a 16 foot shoulder like the bridge plans. Practical design options could include a narrower outside shoulder or travel lane widths instead of an inside SB SR 3 shoulder deviation.

SB SR 3 Restripe to 2 Lanes Alternative

Note: It appears that the SR 3/SR 304 interchange was built in a manner largely consistent with the intent of having two southbound traffic lanes. As a result, the implementation of the restripe alternative is expected to primarily be on existing pavement. However, the original (1989) design did not use a parallel on connection, so some minor widening may be necessary.

The proposed SB SR 3 Restripe to 2 Lanes alternative will provide two continuous lanes on SB SR 3 from the Loxie Eagans interchange to Gorst and the ramp from SR 304 will be reconfigured as a parallel on ramp connection that ends approximately 900’ south of the existing merge.

Conceptual Interchange Drawings

WSDOT staff measured the pavement width on SB SR 3 at MP 36.57 to verify the amount of paved surface available. Thirty-nine feet of paved surface was measured from face of barrier to face of barrier which corresponded with the figures depicted in the Contract 7288.

Five conceptual interchange drawings depict the roadway for the SB SR 3 Restripe to 2 Lanes alternative. For your reference, these drawings are shown on Pages PP4-5 - PP4-13. Section A-A and Section B-B roadway cross sections are displayed as inserts on Page PP4-9.

A-A Roadway Cross Section, SR 3 MP 36.63

Inside Shoulder: 6 foot

Travel Lane1: 12 foot

Travel Lane 2: 12 foot

Outside Shoulder: 8 foot


Chapter #4 – Access Connections & Design

Conceptual Interchange Drawings

SR 3: A-A Roadway Cross Section, MP 36.63 continued

In the A-A Roadway Cross Section, staff recommends reducing the inside shoulder width to 2 feet in order to maintain a consistent 10’ outside shoulder width in this area.

SR 304: B-B Roadway Cross Section, SR 304 MP 0.06

Inside Shoulder: 3 foot

Travel Lane1: 12 foot

Travel Lane 2: 12 foot

Outside Shoulder: 10 foot

.


6’


Chapter 5________________________________________

Land Use and Transportation Plans


Chapter #5 – Land Use & Transportation Plans

IS THE PROPOSED ACCESS POINT REVISION COMPATIBLE WITH ALL LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION PLANS FOR THE AREA?

The proposed Restripe to 2 Lanes SB SR 3 Interchange Improvements project is consistent with the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County area land use plans. The traffic forecasts used to analyze these improvements as discussed in Chapter 3 were based on the adopted land use plans. Kitsap County and the City of Bremerton developed the land use data from these plans there were used to calibrate the regional travel model and to forecast future travel volumes.

The Kitsap Peninsula is primarily served by state routes (SR) 3, 16, and 104. The Kitsap Peninsula, which encompasses all of Kitsap County except Bainbridge and Blake Islands, as well at the northeastern part of Mason County is surrounded by the waterbodies of the Puget Sound to the east and Hood Canal to the west. Much of the Kitsap Peninsula’s terrain is flat. The Kitsap Peninsula is dependent upon ferry service from the Seattle region. The Kitsap Peninsula is also heavily dependent upon the Tacoma Narrows Bridge for access to the region.

Kitsap County occupies a land area of 394.94 square miles with a population density of 643.14 per square mile, making it the third most densely populated county in Washington. The county is virtually an island, only a five-mile strip of land between the Hood Canal and Case Inlet keep it from being such. The relative isolation from the most densely populated areas on the eastern shore of Puget Sound has contributed to the perception of Kitsap as a predominately rural place. While this was true at one time, much of the county today is characterized by suburban and urban development.

Much of the county’s urban growth developed because of jobs created by Navy facilities such as the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Manchester Fuel Deport, Keyport and Bangor Naval Base. The siting of the Submarine Base at Bangor in the mid-1970s and then later the regional shopping center in early 1980s helped Silverdale become the county’s center for commercial and business activity. A significant portion of the country’s land mass has been designated rural, the county’s comprehensive plan identified that approximately 34% of the

unincorporated acreage is designated as either rural protection or rural residential. The next largest land use category in the county is forest which constitutes 22% of the land mass, much of which is located in the western portions of the county.

City or urban land uses make up over 21.9% of the county. This urban designation includes incorporated cities and urban growth areas including urban reserve, industrial urban reserve, and urban restricted lands. Recent annexation of the South Kitsap Industrial area into the City of Bremerton has increased the amount of land designation as urban. Military lands account for approximately 3.4% of the county and is a major employer for county residents. Tribal lands constitute 1.7% of the county. Parks lands, public facilities, and open space make up 2.2% of the county land and mineral resource land, and mineral resource lands make up 1.2% of the county.

Featured on the next page, is a graphic map depicting the different land uses within Kitsap County.



The proposed Restripe to 2 Lanes SB SR 3 Interchange Improvements project is consistent with state, regional, county and local plans. A description of each plan follows:

WSDOT’s 2007-2026 Highway System Plan (HSP) The Washington State Highway System Plan (HSP) is the state highway component of the Washington State Multi- modal Transportation Plan (SMTP). The SMTP is the state’s overall transportation plan that will include an analysis of facilities the state owns and those in which the state has an interest. WSDOT’s HSP

serves as the basis for the six-year highway program and the two-year biennial budget request to the State Legislature and is updated every two years. .

The HSP is the element of the Washington Transportation Plan (WTP) that addresses current and forecasted state highway needs based on the investment options identified in the WTP. The WTP, identifies the SR 3/SR 304 intersection as both a bottleneck and chokepoint location.

Bottlenecks are places where the physical attributes of a roadway change in a manner that impacts the flow of traffic. Typical bottlenecks are locations where the number of lanes decrease.

Chokepoints are places where congestion occurs because of traffic interference and/or the roadway configuration (highway interchanges).

WSDOT is dedicated to delivering a HSP that implements the Legislature’s goals. This is accomplished through the coordination and integration of specific components from many statewide modal and program plans. The HSP is also aligned to the WTP which outlines the policies adopted by the Washington State Transportation Commission.

WSDOT’s goal is to create a long-range plan that provides decision-makers with the most cost-effective strategies.

The spreadsheet below depicts the HSP solutions identified for the SR 3/SR 304 interchange.

Title Description Strategy Need ID Key/ Page

Year

SR 3/SR 304 interchange Widening and ramp meter WB S 304 onto SR 3 and extend on-ramp to SB SR 3.

Widen SB SR 3 under bridge; Ramp meter WB SR 304 onto SR 3; and extend on-ramp to SB SR 3.

Add Capacity Strategically

The SB lanes narrow from two to one lane under a bridge structure. This lane reduction causes large back-ups.

Key162/

J-75 2011

SR 3/SR 304 interchange Reconstruct interchange

Reconstruct the SR 3/SR 304 interchange. Add Capacity

Strategically

Exceeds maximum throughput in 2005

Key 344/

J-77 2011

SR 3/SR 16 to SR 304 HOV Lanes

Widen from 4 to 6-lanes divid facility between the SR 3/SR interchange and SR 3/SR 304 interchange.

Add Capacity Strategically

Exceeds maximum throughput in 2011

Key 343/

J-77 2030

SR 3/SR 16 Spur to SR 304

ITS

Intelligent Transportation Systems Master Plan Improvements

Operate Efficiently

Mobility Deficiency; Bottleneck and Chokepoint; High traffic volume causes congestion

Key 54/

K-16 2030

2007-2026 Highway System Plan Solutions



1996 SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Ferry Terminal to Vicinity Gorst FEIS

The City of Bremerton, in cooperation with WSDOT, FHWA, U.S. Navy, Kitsap County, Kitsap Transit, and the Transportation Improve-ment Board (TIB) are working to implement roadway improvements

to SR 3, SR 304, and some Bremerton city streets.

The project termini is on SR 3 just north of the SR 3/ SR 16 interchange near the railroad crossing in the vicinity of Gorst and the Bremerton Ferry terminal. The improvements proposed include road widening, high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, interchange improvements, access control measures, frontage road improvements, new intersections, signalization and signage improvements, roadway surface improvements, and a one-way couplet system. The proposed road widening includes expanding SR 3, currently four lanes, to eight lanes and expanding a portion of SR 304 from five lanes to six lanes.

The proposed improvements would provide a higher level of service along this route, alleviate congestion, improve safety, and improve access between the regional highway system and downtown Bremerton. In conjunction with the road improvement project, Kitsap Transit is scheduling expansion of its base facility that is located on the project route. The proposed street improvements are coordinated with the street modifications necessary for the base facility’s expansion. Based on review of the DEIS, public hearing and comments received, the Federal Transit Administration has issued a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) categorical exclusion (CE). All alternatives require implementation of Transportation Demand Management and Transportation Systems Management techniques.

Note: This project was shelved in December 1999 due to the passage of Initiative 695 that provided tax relief to citizens by removing the vehicle licensing excise tax. Forty-seven percent of the license-tab money had gone to state transportation projects.

1999 Value Engineering (VE) Study for SR 3 Gorst Railroad Bridge to SR 3/304 Interchange

The purpose of this rural mobility project is to reduce congestion and increase safety on SR 3 between Gorst and Bremerton. The project will increase the capacity of SR 3 by adding HOV lanes from the railroad

bridge tin Gorst to the SR 3/SR 304 interchange. Within the corridor, SR 3 parallels Sinclair Inlet and railroad tracks to one side and high rock bluffs to the other. Currently, the two northbound and two southbound lanes of SR 3 share a common alignment separated by 1.2 m shoulders and median barrier.

The project will widen from the current 4 lanes to 6 lanes of an ultimate 8 lane facility. All additional lanes are to be HOV lanes with 2 HOV lanes and 2 general purpose lanes in each direction.

The widening will be provided by building a new SB roadway paralleling the northbound roadway. The SB roadway will typically be at a higher elevation excavated into the rock bluffs. The existing roadway will be restriped to include only NB traffic, with a HOV lane. A Value Engineering team was assembled to develop and evaluate alternatives for the alignment and land configuration of the SB elements at the SR 3/SR 304 interchange to address the HOV connections. The Value Engineering Team developed the following recommendations recommendation:

To provide for 2 general purpose lanes for SB SR 3 below the existing SR 304 bridge. There will be no provision for HOV traffic approaching the SR 304 bridge from the north. The SB HOV lane will begin from WB SR 304 and continue south on SR 3 in its own dedicated lane. The existing SR 304 bridge will carry one GP lane on the inside and one HOV traffic in the outside lane. The GP lane on SR 304 will merge with the right hand GP lane for SB SR 3, which will still allow for one uninterrupted SB SR 3 lane. Note: At some future date, another HOV lane will be added both northbound and southbound on SR 3.



2004 City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan’s Transportation Element

Bremerton has a rich history of unique transportation options and patterns from the small “mosquito” ferries to a strong grid road system.

The City of Bremerton’s Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element emphasizes the need to

consider pedestrians and bicycles in transportation planning, especially in the creation and linking of walkable centers with appealing streetscapes. While setting standards on heavily used arterials to enable traffic mobility, the Element also works to protect and integrate the adjacent neighborhood character and safety.

A well-coordinated transportation system will enhance the quality of life in Bremerton, while reducing urban sprawl and other undesirable development patterns. A fundamental tool in these efforts, the Level of Service (LOS) standards established in this Element, provide the means to evaluate and measure the impact of future development in the community.

Bremerton’s Transportation Element identifies a series of improvements to SR 304 from SR 3 to the Bremerton Transportation Center in downtown Bremerton. SR 3 is the sole north-south freeway in Central Kitsap County. The four-lane limited access facility accommodates both regional and more localized travel between surrounding communities in Kitsap County. SR 304 is a three to four-lane principal arterial that is partially divided. The SR 304 alignment extends northeast from the SR 3/SR 304 interchange continuing on as the Navy Yard Highway to Charleston Boulevard, along Callow Avenue to Burwell Street and east on Burwell Street to downtown Bremerton.

2012 Kitsap County Final Comprehen-sive Plan

Kitsap County has reached a key point in its growth and development where many residents, business people and government officials see an opportunity to provide direction and a vision for the future growth of Kitsap County. Despite rapid

growth in the past two decades, Kitsap County remains an attractive place to live and work. Kitsap County absorbed an 87% increase in population between 1970 and 1990, more than twice the state’s growth rate of 42.6%. Between 1990 and 2000, Kitsap County increased in size by 22%. And the population continues to grow. Kitsap County represents the third most densely populated county in Washington due to its small geographic size and proximity to the state’s largest employment centers.

The vision for transportation in the future is an efficient, flexible, and coordinated multi-modal transportation system including roads, bridges and highways, ferries, transit, and non-motorized travel---that provides interconnectivity and mobility for county residents and supports out urban and rural land use pattern.

The comprehensive plan’s Transportation chapter provides the policy framework to guide short-range and long-range development and maintenance of the multi-modal transportation system that includes roadways, bikeways, pedestrian facilities, ferries, buses, rail, air travel, freight movement and demand strategies. The Kitsap County’s level of service (LOS) standards were coordinated with other jurisdictions and the two regional planning agencies. LOS standards on state facilities are consistent with those set by WSDOT. In addition to coordinating its LOS with PSRC, Kitsap County coordinates with PSRC in the identification of centers where additional transportation investments should be targeted.



2012 Bremerton Economic Development Study

The Bremerton Economic Development Study (BEDS) is a planning study focused within the South Kitsap/North Mason County area. The study corridors are comprised of the following three principal highways and has a total length of approximately 47.1 miles:

• US 101 • SR 3 • SR 16

These highways provide regional access for Mason and Kitsap Counties and are the primary commercial, freight, military and recreational travel routes within and through these counties. The highways are part of the federal National Highway System and classified as part of of the Washington State’s Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) system.

The Gorst Area Improvements:

Heavy peak period travel through the Gorst area from SR 304, SR 3 and SR 16 has created a traffic congestion issue that cannot be easily improved with a single project.

Stakeholders identified the following Gorst area Improvements as their top priorities:

• To meet existing demand, provide intersection improvements at SR 3/Sam Christopherson Road including grade separation.

• To meet 2020 demand, provide expanded Intersection improvements at SR 3/ Sam Christopherson Road.

• Widen SR 3 to eliminate lane drop on SR 16 to northbound SR 3 by extending the lane north of the railroad bridge, rebuild the bridge, and extend the northbound SR 3 lane.

• Widen SR 3 to 6 lanes from Gorst to SR 304 to add HOV & rebuild SR 3/SR 304 interchange.

2011 Scoping Estimate SR 3/SR 304 I/C Improvements

The scope of the proposal was to eliminate the existing lane reduction on SB SR 3 between Loxie Eagans interchange and the SR 304 interchange. The ramp from SR 304 to sB SR 3 would be configured to a parallel on-ramp connection. The 1989 plans for construction of this interchange show two continuous lanes on SB SR 3 with a standard ramp merge from SR 304. So, it appears the interchange was built in a manner largely consistent with the intent of this scoping proposal. As a result, the configuration in this scoping proposal is expected to primarily be on existing pavement. However, the original design didn’t use a parallel on connection, so some minor widening may be necessary to provide that.

Proposed revisions to the SR 3/SR 304 interchange include:

• The elimination of the lane reduction on SB SR 3 between Loxie Eagans and SR 304.

• This reconfiguration will provide two continuous lanes on SB SR 3 from Loxie Eagans interchange to Gorst and have the ramp from SR 304 reconfigured as a parallel on ramp connection that ends approximately 900’ south of the existing merge.

• This alternative features 12’ lanes on SR 3 and a 15’ lane for the SR 304 ramp. (On SR 304 12’ lanes may be allowed if needed for ROW).

• Continuing the second SB lane on SR 3 was originally thought to result in a sub-standard sight distance beneath the bridge carrying the SR 304 ramp.

• Traffic modeling is recommended.



2015-2020 Kitsap Transit’s Transit Development Plan

Kitsap Transit provides fixed route service, ADA-accessible door- to-door service, Worker/Driver service, vanpool service, general public dial-a- ride service, and foot ferry service for parts of Kitsap County. The

headways for routes that operated all day were usually one hour. During commute hours, many of these all-day routes were also scheduled to meet Washington State Ferries (WSF) at the Bainbridge Island, Bremerton and Southworth terminals. Weekday service hours were from 4:00 AM to 8:30 PM. On Saturdays, 19 routes were operated on one-hour headways between 10 AM and 5:30 PM.

Employees of the Department of Defense who commute to work by bus, ferry (walk-ons or passengers in an eligible vanpool on either KTFF or WSF), or vanpool are eligible to register in the Transportation Incentive Program. Under this program, registered employees can receive a financial incentive, up to $130 per month for their actual commuting costs. Kitsap Transit also provides Worker/Driver Buses. Most worker driver bus fares ($2 one-way) are paid by the Navy via TIP. Kitsap Transit facilitates the following commute trip reduction services: All but two of the W/D buses and many vanpool vans served Puget Sound Naval Shipyard/Naval Base Kitsap. Other vanpools serve Naval Base Bangor along with two W/D buses. Kitsap Transit operated Routed and/or W/D service to 24 park & ride lots throughout Kitsap County in 2014..

• 13 Worker/Driver buses from Gorst to PSNS • 1 Worker/Driver bus from Gorst to Bangor • 15 Vanpools to the Bangor Submarine Base • 3 Vanpools to Keyport

• 5 Vanpools to PSNS

2013 Gorst Subarea Plan

The Gorst Subarea Plan is a comprehensive 20-year plan that establishes the general patterns for future land use, transportation and other infrastructure needs in Gorst. The purpose of this plan is to provide greater detail, guidance and

predictability to future development within the Gorst UGA, while also protecting the environment.

The Subarea Plan is intended only to address the future vision and development regulations for the Gorst UGA which is approximately 335 acres in size. The Gorst community is located on Sinclair Inlet between Bremerton and Port Orchard. Two highways converge in Gorst, SR 3 and SR 16. A railroad also traverses the area and connects the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard with the Bangor submarine facility and the Port of Shelton. Through Gorst, county residents, commuters, and military personnel travel to major job centers in the County including Downtown Bremerton and the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton National Airport and associated South Kitsap Industrial Area, and others. From the north at Navy Yard City, SR 3 carries 44,000 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT), increasing to 73,000 AADT north of Gorst, and continuing on SR 16 to Port Orchard with 43,000 AADT (WSDOT 2012).

In addition to being strategically located between major population and job centers in Kitsap County, the Gorst area contains regionally significant environmental resources. The approximately 6,570-acre Gorst Creek Watershed is diverse with thousands of acres of intact forest land, miles of streams and acres of wetlands. Much of the forested area that comprises the north and central portion of the Gorst Creek Watershed is publically owned, and lies within a contiguous area that also contains Green Mountain and Tahuya State Forest. Taken together, this area comprises the largest open-space block in the Puget Trough Ecoregion of the Puget Sound Basin.



Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization

The proposed Restripe to 2 Lanes southbound SR 3 Interchange Improvements project is consistent with the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning

Organization’s (PRTPO) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) 2030 which was being finalized at the time of this study.

The Regional Transportation Plan depicts national, state and county issues and challenges that will shape the PRTPO’s thinking and planning in the years to come. The legislative environment at the state and national level does not offer a clear direction for regional planning at present. Selectively maintaining facilities, rather than undertaking new construction, is not popular with the governing bodies.

Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC):

PSRC’s Transportation 2040 is an action plan for transportation in the central Puget Sound region for the next three decades. Every four years, the region updates the plan to reflect changing conditions and to meet state and federal requirements.

The proposed Restripe to 2 Lanes SB SR 3 Interchange Improvements project is included in Attachment A – 2015 Transportation 2040 Minor Amendment Proposed Project Revisions Doc ID 1389 dated June 18, 2015.


Chapter 6________________________________________

Future Interchanges


Chapter #6 Future Interchanges

IS THE PROPOSED ACCESS POINT REVISION COMPATIBLE WITH A COMPREHENSIVE NETWORK PLAN?

There is no comprehensive network plan for this section of SR 3 and there are no new interchanges proposed within five miles of the proposed interchange improvements at the SR 3/SR 304 interchange in Bremerton.

The SR 3/SR 304 interchange improvements are consistent with other proposed non-interstate improvements as identified in WSDOT’s 2007-2026 Highway System Plan.

Another study in the area that is just getting underway is the SR 3/SR 16 Gorst (Bremerton) Feasibility Study. Kitsap County received a Surface Transportation Program grant in the amount of $346,000. The STP funds were matched with $54,000 in local funds from WSDOT, Kitsap County, City of Bremerton, Port of Bremerton, Kitsap Transit and the City of Port Orchard. It is anticipated that this study will use the same travel demand model for traffic forecasting as the SR 3/SR 304 study analyses.

WSDOT will study the feasibility of alternatives for the corridor between Gorst and Bremerton. Alternatives may include the following:

• The replacement of the Navy railroad bridge;

• Roadway alignment alternatives including six lanes, eight lanes, reversible lane and roadway changes to Sherman Heights Road,

• Environmental considerations such as shoreline mitigation, rising water from climate change, and salmon streams;

• Right of way acquisitions;

• TDM/TSM considerations;

• Non-motorized issues; and

• Transit considerations such as HOV lanes, worker-driver buses, transit stops, and park & ride lots.

WSDOT has identified various interstate improvements near the SR 3/SR 304 interchange in Bremerton in their current Highway System Plan 2007-2026, completed in December 2007.

The Highway System Plan (HSP) organizes projects into three tiers and also identifies solutions that require further analysis. These levels are as follows:

• Tier I – Features low cost solutions; High return on investment; Short delivery schedules; System-wide implementation; Typical Minimum Fix.

• Tier II – Features moderate to Higher cost solutions; Potential network benefits; Typical Moderate Fix.

• Tier III – Features Higher cost solutions; Corridor-wide benefits; Typical Maximum Fix

Study area projects featured in the HSP:

TIER I: STUDY • Add Intelligent Transportation System

Master Plan Improvements from SR 3/ SR 16 Spur to SR 304.

TIER II • No Tier II solutions were identified.

TIER III • BOTTLENECKS & CHOKEPOINTS

• SR 3 and SR 16 • SR 3 and SR 304

• Widen SB SR 3 under the bridge; Ramp meter WB SR 304 onto SR 3; and extend on-ramp to SB SR 3.

• Reconstruct the SR 3/SR 304 interchange.

• Add HOV lanes by widening the roadway from 4 to 6-lanes divided facility between the SR 3/SR 16 interchange and the SR 3/SR 304 interchange.

The revision of the access point of the SR 3/ SR 304 interchange is compatible with the comprehensive transportation network in the region.


Chapter 7________________________________________

Coordination


Chapter #7 Coordination

ARE ALL COORDINATING PROJECTS AND ACTIONS PROGRAMMED AND FUNDED?

The proposed SR 3/SR 304 interchange improvements are being considered in conjunction with other programmed local projects to improve traffic flow throughout the project area.

The analysis completed for this study was consistent with planned land use proposed by the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County and documented in the City of Bremerton’s and Kitsap County’s Comprehensive Plans and the Puget Sound Regional Council’s Transportation 2040.

Initially no assumptions regarding coordination were considered beyond the funds appropriated by the legislature for initial development of the project, however, current transportation revenue legislation proposed the following additional funds for this project.

Funding for the SR 3 Restriping is recorded in the 2015 Supplemental Transportation Budget as identified as part of the LEAP Transportation Document 2015 NL-1 dated June 28, 2015. A total allocation of $4.2 million ($1.3 million in the 2015-17 biennium and $2.9 million in the 2017-19 biennium.) was allocated.

As depicted in the graphic on the right, the SR 3 Restripe alternative restripes the existing roadway to create two lanes on SR 3 SB in the area where two lanes currently merge into one. This alternative also adds an HOV lane to the SR 304 on-ramp ending 100 feet after the bridge. The current SR 304 WB add lane on-ramp merge to SR 3 SB would be

reconfigured into a parallel on-ramp merge. The second SR 3 SB lane would be a permanent fix that is available around the clock. This alternative was identified as the low cost and short term solution.

The legislature also passed a new law budget that includes a SR 16/Corridor congestion Study between SR 3 and the Tacoma Narrows Bridge for $3 million in the 2015-2017 biennium.


Chapter 8________________________________________

Environmental Processes


Chapter #8 Environmental Processes

WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE PROPOSAL’S ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESSES?

This chapter highlights the required environmental process for the improvements described by this study.

The feasibility study is intended to result in a “finding of engineering and operational acceptability.” A formal environmental process will occur following the study during the preliminary engineering process.

A preliminary screening of potential environmental impacts of improvements at the SR 3/SR 304 interchange was completed as part of the SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements study.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

NOTE: The following environmental information was based on the 1996 Bremerton Ferry Terminal to the Vicinity of Gorst Final EIS.

Wetlands

In December 1992, Parametrix surveyed and flagged wetlands in the project area as part of the SR 3 Gorst Railroad Bridge to SR 304 project. The study area encompasses 9 jurisdictional wetland areas, including the shoreline of Sinclair Inlet (reference the Fish Passages & Wetland graphic on the next page).

Four of these wetlands (1, 4, 7 and 8) are estuarine intertidal wetlands associated with Sinclair Inlet. The remaining wetlands are palustrine wetlands. Note: Palustrine systems are defined as “all non-tidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergent, emergent mosses or lichens, and all such wetlands that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to ocean-derived salts is below 5%.

Wright Creek, the only perennial creek in the project area that drains into Sinclair Inlet, has its headwaters in a wetland. From this wetland the creek flows through a clear-cut forest, a heavily

wooded area, and a steep raving. The upper segment of the creek is within the City of Bremerton’s water supply watershed. There are a few homes located near the mouth of the creek where it becomes a small tidal estuary and flows into Sinclair Inlet and is associated with Wetland 7.

The Ecology rating system uses specific criteria to classify individual wetlands in four categories, ranging from highest value Category I wetlands to lowest value Category IV wetlands. The rating is based on wetland functions and values, sensitivity to disturbance, rarity, and the ability to replace a particular wetland type. This rating system also recommends creating or preserving buffer zones to protect wetlands from adjacent development, and providing replacement rations for compensatory mitigation.

Project Area Wetland Ratings

Category I The entire shoreline of Sinclair Inlet Category II 3 wetlands (1, 7, 8) Category III 5 wetlands (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) Category IV 0 wetlands

Cultural Resource Site

One cultural resource site was identified between Sherman Heights Road and Gorst (Reference the Fish Passages & Wetlands graphic on the next page). A shell midden is a heap of clam, oyster, whelk, or mussel shells created by and large for a single purpose such as dinner.

Mitigated Unstable Slopes

Along SB SR 3 just south of Sherman Heights road are two mitigated unstable slopes. This type of basalt rock is featured throughout the study area. As part of the mitigation process, WSDOT removed the loose basalt rocks from the cliffs, secured the remaining rocks to the bank with dowels and installed a protective wire mesh to prevent rocks from falling onto SR 3.


Fish Passages & Wetlands

A Cultural Resource site was identified between Sherman Heights Rd. and Gorst


Chapter 8: Environmental Processes

Stormwater

All projects in this corridor will provide adequate stormwater treatment as outlined in WSDOT’s Highway Runoff Manual to achieve compliance with federal and state water quality regulations.

Endangered Species

Sensitive fish and wildlife information from the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife indicates that there is a Purple martin bird habitat near Wright Creek. Purple martin is the largest North American swallow. They are well known for their aerial acrobats, have speed and agility in flight, and dive with their wings tucked when approaching their housing.

Fish Passages

Current WSDOT policy states that the fish passage will be replaced in the next 20 years based on the following criteria:

• The fish passage is an identified barrier on the Federal Court injunction.

• If the roadway improvement will change the roadway prism.

Two fish barriers within the project area meet this criterion, one is located within the SR 3/SR 304 interchange (Site ID 991995) and the other is located at Wright Creek (Site ID 991994).

Fish Passage Site ID 991995

The fish barrier (Site ID 991995) located within the SR 3/SR 304 interchange at MP 36.53 is a 4’ x 4’ concrete box 172’ culvert with a large manhole cover at the inlet end. At least three round storm water pipes enter the manhole, the largest being 54”. The outlet of the box culvert is tidally influenced and as a result is submerged almost daily. In 1999, Parametrix, Inc. consulted with Echelon Engineering, Inc. to perform an inspection and provide a report (Inspection Report for SR 3/SR 304 interchange 4x4 Box Culvert July 1999).

The conclusion of the report is the overall condition of the box culvert was found to be good and the concrete is sound.

The recommendation based on the information available, states that this culvert is sound and therefore, could be extended. However, routing

traffic over areas that have not been subjected to traffic loading would require subgrade and pavement analysis.

Fish Passage Site ID 991994

NOTE: The Unnamed Tributary to the Sinclair Inlet fish passage at Wright Creek is a “newly identified barrier” meaning it was discovered after the initial list of known barriers was generated as required by the Federal Court injunction. The Federal Court injunction requires newly discovered barriers to be corrected within the next 30 years.

The fish barrier located near Wright Creek at MP 36.07 is an 8’ x 8’ concrete box 230’ open ended culvert. Wright Creek Estuary flows via Wright Creek through the culvert and outfalls to Sinclair Inlet. The outlet of the culvert is tidally influenced and as a result is submerged almost daily. In 1999 as part of the hydraulic report (Hydraulic Report for the SR-3 Railroad Bridge to SR-304 Interchange dated December 1999), Parametrix, Inc. inspected the culvert for structural integrity and determined the culvert should be replaced with a bridge. Wright Creek is a Salmon-bearing (Chum salmon and resident cutthroat) stream and at this time the existing culvert is a non-barrier to fish. However, the culvert is on the major drainage list.

The recommendation based on the information available, states that because of the possible lack of structural integrity, extending this culvert is not recommended. Routing traffic over areas of the culvert that have not been subjected to traffic loading should have further structural analysis.

Note: The Restripe alternative will not replace these fish passage barriers since it does not change the roadway prism (no changes to imperious surface). The fish passage barriers will be replaced at a later date.

Right of Way Impacts

Since a level of design wasn’t developed, GIS software was used to determine potential impacts to surrounding land parcels. Using GIS the alternative’s alignment was overlaid onto the parcel map to determine the number of parcels impacted. No parcels are impacted with the Restripe to 2 Lanes SB SR 3 alternative. However with the Add 3rd Lane from SR 304 Ramp to Gorst, 40 parcel are potentially impacted.


Chapter #8 Environmental Processes

Interchange Soil Conditions

Soils along the interchange alignment consist of fill which is loose to dense silty, gravelly sand, overlying hard clays and silts of the Whidbey Formation. Medium dense alluvial soils were encountered between the fill and the underlying hard clays and silts.

Liquefaction Potential

The loose sandy tidal deposits and alluvial soils along the project alignment have relatively moderate to high liquefaction potential. Liquefaction potential was assessed for appropriate segments of project using the Seed and Idriss approach. Lateral spreading is anticipated at the Gorst Railroad Bridge and Wrights Creek culvert under design earthquake conditions. Liquefaction induced settlement will result in downdrag loads on some foundation elements for structures at these locations.

Land Use/Recreation:

No recreational opportunities will be impacted by the proposed alternative. There may be some land converted for use as a roadway for the Add 3rd Lane from SR 304 on-ramp to Gorst long-term solution. However, land uses in the area will remain as currently designated.

Environmental Process

Both NEPA and SEPA documentation will be prepared during the preliminary engineering and design process. For the NEPA documentation, it is assumed that the Restripe 2 Lanes SB SR 3 improvement will be classified as a Documented Categorical Exclusion (DCE).

For SEPA documentation, it is anticipated that the Restripe 2 Lanes SB SR 3 improvement will receive a Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance.

The NEPA Environmental Classification Summary and the SEPA Checklist will be supported by the following discipline reports:

• Wetlands and Streams • Biological Assessment • Cultural and Historic Resources • Air Quality • Noise • Hazardous Materials • Stormwater • Geotechnical

Public Involvement

As part of the SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements study, a webpage was created to communicate the latest developments as the study progressed. An open house was also hosted by WSDOT. The open house was held at the Kitsap Conference Center in Bremerton from 4-7 PM on October 30, 2014.

Open House participants viewed the improvement options being explored to improve the congestion along southbound SR 3 where two lanes merge into one. Participants were also asked to record their improvement option preference.

Eighty-eight comments were received in person and online.

• 3 members of the public preferred the Hard Shoulder Running improvement;

• 55 members of the public preferred the Restripe 2 Lanes Southbound SR 3 improvement.

• 5 members of the public preferred the Construct 2 Lanes Southbound SR 3 improvement.

• 25 members of the public preferred the Add 3rd Lane Southbound SR 3 from the SR 3/SR 304 on-ramp to Gorst improvement.

The study stakeholders recommended two solutions. The Restripe 2 Lanes SB SR 3 improvement would address the immediate congestion situation providing up to 25 years of efficient highway operation on SB SR 3. However, this improvement would provide less than 5 years of efficient highway operation on WB SR 304.

The ultimate solution is the Add 3rd Lane alternative which adds a 3rd lane SB SR 3 from the SR 304 on-ramp to Gorst. This improvement is the ultimate solution for long term. However, it is a major investment, has the largest environmental impact and has the least amount of impact to SR 304. It would also need to address the need for a 3rd lane NB between SR 16 and SR 304 for AM peak congestion (or reversible lane option).

sr 3/sr 304 bremerton interchange improvements

Documents