(1) GMA Goals.

(2) Definition. The transportation system is composed of air, water, and land transportation facilities and services, including highways and streets, paths, trails and sidewalks, transit, airports, and ports.

(3) Circulation System. The transportation and circulation system should function to serve the land use patterns established by the Comprehensive Plan. For example, rural areas should be served by a transportation system designed for rural uses while urban areas should be served by a circulation system designed to serve urban uses. The transportation system should also focus on connections, either between urban centers such as from Forks to Port Angeles, or from Clallam Bay to Forks, or between different “modes” of travel, such as automobiles to public transit. Some parts of the circulation system in this area serve County-wide and State-wide interests, such as Highway 101, Burnt Mountain Road, LaPush Road, and the Quillayute Valley Airport. It is imperative that the County-wide and State-wide interests are considered when making land use or facility decisions affecting these systems.

(4) Land Use Coordination. In the past, land use planning and transportation planning were not always coordinated. Impacts from growth on transportation facilities were seldom considered. Transportation planning was little more than remedying existing conditions rather than preventing deterioration of service. Conversely, roads and highways were built in rural areas which encouraged the conversion of these areas into higher densities or commercial centers. The Clallam County Comprehensive Plan indicates that the transportation system should be consistent with the land use plan.

(5) Level of Service. Level of service standards measuring the degree of traffic congestion are used to serve as a gauge to judge the performance of the transportation system. Level of service is ranked from “A” (free flowing, uncongested) to “F” (highly congested, failing). When land use assumptions are made based on expected population growth and subsequent traffic demand, transportation engineers determine whether the transportation system can accommodate the increased demand by using level of service (LOS) standards. Level of service standards are based on average daily traffic (ADT), posted speed limits and characteristics of the area that the road serves (rural, suburban, and urban).

The minimum level of service established in the County-wide Comprehensive Plan for County roads is LOS “C.” Minimum level of service for State Highways is LOS “D,” as prescribed by the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO)¹ These minimum standards indicate a traffic condition where flow of traffic is generally stable, but speeds are controlled by volume of traffic. This condition confines the drivers speed and freedom to maneuver and results in a poor level of comfort for the driver. Figure 2 indicates that all County roads are currently operating at or above these standards.

The forecast of future traffic on County roads in this Plan are based on two (2) methods: projected population growth² and build-out³ potential based on proposed land use designations and their corresponding allowed densities. The latter is determined by first, examining the number of existing residences, businesses and other traffic generating entities within the region, and relating this to the average daily traffic counts for the road(s) serving the area. Next, using Clallam County Assessor records, the number of potential residences, business and other traffic generating entities are determined by figuring out how many “potential” parcels may exist under the allowed minimum lot sizes of the proposed land use designations. The increase from existing developments to potential developments directly correlates with the potential increase in average daily traffic. The forecast of traffic and its potential impact on adopted LOS standards is used to determine if the transportation system is capable of handling the demand. If the system is not capable of handling the demand, the Comprehensive Plan must identify how the system will be improved and financed, or the land use plan must be revised to ensure that the minimum “level of service” standards are met.

Figure 3 indicates that the current system is designed to handle the projected twenty (20) year population growth of this region for rural County roads. Even at build-out, only Highway 101 near the Forks Urban Growth Area would experience demand placing it below adequate level of service. Table 1 lists those rural County roads which will approach the minimum standard (C) by the year 2010 or if full build-out is to be realized.

(6) Road Standards. Level of service standards are an essential part of transportation planning, but they fail to provide a complete inventory of transportation needs and deficiencies. Design standards relating to road and lane width are set forth in RCW 35.83.030 and RCW 43.32.020. Those standards are as follows:

Table 3 lists County roads with standard width deficiencies. As demonstrated, most of the roadways with width deficiencies have acceptable or better LOS ratings. This clearly describes the discrepancy between LOS standards and road width standards. For example, although Erickson Road is currently at LOS “A” and would remain that way even at full build-out, it is clearly deficient in road width (fourteen (14) feet). LOS measures how free-flowing a roadway segment is, but fails to recognize whether the road meets minimum safety standards.

(7) Private Roads. The transportation system in the West End Planning Region also includes private streets and easements, often unimproved, design to serve lots within short plats and surveys. A mechanism to upgrade these roads to land division and fire protection minimum standards should be in place to assist property owners developing property which does not directly abut a public street.

(8) Alternative Solutions. Solutions to transportation deficiencies may include incentives to change patterns of transportation behavior, such as car pooling rather than single occupancy vehicles, and enhancements to alternative modes of transportation that would be efficient and less costly to maintain, such as transit or bicycle lanes.