(a) Traffic Circulation within the City. The City examined the general traffic flow along the roadways to gain an understanding of the traffic circulation system as a whole. This description is not comprehensive, but highlights major east-west roadways and north-south roadways. In addition, this inventory includes unique roadway links, such as roadways crossing natural barriers, links to commercial or industrial centers, important trucking routes, or links to highways. The City of Forks lies on the relatively flat Quillayute Prairie running general to the west and east of State Highway 101, which is called Second Avenue within the City limits. Highway 101 links Forks to other towns and cities. The traffic circulation system within downtown Forks can generally be described as a grid system. In 1992, the City had 15.3 miles of roadway, with 2.8 miles classified as arterial streets.

The major west-east arterials are Bogachiel Way, Calawah Way and Division Street. Portions of all three streets are County roads. Bogachiel Way, via the County road portion, provides the primary method of accessing the southwestern portion of the FUGA. This is a highly traveled and is classified as an collector to SR 101 and the downtown core of Forks. Bogachiel Way is 2.76 miles in length, with an average pavement width of 23 feet, and rights-of-way being a total of 60 feet wide.

Division Street is predominately a City road serving the downtown core of Forks and the public facilities located in the southeastern quadrant of the urban growth area. The easternmost portion of Division Street, starting at the Peterson Road, is a County roadway with relatively minimal usage at the present time. Division Street is classified as a collector due to the potential increase in residential traffic.

Calawah Way is predominately a City road serving the northeastern sector of the FUGA. Almost all of Calawah Way is City roadway, except for the portion providing access to the Elk Creek area. This is the only means of accessing the most eastern portion of the FUGA, and is heavily traveled. This road is a collector linking to SR 101 and the downtown core of Forks. Calawah Way is three miles in length, with an average pavement width of 27 feet, and rights-of-way varying from 40 to 60 feet in total width.

Other important links include Sol Duc Way and Russell Road, which are primarily residential streets. However, Russell Road has a federal function class designation as a minor collector.

(b) Influence of Regional Traffic. Regional traffic has a considerable influence on traffic volumes within the City, therefore the inventory of the transportation system includes a review of the transportation plans for nearby cities and the Regional Transportation Planning Organization. No immediate changes in regional traffic flow through the City are expected. In the long term, however, improvements to State Highway 101 are being considered in WSDOT Transportation Improvement Program, and in the Regional Transportation Plan.

(c) Natural Traffic Barriers. Surface water, geological hazards, or other critical areas create natural barriers to the traffic circulation system requiring special consideration when determining traffic volumes and an important tool for planning for the City’s transportation needs (see maps 1 to 3).

(d) Adequacy of Parking Facilities. Parking facilities include on- and off-street parking, and this inventory includes their adequacy, location, and the influence they have on the transportation system. In addition, because private entities are often involved in provision of parking facilities, the ownership and construction of parking facilities is also relevant. Commercial development has increased the need for off-street parking facilities in the downtown area. The increased parking demand is currently being satisfied by on-street parking on collector and arterial roadways. This tends to aggravate traffic congestion on collector roadways in the central business district.

(e) Mass Transit. Transit is an important alternative to automobile travel for either regional or local trips. Transit is not only useful in reducing traffic volumes and pollution, but is often the only means of transportation available to certain members of the community.

In Forks, most individuals use automobiles to travel to work, therefore, mass transit is most important for the elderly, low-income individuals, or youth, who do not have an alternative means of transportation. Regional bus service is provided daily to the east and to the north by Clallam Transit. Connections can be made from Port Angeles to private carrier services, and to the privately owned and operated Black Ball Ferry to Victoria, British Columbia.

Recently, a test operation was initiated as a result of a coordinated effort of Clallam, Jefferson and Grays Harbor Transit to provide transit services from Forks to the Grays Harbor area. Already in just the first few months of operation, this route has exceeded expectations. It also expected that this route will become a popular tourist route in the spring and summer months.

One problem area, also noted by the PRTPO, is the lack of seven days-a-week service on all of the routes. Most routes currently run Monday through Saturday, thereby making transit usage somewhat unfavorable for tourists.

(f) Pedestrian/Bicycle Trails. The current roadway development in the City is not conducive to pedestrian and bicycle access for residents and visitors. The Forks Urban Growth Area (FUGA) lacks a network of official trails and paths and is not linked to other major trail systems or community points of interest. The City is striving to find the funds and means to provide sidewalk areas and wider shoulders along US 101 in the commercial sector and along the collectors described above. Currently, there are only six bicycle racks available to cyclists. These are located at Pay n’ Save Restaurant, Forks Memorial Library, Quillayute Valley School District, Forks Aquatic Center, Transit Center, and the In Place.

(g) Curbs, Sidewalks, Landscaping, and Lighting. The City may provide curbs, sidewalks, landscaping, and lighting directly, or may regulate their provision and upkeep. These features contribute to the safety and quality of neighborhood and downtown streets. A thorough inventory includes not only the condition of these amenities, but also a review of the regulations and responsibilities associated with their provision.

Most of the streets in the City of Forks do not have sidewalks, and the responsibility for maintenance of sidewalks is unclear. The City is working with the Department of Transportation to extend sidewalk coverage in the City along SR 101. In addition, the 1995-2000 Comprehensive Street Plan adopted by the City has scheduled sidewalk placement along Bogachiel Way and Calawah Way. (See Attachment A).

(h) Past Transportation Problems. Many transportation improvements are designed to alleviate problems identified through traffic accident reports, street maintenance staff reports of poor conditions on roadways, identified areas with heavy traffic congestion, and citizen complaints regarding safety or roadway conditions.

(a) Roadway Classification. The Clallam County Department of Community Development conducted an analysis of the FUGA’s roadway system. Roadways were analyzed via a collection of road infrastructure information for County and other federal functional class roads. The origin of the spatial information is the DNR TRANS layer at 1:24,000 scale produced with USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles. Classifications were determined via a link with the Clallam County Roads Information System (CRIS). CRIS provides such information as daily traffic counts, speed limits, federal functions, etc. The CRIS information was used in determining the information associated with level of service. The spreadsheets containing this information are attached as Appendix A to the ordinance codified in this chapter.

(b) Mapping the Existing Circulation System. Maps were prepared to identify the locations of the existing roadway functional types. While Forks does possess an airport, current usage is limited to small private plans. A plan is underway to determine the feasibility of expanding the airport to permit usage by light commuter planes.

In addition, traffic accidents were mapped. This map shows were accidents occurred in general. It does not necessarily reflect the exact locations of such accidents.

(c) Level of Service Standards. The City and the County have agreed to utilize the Highway Capacity Manual methodology for determining level of service. This methodology incorporates land use, speed limits, number of turnbays and the average daily traffic volume. This methodology divides land use into three (3) categories: urban, transitional, and rural. The City of Forks, as with other cities within the County, is not considered urban in nature under this methodology. Rather, the City of Forks, and the unincorporated areas, are considered transitional and the transitional category of level of service (LOS). Table 5 provides the thresholds used in determining LOS categories based upon the speed associated with a given roadway.

The Regional Planning Commission determined that an LOS C standard should be maintained on all roads within the FUGA. Map 8 displays the current LOS ratings for the major roadways within the FUGA. Currently, all major roadways within the FUGA meet this standard, except for a section of SR 101 which has a LOS D rating. While this is below the standard the RPC established, the PRTPO has determined that for State highways, a LOS D rating is acceptable.

Table 6 summarizes the LOS ratings currently in existence, as well as projected for the year 2010. Map 9 provides a visual summary of LOS projections for FUGA roadways in the year 2010. In addition, the build-out LOS was calculated by comparing the number of developed lots to the number of potential lots (based upon a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet). The difference between these two (2) was calculated in a set percentage. This percentage was then used as a potential growth factor and was multiplied by the current ADT to determined build-out LOS. Map 10 illustrates LOS problems if maximized build-out is realized.

(d) Road Width Deficiencies. Road width deficiencies were determined by subtracting pavement width from pre-determined standards set by the Washington State Board of Transportation. The pre-determined standards are based upon an ADT, with a higher volume of travel requiring a greater road width. Table 7 provides these standards.

The Regional Planning Commission determined that, as a standard, roadways with a road width deficiency greater than twelve (12) feet would be substandard. Table 8 summarizes those sections of roadway that are substandard, while Map 14 illustrates were such substandard roadways are located:

(e) Transit Level of Service Standards. The transit level of service standards must be carefully designed to ensure that they do not work at cross-purposes with the arterial level of service standard. It is also important to ensure that the transit level of service standards would be achievable since the City itself does not directly provide transit service. Therefore, the City has not adopted a level of service standard for transit, yet as the regional transit system becomes operational the City will coordinate with the County to establish and adopt a Level of Service standard for that system.