BFCG Corridor Sketch Initiative Phase II Workshop Minutes 6-7-2017
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MEETING MINUTES Subject: Corridor Sketch Initiative – Phase II Benton-Franklin Council of Governments M3 Workshop Location: Benton PUD Auditorium, Kennewick, WA Date: Wednesday, June 7, 2017 / 1:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Participants: See attached sign-in sheet. Summary The following notes summarize the topics discussed during the June 7, 2017 Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) South Central Region (SCR) M3 workshop in conjunction with the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments (BFCG) to evaluate WSDOT corridors within BFCG’s planning boundary. The workshop supported Phase II of WSDOT’s Corridor Sketch Initiative through a multi-modal, multi-disciplinary, and multi-agency process designed to identify future opportunities to improve how the state highway system functions. Participants included representatives from the following agencies and other stakeholders: Cities of Benton City, Kennewick, Pasco, Richland, and West Richland Franklin County Bike Tri-Cities BFCG Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife WSDOT’s Maintenance, Planning, and Program Management sections SCR structured the workshop around the twin approaches of problem identification and strategy development for the 14 corridors grouped by area as shown in the table below. WSDOT’s corridor number(s) is (are) in parentheses after each corridor name. Benton County Tri-Cities Franklin County SR 24, I-82 to SR 243 (367) SR 225, Benton City to SR 240 US 395, Pasco to Ritzville (266)b (429) I-82, Union Gap to Oregon Border I-182/US 12, Richland to SR 17, Mesa to Moses Lake (263)c (513) Pasco (235) SR 22, Zillah to Prosser (423) SR 397, I-82 to I-182 SR 260/SR 261, SR 17 to Washtucnab (412 and 413) (402 and 403) SR 221, SR 14 to Prosser (427) SR 261, US 12 to SR 260 (409) SR 14, Maryhill to I-82 (129)a SR 124, Pasco to Waitsburg (414) US 12, SR 124 to Idaho Border (255) a The Klickitat County portion of SR 14 is in WSDOT’s Southwest Region. b The Adams County portions of US 395 and SR 261 are in WSDOT’s Eastern Region. c The Grant and Adams County portions of SR 17 are in WSDOT’s North Central Region. BFCG M3 Workshop – Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 10 This workshop focused on all five of WSDOT’s corridor evaluation criteria (preservation, other, mobility, environment, and economic vitality) and addressed corridors not previously evaluated as part of the Phase II M3 process.1 Small groups of participants developed strategies for each corridor in breakout sessions. Primary topics of discussion for many corridors included slow-moving trucks and intersection safety, with truck-climbing lanes, acceleration/deceleration lanes, dedicated left- and right-turn lanes, and interchanges suggested as some of the most frequent strategies. Because several cities in BFCG’s planning boundary are developing rapidly, participants also suggested land use planning and studies for many corridors to define a system-wide context for problems and potential strategies and solutions. Welcome and Corridor Sketch Initiative Summary Paul Gonseth, WSDOT’s SCR Planning Manager, welcomed the participants, explained his role as workshop facilitator, and provided background on the Corridor Sketch Initiative. The workshop participants introduced themselves with their name, agency, and role. Progress to Date SCR completed Phase I of the two-phase Corridor Sketch Initiative in fall 2016. Phase I involved data gathering and preliminary evaluation of state highways and interstates, and allowed SCR to collaborate with its transportation partners – including local communities and a range of stakeholders – to document the current conditions, functions, and performance expectations for each corridor. SCR characterized or “sketched” applicable highways and evaluated them to identify transportation issues. SCR initiated Phase II in December 2016 with a series of e-mails inviting Phase I stakeholders to validate and/or augment the information they provided during Phase I. Concurrently, SCR expanded the Phase II distribution to provide comment opportunities to additional stakeholders such as Tribes, land-managing agencies, and multi-modal organizations. The M3 workshops build on the comment opportunities and feedback loops, and bring together a targeted group of multi-modal, multi-disciplinary, and multi-agency stakeholders to evaluate in detail specific aspects of the selected corridors. Earlier in 2017, SCR held a series of three M3 workshops that focused on corridors with identified mobility issues (i.e., congestion) per WSDOT Headquarters’ performance standards. One of these workshops was held in the Tri-Cities on March 30, 2017. In April 2017, SCR kicked off a second round of M3 workshops to evaluate the remaining corridors (i.e., corridors that did not meet Headquarters’ congestion thresholds) using the remaining criteria (preservation, other, environment, and economic vitality). SCR planned the second round so that a workshop was held with each of their partner metropolitan and regional transportation planning organizations. During the Progress to Date discussion, a participant asked for more detail about the next steps in the Corridor Sketch Initiative process. Ultimately, Phase II is intended to yield corridor-specific strategies that can be ranked and included in WSDOT’s long-range Highway System Plan (HSP). While the HSP focuses on corridors with mobility issues2 and congestion, SCR is currently focusing on refining the strategies developed during Phase II for all of the evaluation criteria. The South Central regional management will continue to work 1 SR 224 (Corridor No. 428), SR 240 (Corridor No. 138), and US 395, Kennewick to Pasco (Corridor No. 265) were previously evaluated at an M3 workshop on March 30, 2017. 2 Congestion focuses on how many cars are moving (or not moving) at a given rate; mobility considers how various modes can move across a transportation system and the obstacles to facilitating various modes. BFCG M3 Workshop – Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 10 with local jurisdictions and other project proponents over the next year to evaluate identified strategies and refine them into projects, operational modifications, or policy changes. How long it takes a strategy to come to fruition varies. Shorter-term, lower-cost projects with readily available funding could occur within 1-3 years. Funding hurdles or a design that is more complicated could take 5-10 years (medium-term). High-dollar, multi-jurisdictional, major capital improvements may require 10-20 years (long-term). For example, Connecting Washington, the current financing package, is a 16-year package running through 2030. Projects that would need to be incorporated into the next financing package are automatically long-term. Information and data gathered during the Corridor Sketch Initiative process does not stop with the HSP. WSDOT will use the information in the database to have a snapshot of issues/strategies if additional funding becomes available in the future. Finally, WSDOT will need to maintain the database. WSDOT is currently considering how often to revisit the data and how often to re-engage its transportation partners to validate and update the information. One option is for local milestones to trigger the re-evaluation of the corridor sketch data (e.g., local plans updates, changes in elected officials, etc.). Workshop Objectives By summarizing progress to date, Paul placed the M3 workshop in the context of Phase II of the Corridor Sketch Initiative. Paul followed up by reiterating how WSDOT will use the M3-generated strategies and outcomes as Phase II continues (described above). Workshop objectives included: Explaining the purpose and structure of the workshop. Differentiating between solutions and strategies and explaining the range of strategies available for consideration: o acceptance of existing conditions and/or current performance, o more detailed planning studies and analyses, o travel demand management, o operational improvements, o local network improvements, and o policy changes. Defining the evaluation criteria. Providing sufficient information and data from Phase I to assist in Phase II decision-making and strategy development. Analyzing problems to identify underlying causes and issues affecting preservation of the corridor, other corridor features, the environment, economic vitality, and, as appropriate, mobility. Involving participants and maintaining an active and energized discussion by breaking out into small group sessions to develop strategies. Developing short-term, medium-term, and long-term strategies to address underlying causes and issues. These objectives comprise a sequential approach to developing strategies that SCR can prioritize and carry forward into WSDOT’s project development and programming processes. Ultimately, Phase II is intended to yield corridor-specific strategies that can be ranked and included in WSDOT’s long-range HSP. BFCG M3 Workshop – Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 10 Problem Identification and Strategy Development To identify problems and develop strategies, the participants evaluated the corridors separately for Benton County first, then the Tri-Cities, followed by Franklin County. For each corridor, Paul reviewed the feedback received in response to the December 2016 opportunity to comment. This feedback is summarized sequentially for each corridor in the attached partner feedback handout. He also encouraged the participants to update and augment the comments as needed, not just with their “agency hat on” but also drawing from their personal experience