chapter 5: future conditions - trpc

July 2020 What Moves You 137

Chapter 5. Future Conditions

Chapter 5 Future Conditions

OverviewThis chapter of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) takes a broad look at the impacts the region’s forecasted population and employment growth will have on our transportation facilities. It also highlights implications for future travel patterns and environmental considerations. The RTP uses a set of regional travel demand models to quantify both current and future travel conditions.

Thurston Regional Planning Council (TRPC) and local jurisdictions analyze model results to identify potential problem areas for further study or assessment.

The models allow analysis of factors such as:

• How we travel (the mode), such as walking, bicycling, driving alone, carpooling or sharing rides, riding the school bus, or taking transit.

• How far we travel, generally expressed as vehicle miles traveled (VMT).

• How system efficiency changes over time.

• How long it takes to travel, measured as average speed, corridor travel time, or delay.

• How our network accommodates more people travelling.

138 Chapter 5. Future Conditions July 2020

What Moves You

The 2045 conditions described in this chapter give us a glimpse into the future of travel within Thurston County. The analysis indicates that:

• Roadway efficiency will increase in the future. We’ll experience a 43 percent increase in vehicle miles travelled and a three percent increase in roadway capacity by 2045.

• Our region’s planned land use and capacity improvements alone will not be sufficient for the region to meet our VMT targets described in Chapter 3.

• Transit use will increase in the future; walking and bicycling percentages will remain about the same.

• Travel mode is strongly influenced by land use characteristics, and access to transportation facilities and services strongly influences travel mode.

• Travel time on I-5 will increase in the future, and the region is examining various strategies to mitigate the increase.

This forecast is only as accurate as the assumptions that underlie it. It gives us important information about our general direction, given what we know today. We recognize many other factors, beyond those of the forecast, may impact exactly where we end up.

The analysis in this chapter also raises questions that TRPC and partners are studying.

• What steps do we need to take to meet our VMT goals? The region’s Climate Action Plan will identify specific strategies.

• What strategies can we identify to meet adopted level of service standards, especially on rural roads that are not meeting today’s standards and are unlikely to be widened in the future? A rural mobility study will help identify actions.

What strategies can we identify to increase efficiency in the urban strategy corridors? The Martin Way Corridor Study and Smart Corridors Study will help answer this question.



How We Model Traffic DemandTRPC developed three regional models for the RTP:

• Current Conditions. The current conditions model reflects 2017/2018 conditions in terms of transportation facilities, travel patterns, and land use.

• 2045 Funded Projects. The 2045 funded projects model reflects 2045 conditions in terms of projected land use and transportation construction projects that have already received funding – therefore highly likely to be constructed by 2045.

• 2045 RTP Projects. The 2045 RTP projects model combines the 2045 funded projects model with planned projects and services listed in the RTP (Chapter 2, Recommendations); continued fare-free transit service; implementation of Intercity Transit’s long-range service plan; and increased participation in telework for the Capitol Campus.

Specific assumptions included in the travel demand models include:

• Land use

• Demographics and household characteristics

• Transportation demand management

• Technology

• Transportation infrastructure


What Moves You

Land UseThe travel demand models take into consideration the number of households, population, school and college enrollment, and jobs. Land use data used in the analysis comes from:

• Joint Base Lewis-McChord’s land use estimates for the base.

• Puget Sound Regional Council’s land use forecast for Pierce County

• TRPC’s adopted population and employment forecast for Thurston County

• TRPC’s land use forecasts for Mason, Lewis, and Grays Harbor counties using population forecasts from Washington State Office of Financial Management.

These estimates and forecasts are meant to reflect expected future conditions based on past trends, adopted land use plans, and best available data (Table 5-1).

Expected Future Versus Sustainable Thurston Vision

TRPC adopted the Sustainable Thurston Plan in December 2013. The plan includes a preferred land use scenario that supports vibrant urban cities and neighborhoods and retains the character of rural Thurston County.

Local jurisdictions began integrating Sustainable Thurston concepts into local comprehensive plans in 2012.

TRPC’s updated population and employment forecast (adopted in 2019) reflects changes to adopted land use plans including changes to growth boundaries, zoning, and development regulations. However, there is still a difference in TRPC’s forecast versus the Sustainable Thurston vision. The forecast is used for the RTP analysis as it is based on adopted plans.



Table 5-1: Select Land Use Characteristics Used in the Travel Demand Models

Grays Harbor County

Lewis County

Mason County

Pierce County

Thurston County

2017 Households 28,900 30,500 24,600 320,500 109,000

2045 Households 31,800 40,500 37,100 446,300 167,300

Increase in Households 10.0% 32.8% 50.8% 39.3% 53.5%

2017 Jobs 30,500 35,900 20,400 360,900 148,700

2045 Jobs 33,900 47,700 29,700 493,200 214,100

Increase in Jobs 11.1% 32.9% 45.6% 36.7% 44.0%

2017 K-12 Enrollment 10,800 12,300 5,700 41,400* 43,000

2045 K-12 Enrollment 11,500 16,900 7,400 43,300* 77,900

Increase in K-12 Enrollment 6.5% 37.4% 29.8% 4.6% 81.2%

2017 College FTE Enrollment 2,100 2,700 300 15,700* 10,100

2045 College FTE Enrollment 2,100 2,700 300 17,800* 10,700

Increase in College Enrollment 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 13.4% 5.9%

*Only includes enrollment in model area for Pierce County

Sources: Thurston Regional Planning Council, Puget Sound Regional Planning Council, Joint-Base Lewis-McChord, and Washington State Office of Financial Management.


What Moves You

Demographics and Household CharacteristicsDemographics such as household size, number of children, and income vary by location. Except for household size, TRPC held these characteristics constant between the forecast base year (2017) and future year (2045).

Thurston County’s household size decreased dramatically in the 1960s and has continued to decrease steadily since then. A variety of factors have contributed to this trend, including fewer children per household, more one-parent households, and longer life expectancy resulting in a greater number of households without children. Household size contributes to the number of trips generated by household. Household size is projected to continue to decrease between 2017 and 2045 (Figure 5-1).

Transportation Demand ManagementTransportation demand management (TDM) is the application of strategies and policies to reduce travel demand or to redistribute this demand in space or in time. Much of TDM focuses on reducing the number of single-occupancy private vehicles using the transportation system – the Thurston region’s largest contributor to travel demand. The region is employing – to varying degrees – a broad range of TDM measures including:

• Promoting the use of ride sharing.

• Building pedestrian-oriented design elements in street design, such as short pedestrian crossings, wide sidewalks, and street trees.

Figure 5-1: Change in Household Size, Thurston County

Sources: 1960-2010 Census; 2018-2045 TRPC Population and Employment Forecast.



• Requiring parking users to pay the costs directly (as opposed to sharing the costs indirectly with others through increased rents).

• Increasing the cost of parking.

• Building public transportation infrastructure, such as bus shelters.

• Providing fare-free transit.

• Building bicycle-friendly facilities and environments, including secure bike storage areas and showers.

• Allowing for and encouraging telework and flexible work schedules.

Nearby jurisdictions apply other TDM strategies such as implementing road pricing tolls during peak hours or providing for high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on the interstate highway. TRPC can model some TDM strategies such as the price of parking, tolling, and HOV lanes directly. The travel demand model can consider others, such as telework and compressed work week policies, by adjusting trip generation rates. Other strategies are captured in overall mode split characteristics but cannot be evaluated without supplemental information.

Technology The travel demand model reflects travel behavior based on technology that exists in 2020. Emerging technologies such as autonomous vehicles will influence travel behavior, but it is too soon to tell what the effect may be. Future enhancements in technology may also increase our ability to collect and model travel behavior data.

Transportation Infrastructure Transportation infrastructure included in the travel demand models are the region’s major roads: collectors, arterials, freeways, and freeway ramps, with some local roads to the extent they support the modeling network. The major roads are comprised of vehicle travel lanes, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, multi-use trails, and transit routes.


What Moves You

2045 Funded Infrastructure Projects:

The 2045 Funded Projects model includes the following infrastructure projects with either committed funding (therefore have a high likelihood of being constructed) or developer-funded infrastructure that would be constructed to support the planned development (typically within large master planned communities). Many of the projects are on the list of regional projects.

2045 Funded Projects JurisdictionRegional Project Number

Campus Glen Drive NE Extension: Campus Glen Drive NE from Salish Middle School to Hogum Bay Road (street extension)

City of Lacey n/a

Carpenter Road Improvements: Pacific Avenue to Shady Lane (widening)

City of Lacey C11

Marvin Road Widening: Britton Parkway NE to Columbia Way NE (widening with median treatment)

City of Lacey C12

31st Avenue NE Extension: Hogum Bay Road to Gateway (street extension)

City of Lacey n/a

Marvin Road I-5 Interchange Improvements (reconstruct freeway interchange to diverging diamond design)

WSDOT n/a

Lacey Hawks Prairie Business District Commercial Corridors (new street network)

City of Lacey A1

Fones Road Improvements: Pacific Avenue to 18th Avenue (widen-ing)

City of Olympia C17

SR 510 Yelm Loop – North Section (Y3) Stage 2: Cullen Road SE to Walmart Boulevard (new lane limited access road)

WSDOT O13

Mosman Avenue SE Phase 2: Railroad Street to Longmire Street (street extension)

City of Yelm A22

Tahoma Boulevard Extension – South: Dotson Street to SR 507 (new street connection)

City of Yelm A26

Tahoma Boulevard Extension – North: 93rd Avenue SE to Tahoma Boulevard (new street connection)

City of Yelm A27

Other developer-funded improvements that are not regional projects are included in the model, as are funded projects in adjacent counties that are within the model area, such as the improvements on Interstate 5 between Mounts Road and Thorne Lane interchange.



How We TravelHow we travel refers to the mode of travel we choose. Several factors influence travel mode, including household characteristics such as income and vehicle ownership; the accessibility and cost of travel between points; and land use characteristics such as employment density.

To evaluate future conditions, we must examine:

• How our mode of travel will change between now and in the future.

• How where you live makes a difference in what mode of travel you choose.

Changing Travel ModesThe transportation model forecasts that by 2045 transit trips will increase while carpooling and other shared rides will decrease. Other travel modes will hold steady (Table 5-2). The consistency between 2018 and 2045 travel modes reflects that much of the land use and infrastructure forecasted in 2045 is already on the ground today.

There are many other factors that could influence future travel modes that were not included in the model such as emerging technologies; implementing the Sustainable Thurston Plan land use vision for more

compact growth around areas with frequent transit service; changes in the cost of fuel or parking, new High Occupancy Vehicle lanes on Interstate 5, or potential increases in other TDM strategies. These could all lead to further changes in travel mode.

Where You Live The urban corridors and centers of Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater are the areas with the greatest concentration of jobs and housing within the county. Residents living in these areas tend to walk and use transit more often than people in other regions of the county. In large part, this is because neighborhoods are walkable, and frequent – generally 15-minute – transit service is available in urban

Table 5-2: Travel Mode

Travel Mode 20182045 RTP

Projects

Walk 8.0% 7.8%

Bicycle 1.6% 1.7%

Transit 2.0% 3.6%

Drive alone 50.8% 50.9%

Other shared rides 37.7% 36.1%

TOTAL 100.0% 100.0%


What Moves You

corridors and centers. Looking out to 2045, transit use is projected to double in urban centers and corridors. This is influenced by the implementation of bus rapid transit within the urban corridor area.

The remaining north county urban areas are neighborhoods that surround city centers and corridors. People in these neighborhoods tend to walk and use transit less than center and corridor residents, but bicycle more. Transit is available in many of the neighborhoods but is generally half-hour to hourly service.

Residents of the south county urban and urban growth areas of Bucoda, Rainier, Tenino, Yelm, and Grand Mound tend to walk and bicycle at around the same rate as the north county urban areas. However, they have less access to transit.

Rural areas are those outside of any of the urban growth areas. People living in rural areas tend to drive alone, vanpool, and take the school bus more than residents of other parts of the county. Transit, pedestrian amenities, and bicycle lanes are not available for large parts of rural Thurston County (Table 5-3).

Figure 5-2: Geographic Areas Used in the Analysis in this Chapter



Table 5-3: Mode Share by Area, Thurston County

Travel Mode

Urban Corridors and

Centers

Remaining North County Urban Areas

South County Urban Areas Rural Areas

2018

Walk 13% 8% 8% 2%

Bicycle 1% 2% 3% 1%

Transit 4% 2% 1% 0%

Other modes 82% 88% 88% 97%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

2045 RTP Projects

Walk 12% 8% 8% 2%

Bicycle 1% 2% 3% 1%

Transit 8% 3% 2% 1%

Other modes 79% 87% 87% 96%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

Importance of Investing in Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Modes

Investing in transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities is an important element of implementing local comprehensive plans. These investments help to:

• Complete our transportation network and provide safe modes of travel for all users.

• Promote active transportation, implementing many of the shared community goals outlined through the Thurston Thrives process and the Sustainable Thurston Plan.

As the region completes the multimodal network, and expands transit service and facilities, the number of travelers utilizing the multimodal network will increase. The modes are all interconnected. For instance, building sidewalks near transit stops will increase safety for both pedestrians and transit users. TRPC is in the process of updating the travel demand models to be more responsive to investments in pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.


What Moves You

How Far We TravelHow far we travel refers to the distance vehicles travel along our transportation network. Commonly referred to as vehicle miles traveled (VMT), we measure this important aspect of travel because of vehicle wear on roads, and contributions to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts. The RTP sets goals to reduce vehicle miles traveled in the Thurston region to help meet regional greenhouse gas reduction goals. The Thurston Climate Action Team estimates transportation accounts for 36 percent of Thurston County’s greenhouse gas emissions (Figure 5-4). Understanding some

of the factors that contribute to how far we travel will help our region’s policy makers better understand how their actions can influence this important measure.

The future conditions evaluation includes examining:

• How our investments in infrastructure and services affect vehicle miles traveled.

• How close we will be to meeting our vehicle miles traveled goals by looking at changes in land use, and facilities and service investments.

Source: Thurston Climate Action Team

Figure 5-3: 2017 Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Thurston County



InvestmentsThe Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) estimated average annual VMT on Thurston County’s roadway network was around 2.5 billion in 2018. This estimate is for all public roads within Thurston County, including local roads, collectors, arterials, and highways. With changes in population and employment, we expect to see annual VMT rise to over 3.6 billion by 2045. The 2045 RTP Projects model forecasts a VMT increase lower than the 2045 Funded Projects model, despite an increase in lane miles. This highlights the importance of adding connections to our transportation network to allow for more direct travel.

Table 5-4: Difference in 2045 Vehicle Miles Traveled with Funded Projects and Regional Projects, Thurston County

2018

Estimate

2045 Funded Projects

2045 RTP

Projects

Annual VMT (millions) 2,529 3,630 3,616

2018-2045 Growth in VMT

n/a 44% 43%

Sources: 2018: Highway Performance Monitoring System; 2045: TRPC travel demand model.

Importance of Street Connections

Some of the Regional Projects identified in the RTP add street connections to complete the grid of arterials and collectors that provide the backbone of our transportation system.

Adding multimodal street connections serves several purposes:

• Increasing connectivity provides a more direct route for travelers and can reduce vehicle miles traveled.

• Increasing connectivity also improves access and safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users.

• Increasing street connections gives travelers options for alternative routes to travel.

• In congested areas, adding new street connections reduces the need to widen parallel routes.


What Moves You

Meeting VMT GoalsChapter 3 Guiding Principles, Goals, and Policies; Goal 18 contains the following policy:

Decrease annual per capita vehicle miles traveled in the Thurston Region to:

• 1990 levels by 2020

• 30 percent below 1990 by 2035

• 50 percent below 1990 by 2050

The transportation model forecasts we will meet our 2020 goal but will fall short of the 2035 goal if we rely solely on planned land use and

infrastructure investments (including multimodal investments). To reach our goals, we will have to increase efforts in other areas such as implementing TDM strategies, establishing land use consistent with the vision of Sustainable Thurston, and increasing investment in multimodal facilities. Other factors will also influence travel behavior but are outside the realm of local government control (such as the cost of fuel) or represent an overall change in travel behavior based on socio-demographic factors.

Table 5-5: Annual Per Capita Vehicle Miles Traveled, Thurston County

Estimate Forecast

1990 2020 2035 2045

Annual VMT (millions) 1,737 2,706 3,319 3,616

Change from 1990 -- 56% 91% 108%

Population 161,238 294,300 354,400 383,500

Change from 1990 -- 83% 120% 138%

Annual Per Capita VMT 10,775 9,195 9,366 9,430

Change from 1990 -- -15% -13% -12%

Sources: Washington State Department of Transportation Highway Per-formance Monitoring System (1990-2018). TRPC travel demand model (growth forecast 2020-2045). US Census Bureau (estimate). TRPC (fore-cast).



Figure 5-4: Estimated and Forecast Vehicle Miles Traveled and Per Capita Vehicle Miles Traveled, Thurston County

Sources: Washington State Department of Transportation Highway Performance Monitoring System (1990-2018). TRPC Travel Demand Model (growth forecast 2020-2045).


What Moves You

Reaching our Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction Goals

As part of the I-5 Mounts Road to Tumwater Corridor Study, TRPC and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) evaluated the effect of a set of congestion relief strategies on VMT. Some strategies reduced VMT up to two percent while others led to an increase up to two percent.

Strategies that reduced VMT:

• Implement Sustainable Thurston Land Use to achieve a more compact form of development and greater number of jobs in Thurston County.

• Convert an existing lane of Interstate 5 into a high-occupancy vehicle lane.

• Implement TDM strategies such as increased telework or parking fees.

Strategies that were neutral for VMT:

• Reconfigure freeway interchanges.

• Increase transit.

• Add local network improvements and new connections.

• Make operational improvements such as adding roundabouts.

Strategies that increased VMT:

• Add an additional lane on I-5.

Overall, the effect of the strategies did not outpace the increase in VMT due to population and employment growth. The modeling did not consider factors such as:

• Increased prices in gas.

• Decreased wages.

• Changes in technology.



How System Efficiency Changes over TimeThe transportation models allow for a comparison of system usage by vehicles versus investments in vehicle system capacity. The RTP calls for strategic investments such as new road connections to add connectivity to the system, but local jurisdictions also invest in operational improvements such as roundabouts and turn lanes to make the most efficient use of our

existing system. The key is to balance mobility needs with the financial and environmental costs of new transportation infrastructure.

Based on the 2045 funded projects model, VMT is expected to increase by 44 percent while capacity (measured by lane miles) will only increase one percent between 2018 and 2045. Meanwhile, the 2045 RTP Projects model projects VMT will increase 43 percent while capacity will increase three percent. Under both scenarios, the system is becoming more efficient over time.

Figure 5-5: Comparison of Increase in VMT versus Increase in Roadway Capacity


What Moves You

Travel Delay and the I-5 Mounts Road to Tumwater Corridor Study

In 2019, TRPC collaborated with WSDOT on a study of I-5 between Mounts Road in Pierce County and Tumwater. The study team was able to analyze the effect of various strategies to address congestion on travel times for I-5, US 101, and other major arterials within Thurston County. The study compared current (2018) conditions with 2040 funded projects and 10 different scenarios to address congestion.

Interstate 5

Travel time on southbound I-5 between Exit 120 (JBLM Main Gate) and the 93rd Avenue Interchange in Tumwater is currently around 23 minutes. By 2040, travel time is expected to increase to 43 minutes – and this includes 2040 funded projects. Observations:

• Delays. Two major areas of delay forecasted for I-5 in the future include the Mounts Road interchange and approaching the US 101 exit/Plum Street on-ramp.

• Sustainable Thurston Land Use. A more compact form for land use, as described in Sustainable Thurston, will result in fewer trips – both local and commute – on the entire system. This will also result in a 3-minute reduction in travel time on I-5.

• Hard Shoulder Running. Allowing use of the freeway shoulder during peak hours between the Sleater-Kinney and Henderson on-ramps will lead to an 8-minute reduction in travel time as compared to the 2040 funded base.

• HOV Lane. Converting a general-purpose travel lane to a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane will lead to a 5-minute increase in travel time, mainly north of Mounts Road. However, those that use transit or carpool will see a reduction in travel time.

• I-5 Widening. Widening I-5 while retaining the HOV lane added in the previous option resulted in a 15-minute reduction in travel time. This includes an additional lane between the Sleater-Kinney on-ramp and the Henderson on-ramp in the southbound direction in lieu of the hard shoulder running described previously.

Urban Arterials and US 101

• Sustainable Thurston Land Use. A more compact form of land use tended to increase congestion and travel times on the major urban arterials in the core urban area. This is likely due to an increased concentration of jobs and housing.

• Operational Improvements. Specific improvements in operations, such as roundabouts, tend to increase travel time for throughput but decrease travel time for side street traffic entering the arterial.

• TDM Strategies. TDM strategies such as telework and compressed work weeks tend to reduce congestion on local arterials.



How Our Network Accommodates Growth in Travel The travel demand model is also used to identify potential vehicle mobility issues well before they arise. Level of service (LOS) is used to measure growth in travel and how the transportation network accommodates such growth. While it can be measured in a variety of ways, we use a volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio to measure roadway LOS. This allows us to understand how “full” the roads are, and in some places, the model may indicate the roads are too full: the roads exceed the adopted level of service standards, and additional study may be warranted to assess the situation.

Multimodal Level of Service

Multimodal level of service (LOS) considers the volume of people and goods, not just vehicles, moving through a corridor. As part of the future work program, TRPC will work with the cities and county to explore regional multimodal level of service measures for the RTP.

The Volume to Capacity (V/C) Ratio and Level of Service

LOS is a qualitative mechanism used to determine how well a transportation facility is operating from a traveler’s perspective. The V/C ratio is a planning level method to determine the LOS, separated into six levels for analysis, and assigned a letter from A to F representing level of service. Planners use V/C ratio to identify possible LOS deficiencies in the transportation system. In this analysis, we use the V/C ratio to identify possible areas for future study.

Level of Service Description Volume-to-

Capacity Ratio

A Highest driver comfort; free flowing <.60

B High degree of driver comfort; little delay

0.60 – 0.70

C Acceptable level of driver comfort; some delay

0.70 – 0.80

D Some driver frustration; moderate delay

0.80 – 0.90

E High level of driver frustration; high levels of delay

0.90-1.00

F Highest level of driver frustration; excessive delays

>1.00


What Moves You

Two-Hour PeriodTRPC conducts the V/C ratio analysis for a two-hour period during the p.m. peak for average weekday conditions. This typically reflects the busiest hours of the day on any particular roadway during average conditions. This means roads are assessed for average conditions rather than worst-case conditions, such as during the holiday shopping season.

Analysis Using the V/C ratio as a screening tool, roadway segments are displayed in varying colors matching LOS levels for:

• Current Conditions (Maps 5-1 and 5-1A)

• 2045 Funded Projects (Maps 5-2 and 5-2A)

• 2045 RTP Projects (Maps 5-3 and 5-3A)

Also shown on the maps are the adopted LOS standards that vary by area characteristics (see Chapter 3: Guiding Principles, Goals, and Policies, Goal 9).

StudiesUsing the maps, members of TRPC’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) identified potential problem areas. Some of the potential problem areas will be studied in future years. The studies will involve more detailed modeling, and planners will consider factors such as intersection spacing and hierarchy, road connections, access management, and environmental, social, and physical constraints prior to considering road widening (see Appendix L, Regional Project List Detail for the full list and explanation of proposed studies).

How Can Demand Exceed Capacity?

The travel demand model assigns traffic trips to the fastest route to estimate demand. If the model must choose between two arterials with the same speed limit, it will choose the shortest route. If one of the arterials becomes congested and travel slows, the model reassigns traffic to the other (now faster) route. The model will also shift trips to other travel modes if they become the fastest way to travel. Because the number of trips traveling between the two destinations is fixed, it is possible that the model is unable to assign the excess trips when the route becomes “full.” In that situation, the model demand will exceed capacity. In the real world, travelers would adjust their departure (spreading the peak period), or where they travel (change jobs or move), in addition to changing routes or travel modes.



Assessment AreasOther potential problem areas are identified as assessment areas. Local jurisdictional planners and engineers will monitor these areas, and if needed, they will conduct further studies to determine if there truly are mobility issues, or if there are other issues causing a high V/C ratio. Assessment areas include:

• Plum Street: Olympia Avenue to Union Avenue (City of Olympia)

• Crosby Boulevard/US 101 Interchange (City of Olympia, City of Lacey)

• I-5 Pacific Avenue and Sleater-Kinney Interchanges (City of Olympia, WSDOT)

• SR 510: Yelm Highway to the City of Yelm (Thurston County, WSDOT)

• Black Lake Boulevard: 21st Avenue to Black Lake-Belmore Road (City of Tumwater, City of Olympia)

• Dutterow Road: Martin Way to Steilacoom Road (Thurston County)

• Kuhlman Road/Nisqually Cut Off Road (Thurston County)

Why are some streets shown as having an acceptable LOS when I know there are traffic issues?

The reasons include:

• The RTP models do not model intersection-level conditions. If congestion is occurring at a traffic signal – it will not be highlighted on the maps – or in the RTP analysis, because it is not an output of the regional transportation model. The RTP models serve as a guide to local jurisdictions for long range planning but are not intended to be a real-time operations tool. TRPC’s Dynamic Model or intersection models are much better tools for this purpose.

• The maps show LOS over a two-hour window. Typically, the average V/C ratio over the two-hour peak travel period is about 85 percent of the one-hour period. Many of the congestion issues our region currently faces do not last the entire two-hour peak period but are concentrated at times when large employment sites finish their workday.

• The maps are based on a regional model. The model is calibrated to actual traffic counts for the year 2018, and while the model is generally accurate across the region, it may be less reliable in some areas. That is why it is used for generalized planning purposes only.


What Moves You

OLYMPIA

LACEY

TUMWATER

Joint BaseLewis-McChord

YELM

RAINIER

TENINO

BUCODAGrandMound

CapitolState Forest

Confederated Tribesof the ChehalisReservation

NisquallyIndian Reservation

SnoqualmieNational Forest

PIERCE COUNTY

LEWIS COUNTY

GRAYS HARBOR

COUNTY

MASON COUNTY

See Map 5-1A

§̈¦5

¬«507

¬«121

¬«510

¬«8

£¤12

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-01 Base.mxd Date: 3/23/2020

DISCLAIMER: This map is for general planning purposes only.Thurston Regional Planning Council makes no representations as tothe accuracy or fitness of the information for a particular purpose.

0 1 2 3 4½Miles

Map 5-1: 2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2018 Land Use and Network

NOTE: Map shows the demand-adjusted volume to capacityratio for the 2-hr PM peak period. For two way roads, thenetwork link with the higher ratio is shown. Only roads in thetravel demand model are shown; local roads are excluded.

*May differ from local comprehensive plans.

Volume / Capacity> 1.00LOS F

0.90 - 1.00LOS E

0.80 - 0.90LOS D

0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C

LOS Standard by Area*

Urban Centers and CorridorsLOS E or betterE

Unincorporated Thurston CountyLOS C or betterC

ReservationRegional LOS does not applyN/A

Urban/Rural Strategy CorridorMay exceed adopted LOS standardN/A

City Limits, Urban Growth Areas, andRural/Urban Transition AreaLOS D or better

D



OLYMPIA

LACEY

TUMWATER


YELM

RAINIER

TENINO

BUCODAGrandMound

CapitolState Forest




PIERCE COUNTY

LEWIS COUNTY

GRAYS HARBOR

COUNTY

MASON COUNTY

See Map 5-1A

§̈¦5

¬«507

¬«121

¬«510

¬«8

£¤12

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-01 Base.mxd Date: 3/23/2020


0 1 2 3 4½Miles

Map 5-1: 2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2018 Land Use and Network




0.90 - 1.00LOS E

0.80 - 0.90LOS D

0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C







D


What Moves You

§̈¦5

¬«510

Union Ave

Herman Rd

12th Ave

20th Ave

37th Ave

28th Ave

Drah

amRd

Elliott AveR

ural

Rd

5th Ave

Walnut Rd

PlumSt

Miller Ave

Deschutes

Pk w

y

Willam

etteDr

Fone

s R

d

Pine Ave

Driftwood

Rd

Dut

tero

wR

d

Kinw

ood

St

Eskridge Blvd

Pug

etS

tBe

thel

St

14th

Ave

Old 99

Hwy

Hog

umBa

yR

d

Hawks Prairie Rd

Linwood Ave

Sapp Rd

22nd Ave

14th Ave

Morse Merryman Rd

Hof

fman

R

d

18th AveW

estB

ayD

r

Libb

y R

d

26th Ave

Cai

nR

d

14th Ave

Easts ide

St

CapitalMall Dr

Lacey Blvd

ClevelandA

v e

Israel Rd

North St

Cap

i tol

Way

31st Ave

15th Ave

Union

MillsRd

Wig

gins

R

d

Trosper Rd

Car

pent

er R

d

26th Ave

Britton Pkwy

Rainier

Rd

Marvin

Rd

Mer

idia

n R

d

DivisionS

t

State Ave

Rich RdLit

tleroc

k

Rd

TumwaterBlvd

HarrisonAve

Mer

idia

n R

d

Lilly

R

d

Kai

ser

Rd

Mar

vin

Rd

4th AveSteilacoom

Rd

Boul

evar

d R

dSo

uth

Bay

Rd

Blac

k

Lake

Blvd

RuddellR

d

Capi

tol

Blvd

Slea

ter

Kinn

ey

Rd

Col

lege

St

YelmHwy

Yelm Hwy

Car

p en t

e r

Rd

Mullen Rd

Hen

ders

onB

l vd

Pacific Ave

MartinWay

LACEY

OLYMPIA

TUMWATER

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-01A Base.mxd

0 1 2½Miles

Map 5-1A: North Urban Area2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2018 Land Use and NetworkVolume / Capacity

> 1.00LOS F0.90 - 1.00LOS E0.80 - 0.90LOS D0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C






D

Date: 3/23/2020

DISCLAIMER: This map is for generalplanning purposes only. Thurston RegionalPlanning Council makes no representationsas to the accuracy or fitness of theinformation for a particular purpose.

NOTE: Map shows the demand-adjusted volume to capacity ratiofor the 2-hr PM peak period. For two way roads, the network linkwith the higher ratio is shown. Only roads in the travel demandmodel are shown; local roads are excluded.*May differ from local comprehensive plans.



§̈¦5

¬«510

Union Ave

Herman Rd

12th Ave

20th Ave

37th Ave

28th Ave

Drah

amRd

Elliott Ave

Rur

al R

d

5th Ave

Walnut Rd

PlumSt

Miller Ave

Deschutes

Pk w

y

Willam

etteDr

Fone

s R

d

Pine Ave

Driftwood

Rd

Dut

tero

wR

d

Kinw

ood

St

Eskridge Blvd

Pug

etS

tBe

thel

St

14th

Ave

Old 99

Hwy

Hog

umBa

yR

d

Hawks Prairie Rd

Linwood Ave

Sapp Rd

22nd Ave

14th Ave

Morse Merryman Rd

Hof

fman

R

d

18th Ave

West

Bay

Dr

Libb

y R

d

26th Ave

Cai

nR

d

14th Ave

Easts ide

St

CapitalMall Dr

Lacey Blvd

ClevelandA

v e

Israel Rd

North St

Cap

i tol

Way

31st Ave

15th Ave

Union

MillsRd

Wig

gins

R

d

Trosper Rd

Car

pent

er R

d

26th Ave

Britton Pkwy

Rainier

Rd

Marvin

Rd

Mer

idia

n R

d

DivisionS

t

State Ave

Rich RdLit

tleroc

k

Rd

TumwaterBlvd

HarrisonAve

Mer

idia

n R

d

Lilly

R

d

Kai

ser

Rd

Mar

vin

Rd

4th AveSteilacoom

Rd

Boul

evar

d R

dSo

uth

Bay

Rd

Blac

k

Lake

Blvd

RuddellR

d

Capi

tol

Blvd

Slea

ter

Kinn

ey

Rd

Col

lege

St

YelmHwy

Yelm Hwy

Car

p en t

e r

Rd

Mullen Rd

Hen

ders

onB

l vd

Pacific Ave

MartinWay

LACEY

OLYMPIA

TUMWATER

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-01A Base.mxd

0 1 2½Miles

Map 5-1A: North Urban Area2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2018 Land Use and NetworkVolume / Capacity







D

Date: 3/23/2020




What Moves You

OLYMPIA

LACEY

TUMWATER


YELM

RAINIER

TENINO

BUCODAGrandMound

CapitolState Forest




PIERCE COUNTY

LEWIS COUNTY

GRAYS HARBOR

COUNTY

MASON COUNTY

See Map 5-2A

§̈¦5

¬«507

¬«121

¬«510

¬«8

£¤12

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-02 Funded.mxd Date: 3/23/2020


0 1 2 3 4½Miles

Map 5-2: 2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2045 Land Use with Funded Projects




0.90 - 1.00LOS E

0.80 - 0.90LOS D

0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C







D



OLYMPIA

LACEY

TUMWATER


YELM

RAINIER

TENINO

BUCODAGrandMound

CapitolState Forest




PIERCE COUNTY

LEWIS COUNTY

GRAYS HARBOR

COUNTY

MASON COUNTY

See Map 5-2A

§̈¦5

¬«507

¬«121

¬«510

¬«8

£¤12

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-02 Funded.mxd Date: 3/23/2020


0 1 2 3 4½Miles

Map 5-2: 2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2045 Land Use with Funded Projects




0.90 - 1.00LOS E

0.80 - 0.90LOS D

0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C







D


What Moves You

§̈¦5

¬«510

Union Ave

Herman Rd

12th Ave

20th Ave

37th Ave

28th Ave

Drah

amRd

Elliott AveR

ural

Rd

5th Ave

Walnut Rd

PlumSt

Miller Ave

Deschutes

Pk w

y

Willam

etteDr

Fone

s R

d

Pine Ave

Driftwood

Rd

Dut

tero

wR

d

Kinw

ood

St

Eskridge Blvd

Pug

etS

tBe

thel

St

14th

Ave

Old 99

Hwy

Hog

umBa

yR

d

Hawks Prairie Rd

Linwood Ave

Sapp Rd

22nd Ave

14th Ave

Morse Merryman Rd

Hof

fman

R

d

18th AveW

estB

ayD

r

Libb

y R

d

26th Ave

Cai

nR

d

14th Ave

Easts ide

St

CapitalMall Dr

Lacey Blvd

ClevelandA

v e

Israel Rd

North St

Cap

i tol

Way

31st Ave

15th Ave

Union

MillsRd

Wig

gins

R

d

Trosper Rd

Car

pent

er R

d

26th Ave

Britton Pkwy

Rainier

Rd

Marvin

Rd

Mer

idia

n R

d

DivisionS

t

State Ave

Rich RdLit

tleroc

k

Rd

TumwaterBlvd

HarrisonAve

Mer

idia

n R

d

Lilly

R

d

Kai

ser

Rd

Mar

vin

Rd

4th AveSteilacoom

Rd

Boul

evar

d R

dSo

uth

Bay

Rd

Blac

k

Lake

Blvd

RuddellR

d

Capi

tol

Blvd

Slea

ter

Kinn

ey

Rd

Col

lege

St

YelmHwy

Yelm Hwy

Car

p en t

e r

Rd

Mullen Rd

Hen

ders

onB

l vd

Pacific Ave

MartinWay

LACEY

OLYMPIA

TUMWATER

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-02A Funded.mxd

0 1 2½Miles

Map 5-2A: North Urban Area2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2045 Land Use with Funded Projects

Date: 3/23/2020



Volume / Capacity> 1.00LOS F0.90 - 1.00LOS E0.80 - 0.90LOS D0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C






D



§̈¦5

¬«510

Union Ave

Herman Rd

12th Ave

20th Ave

37th Ave

28th Ave

Drah

amRd

Elliott Ave

Rur

al R

d

5th Ave

Walnut Rd

PlumSt

Miller Ave

Deschutes

Pk w

y

Willam

etteDr

Fone

s R

d

Pine Ave

Driftwood

Rd

Dut

tero

wR

d

Kinw

ood

St

Eskridge Blvd

Pug

etS

tBe

thel

St

14th

Ave

Old 99

Hwy

Hog

umBa

yR

d

Hawks Prairie Rd

Linwood Ave

Sapp Rd

22nd Ave

14th Ave

Morse Merryman Rd

Hof

fman

R

d

18th Ave

West

Bay

Dr

Libb

y R

d

26th Ave

Cai

nR

d

14th Ave

Easts ide

St

CapitalMall Dr

Lacey Blvd

ClevelandA

v e

Israel Rd

North St

Cap

i tol

Way

31st Ave

15th Ave

Union

MillsRd

Wig

gins

R

d

Trosper Rd

Car

pent

er R

d

26th Ave

Britton Pkwy

Rainier

Rd

Marvin

Rd

Mer

idia

n R

d

DivisionS

t

State Ave

Rich RdLit

tleroc

k

Rd

TumwaterBlvd

HarrisonAve

Mer

idia

n R

d

Lilly

R

d

Kai

ser

Rd

Mar

vin

Rd

4th AveSteilacoom

Rd

Boul

evar

d R

dSo

uth

Bay

Rd

Blac

k

Lake

Blvd

RuddellR

d

Capi

tol

Blvd

Slea

ter

Kinn

ey

Rd

Col

lege

St

YelmHwy

Yelm Hwy

Car

p en t

e r

Rd

Mullen Rd

Hen

ders

onB

l vd

Pacific Ave

MartinWay

LACEY

OLYMPIA

TUMWATER

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-02A Funded.mxd

0 1 2½Miles

Map 5-2A: North Urban Area2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2045 Land Use with Funded Projects

Date: 3/23/2020



Volume / Capacity> 1.00LOS F0.90 - 1.00LOS E0.80 - 0.90LOS D0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C






D


What Moves You

OLYMPIA

LACEY

TUMWATER


YELM

RAINIER

TENINO

BUCODAGrandMound

CapitolState Forest




PIERCE COUNTY

LEWIS COUNTY

GRAYS HARBOR

COUNTY

MASON COUNTY

See Map 5-3A

§̈¦5

¬«507

¬«121

¬«510

¬«8

£¤12

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-03 Full Build.mxd Date: 3/23/2020


0 1 2 3 4½Miles

Map 5-3: 2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2045 Land Use with Regional Projects




0.90 - 1.00LOS E

0.80 - 0.90LOS D

0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C







D



OLYMPIA

LACEY

TUMWATER


YELM

RAINIER

TENINO

BUCODAGrandMound

CapitolState Forest




PIERCE COUNTY

LEWIS COUNTY

GRAYS HARBOR

COUNTY

MASON COUNTY

See Map 5-3A

§̈¦5

¬«507

¬«121

¬«510

¬«8

£¤12

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-03 Full Build.mxd Date: 3/23/2020


0 1 2 3 4½Miles

Map 5-3: 2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2045 Land Use with Regional Projects




0.90 - 1.00LOS E

0.80 - 0.90LOS D

0.00 - 0.80LOS A, B, C







D


What Moves You

§̈¦5

¬«510

Union Ave

Herman Rd

12th Ave

20th Ave

37th Ave

28th Ave

Drah

amRd

Elliott AveR

ural

Rd

5th Ave

Walnut Rd

PlumSt

Miller Ave

Deschutes

Pk w

y

Willam

etteDr

Fone

s R

d

Pine Ave

Driftwood

Rd

Dut

tero

wR

d

Kinw

ood

St

Eskridge Blvd

Pug

etS

tBe

thel

St

14th

Ave

Old 99

Hwy

Hog

umBa

yR

d

Hawks Prairie Rd

Linwood Ave

Sapp Rd

22nd Ave

14th Ave

Morse Merryman Rd

Hof

fman

R

d

18th AveW

estB

ayD

r

Libb

y R

d

26th Ave

Cai

nR

d

14th Ave

Easts ide

St

CapitalMall Dr

Lacey Blvd

ClevelandA

v e

Israel Rd

North St

Cap

i tol

Way

31st Ave

15th Ave

Union

MillsRd

Wig

gins

R

d

Trosper Rd

Car

pent

er R

d

26th Ave

Britton Pkwy

Rainier

Rd

Marvin

Rd

Mer

idia

n R

d

DivisionS

t

State Ave

Rich RdLit

tleroc

k

Rd

TumwaterBlvd

HarrisonAve

Mer

idia

n R

d

Lilly

R

d

Kai

ser

Rd

Mar

vin

Rd

4th AveSteilacoom

Rd

Boul

evar

d R

dSo

uth

Bay

Rd

Blac

k

Lake

Blvd

RuddellR

d

Capi

tol

Blvd

Slea

ter

Kinn

ey

Rd

Col

lege

St

YelmHwy

Yelm Hwy

Car

p en t

e r

Rd

Mullen Rd

Hen

ders

onB

l vd

Pacific Ave

MartinWay

LACEY

OLYMPIA

TUMWATER

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-03A Full Build.mxd

0 1 2½Miles

Map 5-3A: North Urban Area2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2045 Land Use with Regional ProjectsVolume / Capacity







D

Date: 3/23/2020





§̈¦5

¬«510

Union Ave

Herman Rd

12th Ave

20th Ave

37th Ave

28th Ave

Drah

amRd

Elliott Ave

Rur

al R

d

5th Ave

Walnut Rd

PlumSt

Miller Ave

Deschutes

Pk w

y

Willam

etteDr

Fone

s R

d

Pine Ave

Driftwood

Rd

Dut

tero

wR

d

Kinw

ood

St

Eskridge Blvd

Pug

etS

tBe

thel

St

14th

Ave

Old 99

Hwy

Hog

umBa

yR

d

Hawks Prairie Rd

Linwood Ave

Sapp Rd

22nd Ave

14th Ave

Morse Merryman Rd

Hof

fman

R

d

18th Ave

West

Bay

Dr

Libb

y R

d

26th Ave

Cai

nR

d

14th Ave

Easts ide

St

CapitalMall Dr

Lacey Blvd

ClevelandA

v e

Israel Rd

North St

Cap

i tol

Way

31st Ave

15th Ave

Union

MillsRd

Wig

gins

R

d

Trosper Rd

Car

pent

er R

d

26th Ave

Britton Pkwy

Rainier

Rd

Marvin

Rd

Mer

idia

n R

d

DivisionS

t

State Ave

Rich RdLit

tleroc

k

Rd

TumwaterBlvd

HarrisonAve

Mer

idia

n R

d

Lilly

R

d

Kai

ser

Rd

Mar

vin

Rd

4th AveSteilacoom

Rd

Boul

evar

d R

dSo

uth

Bay

Rd

Blac

k

Lake

Blvd

RuddellR

d

Capi

tol

Blvd

Slea

ter

Kinn

ey

Rd

Col

lege

St

YelmHwy

Yelm Hwy

Car

p en t

e r

Rd

Mullen Rd

Hen

ders

onB

l vd

Pacific Ave

MartinWay

LACEY

OLYMPIA

TUMWATER

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-03A Full Build.mxd

0 1 2½Miles

Map 5-3A: North Urban Area2-Hour PM Peak Volume to Capacity2045 Land Use with Regional ProjectsVolume / Capacity







D

Date: 3/23/2020




What Moves You

OLYMPIA

LACEY

TUMWATER


YELM

RAINIER

TENINO

BUCODAGrandMound

CapitolState Forest



PIERCE COUNTY

LEWIS COUNTY

GRAYS HARBOR

COUNTY

MASON COUNTY

1 2

3 4 5

6 7

8

§̈¦5

¬«507

¬«121

¬«510

¬«8

£¤12

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-04 Assessment Areas.mxd Date: 3/23/2020

DISCLAIMER: This map is for general planning purposes only. ThurstonRegional Planning Council makes no representations as to the accuracyor fitness of the information for a particular purpose.

0 1 2 3 4½Miles

Map 5-4: Assessment Areas

NisquallyIndianReservation

L1L2L3L4L5L6L7L8

Black Lake BoulevardCrosby Boulevard/US 101 InterchangePlum StreetI-5 Pacific Ave InterchangeI-5 Slater-Kinney InterchangeDutterow RoadKuhlman Road/Nisqually Cut Off RdSR 510

Tumwater & OlympiaOlympia & TumwaterOlympiaOlympia and WSDOTOlympia and WSDOTThurston CountyThurston CountyWSDOT



OLYMPIA

LACEY

TUMWATER


YELM

RAINIER

TENINO

BUCODAGrandMound

CapitolState Forest



PIERCE COUNTY

LEWIS COUNTY

GRAYS HARBOR

COUNTY

MASON COUNTY

1 2

3 4 5

6 7

8

§̈¦5

¬«507

¬«121

¬«510

¬«8

£¤12

£¤101

Document Path: \\filefish\projects\Transportation\RTP2045\Maps_Images\Map 5-04 Assessment Areas.mxd Date: 3/23/2020

DISCLAIMER: This map is for general planning purposes only. ThurstonRegional Planning Council makes no representations as to the accuracyor fitness of the information for a particular purpose.

0 1 2 3 4½Miles

Map 5-4: Assessment Areas

NisquallyIndianReservation

L1L2L3L4L5L6L7L8

Black Lake BoulevardCrosby Boulevard/US 101 InterchangePlum StreetI-5 Pacific Ave InterchangeI-5 Slater-Kinney InterchangeDutterow RoadKuhlman Road/Nisqually Cut Off RdSR 510

Tumwater & OlympiaOlympia & TumwaterOlympiaOlympia and WSDOTOlympia and WSDOTThurston CountyThurston CountyWSDOT


What Moves You

This page left blank intentionally.

chapter 5: future conditions - trpc

Documents