Transportation for Skamania County, Washington › reports › rtp ›...

Regional Transportation Plan for

Skamania County, Washington

November 2018

Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council

Regional Transportation Plan for Skamania County, Washington

Skamania County, Washington

Published: November 2018

Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council

Street Address Mailing Address1300 Franklin Street

Vancouver, WA 98660 P.O. Box 1366

Vancouver, WA 98666‐1366

Phone: 564‐397‐6067

https://www.rtc.wa.gov

Clark County

Skamania County

Klickitat County

City of Vancouver

City of Camas

City of Washougal

City of Battle Ground

City of Ridgefield

City of La Center

Town of Yacolt

City of Stevenson

City of North Bonneville

City of White Salmon

City of Bingen

City of Goldendale

C‐TRAN

Washington DOT

Port of Vancouver

Port of Camas‐Washougal

Port of Ridgefield

Port of Skamania County

Port of Klickitat

Metro

Oregon DOT

14th Legislative District





Introduction ii

Regional Transportation Plan for Skamania County

Preparation of this Report was funded by grants from the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and local funds from RTC member jurisdictions.

RTC Respects Civil Rights RTC operates its programs without regard to race, color, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, age or disability in accordance with applicable laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and RCW 49.60. To request additional information on RTC’s Title VI nondiscrimination requirements, or if any person believes they have been aggrieved by an unlawful discriminatory practice under Title VI or other applicable law and would like to file a complaint, contact us at 564.397.6067 TTY 711 or email [email protected].

Persons who do not speak or read English well may request language assistance, oral interpretation and/or written translation, at no cost. Contact RTC at 564.397.6067 TTY 711 or email [email protected].

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information: Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations may request written materials in alternate formats, sign language interpreters, physical accessibility accommodations, or other reasonable accommodations by contacting the ADA Coordinator, Mark Harrington at 546‐397‐5207 TTY 711, with two weeks advance notice.

Introduction iii


Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction: RTP Vision, Purpose and Goals .......................................................... 1

Vision ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................... 1Goals ....................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Management Plan for the Columbia River National Scenic Area ..................................................................... 3SR‐14 Corridor Management Plan ................................................................................................................... 3

Transportation Strategy .......................................................................................................................................... 3Guidelines and Principles ........................................................................................................................................ 4Scope ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4Transportation Issues Addressed in RTP ................................................................................................................. 5Statutory Requirements ......................................................................................................................................... 6

State ................................................................................................................................................................. 6Intergovernmental Coordination ............................................................................................................................ 9

Skamania County Transportation Policy Committee ..................................................................................... 10Bi‐State Coordination ..................................................................................................................................... 11

Skamania County Regional Transportation Plan: Work Plan ................................................................................ 11Chapter 2: Land Use, Growth and Transportation .................................................................. 13

Land Use and Transportation ............................................................................................................................... 13Management Plan for Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area .............................................................. 14

Growth and Development .................................................................................................................................... 15Growth in Skamania County .......................................................................................................................... 15

General Land Uses in Skamania County................................................................................................................ 16Planned Land Use ................................................................................................................................................. 17Population and Employment Forecast.................................................................................................................. 17Demographic and Travel Trends ........................................................................................................................... 18

Chapter 3: Identification of Regional Transportation Needs .................................................. 21Current Functional Classification of the Regional Roadway System .................................................................... 21

Rural Principal Arterials .................................................................................................................................. 22Rural Minor Arterials ...................................................................................................................................... 22Rural Major Collector Roads .......................................................................................................................... 22Rural Minor Collector Roads .......................................................................................................................... 22Rural Local Roads ........................................................................................................................................... 22

Designation of the RTP Regional Transportation System ..................................................................................... 23All State Transportation Facilities and Services ............................................................................................. 23All Local Principal Arterials ............................................................................................................................. 23All Other Transportation Facilities and Services Considered Necessary ........................................................ 24

Growth in Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................................................... 27Future Travel Demand .......................................................................................................................................... 28

Introduction iv


Levels of Service .................................................................................................................................................... 28Level of Service Standards .................................................................................................................................... 29Capacity Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 30Safety Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 30

Unstable Slopes .............................................................................................................................................. 31Tunnels ........................................................................................................................................................... 32Trucks ............................................................................................................................................................. 32Recreational Parking ...................................................................................................................................... 33Transit ............................................................................................................................................................ 33

Preservation and Maintenance Need ................................................................................................................... 33Bridge of the Gods ................................................................................................................................................ 35Enhancement Need .............................................................................................................................................. 35Economic Development Need .............................................................................................................................. 35Emerging Technology ........................................................................................................................................... 36Stevenson Couplet ................................................................................................................................................ 36

Chapter 4: Financial Plan ....................................................................................................... 37Overview ............................................................................................................................................................... 37Challenges and Accomplishments ........................................................................................................................ 37Revenue Sources ................................................................................................................................................... 38

Federal Funding ............................................................................................................................................. 38State Funding ................................................................................................................................................. 40Local Funding ................................................................................................................................................. 42Transit Revenues ............................................................................................................................................ 42

Revenue Assumptions .......................................................................................................................................... 43Cost Assumptions ................................................................................................................................................. 44Balancing Revenue and Cost ................................................................................................................................. 45

Chapter 5: System Improvement and Strategy Plan ............................................................... 47Overview ............................................................................................................................................................... 47Maintenance ......................................................................................................................................................... 47Improvements ...................................................................................................................................................... 48Illustrative ............................................................................................................................................................. 48Miscellaneous Strategies and Solutions ............................................................................................................... 49

Bridge Deficiencies ......................................................................................................................................... 49Safety Deficiencies ......................................................................................................................................... 49Economic Development and Freight Transportation Deficiencies ................................................................. 49Non‐Motorized Transportation Deficiencies ................................................................................................. 50Transit Deficiencies ........................................................................................................................................ 50

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................ 50Chapter 6: Performance Monitoring ...................................................................................... 53

Overview ............................................................................................................................................................... 53

Introduction v


Safety .................................................................................................................................................................... 53Capacity Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 53Preservation and Maintenance ............................................................................................................................ 54Special Studies ...................................................................................................................................................... 54

Chapter 7: Plan Development and Implementation ............................................................... 55Public Involvement in Regional Transportation Planning Process ........................................................................ 55RTP Implementation ............................................................................................................................................. 55RTP Update Process .............................................................................................................................................. 55

Glossary ................................................................................................................................ 57

List of Figures Figure 1‐1: Map of Skamania County Location ....................................................................................................... 5Figure 1‐2: Agency Structure ................................................................................................................................ 10Figure 1‐3: RTP Process ......................................................................................................................................... 12Figure 2‐1: Land Use/Transportation Cycle .......................................................................................................... 13Figure 2‐2: Growth in Skamania County ............................................................................................................... 16Figure 2‐3: Population, Housing & Employment, Forecast ................................................................................... 18Figure 4‐1: Transportation Revenue and Cost ...................................................................................................... 45

List of Tables Table 2‐1: Skamania Workflow by County ............................................................................................................ 19Table 2‐2: Work Travel Mode ............................................................................................................................... 20Table 3‐1: Skamania County Public Railroad Crossings ........................................................................................ 27Table 3‐2: Traffic Volumes‐All Day (ADT) .............................................................................................................. 27Table 3‐3: Deficient Capacity Segment ................................................................................................................. 30Table 3‐4: Deficient Safety Segments, 2014‐2016 ................................................................................................ 31Table 3‐5: Rockfall Hazard Locations .................................................................................................................... 32Table 4‐1: Projected Revenue ............................................................................................................................... 44Table 4‐2: Projected Costs .................................................................................................................................... 44Table 5‐1: Transportation Improvement Projects ................................................................................................ 51Table 5‐2: Illustrative Needs ................................................................................................................................. 52

Introduction vi


Skamania County Transportation Policy Committee

Policy/Mission Statement TheCommitteesupportstheimprovementofsafetyandefficiencyoftheregionaltransportationsysteminSkamaniaCounty.TheCommitteesupportstransportationplanningandprojectdevelopmentthataddressestheimprovementofpublicsafetyalongtheregionaltransportationsystem.TheCommitteesupportstheidentificationof“corridorsegments”throughouttheSkamaniaCountyregion,whichshouldbethefocusoftransportationimprovement,enhancement,multimodal,andmobilityfunding.TheCommitteesupportsthecoordinationbetweenagenciesinidentifyingandaddressing,whenpractical,theneedsofamultimodaltransportationsystem.Skamania County Member Jurisdictions SkamaniaCountyCityofNorthBonnevilleCityofStevensonPortofSkamaniaCountyWashingtonStateDepartmentofTransportation

Skamania County Transportation Policy Committee Members TomLannen Commissioner,SkamaniaCountyBenShumaker PlanningDirector,CityofStevensonBrianSabo NorthBonneville,CityMayorPatAlbaugh ExecutiveDirector,PortofSkamaniaCountyBart Gernhart Acting SW Region Administrator, WSDOT

Staff and Other Participants: DevinReck WSDOT,SWRegionMichaelWilliams WSDOT,SWRegionTimElsea SkamaniaCounty,PublicWorksSophieMiller SkamaniaCounty,SeniorServicesEricHansen CityofStevenson,PublicWorksDeannaSyron CityofNorthBonneville,ClerkRyanVollans PortofCascadeLocksKathyFitzpatrick MCEDD,MobilityManagerMattRansom RegionalTransportationCouncilDaleRobins RegionalTransportationCouncil

Chapter 1: Introduction: RTP Vision, Purpose and Goals 1


Chapter 1: Introduction: RTP Vision, Purpose and Goals

TheRegionalTransportationPlan(RTP)forSkamaniaCountyistheregion’sprincipaltransportationplanningdocument.ItrepresentsaregionaltransportationplanforSkamaniaCountyareadevelopedthroughacoordinatedprocessbetweenlocaljurisdictionsinordertodevelopregionalsolutionstotransportationneeds.ThefirstRTPforSkamaniaCountywasadoptedinApril1995.ThisupdatetotheSkamaniaCountyRTPwilluse2040asthehorizonyearandincorporatethelatestavailabledata.TheRTPisintendedtobeaplantomeetthetransportationneedsoverthenext20yearsbyimplementingaregionaltransportationplanningprocess.Thisintroductorychapterpresentsthevision,purpose,goals,scope,statutoryrequirements,anddecision‐makingprocessinvolvedindevelopmentoftheRTPforSkamaniaCounty.

Vision TheRTPisacollectiveefforttoaddressthedevelopmentofasaferegionaltransportationsystemthatwillsupportplannedeconomicgrowthandmaintaintheregion’sruralqualityoflife.

Purpose TheRTPidentifiesfutureregionaltransportationsystemneedsandoutlinestransportationplansandimprovementsnecessarytomaintainadequatemobilityandsafetywithinandthroughouttheSkamaniaCountyregion.Theregionmustplanforafutureregionaltransportationsystemthatadequatelyservesthepopulation,employment,andvisitorgrowthprojectedforSkamaniaCounty.TheRTP’sgoals,objectives,andpolicieswillguidethevariousjurisdictionsandagenciesinvolvedinplanningandprogrammingoftransportationprojectsthroughoutSkamaniaCounty.



Goals ThefollowinggoalswereusedtoguidethedevelopmentoftheSkamaniaCountyRegionalTransportationPlan:

Preservation:Maintainandpreservetheexistingregionaltransportationsystem.

SafetyandSecurity:Provideasafeandsecuretransportationsystem. Economy:Provideatransportationsystemthatfosterseconomic

development. Finance:Provideforthedevelopmentofatransportationsystemthat

efficientlyusesfinancialresources. AccessibilityandMobility:Provideanintegratedandcoordinated

transportationsystemthatincludesavarietyofmobilityoptions. Environment:Provideatransportationsystemthatissensitivetothe

qualityoftheenvironmentandnaturalresources. VisionandValues:Provideforviableandlivablelocalcommunities. ManagementandOperations:Maximizeefficientmanagementand

operationofthetransportationsystem.ThereisconsistencybetweenthegeneralRTPgoalsandthepoliciesestablishedbylocaljurisdictionsandagenciesaspartoftheirlocalcomprehensiveplanningprocess.TheRegionalTransportationPlan(RTP)forSkamaniaCounty,whereapplicable,willconsiderthegoalsestablishedintheManagementPlanfortheColumbiaRiverGorgeNationalScenicArea,SR‐14CorridorManagementPlan,andconsiderotherlongrangeplans.



Management Plan for the Columbia River National Scenic Area

Providetransportationfacilitiesthatmeettheneedsofthetravelingpublicandimplementthisplan’srecreationgoalsandobjectiveswhileprotectingscenic,natural,cultural,andrecreationresources.

Promotealternativemodesoftransportationtoimprovesafetyandenjoymentofthetravelingpublicandtohelpalleviatefuturetrafficdemand.

SR‐14 Corridor Management Plan

ImprovesafetyalongSR‐14withrespectfortheprotectionandenhancementofresources.

Enhancetheeconomyofcommunitiesalongthehighway. DesignHighway14asanationalattractionbyprotectingandenhancing

scenic,natural,cultural,andrecreationresourceswithinthehighwaycorridor,withrespecttolocalresidences,andbusiness.

ManagetheSR‐14Corridorinthemostefficientandeffectivemannerpossible.

Transportation Strategy TheRegionalTransportationPlanforSkamaniaCountyistheregion’stransportationstrategy.



Guidelines and Principles In1994,theStateLegislaturepassedlegislationthatrequiredRTPO’stoestablishGuidelinesandPrinciplesthatprovidedirectionforthedevelopmentofthetransportationelementsofcomprehensiveplans.Thefollowingrepresenttheseguidelinesandprinciples:

Identifyadequateareasforfuturecommercial,retail,andindustrialeconomicgrowth.Coordinateidentifiedeconomicgrowthareaswithanefficienttransportationsystem.

Identifyadequatelandforresidentialdevelopmentanddensitywithinurbanareasthatiscoordinatedwiththetransportationsystem.

Provideatransportationsystemthatsupportstheeconomicvitalityoftheregion,andprovidesforlong‐termfreightmobilityneedsandportaccess.

Providearangeofnon‐motorizedopportunitieswithintheregionaltransportationsystem.

Worktowardthedevelopmentofacoresystemofall‐weatherroadsforfreighttravel.

Encouragereducingtherelianceonthesingleoccupantvehiclebyprovidingothermodesoftransportation.

Encouragepresentandfuturerailroadrightofwaytobeutilizedfortransportationpurposes.

Enhanceintermodalfreightconnections.

Scope TheRTPforSkamaniaCountytakestheyear2040asitshorizonyear.Traveldemandfortheregionisforecastedforthisfutureyearandimprovementstothetransportationsystemarerecommendedbasedontheprojecteddemand.TheareacoveredbytheRTPisthewholeofSkamaniaCounty.SkamaniaCountyislocatedinthesouthernpartofthestateofWashingtonalongthenorthbanksoftheColumbiaRiver.Stevenson,thecountyseat,liesapproximately45mileseastofPortland,OregonandVancouver,Washington(Figure1‐1).



Figure 1‐1: Map of Skamania County Location

Peopleandfreightmovethroughoutaregionaltransportationsystemwithoutconsiderationforcity,county,orstateboundaries.Sincetransportationproblemsextendbeyondjurisdictionalboundaries,theRTPmustanalyzethefuturetransportationneedsfortheentireregionwhilecreatingacooperativeframeworkforcoordinatingtheindividualactionsofvariousjurisdictions.

Transportation Issues Addressed in RTP Transportationsystemmaintenance,preservation,andsafety. Developmentofcorridorstoimproveeconomicdevelopmentpotential. AccessibilityacrosstheColumbiaRiverintermsofcapacity,economic

development,corridorlocation,andconnectingroadways. Federal,state,local,andprivatesourcesofrevenuefortransportation

projects. Accesstoports,airports,intermodaltransportationfacilities,major

freightdistributionroutes,andrecreationareas. Theneedtorelieveandpreventcongestionfromoccurringwhereitdoes

notyetoccur.



Theneedtoimprovecorridorswithsafetyproblems,includingfreightcorridors.

Theneedtoprovideamultimodaltransportationsystem;includingpedestrian,bicycle,bus,truck,rail,marine,andauto.

Theneedtoprovideenhancements(signs,viewpoints,kiosk,etc.),toassistvisitors.

Statutory Requirements

State WithinWashingtonState,MetropolitanTransportationPlansareexpectedtobeconsistentwiththepolicyframeworkandobjectivesdescribedinthetransportationplanforWashingtonState.ThemostrecentWashingtonTransportationPlan,WTP2035,wasdevelopedbytheWashingtonTransportationCommissionandadoptedinJanuary2015.WashingtonTransportationPlanPhase2–Implementation2017–2040wasapprovedinApril2018.TheWashingtonTransportationPlan2035isbasedonthefollowingtransportationpolicygoalsestablishedbytheLegislature:

EconomicVitality:Topromoteanddeveloptransportationsystemsthatstimulate,support,andenhancethemovementofpeopleandgoodstoensureaprosperouseconomy;

Preservation:Tomaintain,preserve,andextendthelifeandutilityofpriorinvestmentsintransportationsystemsandservices;

Safety:Toprovideforandimprovethesafetyandsecurityoftransportationcustomersandthetransportationsystem;

Mobility:ToimprovethepredictablemovementofgoodsandpeoplethroughoutWashingtonState;



Environment:ToenhanceWashington’squalityoflifethroughtransportationinvestmentsthatpromoteenergyconservation,enhancehealthycommunities,andprotecttheenvironment;and

Stewardship:Tocontinuouslyimprovethequality,effectiveness,andefficiencyofthetransportationsystem.

TheWashingtonStateHighwaySystemPlan(HSP)istheelementofWashington’sTransportationPlan(WTP)thataddressescurrentandforecaststatehighwayneeds.TheHSPincludesacomprehensiveassessmentofexistingandprojected20‐yeardeficienciesonthestate’shighwaysystem.Italsolistspotentialsolutionsthataddressthesedeficiencies.TheHSPisupdatedperiodicallywitheachversionbuildingonthelast.Thedocumentcoversallissuesrelatedtothestate’shighwaysystem.The2007‐2026versionoftheHSPtakestheWTP’sinvestmentguidelines,andidentifiesthehighwaysystemneeds,strategiesandperformancemeasurementsassociatedwiththeguidelines.WSDOT’sCorridorSketchInitiativeisasetofplanningactivitiesthatengagestheagency’spartnerstodeterminethecontextandperformanceofstatehighwaycorridorsandidentifieshigh‐levelstrategiesforaddressingperformancegaps.Theinitiativecomplementsandsupportsregionalplanningprocessesaroundthestate.Inaddition,WSDOThascompletedanumberofModelPlansincludingplansforAviation,Bicycle&Pedestrians,Ferry,Freight,Rail,PublicTransportation,andUltra‐HighSpeedGroundTransportation.RecentWSDOTplansaredocumentedonWSDOT’sPlanningsectionwebsite.

Washington State’s Regional Transportation Planning Program WashingtonState'sGrowthManagementAct,enactedin1990,approvedtheRegionalTransportationPlanningProgramwhichcreatedaformalmechanismforlocalgovernmentsandthestatetocoordinatetransportationplanningforregionaltransportationfacilities.TheGrowthManagementAct(GMA)authorizedthecreationofRegionalTransportationPlanningOrganizations(RTPOs)byunitsoflocalgovernment.SouthwestWashingtonRegionalTransportationCouncil(RTC)isthedesignatedRTPOforthethree‐countyareaofClark,SkamaniaandKlickitat.In1994,furtherstatelegislationclarifiedthedutiesoftheRTPOoutlinedintheGMAandfurtherdefinedRTPOplanningstandards.



ThedutiesoftheRTPO,asoutlinedintheGMAandSHB1928,include: Designationoftheregionaltransportationsystem. DevelopmentofasixyearregionalTransportationImprovement

Program(TIP),includingregionallysignificantprojects.TheTIPmustincludeafinancialplan.

DevelopmentofaRegionalTransportationPlan(RTP),toincludearegionaltransportationstrategy,identificationofexistingandplannedfacilitiesandprograms,LevelofServicestandards,afinancialplan,assessmentofregionaldevelopmentpatternsandcapitalinvestmentusingaregionaltransportationapproach.TheconceptofleastcostplanningistobeusedindevelopmentoftheRTP.TheRTPmustbereviewedatleasteverytwoyearstoensurethatitiscurrent.

Establishguidelinesandprinciplesfordevelopmentandevaluationofthetransportationelementsoflocalcomprehensiveplans.

DeveloparegionalLevelofService(LOS)standardfortheregionalsystemasrequiredbytheLOSBill.

TheRegionalTransportationPlanningProgramisdesignedtobeintegratedwith,andaugment,thefederallyrequiredMetropolitanPlanningOrganization(MPO)program.TheRegionalTransportationPlanningProgramextendstransportationplanningbytheRTPO’storuralareasnotcoveredbythefederalprogram.TheRegionalTransportationPlanningProgramisalsointendedtotieinandbeconsistentwithlocalcomprehensiveplanning.Theregionaltransportationplanningprocessshould:

Guidetheimprovementoftheregionaltransportationsystem. Useregionallyconsistenttechnicalmethodsanddata. Considerenvironmentalimpacts. Ensureearlyandcontinuouspublicinvolvement. Beconsistentwiththelocalcomprehensiveplanningprocess. Beanongoingprocess. Incorporatemultimodalplanningactivities. Addressmajorcapacityexpansionandoperationalimprovementstothe

regionaltransportationsystem.



Beapartnership,includingfederal,state,andlocalgovernments,specialdistricts,privatesector,generalpublic,andothersduringconception,technicalanalysis,policydevelopment,anddecision‐making.

TocomplywithStatestandards,theRTPshallincludethefollowingcomponents: Descriptionofthedesignatedregionaltransportationsystem. Regionaltransportationgoals,policies,andstrategy. Regionallandusestrategy.Existingandproposedlandusesdefinedon

localandregionalcomprehensivelanduseplansdeterminetheregionaldevelopmentstrategy.

Identificationofregionaltransportationneeds.Aninventoryofexistingregionaltransportationfacilitiesandservices,identificationofcurrentdeficiencies,andforecastoffuturetraveldemandwillbecarriedout.

DevelopmentofLOSstandardsconsistentwiththeLevelofServiceBill. Developmentoffinancialplanfornecessarytransportationsystem

improvements. Regionaltransportationsystemimprovementandstrategyplan.Specific

facilityorserviceimprovementswillbeidentifiedandprioritiesdetermined.

Establishmentofaperformancemonitoringprogram.Theperformanceofthetransportationsystemwillbemonitoredovertime.Themonitoringmethodology,datacollection,andanalysistechniquestobeusedwillbeoutlined.

PlansforimplementationoftheRTP.

Intergovernmental Coordination InordertomaketheRTPnotonlyaPlantoprovidecarefullythought‐outsolutionstotransportationissuesandproblemsbutalsoaPlanthatalljurisdictionscanimplement,aregionaltransportationplanningcommitteestructurehasbeenestablished.Consistentwiththe1990GMAlegislation,athree‐countyRTCBoardofDirectorshasbeenestablishedtoservetheRTPOregion.IndividualCountyCommitteesandBoardsalsoplayapartintheregionaltransportationdecision‐making.TheSkamaniaCountyTransportationPolicyCommitteecontinuestoguideSkamaniaCountyregionaltransportationpolicy.Theroleof,andrepresentationon,theRTCBoardofDirectorsandindividualCountyPolicyCommitteesisdescribedintheBylawsofSouthwestWashingtonRegionalTransportationCouncil(lastamendedDecember2017)andInterlocalAgreementforEstablishmentofthe



SouthwestWashingtonRegionalTransportationCouncil.TheregionaltransportationcommitteestructureisoutlinedinFigure1‐2.

Figure 1‐2: Agency Structure

Skamania County Transportation Policy Committee TheSkamaniaCountyTransportationPolicyCommitteewasestablishedtoprovideafocusforSkamaniaCountyregionaltransportationissuesandpolicies.ItiscomposedofrepresentativesofWashingtonStateDepartmentofTransportation(WSDOT),SkamaniaCounty,theCityofStevenson,theCityofNorthBonneville,andthePortofSkamaniaCounty.TheSkamaniaCountyTransportationPolicyCommitteecarriesoutregionaltransportationplanningactivitieswithinSkamaniaCounty.Otherlocal/regionalagenciesandorganizations(e.g.ColumbiaRiverGorgeCommission,U.S.ForestService,PortofCascadeLocks,Mid‐ColumbiaEconomicDevelopmentDistrict)arewelcometoparticipateasnon‐votingmembersofthecommittee.



Bi‐State Coordination

SkamaniaCountyislocatedontheWashingtonsideoftheColumbiaRiverGorgeRegionandbi‐statetravelissignificantwithinthisregion.OregonandWashingtonjurisdictionsintheregionhaveahistoryofcoordinatingtheirtransportationandlanduseplans.Theseplanningeffortsensurethatregionallysignificantaspectsofthetransportationsystemareconsideredwithinabi‐statecontext.RTCrepresentativesparticipateinbi‐statetransportationopportunitieswithOregonrepresentatives.ThisincludestheGorgeTransLinkgroup,bi‐statestudies,andotherbi‐stateopportunities.Inaddition,RTCwelcomesparticipationofOregonrepresentativesintheSkamaniaCountytransportationplanningprocess.CoordinationbetweenWashingtonandOregononbi‐statetransportationneedswillcontinuethroughtheregionaltransportationplanningprocess.

Skamania County Regional Transportation Plan: Work Plan AsafirststepinpreparationoftheSkamaniaCountyRTP,aworkplanwasdeveloped.(SeeFigure1‐3).TheworkplanoutlinesmajortaskstobecoveredinthedevelopmentoftheRTP.TheRTPisdesignedasabenchmarkplantomeetRTPOelementsrequiredbythe1990GMAlegislationandSHB1928legislationof1994.

Outline of RTP Chapters Chapter1: Introduction:RTPVision,Purpose,andGoals.TheRTPisintroducedanditsgeneralgoals,policies,statutoryauthority,andpurposearedescribed.TheRTPprocessisoutlinedaswellasregionaltransportationcommitteestructureandintergovernmentalcooperationandcoordinationoftheRTP.Chapter2: RegionalLandUseandGrowth.SkamaniaCounty’sdemographicdata,developmenttrends,andregionaldevelopmentstrategyarediscussed.Existingandfuturelandusesanddevelopmentpatternsareidentified.Chapter3: IdentificationofRegionalTransportationNeeds.Theregionaltransportationsystemisdesignatedanddefined.Thecharacteristicsandpatternsoftoday’sandfutureregionaltraveldemand,today’stransportationproblemlocations,andfutureregionalneedsaredescribed.Needscriteriasuchasaccessibility,levelsofservice,andsafetyareoutlined.Chapter4: FinancialPlan.Revenuesourcesareidentifiedanddescribed,andaplanforfinancingtransportationsystemimprovementsispresented.



Chapter5: SystemImprovementandStrategyPlan.Recommendationsfordevelopmentoftheregionaltransportationsystemaremade.Regionaltransportationgoalsandpoliciesarereviewed.Chapter6: PerformanceMonitoring.Performancemonitoringmeasuresaredescribed.MonitoringtheRTP’sconsistencywiththestatetransportationplan,localtransportationplans,landuseregulations,andregionaldemographicprojectionsareoutlined.Chapter7: PlanDevelopmentandImplementation.ProvisionsfortheimplementationofthepublicindevelopmentoftheRTParedescribed.Provisionsfortheimplementationofregionaltransportationgoals,policies,andactionsestablishedbytheRTParedescribed.TheRTPreviewandamendmentprocessisoutlinedshouldchangingpolicies,financialconditions,orgrowthpatternswarrantamendmentofthePlan.TherequiredbiennialupdateoftheRTPisdescribed.

Figure 1‐3: RTP Process

Chapter 2: Land Use, Growth and Transportation 13


Chapter 2: Land Use, Growth and Transportation

Land Use and Transportation Transportationplanningisaboutmeetingthetraveldemandsofpeopleandgoods.Thetransportationsystemmustconnectpeopletojobsandservicesandconnectfreightandgoodstomarketsandconsumers.Indevelopingaregionaltransportationplan,thefundamentalrelationshipbetweentransportationandlandusemustberecognized,andtheeffectthatlanduseandgrowthhaveontransportationmustbetakenintoconsideration.TheLandUse/TransportationcycleisillustratedinFigure2‐1.Figure 2‐1: Land Use/Transportation Cycle

Thelinkagebetweenlanduseandtransportationisacomplexissue,butonasimplelevelthelinkagecanbethoughtofasworkingintwoways:



1. Thespatialdistributionandtypeoflanduseactivityinfluencesboththedemandfortravelandtravelcharacteristics.Differenttypesoflandusegenerateandattractdifferingtrafficrates;forexample,retaillanduseswillgeneratemoretripsthanresidentiallanduses.

2. Improvingaccessbyexpandingthetransportationsystemallowsforthedevelopmentoflandthatwasformerlyinaccessible.

Landuseandtransportationareinter‐linkedbecauselanduseactivitieslargelydeterminetraveldemandanddesire.Whendifferentlandusesaresegmentedorsegregated,lengthoftripstendstoincrease.Forexample,peoplehavetotravelbetweentheirhomesandtheirworkplaces.Tomeetmobilityneeds,theselongertripsusuallyhavetobeservedbytheautomobile,thusreducingtheuseoftransportationalternatives,suchaswalkingortransit.

Management Plan for Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Mostofthesouthern,morepopulousportionofSkamaniaCountyislocatedintheColumbiaRiverGorgeNationalScenicArea(ScenicArea).Thus,locallanduseisaffectedbytheguidelinesoftheManagementPlanfortheColumbiaRiverGorgeNationalScenicArea(ManagementPlan).In1993,SkamaniaCountyadoptedlanduseordinancesthatareconsistentwiththeManagementPlan.TheseordinancesadoptedbytheCountyprovideforlocalimplementationoftheManagementPlan.TheManagementPlanincludesdirectionforfuturelanduseintheScenicArea.Thislandusedirectionwillinfluencetheregionaltransportationsystemandtravelpatterns.NewindustrialdevelopmentintheScenicAreacanonlybelocatedwithintheurbanareas.Thereisprovisionforsomenewcommercialandruralresidentialdevelopmentoutsideofurbanareas,mainlyinexistingruralcommunitieslikeSkamania.Denserresidentialdevelopmentandmoreintensivecommercialusesareencouragedtooccurwithintheexistingurbanareas.ThecommunitiesofStevenson,NorthBonneville,Carson,andHomeValleyaredesignatedurbanareasthatareexemptfromtheManagementPlanguidelines.Landuseplanninginthesecommunitiesisgovernedbylocalcomprehensiveplans.



Growth and Development Sustainedeconomicdevelopmentandgrowthwithinaregionisdesirablebecauseoftheeconomicbenefitsthatincreasedemploymentandalargertaxbasecanbring.However,whilegrowthcancontributetothehealthofaregion’seconomy,itcanalsohavenegativeimpacts.Unmanaged,fastratesofgrowthcanhaveasevereimpactontheabilityofacommunitytoprovideservicesandinfrastructure.Theneedtomaintaineconomicviability,andatthesametime,qualityoflifeisachallenge.Elementsthatcontributetoadesirablequalityoflifeincludejobopportunities,affordablehousing,ahealthyenvironmentwithcleanair,andrecreationalopportunities.Anefficient,safetransportationsystemcontributestothequalityoflifeforresidentsofaregionandcanactasanattractorforeconomicdevelopment.Conversely,atransportationsystemdependentondeterioratingandoutmodedfacilitiescanbeaninhibitortotheefficient,safemovementofpeopleandgoods.

Growth in Skamania County SkamaniaCountyhasseenmoderategrowthinthelastfewdecades.TheU.S.CensusBureau,WashingtonState’sOfficeofFinancialManagement(OFM),andBureauofEconomicAnalysis(BEA)providedthefollowingdata.BEAemploymentincludesallwageandsalariedjobsaswellasproprietorsjobsthatincludessoleproprietor,self‐employed,andfarmemployment.Between1990and2010thepopulationofthecountyincreasedby34%from8,289to11,066,whilethenumberofhousingunitsincreasedby43%from3,922to5,628.TheincreaseinBEAemploymentwas17%from2,582in1990to3,024in2010.(SeeFigure2‐2)Muchofthegrowthoccurredbetween1990and2007,whilegrowthslowedbetween2007and2010.By2016,thecountypopulationhadincreasedto11,500,with5,880housingunitsand3,480jobs.



Figure 2‐2: Growth in Skamania County

SkamaniaCountyhasseenalargeincreaseinrecreationactivity,duetotheColumbiaRiverGorgeNationalScenicArea,GiffordPinchotNationalForest,Mt.St.HelensVolcanicMonument,BeaconRockStatePark,SkamaniaLodge,InterpretiveCenter,andwindsurfing.Thegrowthofrecreationalactivitiesseeninthecountyinthelastfewdecadeshasresultedinincreasedseasonaldemandsontheregionaltransportationsystem.Developmentofatransportationpolicyplanmustconsiderhowtoplanforatransportationsystemthatcansupportincreasesintraveldemandcausedbygrowthinpopulation,employment,andrecreationalactivity.Atthesametime,thissystemmustbeaffordableandminimizeenvironmentalimpactstomaintaintheruralqualityoflife.Asafe,efficienttransportationsystemcanworktoenhanceeconomicdevelopmentwithinaregion.

General Land Uses in Skamania County ThepopulationofSkamaniaCountyisconcentratedinthesouthernquarterofthecountyneartheColumbiaRiverandintheWindRiverValley.Thecountyhasdiverseenvironments,rangingfromthegentlyslopinglandsneartheColumbiaRivertoruggedandsteepmountainousevergreenforest.TheCascadeMountainstraverseSkamaniaCountyfromnorthtosouth.SkamaniaCountyhasatotalareaof1,683squaremiles,90%ofSkamaniaCountyisforestedand80%isapartofGiffordPinchotNationalForest.MuchoftheprivatelandownershipiswithintheNationalScenicArea.AlmostathirdofthejobsinSkamaniaCountywereinthepublicsector,withlocalgovernmentaccountingforthemajorityofthejobs,especiallythoseineducational

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

Population Housing Units BEA Employment

1990

2000

2010

2016



services.MajorprivateemploymentsectorsincludeAccommodationandFoodService,Manufacturing,andRetailTrade.Theprovisionofpublicfacilitiesandservices,includingtransportation,isaprincipaldeterminantoflandusepatterns.AlthoughthegrowthinSkamaniaCountyhasbeenmoderate,muchofgrowthanddevelopmenthastakenplacenearthetransportationcorridorsoftheColumbiaRiverandStateRoute14.

Planned Land Use Comprehensiveplansarethemeansbywhichlocaljurisdictionscanplanfortheirfuturegrowthanddevelopment;theycanprovideaprocessforanticipatingandinfluencingtheorderlyandcoordinateddevelopmentofland.WithinWashingtonState,planningauthorityisdelegatedbythestatetolocalgovernmentsinRCW36.70A,35.63and35A.63.Comprehensiveplansarerequiredtohavealanduseelementshowingthegeneraldistributionandlocationoflandforvarioususes,aswellasacirculationelementshowingthestreetsystemandtransportationroutes.SkamaniaCounty,CityofStevenson,andCityofNorthBonnevilleallhavecurrentlyadoptedcomprehensiveplans.TheColumbiaRiverGorgeCommissionhasadoptedandisadministeringaColumbiaRiverGorgeManagementPlanpursuanttotherequirementsoftheNationalScenicAreaAct.WithintheColumbiaRiverGorgeNationalScenicArea,futureresidentialandcommercialdevelopmentisencouragedtooccurintheUrbanAreas,butthereisallowanceforsomeresidentialdevelopmentoutsidetheurbanareas.Inaddition,theGiffordPinchotNationalForestandMountSt.HelensNationalVolcanicMonumentmanagementplansareadministeredbytheU.S.ForestService.Localcomprehensiveplans,andtheManagementPlansfortheColumbiaRiverGorgeNationalScenicAreaandForestServicelands,encouragethefuturedevelopmentofresidential,commercial,andindustriallandsintheUrbanAreas.Thereisprovisionforthedevelopmentofsomecommercialandresidentiallandsoutsideoftheurbanareas.Inaddition,theSkamaniaCountyComprehensivePlanprovidesforotherlandusessuchasagricultureandtimber.

Population and Employment Forecast TheWashingtonStateOfficeofFinancialManagement(OFM)developspopulationforecastsforallcountiesintheStateofWashington.Theirforecastcontainsalow,medium,andhighestimate.The2017forecastdevelopedbyOFMfor2040populationinSkamaniaCountyrangedfromalowof12,216toahighof15,766.ForthepurposeoftheRegionalTransportationPlan,amedium‐highforecastof14,793



willbeused.The2040forecastrepresentsa34%or3,727increaseinpopulationfrom2010to2040.HousingandemploymentforecastforSkamaniaCountyweredevelopedbyRTCbasedonpopulationforecastandhistoricaltrends.Estimated2040housingis7,509units.The2040forecastrepresentsa33%or1,881increaseinhousingunitsfrom2010to2040.Estimated2040BEAemploymentis3,940.This2040forecastrepresentsa27%or850increaseinemploymentfrom2010to2035(seeFigure2‐3).Figure 2‐3: Population, Housing & Employment, Forecast

Demographic and Travel Trends Growthinpopulationandemployment,development,andresultinglandusepatternstogetherwithitsdistributionallaffecttraveldemand.However,otherdemographicfactorsalsoinfluencetraveldemand.Thesefactorsincludehouseholdsize,workforceparticipation,employmentpatterns,andvehicleownership.Householdsizeisoneofthemostsignificantdemographicfactorsthatinfluenceslanduseanddemandfortransportationservices.Between1970and2010,therewasatrendtowardsmallerhouseholdsizeinSkamaniaCountyduetomoresingle‐personhouseholdsandsmallerfamilysize.Theaveragenumberofpersonsperhousingunitwas2.69in1970,buthadfallento1.97by2010.The2040forecastis1.97personsperhousingunit.Thefuturepopulationisexpectedtobecomeolderwithahigherproportionofthetotalpopulationhavingdisabilities.Itisestimatedbetween2010and2040persons

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

Population Housing Units BEA Employment



overtheageof65willincreasefrom14%ofthepopulationtoapproximately30%ofthepopulation.In2016,thosewithadisabilitymadeupapproximately14%oftheCountypopulationandthisisexpectedtoincreasetoalmost19%by2040.Withanagingpopulationandagrowingnumberofindividualswithdisabilities,futuredemandandtraveltrendsareexpectedtochange.Anotherdemographictrendthateffectstraveldemandistheincreaseintwoormoreautohouseholds.Typically,theautosareusedtogettowork,forworkpurposeswhileatwork,torunerrandsatlunchtime,beforeorafterwork,andiftheyhaveafamily,totaketheirchildrentotheiractivities.Allresultinpeople’sincreasedrelianceontheautomobilethatpeopleconsidertheirmostconvenienttransportationmode.Employmentpatternshavealsobeenchanging,witharelativedeclineseeninthetraditionalindustrialortimberjobsandanincreaseinservicesectoremployment.Withmoderntechnology,therehasalsobeenarapidgrowthinworkerswhoareabletoworkathome.Inaddition,asthetraditionaltimberjobsarelost,thereisatrendforSkamaniaCountyresidentstobeemployedinothercounties.TheU.S.CensusBureauAmericanCommunitySurvey2006‐2010showsthatapproximately51.2%ofthecountyresidentsworkedoutsideofSkamaniaCounty.The2010Censusshowsthat52.3%ofthecountyresidentsworkedoutsideofSkamaniaCounty.Table2‐1showsdataofthoselivingand/orworkinginSkamaniaCounty.

Table 2‐1: Skamania Workflow by County

Place of Residence Place of Work 2000 2000

Percent 2010 2010

Percent 2000‐2010 Change

Skamania County Skamania County 2,032 47.7% 2,340 48.8% 308 Clark County, WA 896 21.0% 1,060 22.1% 164 Multnomah Co., OR 535 12.6% 510 10.6% ‐25 Hood River Co., OR 353 8.3% 260 5.4% ‐95 Klickitat Co., WA 205 4.8% 340 7.1% 135 Other Washington 63 1.5% 59 1.2% ‐4 Other Oregon 148 3.5% 179 3.7% 31 Other 27 0.6% 43 0.9% 16Skamania Co. Employed Workforce 4,261 4,791 530Skamania County Skamania County 2.032 79.4% 2,340 72.2% 308Clark Co., WA 124 4.8% 260 8.0% 136Multnomah Co., OR 61 2.4% 35 1.1% ‐26Hood River Co., OR 70 2.7% 115 3.5% 45Klickitat Co., WA 147 5.7% 340 10.5% 193Other Washington 24 0.9% 43 1.3% 19Other Oregon 76 3.0% 109 3.4% 33Other 24 0.9% 0 0.0% ‐24Employment within Skamania County 2,558 3,242 684



TraveldemandhasalsogrownasthenumberofregisteredvehiclesandpassengercarsinSkamaniaCountyhasincreasedinthepastseveraldecades.In2010,therewere5,500registeredpassengervehicleswithapproximately74.6%oftheSkamaniaCountyhouseholdshavingtwoormorevehiclesavailable.Therelationshipbetweenlanduseandtransportationshouldbecarefullyconsideredwhendevelopingavisionforfuturegrowthandgrowthpatterns.TraveldemandforfreighttruckspassingthroughtheregiononSR‐14appearstobeincreasing.Trucksaccountforapproximately20%ofthevehicletrafficonSR‐14.TheadditionofthesetruckscreatesconflictswithothervehiclesusingtheSR‐14corridor.ThereareseveraltrendsthataffectseasonaltraveldemandwithinSkamaniaCounty.First,isthetrendofadditionalretiredresidentswholiveinSkamaniaCounty,butspendtheirwintersinawarmerclimate.Theseresidentsaddtothelocaltrafficfromspringtofall.Second,istheincreasedpopularityoftheColumbiaRiverGorgeareaasarecreationalattractor.SinceitsdesignationasaNationalScenicArea,summertrafficvolumeshaverapidlyincreased.Table2‐2alsoprovidesinformationthatcompares2000and2010CensusJourneytoWorkdata.Thisdatadisplaysseveraltrendsimpactingthecommutertraveltimes.First,thedatashowsthatcommutetimeshaveremainedaboutthesame.Second,theuseofcarpoolsdecreased.Third,therehasbeenanincreaseinthenumberofpeoplewhodrivealoneandthosewhoworkfromhome.

Table 2‐2: Work Travel Mode

Skamania County 2000 2000

Percent 2010 2010

Percent

2000 to 2010

Growth

2000 to 2010

Percent Change

2010 WA State

Percent Drive Alone 3,238 76.0% 3,785 78.9% 547 16.9% 72.3% Carpool 631 14.8% 425 8.9% ‐206 ‐32.6% 11.6% Transit 21 0.5% 15 0.3% ‐6 ‐28.6% 5.6% Bicycle or Walked 104 2.4% 100 2.1% ‐4 ‐3.8% 4.3% Motorcycle/Other 26 0.6% 45 0.9% 19 73.1% 1.2% Worked at Home 241 5.7% 425 8.9% 184 76.3% 5.1% Totals 4,261 100.0% 4,795 100.0% 534 12.5% 100.0%

Mean Travel Time to Work (minutes) 29.2 n/a 30.0 n/a 0.8 n/a 25.4

Chapter 3: Identification of Regional Transportation Needs 21


Chapter 3: Identification of Regional Transportation Needs

Current Functional Classification of the Regional Roadway System Functionalclassificationisthegroupingofhighways,roads,andstreetsbythecharacterofservicetheyprovide.Comprehensivetransportationplanningusesfunctionalclassificationtodeterminehowtravelcanbechannelizedwithinthenetworkinalogicalandefficientmanner.Afunctionalclassificationdefinesthemajorrolethataroadorstreetserveswithinthetotalexistingandfutureroadwaynetwork.Insimpleterms,highways,streets,androadsfunctionasarterials,collectors,orlocalaccess.Arterialsprovidethehighestdegreeofmobilityandlimitedaccesstolocalproperty.Collectorsgenerallyprovideequalemphasisuponmobilityandlandaccess.Localroadsandstreetsemphasizelandaccessinlieuofmobility.TheWashingtonStateDepartmentofTransportation(WSDOT)hastheprimaryresponsibilityfordevelopingandupdatingthehighwayfunctionalclassificationsystem.Theyworkcooperativelywithlocalandregionalagenciesindevelopingandupdatingthefunctionalclassificationsystem.TheFederalFunctionalClassificationsystemforSkamaniaCountyroadshasbeencompletedandresultedina

countywideuniformclassificationsystem.Generally,facilitiesclassifiedasMajorCollectororaboveinruralareasareeligibleforfederalfunding.FurtherinformationonthefunctionalclassificationofroadscanbefoundonWSDOT’swebsite.Astatewidemapofthefederalfunctionalclassificationisavailable,allowingthezoomingintoKlickitatCountyandCitydetail.ISTEAalsorequiredthatroadsbedesignatedasNationalHighwaySystem(NHS)facilities.CongressapprovedtheNHSSystemwithpassageoftheNationalHighwaySystemDesignationActof1995(NHSAct).InSkamania



County,SR‐14andtheBridgeoftheGodshavebeendesignatedasanNHSfacility.In1999,thestatelegislatureadoptedHighwaysofStatewideSignificance.InSkamaniaCounty,theonlyhighwayfacilitydefinedas“ofStatewideSignificance”isSR‐14.Adescriptionoftheruralfunctionalclassificationcategoriesfollows:

Rural Principal Arterials Ruralprincipalarterialsaresub‐dividedintotwosets(1)interstatefacilitiesand(2)otherprincipalarterials.Ruralprincipalarterialsservecorridormovementshavingtriplengthandtraveldensitycharacteristicsofstatewideorinterstatetravel.Theyconsistofaconnectedruralnetworkofcontinuousroutes.

Rural Minor Arterials Inconjunctionwiththeprincipalarterials,theruralminorarterialsformaruralnetworkwhichlinkcitiesandlargertownstogetherwithothermajortrafficgenerators.Theprincipalarterialsandruralminorarterialsarespacedatsuchintervalsthatalldevelopedareasofthestatearewithinareasonabledistanceofanarterialhighway.Minorarterialsshouldbeexpectedtoprovideforrelativelyhighoveralltravelspeedswithminimuminterferencetothroughmovement.

Rural Major Collector Roads Ruralmajorcollectorsprovideservicetolargertownsnotdirectlyservedbythehighersystemsandtoothertrafficgeneratorsofequivalentimportance.Ruralmajorcollectorsservethemoreimportanttravelcorridorswithinthecounty.

Rural Minor Collector Roads Ruralminorcollectorsarespacedatintervals,consistentwithpopulationdensity,tocollecttrafficfromlocalroadsandprovidedevelopedareaswithreasonabledistancetoacollectorroad.Ruralminorcollectorsprovideservicetotheremainingsmallercommunitiesandlinkthelocallyimportanttrafficgeneratorswithsurroundingruralareas.

Rural Local Roads Localstreetsprovidedirectaccesstoabuttinglandandaccesstothehigherclassificationfacilities.Theyofferthelowestlevelofmobility.Theyarenotintendedtocarrythroughtraffic;however,theydomakeupalargepercentageofthetotalstreetmileage.



Designation of the RTP Regional Transportation System Consistentwiththestate’sRegionalTransportationPlanningProgramPlanningStandards,theRTPregionaltransportationsystemhasbeendesignatedtoinclude:

1. Allstatetransportationfacilitiesandservices(includingstatehighways).2. Alllocalprincipalarterials(thedefinitionofruralprincipalarterialscan

bethesameasusedforfederalclassificationorberegionallydetermined).3. Allothertransportationfacilitiesandservices,includingairports,transit

servicesandfacilities,roadways,railfacilities,marinetransportationfacilitiesetc.thattheRTPOconsidersnecessarytocompletetheregionalplan.

4. Anytransportationfacilityorservicethatisregionallyneededorimpactsplacesintheplan,asdeterminedbytheRTPO.

AdetaileddescriptionofthedesignatedRTPRegionalTransportationSystemfollows:

All State Transportation Facilities and Services

InSkamaniaCountythiscategoryincludesthefollowingStateRoutes:SR‐14andSR‐504.

SR‐14providesthemaineast‐westaccessfromsouth‐westClark/SkamaniaCountylinetosouth‐eastKlickitat/SkamaniaCountylinealongthenorthbankoftheColumbiaRiver.Thefacilityhastwolanesineachdirectionandextends41.71milesthroughSkamaniaCountybetweenClarkCountyandKlickitatCountylines.

SR‐504providesthemainaccessfromI‐5(CowlitzCounty)easttotheMountSt.HelensNationalVolcanicMonument.SkamaniaCountyhasidentifiedtheneedtoconnectSR‐504easttotheU.S.ForestServicehighwaysystem.

All Local Principal Arterials

InadditiontoStateRoutes,theonlyotherruralprincipalarterialinSkamaniaCountyistheBridgeoftheGods.

TheBridgeoftheGods



All Other Transportation Facilities and Services Considered Necessary

Theseincludetransitservicesandfacilities,roadways,railfacilities,airports,marinetransportationfacilities,etc.

Rural Major Collectors Alllocalruralmajorcollectorsaredesignatedaspartoftheregionaltransportationsystem.MajorcollectorsincludesuchfacilitiesasFirstStreet,RockCreek,FosterCreek,Gropper,Vancouver,Russell,Cascade,andColumbiaintheCityofStevenson;Evergreen,HotSprings,andEastCascadeintheCityofNorthBonneville;WindRiverRoad,Cook‐UnderwoodRoad,WashougalRiverRoad,SalmonFallsRoad,CanyonCreekRoad,Ryan‐Allen,Loop,KanakaCreek,andCurlyCreekintheCounty.

Forest Service Road System WithmuchofSkamaniaCountylocatedwithintheGiffordPinchotNationalForest,theForestHighwaySystemplaysanimportantpartintheeconomyofSkamaniaCounty.ForestHighwaystobeincludedintheregionaltransportationsystemareForestRoads23,25,30,88,and90.

Port Facilities SkamaniaCountyhasonePortDistrict;thePortofSkamaniaCounty,whichcoversmuchofthesouthernportionofSkamaniaCounty.ThePortofSkamaniaCountyisamunicipalcorporationoftheStateofWashington.ThePortcurrentlymaintainsanassetbaseofcommercial,industrial,recreationallands,buildings,andotherfacilities.ThePort’sprimarymissioniseconomicdevelopmentandjobcreationinindustrialandcommercial‐relatedbusinesses.ThePortowns162acresinStevenson,Carson,andNorthBonnevilleincludingapproximately30,000squarefeetofcommercialspaceand120,000squarefeetofindustrialusespace.Publicaccesstorecreational

opportunitiesisanimportantpriorityforthePort.ThePortownsandmaintainsapproximately6acresofparklandwith1.5milesofwaterfrontinStevenson,andhasdeveloped1.1milesofwalkingpathswithinterpretivesignsandamenities.TheStevensonLandingdock,parks,beaches,andboatlaunchrampfacilitiesdrawavarietyofwater‐sportenthusiastsandtouristshelpingtoinvigoratethelocaleconomy.ThePort’sStevensonWaterfrontareaincludesaLevelIIElectricVehiclechargingstation.



Airport Facilities TherearenopublicairfieldscurrentlyoperatinginSkamaniaCounty.However,thereareafewprivateairfields.PortlandInternationalAirport(PDX)islocatedinPortland,Oregonapproximately45mileswestofStevenson,south‐westoftheI‐205GlennJacksonBridge.Thisisaregionalairportwithdomesticandinternationalpassengerandfreightservice.

Bridges AllpublicbridgesincludingColumbiaRiverbridgesaredesignatedaspartoftheregionaltransportationsystem.Allbridgesareimportanttothemovementofpeopleandgoodswithintheregion.OfgreatimportancearethosebridgesthatcrosstheColumbiaRiver.Thereareover30publicbridgeslocatedinSkamaniaCounty.TheBridgeoftheGodsandtheHoodRiverBridgearetheonlybridgescrossingtheColumbiaRiverfromOregontoWashingtonintheSkamaniaCountyregion.BothofthesebridgesaretollBridgeswhichareownedandoperatedbyOregonPortDistricts.Allbridgesareimportanttothemovementofpeopleandgoodswithintheregion.However,thosealongtheregionaltransportationsystemareessentialtotheregion.Inaddition,theWashingtonStateLegislaturedesignatedanSR‐35corridorinthe1997legislativesession.SR‐35willprovideafuturelinkacrosstheColumbiaRivertoOregonintheBingen/WhiteSalmonarea.ADraftEnvironmentalImpactStatementforafuturerivercrossingintheSR‐35corridorwascompletedin2004,aTypeSizeandLocationStudywascompletedin2011,andaFinalEnvironmentalImpactStatementwillbeginin2018.

Columbia River Historically,theColumbiaRiverhasalwaysbeenanimportanttransportationcorridortoSkamaniaCounty.TheColumbiaRiver,asatransportationcorridor,isusedtomovegoodsandpeople.TourboatsvisittheColumbiaRiveranddockinStevenson.



Public Transportation SkamaniaCountySeniorServicesprovidesgeneralpublicDial‐A‐RideserviceinSkamaniaCounty,adeviatedfixedrouteservicealongSR‐14intoClarkCounty,andoperatesavolunteerdriverprogram.Inaddition,SkamaniaCountySeniorServicesparticipatesinacoordinatedeffortlinkingtransitagenciesintheMid‐ColumbiaRiverGorgearea.Thesystemhasanumberofvehicletypesfromaccessibleminivanstoa26‐passengerbus.InadditiontoSeniorServices,thereareprivatefirmsthatprovidetransit/taxiservicetoPortlandInternationalAirport.Although,thedial‐a‐rideserviceprovidespreferencetoseniorsandpersonswithdisabilities,allCountyresidentsareeligible.Themajorityofsystemtripsareformedical,socialservice,andshoppingpurposes.ThisservicedoesprovidetransportationserviceasfarwestasVancouver/PortlandandeasttoTheDalles.Out‐of‐countymedicaltripsaregivenpriorityovershoppingorpersonaltrips,althoughtrippurposesaregroupedwhenpossible.TheSR‐14deviatedfixedrouteserviceconnectstoC‐TRAN’sFisherLandingTransitCenterinVancouver,makingthreeroundtripsperday(morning,midday,evening).TheservicebeganinJanuary2004andhasbeenverysuccessful.Thisserviceprovidesaccesstojobs,schooling,andothertrippurposeswithinthegreaterPortland/Vancouverregion.TheGorgeTransLinkisanallianceoftransportationprovidersofferingpublictransportationservicesthroughouttheMid‐ColumbiaRiverGorgeareaaswellastodestinations,suchasPortlandandVancouver.ThegoalofthiscoordinationeffortistoimproveinterconnectivitybetweenthevarioustransitprovidersintheMid‐ColumbiaRiverRegioninbothOregonandWashington.

Rail Facilities ThereisonemainraillineinuseinSkamaniaCountywhichprovidesfreightandpassengerservice.BurlingtonNorthernSantaFe(BNSF)ownsthismainline.The

BNSFVancouver/EasternWashingtonlinehastwotracksingoodconditionwithupto60trainsoperatingonthelinedaily.AmtrakalsohasanagreementwithBNSFtooperatepassengerserviceonthefreightcarrier’sraillines,providingservicefromVancouvertravelingeastthroughSkamaniaCountytowardSpokane.Sevendaysaweek,theAMTRAKEmpireBuildertravelsthroughSkamaniaCountybotheastandwestbetweenPortland,OregonandChicago,Illinois.AlthoughtherearenoAmtrakstationsinSkamaniaCounty,mostSkamaniaCountyresidentsarewithinanhourdriveofstationsinBingenorVancouver.Alongthemainrailline,therearesevenpublicandnumerousprivaterailroadcrossingsinSkamaniaCounty.ThepublicrailroadcrossingsarelistedinTable3‐1.



Table 3‐1: Skamania County Public Railroad Crossings Road Warning SystemCape Horn Road Stop SignsSR 14 (St. Cloud) Warning LightsSR 14 (Skamania Landing) Warning LightsSR 14 (Skamania Landing) Warning LightsRussell/SR 14 (Stevenson) Warning Lights and Drawbars SR 14 (Cemetery) Stop Sign, Tracks Warning SR 14 (Home Valley Park) Overhead/Side Lights, Drawbars

Enhancements Transportationenhancementsaredesignatedaspartoftheregionaltransportationsystem.Enhancementsincludefacilitiesforbicyclesandpedestrians,scenicvistas,thematicsignage,reststops,androadsidebeautificationalongtheregionalroadnetwork.ExistingenhancementswouldincludefacilitiessuchasCapeHornVista,FranzLakeviewpoint,StevensonWaterfrontTrail,andotherenhancementswithintheCounty.Theregionhasidentifiedtheneedtodevelopasafeeast‐westbicyclefacilitythroughthecounty.

Growth in Traffic Volumes Asaresultofsocio‐economicanddemographicchangesdescribedinChapter2,SkamaniaCountyhasseenanincreaseintrafficvolumesovertheyears.WashingtonStateDepartmentofTransportationcompilestrafficcountdataalongStateRoutes.TrafficvolumesalongSR‐14intheColumbiaRiverGorgeNationalScenicAreavarybyseason,withsummertrafficvolumessignificantlyhigherthanwintertrafficvolumes.ExamplesofgrowthintrafficvolumesatselectedlocationsalongSR14inSkamaniaCountyarelistedinTable3‐2.Table 3‐2: Traffic Volumes‐All Day (ADT)

Location Leg 2002

Volumes 2017

Volumes %

Increase Annual %Increase

Bridge of The Gods S 2,500 3,900 56% 3.7%

SR‐14 at Clark Co. Line E 4,000 5,900 47% 3.2%

SR‐14 at Bridge of The Gods E 5,900 8,200 39% 2.6%

SR‐14 at Russell Ave. W 6,800 8,500 25% 1.7%

SR‐14 at Wind River Rd. W 6,100 7,700 26% 1.7%

SR‐14 at Wind River Rd. E 2,400 2,900 21% 1.4%

SR‐14 at Klickitat Co. Line W 5,200 6,300 21% 1.4%



Future Travel Demand FuturetraveldemandwasforecastedfortheSkamaniaregionbasedonhistorictrends,netchangesinlanduseandactivitylevels,applyingappropriatetrafficgenerationrates,andthenusingtripdistributioninformationtodeterminethedirectionoftravel.TheRTPnetworkisconsideredtobethesametransportationnetworkasexiststoday.Itisusedonlyasabasecasescenarioforforecastingfuturetraveldemandandpotentialtrafficvolumesonroadsegmentsanddoesnotconstitutearecommendednetwork.TrafficvolumescoulddiffersignificantlyfromthosethatresultfromthefuturetripassignmentontotheRTPnetworkifsignificantchangestothepopulation,landuse,ortransportationsystemoccur.BurlingtonNorthernSantaFeoperatestheeast‐westrailroadroutealongtheWashingtonsideoftheColumbiaRiverGorgeandthroughSkamaniaCounty.Thisrouteiscurrentlyexperiencingcapacityconstraintsandwillcontinueinthefuturewithoutsomekindofexpansion.TheColumbiaRiversystemisanimportanttransportationcorridorforthemovementofgoods.Inordertomeetthetraveldemandassociatedwiththiscorridor,itwillbeessentialtopreserveappropriatechanneldepthsandwidthsforshipping,andtomaintaincurrentlockhandlingcapacity.Walkingandbicyclingareintegralpartsofthetransportationsystem.Peoplewalkandbikeforvarioustrips.Walkingandbicyclingtripsareusuallyshortanddemandisgreaterinurbanareas.However,thereisademandforbicyclingfacilitiesalongSR‐14fortouringbicyclist.Publictransitisanimportantaspectofthetransportationsystem,especiallyforthosewithlimitedincome,elderly,anddisabled.Withanagingpopulationandpercapitaincomelowerthanthestateaverage,thedemandforpublictransitwillincreaseinSkamaniaCounty.

Levels of Service Levelsofservicestandardsrepresenttheminimumperformanceleveldesiredfortransportationfacilitiesandserviceswithintheregion.Theyareusedasagaugeforevaluatingthequalityofserviceonthetransportationsystemandcanbedescribedbytraveltimes,travelspeed,freedomtomaneuver,trafficinterruptions,comfort,convenience,andsafety.TheselevelsofservicearedesignatedAthroughF,frombesttoworst.LevelofserviceEdescribesconditionsapproachingandatcapacity.Foruninterruptedflowconditions,thefollowingdefinitions1apply:

LevelofServiceAdescribesfreeflowconditions,withlowvolumesandhighspeeds.Thegenerallevelofcomfortandconvenienceprovidedtothemotorist,passenger,orpedestrianisexcellent.

1 From Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 1985



LevelofServiceBisintherangeofstableflowbutthepresenceofotherusersinthetrafficstreambeginstobenoticeable.Freedomtoselectdesiredspeedsisrelativelyunaffected,butthereisaslightdeclineinthefreedomtomaneuverwiththetrafficstreamfromLevelofServiceA.

LevelofServiceCisstillintherangeofstableflow,butmarksthebeginningoftherangeofflowinwhichtheoperationofindividualusersbecomessignificantlyaffectedbyinteractionswithothersinthetrafficstream.Thegenerallevelofcomfortandconveniencedeclinesnoticeablyatthislevel.

LevelofServiceDrepresentshigh‐density,butstableflow.Speedandfreedomtomaneuverareseverelyrestricted,andthedriverorpedestrianexperiencesagenerallypoorlevelofcomfortandconvenience.

LevelofServiceErepresentsoperatingconditionsatornearthecapacitylevel.Allspeedsarereducedtoalow,butrelativelyuniformvalue.Comfortandconveniencelevelsareextremelypooranddriverorpedestrianfrustrationisgenerallyhigh.

LevelofServiceFdescribesforcedorbreakdownflow.Theseconditionsusuallyresultfromqueuesofvehiclesbackingupfromarestrictiondownstream.Operationswithinthequeuearecharacterizedbystop‐and‐gowaves,andtheyareextremelyunstable.

Level of Service Standards In1998theWashingtonStateLegislaturepassedHouseBill1487,otherwiseknownastheLevelofService(LOS)Bill.TheBillsetnewrequirementsrelatingtotransportationandgrowthmanagementplanning.Theintentofthelegislationwastoenhancethecoordinationofplanningeffortsandplanconsistencyatthelocal,regional,andstatelevel.Thekeyapplicableelementsinclude:HighwaysofStatewideSignificance:TheStatemustgivehigherprioritytocorrectingidentifieddeficienciesontransportationfacilitiesofstatewidesignificance.DesignationofHighwaysofStatewideSignificance(HSS)wascompletedin1999.IntheSkamaniaCountyregion,theHSSsystemincludesSR‐14.WSDOThasestablishedanLOS‘C’forruralHSSfacilitieslikeSR‐14.Non‐HighwaysofStatewideSignificance:Non‐HSSstatehighways,otherwiseknownasHighwaysofRegionalSignificance,inSkamaniaCountyincludeSR‐504.TheRTPOhasestablishedanLOS‘C’forruralnon‐HSS.



Capacity Analysis TheHighwayCapacitySoftwarewasusedtoanalyzelevelofservicewithintheSkamaniaCountyRegionbasedonP.M.peakhourtraffic.Inaddition,thereareseverallocationswithcapacitydeficienciesassociatedwithsubstandardcurvesandsteepgrades,whichcreateaparticularproblemintheColumbiaRiverGorgeareaduetothemixoftrucks,recreationalvehicles,andautos.DeficientsegmentsassociatedwithcapacityarelistedinTable3‐3.

Table 3‐3: Deficient Capacity Segment Road Mile Post Deficient Capacity Segment LOSSR‐14 21.77 ‐ 24.92 Clark Co. line to Half Bridge CSR‐14 24.92 ‐ 27.87 Half Bridge to Prindle Rd. Vicinity CSR‐14 27.87 ‐ 37.04 Prindle Rd. to North Bonneville. CSR‐14 43.90 ‐ 47.44 Rock Creek Br. to Wind River Rd. C

Safety Analysis Improvingsafetyforallmodesoftransportationiscriticaltoimprovingqualityoflifeandimprovingaccessforallthecitizensoftheregion.WashingtonState’sStrategicHighwaySafetyPlan,TargetZero,establishesastatewidepolicyofzerofatalitiesandzerodisablinginjurycollisionsby2030.TargetZero,helpstoassessthesafetyneedsstatewide,encouragingandpromotinggoodsafetypracticesinthedesignandoperationofthetransportationsystem,aswellaspromotingsafetybysystemusers.TargetZerosetsstate‐widepriorities,providesaresourceforpotentialstrategies,andmonitorsoutcomeatastatewidelevel.StatewidetrafficsafetyprioritieswereusedtodisplaySkamaniaCountyfatalityandseriousinjurydata.Table3‐4showstheSkamaniaCountyFatalityandSeriousInjuryFactorsbystatewideprioritiesbetweenyears2014‐2016.Sincemorethan

onefactoriscommonlyinvolvedinmostcollisions,thenumberfatalitiesandseriousinjuriesbyfactordonotmatchthetotalsatthebottomofthetable.TheTotalsatthebottomofthetablerepresenttheactualnumberoffatalities(15)andseriousinjuries(31).WashingtonStateStrategicSafetyPlan,TargetZero,includesspecificobjectivesandstrategiestohelpreducetrafficfatalitiesandseriousinjuriesforeachoftheprimaryfactors.WithinSkamaniaCounty,thefocusshouldbeonimplementingstrategiesthataddressthehighestprioritizedfactors.



Table 3‐4: Deficient Safety Segments, 2014‐2016 Fatalities Serious Injuries

# of People % of Total # of People % of Total

Priority Level One

Young Driver 16‐25 Involved 8 53.3% 11 35.3%

Impaired Driver Involved 8 53.3% 6 19.4%

Run Off the Road 5 33.3% 18 58.1%

Speeding Involved 4 26.7% 12 38.7%

Distracted Driver Involved 4 26.7% 5 16.1%

Intersection Related 1 6.7% 3 9.7%

Priority Level Two

Opposite Direction Multi‐Vehicle 6 40.0% 4 12.9%

Unlicensed Driver Involved 5 33.3% 0 0.0%

Unrestrained Vehicle Passenger 4 26.7% 3 9.7%

Motorcyclist 2 13.3% 16 51.6%

Pedestrian 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Priority Level Three

Older Driver 70+ Involved 1 6.7% 1 3.2%

Heavy Truck Involved 1 6.7% 1 3.2%

Drowsy Driver Involved 0 0.0% 2 6.5%

Bicyclist 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Wildlife 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Vehicle‐Train 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Work Zone 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

School Bus Involved 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Total 15 31

Unstable Slopes WashingtonStateDepartmentofTransportation(WSDOT)begantheirUnstableSlopeManagementSystemin1993.Thismanagementsystemincorporatedanumericalslopehazardratingsystem.Theratingsystemutilizesamatrixevaluatingelevencategories.In2004anenvironmentalassessmentofSR‐14unstableslopeswascompleted.Ofthesitesinvestigated,26priorityprojectswereidentifiedinSkamaniaCounty.PriorityprojectshadanUnstableSlopeManagementSystemratinggreaterthan200.Thosewithratingsabove300totalpointsrepresentarelativelyhighhazardslope.ABenefittoCost(B/C)Ratioisthenused



todetermineprojectpriority.Table3‐4liststhe17remainingpriorityprojectsalongSR‐14inSkamaniaCounty.Table 3‐5: Rockfall Hazard Locations Road Mile Post Rating B/C Ratio Improvement SR‐14 24.91‐25.00 315 1.70 Reslope SR‐14 25.00‐25.20 369 0.34 Realign: Move BridgeSR‐14 30.20‐30.34 279 2.27 Reslope SR‐14 30.37‐30.46 345 1.22 Retaining/Buttress WallSR‐14 30.90‐31.10 219 1.12 Reslope/Realign/BoltsSR‐14 46.46‐46.55 309 7.52 Reslope/Scaling/Bolts/TrimSR‐14 46.61‐46.68 309 1.80 Realignment/Scaling/BoltsSR‐14 53.33‐53.44 267 5.93 Scaling/Shotcrete/BoltsSR‐14 53.56‐53.62 267 3.56 Euromesh/Scaling/Bolts/MeshSR‐14 54.80‐54.97 249 2.54 Reslope/Erosion FabricSR‐14 55.05‐55.35 327 1.59 Reslope/Erosion FabricSR‐14 55.60‐55.66 285 1.06 Scaling/Euromesh SR‐14 55.88‐55.96 375 1.75 Reslope/Scaling SR‐14 58.84‐58.93 315 1.03 Reslope/Scaling/BoltsSR‐14 59.07‐59.14 261 8.06 Reslope SR‐14 62.50‐63.00 501 1.31 Scaling/Euromesh SR‐14 63.05‐63.20 429 3.14 Realign

Tunnels TherearefivetunnelsalongSR‐14inSkamaniaCountybetweenmilepost58.08and60.27.Thesetunnelshavea24footpavementwidth,nolighting,andabicyclewarningsystem.Thetunnelsarearchedwithacenterclearanceseveralfeethigherthanthe12.9footclearanceattheouteredgeofthepavement.Severalofthetunnelsarelocatedoncurves.Trucks,especiallythoseunfamiliarwiththetunnels,frequentlystraddlethecenterlinecreatingadangeroussituation.

Trucks Interstate84(I‐84)andStateRoute14(SR‐14)areparalleleast/westhighwaystravelingthroughtheColumbiaRiverGorge.I‐84isa4‐laneInterstatefacilitylocatedinOregonandSR‐14isarural2‐laneStateHighwaylocatedinWashington.BothroutesarepartoftheNationalHighwaySystem(NHS).Bothroutesarepublicroutesthatareopentoalllegaltrucks.Asaruralhighway,SR‐14islessconducivetothroughtrucktrafficbecauseofsharpcurves,steepgrades,andheightrestriction.I‐84asanInterstateHighwayisthehighestroadclassificationandprovidesthehighestlevelofmobility,atthehighestspeed,foralonguninterrupteddistance.Assuch,throughtrucktrafficshouldbeencouragedtouseI‐84.



TheOregonDepartmentofTransportationestimatesa4‐5%avoidanceoftheOregonWeightMileTaxstate‐wide.However,a1997SR‐14TruckSurveyfoundthat8%to13%ofthetrucksonSR‐14maybeavoidingtheOregonWeightMiletax.AslongasWashingtonandOregonStateshavedifferenttrucktaxationmethods,sometruckerswillchoosetouseSR‐14tolowertheiroverallcosts.

Recreational Parking Thegrowthinrecreationhascreatedaparkingcapacityissueatpopularrecreationalsites,whichoftenleadstoillegalparkingandsafetyissuesonthetransportationsystem.Duetolimitedparking,safetyissuesatDogMountainparkinglot,andForestServicerequiredpermit,SkamaniaCountySeniorServicesprovidesseasonal(April‐June)shuttleservicetoDogMountainontheweekends.

Transit InadditiontotheneedformoretransitservicewithintheCounty,thereisaneedforregionaltransitservicewithintheColumbiaRiverGorgeNationalScenicareaduringthepeaksummerseason.In2016,OregonbegantheColumbiaGorgeExpress,whichcurrentlyrunsdailyduringthesummerseasonfromPortland’sGatewayTransitCentertoHoodRiver,Oregon.AsimilarserviceorloopserviceisneededtoservetheWashingtonsideoftheColumbiaRiverNationalScenicArea.

Preservation and Maintenance Need Ofoverwhelmingimportanceintheplanningfortheregionaltransportationsystemistheneedtomaintainandpreservetheexistingsysteminordertoprotecttheheavyinvestmentsalreadymadeinthesystem.TheRTPsupportsprojectsprogrammedintheTransportationImprovementProgramtomaintainandpreservetheregionaltransportationsystem.APavementManagementSystemhasbeendevelopedforpavementconditiononallstateroadfacilities.Thissystemisintendedtoassistwiththeprioritizationofpavementpreservationandtorespondtorecentlyobservedconditionsandpredictprobablefutureconditions.WSDOTand



localjurisdictionsvisuallyinspectpavementconditionsoffacilitiestodetermineneededmaintenanceandpreservation.ProjectsthathavereachedaconditionthatwarrantsrehabilitationareprogrammedintotheStateandlocalSix‐YearTransportationImprovementPrograms.WashingtonStatehasdevelopedaBridgeManagementSystem,aproceduretovisuallysurveybridgeconditions.Thissystemisintendedtoassistwiththeprioritizationofbridgereplacementandmaintenance.ProjectswithimmediateneedsareprogrammedintotheStateorlocalSix‐YearTransportationImprovementProgram.Thereareseveralbridgesindeterioratingcondition,orofsubstandardwidth,andcannotaccommodatebicyclistandpedestriantraffic.Thesebridgeswillneedtobereplacedwithinthenext20years.BoththeHoodRiverBridge(PortofHoodRiver)andtheBridgeoftheGods(PortofCascadeLocks)areregularlyinspectedbytheOregonDepartmentofTransportation.MaintenanceandrepairsaremadebythePortsthatowneachbridge.BurlingtonNorthernSantaFeRailroadmaintainstheBNSFmainraillinethroughSkamaniaCounty.PortofCascadeLocksmaintainstheBridgeoftheGods.ThePortofHoodRivermaintainstheHoodRiverBridge.TheU.S.ForestServicemaintainstheForestServiceroads.UnderthedirectionoftheU.S.ArmyCorpsofEngineers,theColumbiaRiverismaintained.LocaljurisdictionandWSDOTmaintainbicycleandpedestrianfacilities.TheRegionalTransportationPlansupportsadditionaltransportationdollarsforthepreservationandmaintenanceoftheregionaltransportationsystem.Priorityshouldbegiventomaintaintheheavyinvestmentalreadymadeintheregionaltransportationsystem.



Bridge of the Gods TheBridgeoftheGodsisa1,858footlongand35footwidesteeltrusscantilevertollbridgespanningtheColumbiaRivernearCascadeLocks.ThebridgeconnectsSR‐14inWashingtontoI‐84inOregon.TheBridgeisownedandoperatedbythePortofCascadeLocks.TheBridgewasoriginallycompletedin1926,butwaselevatedtoitscurrentlocationin1940.Thebridgeislocated37mileseastoftheI‐205GlennJacksonBridgeand22mileswestoftheHoodRiverBridge.TheBridgeoftheGodsalsoservesaspartofthePacificCrestTrailconnectingOregonandWashington,butdoesnotincludeadedicatedpedestrianpath.ThePortiscurrentlyseekinggrantfundingtostudyanddesignamultimodalpaththatcouldbeaddedtothecurrentbridgestructure.TheRegionalTransportationPlansupportsmaintainingtheBridgeoftheGods.

Enhancement Need Thereisaneedtodevelopandimprovefacilitiesforbicycles,pedestrians,scenicvistas,restareas,thematicsignage,roadsidebeautification,andotherenhancementswithintheSkamaniaCountyregion.TheRegionalTransportationPlansupportscosteffectiveenhancementstothetransportationsystem.

Economic Development Need Theprosperityofaregionisdependentontheprovisionoftransportationinfrastructuretosupporteconomicdevelopment.Themovementofgoodsbyhighway,rail,water,andairareessentialtotheeconomyofSkamaniaCounty.TheRTPsupportsimprovementstothetransportationsystemthatwillgiveprimeconsiderationtoeconomicdevelopmentandthesafe,efficientmovementofpeopleandfreight.Specifically,freightproducedbyormaterialnecessaryfortheoperationofbusinessesandindustriesintheSkamaniaCountyregion.TheRTPsupportstheimplementationofthe10‐YearPlanfortheBridgeoftheGods,whichidentifiesvitalimprovementsandmaintenanceneeds.TheBridgeoftheGodsisacriticalaccesspointforpeopleandgoodsinthemostpopulatedportionofSkamaniaCounty.Theeconomicwell‐beingoftheregionisdependentontheBridgeoftheGods,whichprovidesessentialaccesstoemployment,services,andgoods.Thefacilityisaginganditisessentialthatexistingtollrevenuebededicatedtowardsfundingthe10‐YearPlan,toguaranteetheBridge’scontinualoperationformanymoreyears.TheRTPsupportsthereplacementoftheHoodRiverBridge.TheHoodRiverBridgeprovidestheprincipleaccessforeasternSkamaniaCountytoemployment,services,



andgoods.Thisfacilityisessentialtotheregion’sdiversificationbyprovidingaccessandemploymentopportunities.Thisfacilityisimportantforthemovementoflocalgoodstomarket.Theexistingfacilityisnarrowandinadequatetohandlethedemandsoftheregion.Thefacilityisagingandwilllikelyneedtobereplacedwithinthenext20years.ThelocaleconomydependsheavilyontheHoodRiverBridge,ensuringanadequatereplacementfacilityisahighpriorityfortheregion.TheRTPsupportsimprovementstothetransportationsystemthatwillgiveprimeconsiderationtoeconomicdevelopmentandthesafe,efficientmovementofpeopleandfreight.Specifically,freightproducedbyormaterialsnecessaryfortheoperationofbusinessesandindustrieswithinSkamaniaCounty.

Emerging Technology Emergingtechnologyisageneraltermthatisusedtodescribedevelopmentsintransportationtechnology.Thiscouldincludeawiderangeoftechnologysuchasautomatedvehicles,connectedvehicles,carsharing,carhailing,travelerinformation,automatedtolls,andsmartcities.Technologyisalreadybeginningtotransformthewaypeoplemove.Individualsareincreasinglyusingsmartphoneapplicationstohelpthemmaketraveldecisions.Ridesharingandhailingservicesarebecomingincreasinglypopular.Vehiclesafetytechnologyisbeingdevelopedtoensuresafetyandsecurity.Thesetechnologychangesarelikelytohaveimplicationsonhowpeopletravelinthefuture.

Stevenson Couplet ThroughdowntownStevenson’s1stStreetwasconstructedtoserveasacoupletwithcurrentStateRoute14(2ndStreet).However,theimplementationhassatdormantforoveradecadeduetosafetyconcerns.In2017,theStevensonCity

Councilremovedthestopsignon1stStreetandisinapositiontoreconsidertrafficpatternson1stStreetand2ndStreetasSR‐14passesthroughtheCity.Decisionstoconverttoaone‐waycoupletwillrelyonhowwellitaddscapacity,improvestrafficflow,increasespedestriansafety,andleadstoadditionaleconomicdevelopment.Ifextensivetrafficcalmingisnotnecessary,theprojectcouldbecompletedataminimalcost.

Chapter 4: Financial Plan 37


Chapter 4: Financial Plan

Overview PotentialtransportationimprovementprojectsproposedinthisPlanareintendedtomeettheRTPgoalsandpolicyobjectiveasoutlinedinChapterOne.Thesegoalsandpoliciesincludemakingthemostefficientuseofandenhancingtheexistingtransportationsystem.Theavailabilityoffederal,state,andlocalmoneyswillhaveasignificantimpactontheabilitytofundproposedprojects.Thischapterdescribesrev

Transportation for Skamania County, Washington › reports › rtp ›...

Documents

Transcript of Transportation for Skamania County, Washington › reports › rtp ›...