TO: BELLEVUE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: FRANZ
LOEWENHERZ, SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNER
SUBJECT: EASTSIDE
CONCURRENCY STUDY STATUS REPORT
DATE: SEPTEMBER
20, 2002
On January 30, 2002 the City
of Bellevue contracted with the Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC)
to provide consulting services on the Eastside Concurrency Study. The Eastside Concurrency Study is funded by
the State of Washington and managed by the City of Bellevue in cooperation with
the neighboring cities of Kirkland, Redmond and Issaquah. It is examining
methodologies for calculating transportation concurrency that might be useful
to the participating jurisdictions.
This sub-regional study is
considering alternative methods that might address traffic diverted from
congested freeways, regional trips associated with neighboring jurisdictions,
and the effect of alternative modes of transportation, none of which are
addressed by the current methods employed by the four cities. The study will also investigate needed
changes in state and local laws to improve the effectiveness of dealing with
transportation concurrency issues. By
November 1, 2003, a report of the findings will be made to the transportation
committees of the Washington State Legislature.
Attached is a status report for the Eastside Concurrency Study, including information about the project schedule and findings to date. As noted in the documentation, the Executive Steering Committee (ESC), comprised of the Directors of Planning and Transportation or Public Works for each of the participating jurisdictions, is meeting on October 24, 2002. The ESC provides guidance to the Technical Advisory Committee and the consultant team, offers direction on key issues, and will assist with shepherding project recommendations or ongoing analyses through their respective city policy-making and public outreach processes.
Additional council feedback will be provided in November
2002 following the upcoming Executive Steering Committee meeting. In the meantime, for more information about the
Eastside Concurrency Study, log onto http://depts.washington.edu/trac/concurrency/. Should you wish to discuss this
project, please do not hesitate to contact me at 452-4077.
EASTSIDE TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY STUDY UPDATE
September 20, 2002
Project
Budget/Schedule - The project is within budget and ahead of
schedule (with the exception of one task) as reflected in the following table:
Stakeholder
Involvement On
Schedule
Executive Steering Committee
Meetings Ongoing
Technical Advisory Committee
Meetings Ongoing
Coordination with Puget Sound
Regional Council - Ongoing
Stakeholder Involvement Plan Completed
Existing
& Future LOS Conditions Behind Schedule (ends10/20/02)
Report on Current Practices Draft Complete
Prepare Technical Memo Draft
Complete
Analyze Existing LOS
Conditions Completed
Identify Future Needs Dependent
on New Process (8/02)
Prepare Technical Memorandum Draft Underway (9/02)
Issue
Identification Ahead of schedule
Issues Identification 90%
Complete (11/02)
Prepare Technical Memorandum 90% Complete (12/02)
Literature Review 95%
Complete (1/03)
Prepare Technical Memorandum 85% Complete (1/03)
Alternative Concurrency
Practices 60% Complete
(1/03)
Prepare Technical Memorandum 50% Complete (2/03)
Measures of Effectiveness 25% Complete
(1/03)
Evaluate Alternatives 25%
Complete (3/03)
Select Alternatives and Case
Studies Not Started
(3/03)
Case Study Application Not
Started (5/03)
Prepare Technical Memorandum Not Started (6/03)
Implementation
Plan Not
Started
Identification of Supporting
Roles (9/03)
Prepare Memorandum (8/03)
Legislative Strategy (11/03)
Executive Summary (11/03)
Project Findings -
This summary describes study findings about how the cities of Bellevue,
Issaquah, Kirkland, and Redmond currently determine transportation concurrency
and how they apply the results of those computations.
·
There are more similarities than differences in how the
four cities determine concurrency.
·
Each city tends to view the objectives of concurrency
differently and thus use approaches that address their specific objectives.
·
Only roadway volume/capacity ratios are used to
determine concurrency; there is no mechanism to substitute investments in
transit capacity or non-motorized facilities.
·
Current
forecasting models do not account for travel demand management actions
accurately or consistently.
·
The concurrency determination examines only local
traffic impacts within the individual city. The effects of generated trips
outside the city are generally not considered.
Comparison of Eastside Jurisdiction Concurrency Approaches
City |
Citywide Approach |
Model Used |
Project Specific Approach |
LOS Standard is Based On |
Roadway Facility Type Used |
Methodology |
Time Period Used |
Redmond |
Four-step model |
BKR |
ITE Trip Generation + Current Conditions + CIP |
Roadway v/c |
Intersection |
Circ. 212 |
1 hour |
Kirkland |
Four-step model |
BKR |
ITE Trip Generation + Current Conditions + CIP |
Roadway v/c |
Intersection |
Cir. 212 |
1 hour |
Issaquah |
Four-step model |
T-Model |
ITE Trip Generation + Current Conditions + CIP |
Roadway v/c |
Mid-block screenlines |
(segments) |
1 hour |
Bellevue |
Four-step model |
BKR |
ITE Trip Generation + Current Conditions + CIP |
Roadway v/c |
Intersection |
HCM 209 |
2 hour |
City |
Zonal V/C Standards Used? |
Zonal V/C Ratios Accepted |
Specific Facility Exemptions Allowed? |
V/C Intersection Exceptions Allowed? |
Multi-Modal? |
Other |
Redmond |
Yes |
0.85 – 0.95 |
Yes |
Yes |
Partly |
Sum v Sum c not average of individual v/c |
Kirkland |
Yes |
0.98 – 1.116 |
Yes |
Yes |
Partly |
No intersection can exceed a v/c of 1.4 |
Issaquah |
Yes |
0.85
– 3.18 |
Yes |
Yes |
Partly |
Additional check for intersections exceeding baseline by more than 0.3 |
Bellevue |
Yes |
0.80 – 0.95 |
Yes |
Yes |
Partly |
No. of intersections allowed to exceed standard changes from zone to zone |
Project Schedule - The Executive Steering Committee, comprised of the Directors of Planning
and Transportation or Public Works for each of the jurisdictions, is meeting on
October 24th to provide input on potential approaches to the
concurrency related problems identified in the scope of work. Additional council feedback will be provided
following this upcoming meeting.