RES NO. 2017-02 ADOPTING THE ISLAND-WIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND
ISLAND-WIDE
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
February 2017
i
ISLAND WIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Plan Purpose .............................................................................................................1-1
Planning History ........................................................................................................1-3
Relationship to Comprehensive Plan ........................................................................1-3
Plan Update ..............................................................................................................1-4
Plan Organization .....................................................................................................1-4
CHAPTER 2 SUSTAINABILITY & QUALITY OF LIFE
Community Character ...............................................................................................2-2
Relationship to Transportation .....................................................................2 -2
Community Character Transportation Features ...........................................2-3
Desired Features of Community Character ..................................................2-4
Livability and Health .....................................................................................2-4
Relationship to Transportation .....................................................................2-4
Neighborhoods .........................................................................................................2-5
Relationship to Transportation .....................................................................2 -5
Neighborhood Transportation Features .......................................................2-5
Desired features for Neighborhoods ............................................................2-6
Environment .............................................................................................................2-6
Relationship to Transportation .....................................................................2-6
Environmental Transportation Features ......................................................2-7
Desired Features of Environment .................................................................2-7
Storm water Management and Green Infrastructure ..................................2-8
Balancing Community Needs ....................................................................................2-9
CHAPTER 3 OPERATIONS AND MOBILITY
Existing Roadway System .........................................................................................3-1
Travel Corridors ............................................................................................3-2
Roadway Inventory .......................................................................................3-2
Roadway Classifications ................................................................................3-2
Road Standards .............................................................................................3-3
Level of Service .........................................................................................................3-3
LOS Defined ..................................................................................................3-5
Roadway LOS Measurement ........................................................................3-5
Intersection LOS Measurement ....................................................................3-7
City LOS Standard .........................................................................................3-7
Non-Motorized LOS Standard .......................................................................3-8
SR305 LOS Standard .....................................................................................3-8
Existing Traffic Conditions ..................................................................................... 3-10
ii
Transportation Model ................................................................................ 3-10
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ........................................................................ 3-11
WSDOT Ferry Travel Survey ....................................................................... 3-11
Existing LOS ............................................................................................................ 3-14
Future Traffic Conditions ....................................................................................... 3-15
Land Use Forecast ...................................................................................... 3-16
Determinations of Base Year Land Use ..................................................... 3-16
Land Use Forecasts (2021-2035) ................................................................ 3-17
Future Traffic Operations ...................................................................................... 3-17
2021 Traffic Forecast ................................................................................. 3-17
2021 LOS .................................................................................................... 3-17
Roadway LOS ............................................................................................. 3-17
Intersection LOS ......................................................................................... 3-17
2016-2021 Mitigation ................................................................................ 3-20
2035 Traffic Forecast ................................................................................. 3-21
2021-2035 Model Forecast Improvements ............................................... 3-21
2035 LOS .................................................................................................... 3-21
2021-2035 Mitigation ................................................................................ 3-23
Other Mobility Issues ............................................................................................. 3-23
Connectivity ............................................................................................... 3-23
Access Management .................................................................................. 3-24
CHAPTER 4 SR 305
Summary of SR305 Issues .........................................................................................4-1
SR305 LOS Impacts .......................................................................................4-1
What Makes SR305 Different? .....................................................................4-4
SR305 Special Study ..................................................................................................4-4
Special Study Alternatives ............................................................................4-4
Special Study Results and Recommendations for Further Study .................4-4
Other SR 305 Issues ..................................................................................................4-5
SR305 Recommendations .........................................................................................4-9
Interim Improvements ..................................................................................4-9
Long Term Recommendations ......................................................................4-9
CHAPTER 5 SAFETY AND MAINTENANCE
Safety ........................................................................................................................5-1
Collision History ............................................................................................5-2
City Intersections ..........................................................................................5-2
SR305 Intersections ......................................................................................5-3
Collisions involving pedestrian and cyclists ..................................................5-4
Addressing Safety Problems .........................................................................5 -4
How Study Addresses Safety ........................................................................5-5
Safety Programs ............................................................................................5-6
Maintenance .............................................................................................................5-6
3
Maintenance Issues ......................................................................................5-6
Maintenance Programs ................................................................................5-7
CHAPTER 6 NON-MOTORIZED SYSTEMS
Background-History ..................................................................................................6-1
Non-Motorized Use ..................................................................................................6-5
Barriers to Use and Connectivity Improvements ......................................................6 -7
Non-Motorized Travel Routes and Network ............................................................6 -8
Facility Types ......................................................................................................... 6-15
Levels of Service .................................................................................................... 6-17
Non-Motorized Improvement Plan ....................................................................... 6-20
Design Considerations ........................................................................................... 6-22
Standards ............................................................................................................... 6-24
Preservation and Maintenance ............................................................................. 6-24
Education, Encouragement and Enforcement ....................................................... 6-25
CHAPTER 7 OTHER TRANSPORATION SYSTEMS
Washington State Ferry Operations .........................................................................7-1
Ferry LOS ...................................................................................................................7-2
Kitsap Transit Passenger Only Ferry Proposals .........................................................7-3
Ferry System Issues ......................................................................................7-3
Recommendations for Ferry Services ...........................................................7-4
Kitsap Transit Bus and Other Services ......................................................................7-4
Existing Routes ..............................................................................................7-4
Park and Ride Lots ........................................................................................7-7
Transit System Issues ....................................................................................7-8
Recommendations for Transit Systems ........................................................7-9
Non-Motorized System Connectivity to Transit ...........................................7-9
Multimodal - Transportation Demand Management ...............................................7-9
TDM Programs on Bainbridge Island ......................................................... 7-10
Employer-Based Programs ......................................................................... 7-11
Regional Coordination ........................................................................................... 7-11
WSDOT Plans ............................................................................................. 7-11
Consistency with IWTP .............................................................................. 7-12
Kitsap Transit Plans .................................................................................... 7-12
Consistency with IWTP .............................................................................. 7-12
CHAPTER 8 FINANCING
Funding Capabilities ................................................................................................. 8-1
Types of Funding Sources ......................................................................................... 8-2
General Funds............................................................................................... 8-2
Grants ........................................................................................................... 8-2
General Obligation Bonds............................................................................. 8-3
Developer Contributions .............................................................................. 8-3
Impact Fees .................................................................................................. 8-3
4
Transportation Benefit District Fees ............................................................ 8-3
Local Improvement Districts ......................................................................... 8-4
User Fees ...................................................................................................... 8-4
Proposed Projects and Funding Needs ..................................................................... 8-4
Proposed Sources of Funding .................................................................................. 8-4
Reassessment Strategy ............................................................................................. 8-5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 Planning ................................................................................................... 1-5
Figure 3-1 Road Classifications ................................................................................. 3-4
Figure 3-2 Recommended Level of Service Standards ............................................. 3-9
Figure 3-3 Ferry Terminal Person Trips .................................................................. 3-12
Figure 3-4 2015 Level of Service ............................................................................. 3-14
Figure 3-5 2021 Level of Service ............................................................................. 3-18
Figure 3-6 2035 Level of Service ............................................................................. 3-22
Figure 3-7 Road Connectivity Improvements ......................................................... 3-26
Figure 3-8 Guide to Potential Connectivity Improvements .................................... 3-27
Figure 4-1 SR305 Level of Service Existing Conditions ............................................. 4-2
Figure 4-2 Level of Service 2035 No Action .............................................................. 4-3
Figure 4-3 SR305 Level of Service 2035 Alternative A .............................................. 4-6
Figure 4-4 SR305 Level of Service 2035 Alternative B .............................................. 4-7
Figure 4-5 SR305 Levels of Service 2035 Alternative C ............................................ 4-8
Figure - Non-Motorized System Plan Map A (Existing) ............................................ 6-4
Figure – Non-Motorized System Plan Map B (Existing) ............................................ 6-5
Figure - Core 40 Program Priority Map G ............................................................... 6-15
Figure - Non-Motorized System Plan Map C (Minimum Standards) ...................... 6-19
Figure – Non-Motorized System Plan Map D (Minimum Standards) ..................... 6-20
Figure - NMTAC Recommended Capital Improvements Map E ............................. 6-21
Figure – NMTAC Recommended Capital Improvements Map F ............................ 6-22
Figure 7-1 Ferry Routes ............................................................................................ 7-2
Figure 7-2 Ferry Operations LOS .............................................................................. 7-5
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 GMA Requirements for Transportation Planning ...................................1-5
Table 2-1 Competing Community Needs ................................................................2-9
Table 3-1 Functional Classifications ........................................................................3-2
Table 3-2 Level of Service Descriptions ..................................................................3-5
Table 3-3 Roadway Level of Service and Volume/Capacity Ratio ...........................3-6
Table 3-4 Existing Roadway Capacity Policy ...........................................................3-6
Table 3-5 Intersection LOS and Delay .....................................................................3-7
Table 3-6 Intersections PM Peak Hour LOS Deficiencies – 2014 Baseline ........... 3-13
Table 3-7 2014 Land Use ...................................................................................... 3-16
Table 3-8 2021 and 2035 Forecasts ..................................................................... 3-16
Table 3-9 Intersection PM Peak Hour LOS Deficiencies (2021 Forecast) ............. 3-19
5
Table 3-10 Street Segment PM Peak Hour LOS Deficiencies (2021 Forecast) ....... 3-20
Table 3-11 Intersection PM Peak Hour LOS Analysis (2035 Forecast) ................... 3-21
Table 3-12 Street Segment PM Peak Hour LOS Analysis (2035 Forecast) .............. 3-21
Table 5-1 Bainbridge Island Accident Location .......................................................5-3
Table 5-2 SR305 Accident Locations .......................................................................5-4
Table 6-1 Non-Motorized Counts ...........................................................................6-6
Table 6-2 Roadway Network Barriers ......................................................................6-7
Table 6-3 Regional and Intra-Island Trails ............................................................ 6-10
Table 6-4 Winslow Area Sidewalk Gaps and Deficiencies...................................... 6-12
Table 6-5 Islandwide Newtwork of Shoulder Facilities for Cyclists ...................... 6-14
Table 6-6 Non-Motorized Levels of Service .......................................................... 6-16
Table 6.7a Non-Motorized Level of Service for Designated Centers ................... 6-17
Table 6.7b Non-Motorized Level of Service for Conservation Area ..................... 6-18
Table 7-1 WSF Schedules and Headways ................................................................7-2
Table 7-2 Ferry Operation Level of Service (LOS) ...................................................7-2
Table 7-3 Kitsap Transit Services .............................................................................7-6
Table 7-4 Park and Ride Facilities ...........................................................................7-7
Table 7-5 Park and Ride Utilization .........................................................................7-8
Table 8-1 Historical Transportation Funding Sources .............................................8-2
Table 8-2 Recommended Improvements to Meet LOS Standards ..........................8-5
Table 8-3 Six-Year Transportation Funding Needs .................................................8-6
APPENDIX
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
Glossary of Terms
References
Traffic Data
Level of Service Forecast Information
Land Use Forecast and Assumptions
SR 305 Level of Service Forecast Information
Accident Data
Roadway Condition Assessment
Non-Motorized Existing Facilities Maps
Non-Motorized Planned Facilities Maps
Non-Motorized Capital Improvements Projects Map
1 - 1 February 2017
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
The City of Bainbridge Island is a unique community with a unique set of
transportation needs. The City, which encompasses the entire island, is primarily
residential and includes a variety of land uses and intensities of development from the urban
Winslow area to farmlands and suburban communities. Each of these land uses has different
transportation needs that ideally would be addressed separately; however, the entire roadway
system operates as a system.
The backbone of the transportation system is the SR 305 Corridor that runs from the Bainbridge
Island ferry terminal north to the Agate Pass Bridge. This State facility not only provides
regional travel to and from the Island, but also is an important connection for local traffic needs.
The Island’s transportation system is truly multimodal, with commute, school, recreation, and
shopping trips being commonly taken by, foot, bicycle, bus, auto, and ferry. While Winslow and
other more urban areas have sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and widened shoulders, which facilitate
non-motorized movement, there are many areas of the City where pedestrians and bicyclists
must share the vehicle travel lanes or walk on narrow, unimproved shoulders. Non-motorized
issues have been discussed as part of the City of Bainbridge Island’s Non-Motorized
Transportation Plan, which is part of this plan.
Traffic has increasingly become an issue for the community. Traffic from growth has resulted in
increased roadway volumes, often coupled with high vehicle speeds and congestion at
intersections. This traffic increases conflicts with non-motorized users. In addition, the release
of the ferry and other commuter traffic creates surges of vehicles onto the highway and the
entire roadway system. During peak commute hours and tourist season, the highway can be
overwhelmed, resulting in congestion and delays.
Plan Purpose
The Island-Wide Transportation Plan (IWTP) represents an update and expansion of the 2004
Island-Wide Transportation Study (IWTS) in support of and in aid to the implementation of the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The IWTP focuses on the issues and
desires of the Bainbridge Island community to develop a transportation system that will
accommodate vehicle traffic patterns within a multimodal environment. Figure 1-1 shows the
study area and primary transportation features in relationship to the surrounding region.
The purpose of this plan is to provide the technical data and analysis to facilitate transportation
planning and to aid in implementation of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive
Plan. The effort will include the development of a transportation model based on recent traffic
counts, land use data, and roadway information that has allowed the analysis of existing and
future travel needs. The emphasis in the model is to identify congested areas and the
improvements needed to accommodate existing future vehicle traffic considering the needs of
all the Island’s transportation modes of travel.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 1 Introduction
1- 2 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 1 Introduction
1- 3 February 2017
The IWTP incorporates information from other transportation planning efforts to provide a
consistent approach to transportation issues. The IWTP uses information from the Winslow
Master Plan and Comprehensive Plan to provide a document that directs transportation
planning efforts throughout the community.
Planning History
In 1994, the City’s Transportation Plan provided discussion and analysis of the transportation
needs of the Island, except for the Winslow subarea that was studied separately. The final study
was adopted and incorporated in the Transportation Element of the City’s 1994 Comprehensive
Plan. Since that time, several Comprehensive Plan updates have occurred to clarify, modify, or
revise various sections of the study, including those in the Transportation Element.
In 1995, the Winslow Master Plan, as a sub-element of the
Comprehensive Plan, provided focus of the transportation needs
in the Winslow and ferry terminal areas. In 2002, a Non-
Motorized Transportation Plan was adopted to propose a
transportation system to meet the needs of pedestrians,
bicyclists, and other non-motorized transportation users.
The City’s Non-Motorized Transportation Advisory Committee
(NMTAC) and staff have worked together to evolve the City’s
level of thinking for non-motorized planning. This work has been
reflected in Comprehensive Plan updates.
The NMTAC and staff recognize the substantial effort that was involved with creating the
original 2004 Island-Wide Transportation Study and 2003 Non-Motorized Transportation Plan.
Each of these efforts was developed with extensive effort and time by members of the
community through steering committees, public participation, workshops, and surveys. Their
influence is part of this plan and represents the values and thoughts of the community. These
studies are comprehensive and is still largely relevant today.
Since the development of these plans, the City has been successful in implementing
transportation improvement projects with a focus on non-motorized projects, including a
successful track record of procuring grant funding. At the time of this writing the City is
undertaking several significant grant-funded projects including the Sound to Olympics (STO)
Trail, the Wing Point Way Reconstruction, and the Wyatt Way Reconstruction projects.
Relationship to Comprehensive Plan
The Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan provides transportation policy. This
includes identification of transportation issues, establishing a comprehensive vision for
transportation, and setting overarching goals. Elements of the IWTP were used to develop the
Transportation Element. The IWTP provides the technical data and analysis to facilitate
transportation planning and provides for implementation of the vision, and goals, and policies
established in the Transportation Element, as well as a detailed analysis of a variety of
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 1 Introduction
1- 4 February 2017
transportation issues affecting the community. It is intended that the IWTP be adopted by
Council as a reference document to the Transportation Element in the Comprehensive Plan.
The City of Bainbridge Island has developed its Comprehensive Plan under the requirements of
the Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA requires that jurisdictions identify existing
transportation system characteristics, establish level of service ratings, identify existing and
future deficiencies, develop improvement projects and strategies to mitigate deficiencies, and
analyze projected revenues to ensure that necessary improvements will be constructed
concurrent with demand.
The City is currently undergoing an update to its Comprehensive Plan, to be completed in early
2017. The Island-Wide Transportation Study (now IWTP) was last updated in 2004, and is
being updated concurrently with the Comprehensive Plan.
Plan Update Process
This update of the Island-Wide Transportation Plan was designed to be more limited in scale
than the prior efforts to develop the original plans. With resources largely focused on
implementation, this update was accomplished by staff working with the NMTAC to review and
comment on a chapter by chapter basis. The City engaged the services of Transportation
Solutions Incorporated (TSI) to support the City Council in considering implementation of
Transportation Impact Fees. This effort involved extensive traffic counts and the creation of a
transportation model. This information was utilized for editing the write up and updating the
exhibits in the IWTP. TSI was consulted to support updates to Chapters 3 and 4, and for peer
review.
Public involvement related to the plan has been oriented around regular NMTAC meetings and
the review of the plan along with the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan by the
Planning Commission. Public comment was taken at these meetings starting in early 2015 and
continuing to the City Council’s review in the fourth quarter of 2016. A project page on the City’s
website for the plan was provided to facilitate public engagement.
Plan Organization
The Island-Wide Transportation Plan is organized in chapters. Each chapter addresses one or
more of the plan goals and discusses how the policies are to be implemented by the City. The
chapters are as follows:
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Sustainability and Quality of Life
Chapter 3: Operations and Mobility
Chapter 4: SR 305
Chapter 5: Safety and Maintenance
Chapter 6: Non-Motorized Transportation
Chapter 7: Other Transportation Systems
Chapter 8: Financing
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 1 Introduction
1- 5 February 2017
A matrix is provided below showing where in the IWTP the information is contained to address
Growth Management Act requirements for transportation planning in accordance with RCW
36.70A.070(6).
Table 1 -1, GMA requirements for Transportation Planning.
Land use assumptions used in estimating travel. (i) Refer to Chapter 3.
Estimated traffic impacts to State owned
transportation facilities. (ii)
Refer to Chapter 4.
Inventory of transportation facilities and services.
(iii-A)
Refer to Figure 3-1, Roadway Classifications,
Figure 7-1, Ferry Routes and Figure 7-5 Kitsap
Transit Routes.
Level of service standards for locally owned arterials
and transit routes. (iii-B)
Refer to Chapters 3 and 7.
Level of service standard for state highways. (iii-C) Refer to Chapter 3.
Actions to correct current level of service
deficiencies. (iii-D)
Refer to Chapters 3 and 4.
Traffic forecasts. (iii-E) Refer to Chapters 3 and 4.
Identification of needs to meet future local and state
system demands. (iii-F)
Refer to Chapters 3 and 4.
Probable funding capacity. (iv-A) Refer to Chapter 8.
Multi-year financing plan to meet road and transit
level of service standards over the next 6 years. (iv-
B)
Refer to Chapter 8.
Probable funding shortfalls and strategies to
address funding needed to meet or reassess level
of service standards. (iv-C)
Refer to Chapter 8.
Assessment of impacts of plan on neighboring
jurisdictions. (v)
Refer to Chapters 3, 4, and 7.
Demand Management Strategies. (vi) Refer to Chapter 7.
Non-Motorized element planned improvements. (vii) Refer to Chapters 6 and 8.
2-1 February 2017
CHAPTER 2
SUSTAINABILITY AND QUALITY OF LIFE
Of great concern to the Bainbridge Island community is the relationship
between the transportation system elements and the character of the
community, livability, public health, and the environment. This chapter discusses each of these
elements of the transportation system, identifies how this plan responds to these issues, and
provides examples of transportation system features that illustrate these concepts. This chapter
provides additional context to support the transportation issues, policies, and goals in the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Transportation plays a large role in the quality of life of Bainbridge Island residents. The ferry
terminal to Seattle and the Agate Pass Bridge are the only two options for traveling off the
island. Many Islanders commute off-island by ferry or by bridge. Lengthy commute times by
ferry or being stuck in traffic on SR 305 mean spending hours away from family, friends, and
activities. Speeding and cut-through traffic makes neighborhood streets feel unsafe. Reliable
and efficient transportation on and off island is important to balance jobs and housing and
maintain the quality of life for Island residents.
Poor quality or nonexistent bicycle and pedestrian facilities can be a deterrent to residents
walking or bicycling for transportation, connecting to transit, traveling to schools and parks, as
well as for recreational purposes. Non-motorized facility networks provide options for active
modes of transportation allowing residents to make healthy lifestyle choices. Walkability and
bikeability are desirable characteristics of neighborhoods. An increasing number of Island
residents are choosing to walk and bike to work and to obtain goods and services in the more
densely developed areas of the Island.
How people choose to travel is a key element of both environmental sustainability and quality of
life. Transportation is a significant contributor to climate change, as it accounts for a high
percentage of greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions from transportation, especially diesel
particulates, are a significant health hazard. The City’s Comprehensive Plan focuses growth in
areas such as Winslow and the Neighborhood Centers. With good planning and
implementation of mixed use and higher densities within these areas, development can lead to
a more sustainable growth pattern and preserve community character. Investments in
infrastructure for active transportation modes and access to transit allow for reduced
dependence on the automobile and present opportunities for the Island to develop more
sustainably, and improving the quality of life for Island residents.
Active transportation facilities improve accessibility for people of all ages and abilities. For
example, barriers to travel by wheelchair or walker (such as curbs lacking curb cuts) and lack of
resting places for people with limited stamina, greatly reduce people’s ability to participate in
community life. Many youth and seniors do not drive.
Infrastructure for active transportation also reduces the need for parking, which in turn improves
walkability and bikeability, and access to transit by encouraging more compact development.
Costs of owning cars are a major expense for families, and good non-motorized infrastructure
with compact development can make living on Bainbridge more affordable, allowing a more
economically diverse community.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-2 February 2017
Transportation infrastructure and associated drainage have direct impacts on the environment.
Stormwater runoff from roads can contribute to water pollution, flooding, and water temperature
elevation in riparian stream habitat corridors and Puget Sound. The road network right-of-way
presents many opportunities to incorporate sustainable practices providing positive contributions
to environmental sustainability.
Community Character
Community character is a term used to identify the elements that define Bainbridge Island. The
City of Bainbridge Island’s Comprehensive Plan discusses the Island’s character as “; forested
areas, meadows, farms, marine views and access, and scenic and winding roads supporting all
forms of transportation.” [Comprehensive Plan]
Relationship to Transportation
The transportation elements related to community character include the highway, major streets,
neighborhood roadways, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Community character includes
natural and manmade features within the roadway right-of-way, such as trees with native
understory and landscaping, drainage ditches, and street lighting. Each of these elements
define the existing character of the City of Bainbridge Island. Some of these elements may be
highly desired such as trees and plantings.
Much of the character of the transportation system stems from the roadway development.
Roadways throughout the Island were originally constructed as logging, mill, or farm-to-market
roads, connecting the rural areas of the Island with areas of urban development such as
Winslow and to transportation connections such as “mosquito fleet” foot ferry docks. As the
Island became more developed, major transportation features were added, including the Agate
Pass Bridge, SR 305, and the Washington State Ferry’s Bainbridge Island terminal. Island
roadways were also improved over time – pavement was added, roadways were widened,
drainage was improved, and traffic controls were added to improve vehicle mobility and safety.
Designated centers, mainly Winslow, saw a higher level of development including sidewalks and
pedestrian paths, on-street parking spaces, street trees and landscaping, and street lighting.
Recent improvements to the Winslow area include bicycle lanes and sidewalks, pedestrian
crosswalks and refuge areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths, vehicle turn lanes, roundabouts,
and other transportation features. New property developments are required to include
transportation improvements along the property’s frontage in accordance with the City’s
roadway design standards.
The City has followed the community’s desires by defining and implementing an appropriate
look and feel for its roadway and off-roadway transportation systems. Emphasis throughout the
City’s planning activities has responded to the community’s concerns about preserving the
elements that define the character of the community.
• The adopted Winslow Master Plan emphasizes the use of traffic calming to slow traffic speeds
and promotes the development of pedestrian and sidewalk facilities within Winslow.
• The City roadway standards use 10-foot wide travel lanes instead of the standard 12 feet,
creating a narrower feel and less paved width. This helps to slow traffic and reduce stormwater
impacts of roads.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-3 February 2017
• The City developed a Non-Motorized Transportation Plan and created a Non-Motorized
Transportation Advisory Committee to provide better facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists
throughout the Island.
• The City continues to explore and implement innovative traffic control options such as the
roundabout at Madison Avenue and High School Road as alternatives to the installation of traffic
signals.
• The City continues to evolve its transportation vision to include complete streets, shoulder
networks for cyclists, sidewalk improvements for better accommodation of a wide range of users,
and trails including regional, intra-island, and local connecting pathways.
• The City with Kitsap County has developed the concept of the Sound to Olympics Trail (STO) – a
regional trail crossing Kitsap between both Winslow and Kingston to the Hood Canal Bridge –
which will link the Burke-Gilman Trail in Seattle and the Olympic Discovery Trail.
Community Character Transportation Features
The IWTP is focused on identifying the infrastructure needed to improve mobility and safety of
the transportation system. The plan’s alternatives and recommendations meet the plan’s goals
for maintaining community character including:
• Road development guidelines – Providing consistency with the adopted roadway standards
that promote the retention of appropriate roadside vegetation and trees and follow the natural
topography.
• Street design guidelines – Providing for and protecting the development of more urban
features, such as parking, sidewalks, and bicycle facilities within designated centers, widened
shoulders and separated paths in less urban areas. Providing context appropriate street designs
that promote the use of all modes of transportation for all ages and abilities of people.
• Street lighting guidelines – Concentrating street lighting within Winslow and Neighborhood
Centers and areas identified by safety or community planning needs.
• Scenic resource and habitat protection – Focusing the development of the transportation
system within existing and carefully chosen new travel corridors, while retaining trees with
understory and standing or fallen deadwood.
• SR 305 Scenic Byway – Retaining the scenic character of SR 305 by discouraging new access
points, and maintaining or enhancing vegetative buffers. SR 305 is a WSDOT designated Scenic
Byway, and the community wishes to preserve, enhance, and restore healthy forested habitat
along the corridor. Trees, understory, standing and fallen deadwood all contribute to the desired
view-shed and wildlife corridor. Vegetative buffer screening adjacent development is important,
both within WSDOT right-of-way, and within adjacent land bordering the highway. Development
of the Sound to Olympics Trail in and along the SR 305 right-of-way is planned to reduce the
need for more motor vehicle lanes, enhance vegetative buffers, and improve connections with
transit. Reversible bus rapid transit lanes are being studied to move people more efficiently, and
with minimum impervious surface.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-4 February 2017
Desired features of Community Character
The photographs and sketches identify some of the key features that define the transportation
character of Bainbridge Island.
Livability and Health
The public is becoming more conscious of the environment in which they live and an increasing
percentage of the population desires to live in places that are walkable and bikeable. The
federal Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Kitsap Public Health District strongly
encourage developing active transportation facilities to support moderate exercise for basic
public health. Today prospective home buyers are presented with statistics such as walkability
scores. A growing number of residents’ desire active transportation alternatives for daily trips
including access to goods and services. More and more commuters choose active modes of
transportation to commute to work. On Bainbridge Island, many residents commute by walking
and bicycling to the Seattle ferry. Other commuters use Kitsap Transit or carpool and often walk
to stops within their neighborhood.
Relationship to Transportation
In order to achieve livability and promote public health, frequent updating of standards and
incremental investments in transportation infrastructure, including non-motorized elements, are
essential.
• Roadway Standards – Pedestrian and bicycle facilities provide for active modes of
transportation and recreation. Street lighting is to be appropriate for routes where residents are
walking or cycling to school, work, or transit in the dark during fall and winter months. This is
particularly important for people with low vision, including seniors. Recognizing that investments
take time, provide interim measures for additional non-motorized safety through means such as
reducing speed limits, providing wider shoulders, and installation of signage.
Following natural topography, roadside
trees and vegetation, with minimized
paved surfaces are desired in
conservation areas
Crosswalks, parking, street lighting, and
non-motorized facilities are desired
features in urban areas
Integration of bicycles,
pedestrians, and non-
motorized facilities are
important features for the
community
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-5 February 2017
• Complete Streets – Investments over time in pedestrian and bicycle facilities within both
designated center areas will provide for greater connectivity. Many streets lack sufficient
sidewalks and bike lanes. Many secondary arterial roadways lack shoulders and separated
facilities.
• Multi-use pathways – Investments in separated pathways with regional, intra-island and local
connectivity.
• ADA Transition Plan – The City is continuing a process of identifying ADA-accessible routes for
people with reduced mobility, many using assistive devices such as wheelchairs (motorized and
manual) and walkers.
Neighborhoods
Bainbridge Island is a residential community and the protection of neighborhood areas and
promotion of neighborhood transportation facilities is an important concern for Island residents.
Designated centers such as Winslow need a high level of development with pedestrian and
bicycle facilities, transit access, and a development of residential street character. In
conservation areas, residents are concerned about the impacts of traffic flow, the development
of non-motorized facilities and improving future connections and circulation.
Relationship to Transportation
Provide a safe roadway system in residential areas for adults and children walking, bicycling,
and driving. The City of Bainbridge Island has a limited transportation network and vehicle
movements often depend on a single street. Because of this, as traffic levels increase on the
arterial street system, adjacent and parallel streets will begin to experience factors such as “cut-
through” traffic, inappropriate vehicle speeds, and intersection congestion.
• Neighborhood traffic calming– The City’s Public Works Department, in conjunction with the
Police Department, reviews complaints about inappropriate speeding or cut-through traffic on
neighborhood streets.
• Traffic enforcement – The City of Bainbridge Island Police Department responds to
neighborhood concerns about high traffic speeds through residential areas.
• Roadway standards – The City of Bainbridge Island has developed its roadway design
standards to act as traffic calming features using narrow travel lanes and non-motorized facilities.
Neighborhood Transportation Features
The IWTP is focused on identifying the improvements needed for the mobility and safety of
people using the transportation system. The alternatives and recommendations meet the plan’s
goals for maintaining the neighborhoods including:
• Reducing neighborhood cut-through traffic – Focus development of the transportation system
within primary travel corridors.
• Neighborhood circulation – Develop the transportation network to provide secondary roadway
access, improve emergency access, increase neighborhood circulation, and improve pedestrian
and bicycle mobility. Pedestrian and bicycle path short-cut connections through neighborhoods
offer important connectivity to link neighborhoods and discourage unnecessary vehicle trips.
Provide non-motorized connectivity between neighborhoods through City review of new
development projects
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-6 February 2017
• Winslow street visualization plan – Promoting the design and unique character of each street
within the Winslow area.
Desired features for Neighborhoods
The photographs and sketches identify some of the key features that define the neighborhood
goals for transportation.
Environment
Maintaining a natural environment is very important to the Bainbridge Island community.
Protection of the environment is a key consideration for all development projects, with the City,
State, federal government agencies, and Tribes all playing roles.
Bainbridge Island residents voted to fund a $10 million bond to purchase open space, and that
money was heavily leveraged through the City’s Open Space Commission to vastly increase
open space on the Island. Bainbridge voters approved a Levy Lid Lift for the Bainbridge Island
Metropolitan Parks and Recreation District to purchase land to strategically increase open
space for recreational usage. The City completed an Open Space Study, which provides
guidance for land use planning regarding environmentally sensitive areas.
Relationship to Transportation
Bainbridge Island has a variety of environmental characteristics that affect the development of
the transportation system. As an island, traffic is concentrated near the ferry terminal in
Winslow, and at the two-lane Agate Pass Bridge at the north end of the Island. The Island’s
topography, soils and steep slopes have limited the development of roadways in many areas.
The Island has many sensitive resources such as ravines, parklands, open spaces, and
shoreline and wetland areas that require creative and environmentally sensitive approaches to
roadway and non-motorized facility development.
Neighborhoods are enhanced by
providing appropriate street width,
sidewalks, and other facilities
The character and needs of
Winslow streets are part of
a visual street plan
Streets reflect the special
needs of pedestrians,
bicyclists and traffic flow
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-7 February 2017
Possible impacts to the environment are a key consideration in the development of
transportation projects. These include full consideration of impacts on the environment in the
planning and design of a project.
Environmental Transportation Features
The following environmental aspects should be considered in addition to improving mobility and
safety for all modes of transportation:
• Environmental sensitivity – Minimizing road construction within environmentally sensitive areas
and encouraging the planting of low-maintenance, native groundcover and trees along roadways.
The plan focuses the development of the transportation system within existing travel corridors.
• Utilities – Promoting the undergrounding of overhead utilities to reduce the need for removal and
maintenance of roadside vegetation.
• Stormwater management. – Providing for environmentally-sensitive design of stormwater
collection and detention facilities. Combining traffic calming and stormwater management goals
through green infrastructure provisions within traffic calming features such as curb bulbs.
• Air quality – Developing transportation plans and programs that improve traffic flow, encourage
non-motorized and transit transportation alternatives to driving, thus lessening the impact on
regional air quality.
• Wildlife Corridors and networks – Recognizing and promoting the maintenance of wildlife
Corridors and networks.
Desired features of Environment
Bainbridge Island has a variety of environmental characteristics that affect the development of
the transportation system.
The photographs and sketches below identify some of the key features that define the
environmental goals.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-8 February 2017
Stormwater Management and Green Infrastructure
Stormwater planters to control run
off and improve water quality
Protection of environmental
resources such as the Ravine
Roadside vegetation filters run-off
Rain gardens to control stormwater run-off
and improve water quality
Special stormwater containment
features can control water runoff
roadway surfaces
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-9 February 2017
Developed landscapes including roadways are covered with impervious surfaces which can
increase pollutant levels and increase stream flows, degrading water quality. The Washington
State Department of Ecology (DOE) establishes the stormwater flow control and water quality
requirements for roadway projects. As a municipality, the City of Bainbridge is required to meet
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit obligations to discharge
stormwater to waters of the State of Washington and meet the NPDES permit requirements.
With the implementation of the 2012 NPDES Permit, the City is implementing Low Impact
Development (LID) requirements for both public and private development.
LID is an innovative stormwater management approach that attempts to mimic the natural
stormwater hydrology of pre-development conditions. LID uses techniques that infiltrate, filter,
detain, evaporate, and attenuate stormwater run-off close to the source. Examples of “green”
natural processes include swales, bio-retention, filter media, permeable pavement, and street
trees. Streets that implement natural processes are commonly referred to as green streets.
Green streets can serve multiple community goals by combining stormwater infrastructure within
traffic calming features such as curbs, bulbs, or by adding planting strip rain gardens that
provide an additional buffer between the street and the sidewalk.
Balancing Community Needs
With thoughtful planning, new transportation infrastructure can often protect environmental
functions, as when LID facilities replace more traditional stormwater piping, or when pedestrian,
bicycle, and/or transit facilities reduce the need for impervious and expensive parking facilities.
One of the more challenging aspects of improving a transportation system is finding the right
balance between competing community needs and desires. For example, it may be best to
construct a sidewalk or separated pathway on one side of the roadway rather than on both sides
in order to reduce impacts to vegetation. Balancing needs of non-motorized users and goals of
vegetation protection will require analysis and public engagement to design improvements that
best meet competing interests.
Creating designs that improve transportation systems and evaluating the trade-offs where they
exist (weighing the importance between community goals and design guidelines) is an important
function of the City of Bainbridge Island Public Works Department. Table 2-1 illustrates the
issues that can arise for a variety of transportation improvements.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 2 – Sustainability and Quality of Life
2-10 February 2017
Table 2-1: Competing Community Needs
Project Type Community Character
concerns
Environmental concerns Neighborhood
concerns
Widen roadway to
include bicycle lanes
Increased paved width of
roadways changing the
road’s look and feel
Promotes use of non-
motorized, but also can
increase water runoff
May slightly increase
vehicle travel speeds
on widened road
corridor
Installation of
roundabout at an
intersection
Roundabouts highly
desired over traffic
signals
May result in removal of
trees near intersection
May reduce cut-
through traffic in
residential areas
Rebuilding roadway
impacted by shoreline
erosion
May result in a more
structured and modern
roadway facility
May impact shoreline areas,
loss of trees and foliage
Needed improvement
for access to property
Installing pedestrian
path or sidewalk
May affect the feel of a
traditional neighborhood
Promotes use of non-
motorized vehicles
Provides safe access
for pedestrians
As illustrated in the table above, each of these examples could have competing concerns. In
other words, a highly-desired project for one sector of the community may be opposed by
another. In the end, these checks-and-balances can improve the planning and design of
roadway projects by reflecting the needs and desires of the larger community.
The City uses the community values in the Comprehensive Plan when developing project
objectives. The City is committed to the principles of context-sensitive solutions. City staff
strives to facilitate public engagement when developing capital projects to evolve and refine the
community’s values as they relate to each project.
3-1 February 2017
CHAPTER 3 OPERATIONS AND MOBILITY
This chapter describes the traffic operations and current and future vehicle mobility for
the City’s roadway system. Mobility is the measure of how well vehicles can get around on the
roadway system – the opposite of congestion. Island residents expect a high level of mobility
that maintain the character of their community. The high levels of congestion experienced
during peak periods, especially on and around SR 305, are a common source of frustration for
drivers.
While the focus of this chapter is on motorized level of service, it is recognized that providing for
level of service for all modes is important for a viable transportation system. In some locations
where constraints limit options, some modes may be favored over other modes. Transportation
networks should provide for all modes of transportation as a system. For vehicular traffic,
transportation demand strategies may be an optimal approach.
Level of service standards are used to provide a basis for the mobility analysis. This plan used
planning and operational models developed by Transportation Solutions, Inc. in TransCAD and
Synchro software, respectively, to analyze current conditions (based on traffic counts and
existing roadway network information) and to forecast future levels of service (based on traffic
generated by forecasted land use and roadway network changes). The structure of the roadway
network was analyzed by reviewing the roadway classification system, connectivity, access, and
road standards.
Existing Roadway System
The section on existing conditions provides an analysis of the current operating conditions and
provides a baseline for future comparisons. The City of Bainbridge Island’s transportation
system is made up of a network of roadways, pedestrian facilities, bikeways, the ferry terminal,
and formal and informal trails. Each of these elements is important to the mobility or movement
of people and goods within and to destinations beyond the Island. This chapter focuses on the
roadway system only; the non-motorized, bus transit, and ferry systems are described in
Chapters 6 and 7.
The roadway system is designed for the
movement of people and goods
throughout the community. Major
regional transportation features of the
Island include the Washington State
Ferry Terminal, which connects
Bainbridge Island to downtown Seattle;
and SR 305, which connects the Island
to the Kitsap and Olympic Peninsula.
SR 305 is the Island’s principal
transportation corridor, providing an
important north-south connection.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-2 February 2017
The State system is supported by a City roadway system that connects residential areas to the
highway and retail and employment areas. The City’s arterial, collector, and residential street
system provides roadway connections and access to properties within the City.
Travel Corridors
The following important commuter, shopping, business, school, and freight/commercial corridors
are identified for the Island:
Commute Corridors – SR 305, Winslow Way, Wyatt Way, Ferncliff Avenue, High School Road,
Day Road, Blakely Avenue, Eagle Harbor Drive, Baker Hill Road, Miller Road, and North Madison
Avenue.
Retail Corridors – SR 305, Winslow Way, High School Road, Madison Avenue, Hildebrand, Miller
Road, Wyatt Way, Lynwood Center Road, and Valley Road.
School Corridors – High School Road, New Brooklyn Road, Sportsman’s Club Road, Madison
Avenue, Day Road, North Madison Avenue, and Blakely Avenue
Freight Corridors – SR 305, Day Road, Miller Road, Fletcher Bay Road, Sportsman’s Club Road,
High School Road, Madison Avenue, and Winslow Way.
Roadway Inventory
The City’s roadway system consists of approximately 140 miles of paved roads, and another 20
miles of unpaved roads. The City maintains a Geographic Information System (GIS) that
includes the roadway system. The GIS database includes characteristics for each roadway
segment, including length, pavement width, functional classification, posted speed, sidewalks,
and transit and bicycle facilities. A spreadsheet is maintained that includes sign inventory
information. The City periodically conducts an island-wide traffic count and develops volume
and traffic speed information for its major roadways. This plan was updated in 2014 with TSI
traffic counts shown in Appendix C.
Roadway Classifications
Roadway functional classification is defined as the process by which streets and highways are
grouped into classes, or systems, according to the character of traffic service that they are
intended to provide. The City divides Island roadways into four functional classifications:
principal arterial, secondary arterial, collector, and local access roads. These classifications are
described in Table 3-1.
Table 3-1. Functional Classifications
Classification Definition
Principal Arterial Carry the highest levels of traffic in the system at the greatest speed for the
longest uninterrupted distance, often with some degree of access control.
Used for through trips, and provide connections within the system.
Secondary Arterial Carry high level of traffic at a moderate speed, sometimes for through trips.
Often serve as access to high-intensity land uses such as major employers
or larger commercial centers; provide connections within the system.
Collector Connect traffic from residential roads to arterials at a lower speed, carrying
lower levels of traffic than arterials. Serve neighborhood centers.
Local Access Carry low levels of traffic at low speeds. Serve as access to residential and
commercial areas and are not used for through trips.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-3 February 2017
Streets and highways are assigned one of these classes, depending on the character of the
traffic (i.e., local or long distance) and the degree of land access that they allow. Typically, a trip
will use a combination of different road classes, with each classification having a specific
function with regard to access and travel speed. Arterials provide a high degree of mobility and
less access, while local access roads provide a high level of access and less mobility.
Collectors provide a balance between access and mobility and connect the system.
Road Standards
The City of Bainbridge Island has established its roadway street and design standards as part of
its Engineering Design and Construction Standards and Specifications. These standards set the
minimum requirements for constructing roadways and are applicable to all new roadway
construction and modifications to existing roadways within the City of Bainbridge Island. The
road and street design standards follow the functional classification system described above
and establish separate standards for designated centers and the conservation area of the
Island.
The City has both urban and suburban standards. Urban standards are intended to apply within
the designated center of Winslow, the neighborhood centers including Lynwood, Island Center,
and Rolling Bay, and the Day Road Industrial Center. Urban standards apply in all locations
with R2.9 and greater zoning and/or effective density. The City may require urban standards to
be applied in other areas in close proximity for system continuity.
Level of Service
This section describes the Level of Service (LOS) standards used in this document. LOS
provides a method for measuring the performance of the transportation system. The City uses
a standard for LOS that determines if adequate mobility is being provided on the roadway
system. LOS standards and method of measurement have been coordinated with Washington
State Department of Transportation, Washington State Ferries, Kitsap County, and Kitsap
Transit to ensure that standards used in this document are consistent with these other entities.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-4 February 2017
Figure 3-1, Road Classifications
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-5 February 2017
LOS Defined
LOS is a measurement used in transportation planning to assess the operating performance of
the transportation system. For roadways, LOS measures the degree of traffic congestion along
a roadway varying from LOS A (free-flow traffic with minimal delays) to LOS F (highly-
constrained traffic with long delays).
The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board, Special Report 209)
establishes quantitative methodologies for determining level of service for differing types of
facilities. The methodologies vary for intersections, roadways, freeway, and highway, but all
follow the LOS A - F classification and provide a consistent method of measuring the
performance of the transportation system. Table 3-2 describes the operation of the
transportation system at each LOS ranking.
Table 3-2: Level of Service Descriptions
Level of Service Description
LOS A Free flow traffic conditions with very low delay at intersections.
LOS B Reasonably unimpeded traffic operations with only short traffic
delays at intersections.
LOS C Stable operating conditions with average traffic delays at
intersections
LOS D Operating conditions result in lower travel speeds and higher
delays at intersections.
LOS E Travel speeds are substantially restricted with problems likely to
occur at intersections.
LOS F Roadway operations are over capacity with extreme delays
likely at intersections.
LOS is measured differently for roadways and intersections. For roadways, LOS is measured
as a function of traffic volume and roadway capacity. For intersections, LOS is measured as a
function of vehicle delay in clearing the intersection.
Roadway LOS Measurement
Roadway LOS is measured by the relationship between traffic volume (V) and capacity (C) of
the roadway. As the volume of traffic using the roadway approaches, the capacity of the
roadway (V/C approaching 1.0), the level of service deteriorates. Table 3-3 relates
volume/capacity to LOS measurements for roadways.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-6 February 2017
Table 3-3. Roadway Level of Service and Volume/Capacity Ratio
LOS Volume/Capacity (V/C) Ratio
A Less than 0.6
B 0.60 to less than 0.70
C 0.70 to less than 0.80
D 0.80 to less than 0.90
E 0.90 to less than 1.00
F More than 1.00
Traffic volumes can be counted or they can be calculated using the traffic model by analyzing
land uses that are served by the roadway. Bainbridge Island’s roadway capacity policy is
defined in the City’s Design and Construction Standards; see Table 3-4. No policy is currently
defined for arterial roadway capacity. There is some inconsistency between the City’s current
capacity policy and an engineering-based approach to roadway capacity calculation which
would typically consider the physical structure of the roadway, including the number of lanes,
type of intersection controls, widths of lanes and shoulders, and design speed. The City’s
capacity standards will be reviewed and updated during the roadway design standard update
process.
The roadway levels of service described in this plan are based upon current capacity policy. In
lieu of an arterial capacity policy, this plan calculated arterial segment LOS based on an
approach which is currently used by other small cities and which is consistent with the state of
engineering practice.
Table 3-4. Existing Roadway Capacity Policy
Functional Classification Area Type Capacity *
Secondary Arterial Urban > 3,000
Secondary Arterial Suburban >2,000
Collector Urban 2,000 to 3,000
Collector Suburban 1,000 to 2,000
Residential Urban < 2,000
Residential Suburban < 1,000
* Capacity is measured using the Average Daily Traffic (ADT)
To improve the LOS for a roadway, either the capacity must be increased or the volume of
traffic using the road must be decreased. To increase the capacity, the City can look at several
options such as roadway improvements ranging from adding signals or separated turn lanes to
an intersection to roadway widening. To reduce traffic volumes, the City can explore options
such as changing allowable land uses or modifying individual travel behavior. This section
focuses on capacity improvements. Chapter 7 discusses other travel modes and methods of
transportation demand management.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-7 February 2017
Intersection LOS measurement
Intersection LOS is measured by the amount of delay experienced by a vehicle waiting to clear
an intersection. Delay at a signalized intersection can be caused by waiting for the signal or
waiting for the queue ahead to clear the signal. Delay at un-signalized intersections is caused
by waiting for a break in traffic or waiting for a queue to clear the intersection. Table 3-5 shows
the amount of delay used to determine LOS for signalized and un-signalized intersections.
Roundabout controlled intersections use the same LOS thresholds as signalized intersections.
Table 3-5. Intersection LOS and Delay
LOS Signalized Delay per
Vehicle (sec/veh)
Unsignalized Delay per
Vehicle (sec/veh)
A 0-10 0-10
B >10-20 >10-15
C >20-35 >15-25
D >35-55 >25-35
E >55-80 >35-50
F >80 >50
Different delay standards are used for signalized (stop light
controlled) and un-signalized (stop sign controlled) intersections. For
signalized and all-way stop controlled intersections, the LOS is the
amount of delay per vehicle caused by control and is reported for the
intersection. For un-signalized intersections, where there are controls
only on the minor approaches, the LOS is estimated by the average
delay per vehicle and is reported for only minor approaches to the
intersection.
City LOS Standard
The City of Bainbridge Island’s LOS standard designates the
minimum operational performance of the roadway system that must
be maintained. If traffic volumes cause a roadway to fall below the
minimum LOS standard, improvements or other mitigation must be
made to bring the facility back to the designated LOS standard. Level
of service standards are normally prescribed for the afternoon or p.m. peak hour (most
congested hour) of the traffic system, which typically occurs between 4:45 and 5:45 in the
evening on Bainbridge Island.
The recommended minimum LOS standard uses the City’s roadway classification system, and
four zones that reflect the differences in the Island’s character: designated centers including
Winslow and Neighborhood Centers, Conservation Area, and the SR 305 Corridor. Within each
of these categories, individual minimum LOS standards were established for secondary
arterials, collectors, and residential roadways. These are shown in Figure 3-2 and described
below.
Generally, speaking.
Roadways that are
LOS E or F fail the
standard.
LOS D is okay for
certain arterials and
collectors in urban
areas
LOS A, B or C are
within the standard for
all arterials and
collectors
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-8 February 2017
Winslow – (applies to roadways and intersections in the greater Winslow area)
Secondary Arterial – LOS D
Collector – LOS D
Local Access – LOS C
Neighborhood Centers – (applies to roadways and intersections within the City-defined
centers of Rolling Bay, Island Center, and Lynwood Center)
Secondary Arterial – LOS D
Collector – LOS C
Local Access – LOS C
Conservation Area – (applies to roadways and intersections in areas outside of the Winslow
core and the Designated Centers – the remainder of the Island)
Secondary Arterial – LOS C
Collector – LOS C
Local Access – LOS B
SR 305 Corridor – (applies to state highways and is established by the State)
All Roadways– LOS D
SR 305 LOS Standard
The LOS standard for state facilities is set by the Washington State Department of
Transportation as a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) under RCW 47.06.140. The HSS
designation requires that SR 305 be evaluated using a LOS Standard designated by WSDOT.
While WSDOT internally evaluates roadways using its own methodology, WSDOT has assigned
a level of service standard for SR 305 as LOS D-mitigate for City planning purposes. This
standard requires that congestion be mitigated when the peak period operation of the state
facility falls below LOS D.
Non-Motorized LOS Standard
The facility types and associated level of service for non-motorized transportation elements for
secondary arterial and high volume collector (ADT 1500 or greater) roadways are established in
Chapter 6, “Non-Motorized Systems” of this plan. The minimum Bicycle Level of Service
(BLOS) and Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS) for development is level of service C. PLOS
and BLOS is calculated using the methodology in the latest edition of the Highway Capacity
Manual. The 2010 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010) provides a detailed methodology for
calculating level of service for pedestrians and cyclists. The level of service is based on quality
of facilities as well as traffic volume and speeds. LOS measures are graded A through F based
on a numerical score with the letter A representing the highest-grade facility.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-9 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-10 February 2017
Existing Traffic Conditions
This section describes the traffic conditions for the 2014 plan year. The plan is based on traffic
data collected for roadway segments in 2012 and intersection counts in 2014 as shown in
Appendix C.
Transportation Model
A consultant, Transportation Solutions, Inc. (TSI) developed a citywide transportation model to
estimate existing travel demand and to provide a tool for forecasting future travel demand on
City roadways. Current and future travel demand were used as inputs to a citywide operational
model, developed using Synchro software, to evaluate current and forecasted PM peak hour
levels of service throughout the City’s roadway network. The demand model is based upon the
concept of vehicle trips; pedestrians and cyclist demand is not forecasted. Similarly, carpool,
vanpool, or transit users are represented by single vehicles in the model. The consultant’s
report is included in Appendix D to this plan.
For analysis of existing conditions, the TransCAD-based model used existing land use data
from Kitsap County and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), roadway information from the
City, and TSI traffic counts to reproduce existing trips and their paths, from origin to destination,
through the citywide roadway network.
Land use was collected from Kitsap County at the individual parcel level and aggregated to
create 241 transportation analysis zones (TAZs) which covered the entirety of the City. Two
external zones were created to represent travel demand at the ferry terminal and at the north
end of the Island. Appendix D provides the background information on how the future land use
forecast was prepared.
Trip generation was based upon existing land use and trip generation rates established by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition and calibrated
based on knowledge of local conditions and travel patterns. It was observed during calibration,
for example, that single-family trip generation rates on Bainbridge Island were lower than the
nationally-calibrated averages published by ITE. This reduced single family trip rate may be
associated with a growing percentage of retirees living on the Island. Peak hour ferry trip
generation rates were estimated from the WSDOT Ferries Division 2013 Origin-Destination
Travel Survey Report.
For operational analysis, a citywide traffic model was developed in Synchro software, using
roadway information obtained from the City, satellite and street-level imagery collected from
Google Earth, and traffic counts collected in 2014 by TSI. Relevant roadway information for
operational analysis included number of lanes, intersection channelization, traffic control
devices, speed limits, and lane width. Observed PM peak hour traffic volumes were applied to
the roadway network to calculate intersection levels of service.
Peak Hour Traffic Volumes
The City of Bainbridge Island collects traffic count data on a periodic basis to assess changes in
traffic patterns, to collect information for its concurrency program, and to track the operational
characteristics of the Island. In 2012, the City contracted an update of Island-wide traffic counts
and travel speeds. In 2014, the City contracted intersection counts. This information was
utilized in the traffic model developed by TSI.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-11 February 2017
WSDOT Ferry Travel Survey
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) conducts origin-destination (OD)
surveys every six to seven years as a way to accurately capture and measure the travel
patterns of ferry passengers. Passengers were asked about their typical routes, how they get to
and from ferry terminals, and the purpose of their trips.
Surveys were administered to ferry riders during weekdays and Saturdays in October 2013.
Over 17,000 survey questionnaires were collected system-wide, with 92 percent of collected
surveys sufficiently complete for analysis. Survey responses were used to develop a database
of ferry user characteristics, including trip origin and destination patterns. TSI reviewed and
processed survey results for the Seattle-Bainbridge route and used them as inputs to the
citywide travel demand and traffic operations models.
Figure 3-3 summarizes survey findings for the Seattle-Bainbridge Island ferry.
Highlights of the survey results published in August 2014 are summarized below:
Ferry ridership has declined slightly since 2006, with approximately 17,000 riders per
day in 2013 compared to 18,000 riders per day in 2006. Vehicle boardings decreased by
7 percent during that period.
The Seattle-Bainbridge route has shown an aging ridership, with the number of
passengers over age 64 increasing from 8 percent in 2006 to 17 percent in 2013.
System-wide, average passenger age increased from 42 in 1993 to 48 in 2006 and 49 in
2013. Currently 18 percent of riders are retired and another 14 percent are planning to
retire in the next five years.
Approximately 25 percent of weekday riders telecommute at least one day per week, up
from 20 percent in 2006.
The proportion of work- and school-related trips decreased and the proportion of
recreation and shopping trips increased between 2006 and 2013.
Of the 6,070 total (eastbound and westbound) ferry trips during the 3:00 to 7:00 PM
weekday peak period, 67 percent had an origin or destination on Bainbridge Island,
while the remaining 33 percent had off-Island trip ends. This indicates the WSF
terminal’s regional nature, with one in three travelers originating or destined for off-Island
locations.
The City of Poulsbo and other North Kitsap County locations accounted for 57% of the
off-Island destinations. Other primary destinations included the cities of Kingston,
Silverdale, Port Townsend, and Sequim. The results indicate that while much of off-
Island traffic is coming from areas adjacent to Bainbridge Island, as many as 40% of off-
Island drivers could take advantage of new or improved service to downtown Seattle
from Kingston or Bremerton.
Nearly 70 percent of total weekday PM peak period ferry trips are destined westbound,
with the other 30 percent of trips destined primarily for locations within Seattle.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-12 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-13 February 2017
Existing LOS
The travel demand model was calibrated using a process that compares the counted roadway
volumes to modeled flows which are based on land use and roadway network data. The
calibrated TransCAD model and Synchro intersection analysis software were used to determine
the 2014 LOS for the intersections in the study area.
Figure 3-3 shows the 2014 LOS for the Island as a whole and for the Winslow area. The LOS
for each intersection is shown by approach in Table 3-6. All intersections modeled on SR 305
north of High School Road currently do not meet minimum LOS standards except for the signal
at Day Road. Day Road, however, is close to exceeding the standard. In urban areas, the
Madison/Wyatt intersection currently fails the minimum LOS standard but will be improved to
LOS A upon completion of a planned roundabout.
There are currently no roadway level of service failures.
Table 3-6. Intersections PM Peak Hour LOS Deficiencies – 2014 Baseline
Intersection Control Type1 Delay2 (s/veh) LOS
Madison Ave N / Wyatt AWSC 38.5 E
SR 305 / Koura Rd TWSC 37.3 E
SR 305 / Lovgreen Rd TWSC 38.9 E
SR 305 / NE Hidden Cove Rd TWSC 48.3 E
SR 305 / Port Madison TWSC >180 F
SR 305 / Agatewood Rd TWSC >180 F
1TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control; AWSC = All-Way Stop Control; RAB = Roundabout; Signal = Signalized
2Average control delay for all movements. For TWSC, delay is reported for the movement with the highest delay.
Future Traffic Conditions
This section identifies the land use forecast methodology and results used to identify the future
needs and deficiencies of the transportation system as described in Appendix E. Two time
periods were studied: 2021, representing the six-year short-term planning period, and 2035,
representing the 20-year long-term planning period. 2035 matches the long-term planning
horizon of Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), the region’s major planning entity.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-14 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-15 February 2017
Land Use Forecast
The transportation model used PSRC and Kitsap County land use forecasts to determine future
PM peak hour trip growth by transportation analysis zone (TAZ). Trip growth forecasts were
distributed and assigned to the future roadway network to generate expected future traffic
growth citywide.
Determination of Base Year Land Use
Base year land use was provided by Kitsap County in the form of GIS-based tax parcel data.
These data were refined based on recent satellite and street-level photography, then
categorized according to the following modeled land use types:
Single-Family Housing
Multi-Family Housing
Senior/Assisted/Retirement Housing
Retail
General Office
Industrial and Manufacturing
Warehouse/Utility/Storage
Hotel
Hospital/Nursing Home
Park and Ride
School
Recreation/Entertainment
Church
Land use data were subsequently aggregated to create 241 transportation analysis zones
(TAZs), with each TAZ representing a distinct geographical trip generating unit in the travel
demand model. Table 3-7 describes the modeled 2014 land use quantities. The base year travel
demand model was calibrated using 2014 traffic counts to establish a tool that reflects vehicle
traffic and travel patterns for each of the TAZs.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-16 February 2017
Table 3-7. 2014 Land Use
Land Use Category Quantity Units
Single-Family Housing 8,517 Dwelling Units
Multi-Family Housing 1,311 Dwelling Units
Senior/Assisted/Retirement Housing 212 Dwelling Units
Retail 589 KSF*
General Office 316 KSF
Industrial and Manufacturing 163 KSF
Warehouse/Utility/Storage 226 KSF
Hotel 96 Rooms
Hospital/Nursing Home 69 KSF
Park and Ride 841 Stalls
School 3,355 Students
Recreation/Entertainment 207 KSF
Church 121 KSF
* KSF equals one thousand square feet.
Land Use Forecasts (2021 and 2035)
The next step in the transportation modeling process was to incorporate land use forecasts to
the calibrated base year travel demand model in order to establish 2021 and 2035 traffic
forecasts.
In order to convert regional 2035 land use forecasts to the level of detail required by the citywide
transportation model, housing and employment growth forecasts were geographically distributed
to the TAZ level according to zoning and estimated land capacity. Employment growth forecasts
were converted to gross floor area or equivalent modeled units using relationships established
by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, U.S. Department of Energy, and San Diego
Association of Governments.
Table 3-8 shows the citywide residential and employment forecasts used in this plan.
Table 3-8. 2021 and 2035 Forecasts
Households % Change
from Base Employees % Change
from Base
2014 Base Year 10,152 -- 8,600 --
2021 Forecast 11,346 12% 9,321 8%
2035 Forecast 13,248 30% 10,587 23%
Growth in households is assumed to occur at an annual rate of approximately 1.3 percent per
year during the planning period. Employment growth is expected at 1.7 percent per year. The
2035 forecasts assigned a moderate rate of growth throughout the Island with the greatest
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-17 February 2017
commercial growth in the designated Neighborhood Centers, industrial growth focused in areas
currently zoned business/industrial, and residential housing growth occurring in areas with the
greatest potential for new housing under existing zoning. The 2021 forecasts were based on a
straight-line interpolation of growth for each TAZ, with the assumption that the distribution of
employment and housing would be proportionate to the 2035 scenario.
Future Traffic Operations
This section describes the future traffic conditions on the City’s roadway system for 2021 and
2035. Future traffic conditions were estimated for 2021 and 2035 using the results of the land
use and employment forecasts, roadway network information, and the calibrated travel demand
model (including calibrated trip generation, distribution, and traffic assignment sub models).
2021 Traffic Forecast
The 2021 traffic forecast was developed by applying a linear interpolation of forecasted 2035
land use growth to the calibrated base year planning model. Forecasted traffic growth was then
applied to the Synchro traffic operations model to analyze 2021 levels of service. Where LOS
was shown to fall below the minimum LOS threshold by 2021, mitigating improvements were
added to the road network. This section describes the results of the 2021 analysis.
2021 LOS
The traffic model produces a forecast of 2021 traffic conditions, which are shown in Figure 3-5.
Results of the 2021 forecast show continued heavy congestion and poor level of service along
SR 305. At locations other than SR 305, there are only a few minor LOS deficiencies.
Roadway LOS
Roadway Segment LOS at sections of Eagle Harbor Drive and Miller Road are expected to
decline. Shoulder widening project are included in the City’s short term (6 year) capital
improvement plan for these locations.
Along the SR 305 Corridor, north of Sportsman’s Club Rd., roadway capacity, in addition to poor
intersection operation, is predicted to become an impediment to traffic flow and contribute to
congestion.
Intersection LOS
The traffic model was used to identify locations where intersections may be the cause of poor
operations. Table 3-9 shows the results of the 2021 Plan year intersection LOS analysis.
Without mitigation, one intersection at Madison Avenue N / Wyatt Way NE fails to meet the
minimum LOS standards. The intersection of Winslow Way/ Ericksen Ave. is forecasted to
decline to LOS D.
On SR 305, the intersections at Agatewood Road, Seabold Road, Hidden Cove Road,
Lovegreen Road, and Koura Road all fail to meet the minimum standard. By the 2021 forecast
year, SR 305 Corridor congestion continues to deteriorate with the intersection at Hidden Cove
Rd falling from LOS E to LOS F. The intersection at Day Road is anticipated to fail. The poor
operation of the highway intersections, if not addressed, will increasingly be a barrier to cross-
Island traffic, impacting operations of the City’s roadway system as a whole.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-18 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-19 February 2017
2016-2021 Mitigation
Each intersection and roadway segment identified as below the minimum LOS standard in 2021
was studied to see if mitigation actions could improve the intersection LOS to the minimum
standard. Targeted roadway improvements can correct an intersection or roadway that fails to
meet the minimum LOS standard.
City Mitigation
For intersections in the City’s roadway system where the expected LOS is below the minimum
standard, the following mitigation is proposed:
Madison Avenue/ Wyatt Way – An intersection control improvement such as a signal or
a roundabout would improve the intersection to LOS B. The intersection will be studied
to determine what specific improvement should be constructed. A roundabout may be
one alternative. An improvement project is currently programed in the City’s CIP for
Wyatt Way, including the intersection.
Eagle Harbor Drive from Wyatt to Blakely - Shoulder improvements for non-motorized
users are recommended. An improvement project is currently programed in the City’s
CIP.
Miller Road from New Brooklyn to Arrow Point – Shoulder improvements for non-
motorized users are recommended. An improvement project is currently programed in
the City’s CIP for this segment.
WSDOT Mitigation
Six SR 305 intersections and roadway segments north of Day Road currently fail to meet LOS
and will continue to deteriorate. Refer to chapter 4 of this Plan for recommendations.
Table 3-9 Intersections PM Peak Hour LOS Deficiencies – 2021 Forecast
Intersection Control
Type1
2021 Delay2
(s/veh)
2021
LOS Possible Mitigation
Madison Ave N / Wyatt AWSC 44.2 E Roundabout or signal
SR 305 / Koura Rd TWSC 43.5 E
SR 305 Corridor
Improvements
SR 305 / Lovgreen Rd TWSC 39.4 E
SR 305 / Day Rd Signal 60.1 E
SR 305 / Hidden Cove Rd TWSC >180 F
SR 305 / Port Madison TWSC >180 F
SR 305 / Agatewood Rd TWSC >180 F
1TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control; AWSC = All-Way Stop Control; RAB = Roundabout; Signal = Signalized
2Average control delay for all movements. For TWSC, delay is reported for the movement with the highest delay.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-20 February 2017
Table 3-10. Street Segment PM Peak Hour LOS Deficiencies – 2021 Forecast
Segment From To V/C LOS
SR 305 Day Rd Hidden Cove Rd 0.94 E
SR 305 Hidden Cove Rd Seabold Church Rd 0.96 E
SR 305 Seabold Church Rd Seabold/W Port Madison 0.93 E
SR 305 Seabold/W Port Madison Agatewood Rd 0.99 E
SR 305 Agatewood Rd Reitan Rd 0.98 E
Bucklin Hill Rd Blakely Ave Eagle Harbor Dr 0.84 D
Miller Rd New Brooklyn Rd Battle Point Dr 0.99 E
Miller Rd Battle Point Dr Tolo Rd 0.84 D
Miller Rd Tolo Rd Arrow Point Dr 0.85 D
Eagle Harbor Dr Bucklin Hill Rd Finch Rd 0.84 D
2035 Traffic Forecast
The analysis of 2035 traffic conditions provides a long-range view of how the roadway system
will operate on the Island. The 2035 traffic forecast considers housing and employment growth
forecasted by PSRC and by Kitsap County, as well as any roadway network changes that would
impact traffic operations. This section describes the results of the 2035 analysis.
2021-2035 Model Forecast Improvements
Few projects have been programmed into the traffic model to be constructed between 2021 and
2035. The City’s traffic plan has not been updated since 2004 and was not formally adopted.
The State has recently begun longer term planning for the SR 305 and other corridors.
2035 LOS
The traffic model produces a forecast of 2035 traffic conditions, which are shown in Figure 3-6.
Results of the 2035 forecast show continued heavy congestion and poor level of service along
SR 305 and some minor intersection problems in the Winslow area.
Roadway LOS
Analysis of the expected traffic in 2035 shows that most of the City’s roadway system would
continue to meet the minimum LOS standards with the roadway system in Winslow, including
SR 305 intersections, generally operating acceptably. Based on the City’s existing capacity
policy, some roadway LOS failures would still exist on Eagle Harbor Drive and Miller Road.
For the 2035 forecast year, LOS on SR 305 from Day Road to the north end of the Island is
expected to continue to decline, if roadway segment capacity improvements, in addition to
intersection operation improvements, are not addressed.
Intersection LOS
The intersection analysis results from the 2035 Plan year are shown in Tables 3-11 and 3-12.
Assuming the identified short term planning horizon improvements are provided in the Winslow
Area, further intersection improvements are needed or anticipated. At the intersection of
Winslow Way and Erickson restricted turning movements are advised to maintain LOS.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-21 February 2017
By 2035, the increase in traffic on SR 305 is expected to result in continued deterioration of
intersection operations. Excessive delay would occur at nearly all of the intersections north of
Day Road. The intersections at SR 305 and Koura Road would further deteriorate from LOS E
to LOS F.
Table 3-11. Intersections PM Peak Hour LOS Analysis – 2035 Forecast
Intersection Control
Type1
2035 Delay2
(s/veh)
2035
LOS Possible Mitigation
Madison Ave N / Wyatt AWSC 42.9 E Roundabout or signal
Winslow Way / Erickson
Ave TWSC 64.4 F Access restrictions / RIRO
SR 305 / Koura Rd* TWSC 51.2 F
SR 305 Corridor
Improvements3
SR 305 / Lovgreen Rd4 TWSC 45.1 E
SR 305 / Day Rd Signal 78.7 E
SR 305 / Hidden Cove Rd4 TWSC >180 F
SR 305 / Port Madison TWSC >180 F
SR 305 / Agatewood Rd TWSC >180 F
1TWSC = Two-Way Stop Control; AWSC = All-Way Stop Control; RAB = Roundabout; Signal = Signalized
2Average control delay for all movements. For TWSC, delay is reported for the movement with the highest delay.
3Specific Corridor improvements identified below
4Alternative access to SR 305 is provided for locations w/ right-in and right-out (RIRO) access during PM peak
hour:
-Koura Rd access via Miller Rd
-Lovgreen Rd access via N Madison Ave or Miller Rd
-Hidden Cove access via Phelps Rd, Seabold Rd or Day Rd
Table 3-12. Street Segment PM Peak Hour LOS Analysis – 2035 Forecast
Segment From To V/C LOS
SR 305 Day Rd Hidden Cove Rd 0.95 E
SR 305 Hidden Cove Rd Seabold Church Rd 1.03 F
SR 305 Seabold Church Rd Seabold/W Port Madison 1.01 F
SR 305 Seabold/W Port Madison Agatewood Rd 1.05 F
SR 305 Agatewood Rd Reitan Rd 1.04 F
Bucklin Hill Rd Blakely Ave Eagle Harbor Dr 0.86 D
Miller Rd New Brooklyn Rd Battle Point Dr 0.97 E
Miller Rd Battle Point Dr Tolo Rd 0.81 D
Miller Rd Tolo Rd Arrow Point Dr 0.82 D
Eagle Harbor Dr Bucklin Hill Rd Finch Rd 0.85 D
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-22 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-23 February 2017
2021-2035 Mitigation
Mitigating the LOS for the City intersections would require minor improvements which can be
programmed into the City’s future transportation improvements program. The increased traffic
volume expected to use SR 305 in 2035 would overwhelm the existing facility, resulting in a
situation that cannot easily be mitigated.
City Mitigation
Improvement to intersection channelization and/or intersection control can mitigate the
substandard LOS at all of the City intersections. The below project is proposed to improve LOS
at the identified substandard intersection:
• Ericksen Avenue at Winslow Way – An intersection control improvement such as
prohibiting left turns during peak traffic hours is recommended.
WSDOT Mitigation
Roadway segments along the seven-mile SR 305 Corridor within the study area will operate at
LOS F. This problem is based on lack of roadway capacity that affects the intersection
operation as well, making it extremely difficult to mitigate individual locations. Any mitigation
that is proposed would need to be examined on a corridor basis, and would need to be
consistent with WSDOT operational objectives, as well as City’s goals and objectives with
regard to traffic operations, environmental and community character concerns. An individual
solution for each problem location would not provide an adequate assessment of the corridor-
wide issues that are present on the highway.
There are a number of possible solutions that could be proposed to mitigate the corridor. In
order to adequately explore possible solutions, a special study was performed for this corridor.
The results of the study are explained in Chapter 4.
Other Mobility Issues
There other issues that affect the mobility of traffic on the roadway network. These issues
include factors that influence how traffic operates and connects to the City’s roadway system.
The three areas discussed in this section include the connectivity of the roadway system,
access management, and special study areas.
Connectivity
Connectivity is defined as the level of connections between roadways in a transportation
system. In concept, connectivity describes the efficiency of travel between any two points on
the roadway system. A high level of connectivity is characterized by a well-developed street
network, available alternative routes, quick response times for emergency vehicles, good
mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists, and an efficient use of the roadway system. A low level
of connectivity is characterized by numerous dead-end streets, cul-de-sacs, and roadways that
do not connect, resulting in poor response times for emergency vehicles, circuitous routing of
pedestrian and bicycle travel, and inefficiencies in traffic flow. Low connectivity can also result
in interrupted access to areas in the event of a road closure such as a traffic accident or
landslide, and can cause a high level of congestion and bypass traffic on the available streets.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-24 February 2017
On Bainbridge Island, an example of an area with relatively high connectivity is the Winslow
area, where the street network is more developed and few streets end in dead-ends or cul-de-
sacs. However; there are areas in Winslow where there are “super blocks” which inhibit
connectivity. Many parts of the conservation area have low connectivity.
Connectivity improvements are usually undertaken to solve potential safety problems or to
improve traffic flow. New connections can be constructed to provide alternative access in areas
where there is only one roadway serving many homes or businesses, where the existing road is
unstable due to steep slopes or erosion, or where an alternative route is needed to provide relief
to an overly congested route.
The recommendations were developed by looking at the needs of schools, fire and emergency
medical response, and other public facilities, as well as access to landlocked properties. Each
potential connection will be considered separately as traffic patterns and emergency response
times warrant, will be studied to identify potential impacts, and will include discussions with
affected property owners. Connections will be considered for inclusion with other nearby
projects. Connectivity improvements are not included in this Plan’s 2035 traffic model.
Access Management
Access management is the control of the number and location of access points along a
roadway, in order to provide access to property, maximize safety for all roadway users, and
optimize roadway operations. Access management is especially important on arterial roadways
and highways.
Access management is generally implemented on roadways for three reasons: to improve
roadway operations, to improve safety, and to improve access to properties. Roadways operate
best when all vehicles travel in a straight line. Conflict points occur when the path of one
vehicle crosses the path of another. These can be at intersections, driveways, or at other
locations where vehicles turn. Vehicles that slow to make turning movements, accommodate
merging traffic, or allow crossing traffic flows all contribute to the reduction in the number of cars
that can travel through a corridor. Reducing conflict points increases capacity and traffic
speeds.
Multiple conflict points not only slow traffic and reduce roadway capacity, but also increase the
potential for crashes. Rear-end and turning vehicle collisions can be minimized through the use
of access management strategies that reduce conflict points. Too many conflict points can also
interfere with access to properties by making it difficult for vehicles to turn across traffic, or by
restricting turning movements. Access management can also improve access to individual
properties by organizing driveways at locations where turning movements are safer and easier.
On Bainbridge Island, access is a major issue along the SR 305 Corridor, particularly north of
Hidden Cove Road. Along this stretch of highway, there are multiple driveways and streets
where the only access to properties is via SR 305.
Techniques that can be applied to increase the mobility and safety of a travel corridor vary from
development of shared access points to the installation of medians or other turning restrictions.
Control techniques fall into two categories: driveway access and roadway operation. Driveway
access controls prescribe the number and location of driveways for properties along a roadway
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-25 February 2017
segment. Roadway operation controls provide for access to properties and cross streets. The
following list identifies the techniques included in each category:
Driveway Access Controls / internal circulation between parcels:
shared driveways
limits on number, spacing, and size of driveways
consolidation of access for adjacent parcels
use of one-way driveways
right-in/right-out (RIRO) access
development of access driveways on minor streets
Roadway Operation Controls:
refuge lanes or two-way continuous left turn lanes
turning movement limitations through signage and channelization
construction of deceleration lanes
raised medians that limit left turns
traffic signals at high volume locations
provisions for U-turns
The State of Washington supports the use of access management strategies to protect its key
roadways and travel corridors. RCW 47.50.010 requires that access be managed along all
state facilities:
“Regulation of access to the state highway system is necessary in order to protect the public
health, safety, and welfare, to preserve the functional integrity of the state highway system, and
to promote the safe and efficient movement of people and goods within the state.”
While access management may not solve the corridor’s congestion problems, adoption of
access management strategies and practices will increase the efficiency and safety of the
corridor.
The City of Bainbridge Island does not currently have a formal access management program.
Some aspects of access management, such as number and location of driveways and internal
parcel circulation, are monitored by the Public Works Department during the site plan review
process.
WSDOT manages access on state highways, including SR 305 as it crosses the island. This
highway is classified as Partial Access Control, which has the following definition: “Access
approaches are permitted for selected public streets, roads, some crossings, and existing
private driveways. No commercial approaches are permitted and no direct access if public
street or road access is available.”
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 - Operations and Mobility
3-26 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 3 Operations and Mobility
3-27 February 2017
Figure 3-7
Guide to Potential Connectivity Improvements
This figure identifies potential connectivity opportunities. As part of the 2004 Island-Wide
Transportation Study, a special study was undertaken to identify motorized connectivity
opportunities. Most of the identified locations have their origins in this study. Refer to the write
up in the former study for commentary.
Many of the potential connections are at locations where there is existing unopened or under-
utilized City rights-of-way, or where existing rights-of-way are in close proximity.
#5 and #6 where added as possibilities to improve access to SR 305.
If and when there is further interest in developing connectivity, further study and public
involvement is needed.
1. Agate Pass Road – The extension of Agate Pass Road between Dolphin Road and W. Port
Madison Road would provide a secondary access to the area and lessen traffic impacts and delay
at the intersection of Agatewood Road/SR 305. This location could also be improved to serve as
a non-motorized route connecting two walkable areas of the Island.
2. Phelps Road – The realignment of Phelps Road, east of current intersection with Day Road
would improve the intersection’s geometrics and intersection spacing from Day Road/SR 305.
3. Country Club Road – The connection between Country Club Road and Toe Jam Hill Road
would provide an access around a potential shoreline erosion area.
4. Reitan Road - Providing an access on both sides of the highway is recommended to maintain
reliable access to the neighborhood as the only access is from SR 305. This improvement would
allow limited access for a section of SR 305.
5. Agate Beach Lane - Providing a frontage road to link this and other properties fronting SR 305 is
recommended to maintain reliable access. This improvement would allow limited access for a
section of SR 305. This improvement would also provide an alternative route to SR 305 for non-
motorized users. The existing Rotary welcoming park is located is in the State’s ROW and may
need to be altered to provide for this improvement.
4-1 February 2017
CHAPTER 4 SR 305
State Route (SR) 305 is the State Highway System’s primary
connection via the Washington State Ferry (WSF) between Seattle
and the Kitsap Peninsula. Traffic during the morning and evening peak
travel hours is congested, resulting in long delays. This chapter
reviews the issues associated with SR 305 and its impact to the City’s
roadway system. The chapter also describes a special study that was
performed, and recommendations for future actions.
Summary of SR 305 Issues
SR 305 is significant to the City’s roadway system as the major north-south travel corridor on
the Island, not only for through traffic traveling to and from the ferry dock, but also for Island
residents and employees. The Comprehensive Plan goals and policies address the LOS
standard, access to the Island via the Agate Pass Bridge, improvements to the highway,
impacts to the highway from the City’s Comprehensive Plan elements, and off-Island
improvements that effect on-Island traffic.
As a state highway, WSDOT is the agency responsible for the operation and maintenance of SR
305. This means that WSDOT sets the minimum LOS standard and is responsible for the
funding and implementation of any improvements to the highway. According to WSDOT policy,
control of the highway within a City’s corporate limits can be transferred to the City if its
population is greater than 25,000. Some of the responsibility for highway improvements could
shift to the City.
SR 305 LOS Impacts
The traffic analysis (described in Chapter 3) shows that current conditions on SR 305 do not
meet the WSDOT minimum LOS standards, and future traffic will be even worse. Currently,
along the SR 305 Corridor all collector street
intersections fail and one secondary arterial
intersection (Koura Rd.) does not meet level
of service standards. The PM peak hour
average speed along the seven-mile Corridor
is currently 16 miles per hour, with several
roadway segments operating below the
average speed. The problem is most severe
at the north end of the Island, where there are
large back-ups beginning at the Suquamish
Way intersection and Agate Pass Bridge. By
2021, all of these locations will have a failing
LOS. Additionally, by 2035 the Day Road intersection will be LOS D and approaching falling
below standard. The corridor is forecasted to operate with an average speed of 14 mph by
2035, which is less than one-third the posted 45 mph speed limit at the north end of the island.
The expected level of service for the highway without improvement, described as the No Action
alternative as shown for the 2015 and 2035 years in Figures 4-1 and 4-2.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 4 SR 305
4-2 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
SR 305
4-3 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 4 SR 305
4-4 February 2017
What Makes SR 305 Different?
The traffic issues on SR 305 are different than the issues associated with the rest of the Island’s
roadway system for several reasons. First, the highway facility is owned and operated by the
WSDOT. This is significant because WSDOT is the lead agency and has primary decision
making and financial responsibility for improvements to the highway. Second, even though the
highway functions as a main north-south corridor for Island travel, it is also heavily used by
regional traffic, especially by vehicles traveling to and from the ferry terminal in Winslow.
Because the WSF controls the ferry schedule, they have a great deal of influence on when and
how much ferry traffic is using the highway. Third, the highway experiences substandard levels
of service over most of the seven-mile length of the highway on the Island and the Agate Pass
Bridge. Improvements to the highway would require several large projects that could be
expected to require significant time to complete the planning, design, and construction of each,
as well as a significant financial outlay.
SR 305 Special Study
Because of the major issues associated with SR 305 improvements, a preliminary study
(Appendix F) was undertaken to determine what possible improvements could resolve the traffic
issues without looking into the environmental, financial,
or other issues associated with the improvements. The
goal of the study was to identify possible improvements
along SR 305 to compare their effectiveness to
improve mobility along the corridor, improve
permeability across the corridor, and provide reliable
access to neighborhoods whose only access is from
SR 305. Based on this information, the NMTAC and
City Staff, included recommendations in the IWTP to
better position the City to advocate for improvements.
Because SR 305 is a state facility, all improvements
would require a commitment by WSDOT to be
constructed. The City could participate in the
improvements in order to improve mobility and level of
service for the City roadway system.
Special Study Alternatives
Three preliminary alternatives were developed to examine different future scenarios to see if
there is a way to overcome the SR 305 operational deficiencies. Alternatives include at-grade
signalized intersections, at-grade roundabouts, and separated grade intersection improvements.
Refer to Figures 4-3, 4-4, and 4-5.
Special Study Results and recommendations for further study
The three improvement alternatives were analyzed and compared to see how well they were
able to meet LOS minimum standards. The special study compares at-grade and separated
grade alternatives. Both at-grade and separated grade alternatives maintain an acceptable
LOS at intersections. However, in some locations alternative longer routes would need to be
taken to access intersections meeting LOS standards. Additional intersection improvements
could be evaluated in a more comprehensive study. Roadway level of service failures are not
mitigated in either of the two alternatives but would require additional roadway capacity along
the SR 305 corridor (e.g. in the form of added travel lanes) or decreased volume.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
SR 305
4-5 February 2017
Further study is needed to design alignments and develop reliable cost estimates to plan for
maintaining adequate level of service both currently and in the next 20 years along SR 305.
Grade separated alternatives would be significantly more costly to implement than at grade
alternatives. Both alternatives achieve acceptable LOS. Therefore, it may be difficult to justify
the additional cost of grade-separated alternatives, especially larger interchanges. Some
combination of intersection improvements and limited access is needed to reduce congestion
and provide for reliable access. It may be practical to incorporate less extensive grade
separation options for both motorized and/or non-motorized modes to maintain permeability
along the corridor.
The SR 305 corridor as it exists today and with any future improvements has a significant
impact on many aspects of transportation on Bainbridge Island. Further study should be
inclusive of and comprehensive to address all aspects. The following issues have been
identified for inclusion in further study of the corridor:
• Operations of adjoining roadway networks and connectivity – The study should consider
the effectiveness of the adjacent roadway networks along the corridor. There may be
opportunities to mitigate cut-through traffic and improve connectivity. There may be
impacts to circulation and neighborhoods.
• Corridor permeability – Permeability for all modes remains a key consideration for any
scenario.
• Maintaining reliable access for neighborhoods – For many neighborhoods, such as in
the Agate Pass and West Port Madison areas, the only access is from roadways that
connect to SR 305. Maintaining reliable access is an important aspect of any scenario.
• Sound to Olympics Trail and intra-Island trails – The City envisions a network of regional
and sub-regional separated pathways along and crossing the SR 305 corridor. The
existing and potentially wider highway presents a barrier to many users. Permeability for
active modes of transportation is a key consideration for intersection and other
improvements.
• Bus transit – Improving efficiency of and access to transit along the corridor is an
important aspect that should be studied and integrated into all scenarios. Collaboration
with Kitsap Transit is needed to explore possibilities.
• Vegetative Management – Preserve natural character and screening of SR 305 with
trees.
Other SR 305 Issues
The deficient level of service is the most significant issue currently affecting the City’s
transportation system. The bridge, park and ride, and off-Island improvement issues will be
addressed in future studies in conjunction with an overall plan for SR 305 improvements. The
City should take a leadership role in initiating studies to develop improvement projects and not
defer to WSDOT’s timeline and priorities. The City should partner with Kitsap Transit and others
to reduce vehicular demand on the highway.
Past Improvements to SR 305
Since the 2004 IWTS, WSDOT has implemented a number of intersection projects including the
following:
• Signal improvements at N. Madison.
• Signal timing optimization for peak hour ferry offloading at the Winslow Way intersection
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 4 SR 305
4-6 February 2017
• Signal timing optimization for the Day Road intersection to improve access from Day and
Miller.
• Bike through lane on right improvements to the north and south legs of the intersections
at Madison, Sportsman’s Club/ N. Madison, and Day Roads.
• Right hand turn lane improvement to the south leg of the Suquamish Intersection,
including bicycle lane, sidewalk, and crossing improvements.
•
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
SR 305
4-7 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 4 SR 305
4-8 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
SR 305
4-9 February 2017
SR 305 Recommendations:
A number of interim and long term recommendations are as follows based on the SR 305
Special Study (Appendix F).
Interim Improvements:
The following interim improvements are recommended at the time of this study for the next 6
years:
• Advocate for WSDOT to include “do not block” intersection signage at intersections north
of Day Road, Hidden Cove, West Port Madison, and Agate Point.
• Intersection improvements at West Port Madison eliminating access to Seabold and
providing a receiving lane (similar to Agatewood) for south bound traffic. The intent of
this proposal is to reduce cut-through traffic in the Seabold neighborhood and improve
access to SR 305 from West Port Madison Road.
• Advocate for consistent 8 foot or wider paved shoulders along the full length of the
corridor to accommodate cyclists and pedestrians.
• Advocate for the Sound to Olympics Trail and its branch trails.
• Advocate for improved non-vehicular access to ferry and bus transit including park-and-
ride and bike parking opportunities both on and off island.
Long Term Recommendations:
The following long term improvement projects are recommended:
• Advocate for continued improvements at the intersection to Suquamish to address north-
south mobility/capacity.
• Advocate for capacity improvements to roadway segments on the highway that do not
require widening of the highway.
• Advocate for Agate Pass Bridge upgrades or replacement.
• Advocate for a separated pathway for non-motorized users in conjunction with other
improvements.
• Advocate for limited access improvements at Reitan Road in conjunction with the bridge
replacement. This would include access for Reitan Road and possibly connecting
frontage roads from both sides of the highway.
• Advocate for intersection improvements at Agatewood and West Port Madison to restore
access to these “highway locked” areas. A joint signal may be the most economical
solution, if spaced evenly with adjacent signals allowing for signal synchronization. This
could interrupt the continuous traffic at peak hours should the WSDOT proposed
roundabout be constructed at Suquamish Way. Note that this signal could be
programmed to flash yellow/ red during non-peak hours.
• Advocate for intersection improvements at Day Road to help with queuing for operational
efficiency. Additional facility investments are also needed to accommodate pedestrians
and cyclists. The Phelps Road intersection with Day Road is in close proximity to SR
305. A roundabout may be a preferred solution to address this proximity,
Further study and preliminary design and engaging the community in a process for decision
making is recommended prior to developing and prioritizing specific improvement projects. The
priorities for funding are based on reducing traffic congestion and improving safety on SR 305
and improving access at intersection locations with no alternative access.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 4 SR 305
4-10 February 2017
At the time of the writing of this plan a gas tax increase had been passed by the State
Legislature. The City of Bainbridge Island, Kitsap County, the Suquamish Tribe, and the City of
Poulsbo are participating in a multi-agency effort to plan improvements for the corridor.
WSDOT is undertaking a State-wide effort for planning corridors including SR 305, called
“Corridor Sketches”.
New State funding may provide for intersection access and safety improvements on Bainbridge
Island. The level of funding for Bainbridge could address intersection improvements and other
related work at the Day Road intersection, the Agatewood/West Port Madison intersections, and
possibly some limited access roadway improvements. At other intersections along SR 305
where there are alternative routes to access SR 305 access restrictions would be employed for
peak hours until additional funding can be secured.
5 - 1 February 2017
Chapter 5 Safety and Maintenance
Safety and the related issue of maintenance are primary community concerns to ensure the
roadway system’s safety and longevity. This chapter provides an overview of the safety and
maintenance issues for the City of Bainbridge Island. The core of the safety
section is a discussion about collision history and high collision locations. The
maintenance section describes maintenance issues, activities, and programs
that occur on the Island.
Many of the Island’s two-lane roads were constructed before current safety
guidelines were developed. As traffic levels increase, the potential for safety
concerns rises. There is a combination of factors that can lead to collisions on roadways,
including demographic changes to the Island’s population, preferences for larger or more
powerful vehicles, increased motor vehicle volumes, and greater use of roadways by
pedestrians and bicyclists. Collisions on these roads can have more serious consequences
because of narrower lanes and shoulders, hazardous roadsides, steeper grades, and sharper
curves, which also impedes the ability for emergency vehicles to respond.
Speed and inattention are factors in the risks and severity of traffic collisions. Both the
likelihood of collisions and the severity of injuries are greater with higher speeds. Communities
are embracing initiatives for lowering speed limits such as the Vision Zero initiative that has
been adopted by the City of Seattle and WSDOT’s Target Zero initiative. Vision Zero initiatives
make the goal of zero deaths and serious injuries the highest priority and emphasize
government taking the lead to implement improvements to further that goal. An emphasis is
placed on lowering speed limits through engineering solutions such as narrowing traffic lanes
and employing traffic calming.
The City of Bainbridge embraces the principle of putting people first when it comes to safety
over efficiency for vehicular traffic and bicycle traffic. The City’s standard roadway lane width is
10 feet, providing narrow lanes for traffic calming. The following areas are emphasized for safe
street design:
• Consider neighborhood context and existing and future non-motorized use when
establishing speed limits.
• In developing capital projects, consider elements that manage speed, improve safety and
traffic calming. Examples include non-motorized improvements, roundabouts, traffic
islands, and curb bulb outs, and radar feedback signs.
• Include bicycle climbing lanes at locations where differential speeds are greater between
cyclists and motorists.
• Provide pathways separated from the roadway for pedestrians, wheel chair users, and
cyclists.
• Provide and maintain street lighting in areas used by pedestrians and cyclists in designated
centers of the Island and near schools. Locations for lighting include intersections and mid-
block crosswalks.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 5 Safety and Maintenance
5 - 2 February 2017
• Maintain or provide vegetation close to the roadway for traffic calming.
The number of collisions provides an indication of the safety of an intersection. Types of
safety concerns that may contribute to accident data include:
• Road Surface Conditions – Poor roadway surface conditions such as pavement edge drop-
offs, potholes, worn lane striping, and reductions in surface friction due to age and wear
affect vehicle stopping and maneuvering capabilities. Road conditions may present
hazards to cyclists and pedestrians.
• Intersection Configuration – Collisions related to high turning volumes, lack of
channelization, and improper phasing.
• Non-Motorized Conditions – High accident data between vehicles with pedestrians or
bicycles may emphasize the need for the construction of non-motorized facilities.
• Geometric Conditions – Collisions related to undesirable physical characteristics of the
roadway’s design, such as sight distance, curve radii, paved width and shoulder, and
roadway slope.
• Enforcement Issues – Collisions related to vehicle speeding, intersection traffic violations,
driving under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs.
Collision History
Collisions can indicate where safety issues exist within a transportation system. The number of
accidents at a specific location is a function of a number of factors including the quality of
reporting data, traffic volumes, roadway design and geometrics, vehicle speed, and speed limit.
For the analysis, the total number of annual accidents at intersections over a ten-year period is
used. Unsignalized intersections with an average annual number of collisions of 5 or more are
considered to be a high collision location. Signalized intersections with seven (7) or more
accidents are considered to be a high collision location. Appendix G provides the collision
history data for the transportation system.
City Intersections
Table 5-1 indicates intersection locations with
10 or more collisions over the ten-year period
ending in 2014 per the City’s accident data
base at locations other than along the SR 305
Corridor. Current data are compared with data
from the previous study which was reported
over a 9.5-year period ending in 2000.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 5 Safety and Maintenance
5 - 3 February 2017
Table 5-1. Bainbridge Island Collision Locations
Intersection
Type
Accidents
2005- 2014
Average
Annual
Collisions
Accidents
1991 - 2000
Average
Annual
Collisions
Accidents
High School Rd @ Madison Ave. RA 22 2.2 45 4.7
High School Rd @Hildebrand Ln. SC1 20 2.0 19 1.9
Winslow Way @ Ericksen Ave. SC2 14 1.4 18 1.8
Wyatt Way @ Madison Ave. SC4 13 1.3 23 2.4
Miller Rd. @ Koura Rd. SC2 12 1.2 --- ---
High School Rd. @ Grow Ave. SC2 10 1.0 24 2.5
Eagle Harbor Dr. @ Bucklin Hill Rd. SC1 10 1.0 --- ---
RA - Round About, SC – Stop Controlled
All of the top ten intersections fall below the high collision criteria threshold. The highest
number of collisions are reported for the two intersections along High School Road west of and
in closest proximity to SR 305.
State Route 305 Intersections
Table 5-2 indicates the collision rates at primary intersections along the SR 305 Corridor from
data available from Washington State for the ten-year period ending in 2014.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 5 Safety and Maintenance
5 - 4 February 2017
Table 5-2. SR 305 Collision Locations*
Intersection
Signalized/
Unsignalized
Accidents
2005 -
2014
Average
Annual
Accidents
Accidents
1997 -
2000
Average
Annual
Accidents
SR 305 @ Madison Ave. S 82 8.2
22 6.8
SR 305 @ Sportsman’s Club S 71 7.1 21 6.5
SR 305 @ Day Rd. S 52 5.2 34 10.5
SR 305 @ High School Rd. S 47 4.7 25 7.7
SR 305 @ Winslow Way S 31 3.1 9 2.8
*Under 23 U.S. Code § 409, safety data, reports, surveys, schedules, lists compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying ,
evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of potential collision sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway
crossings are not subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other
purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys,
schedules, lists, or data
As indicated by the table, the intersections at SR 305/Madison and SR 305/Sportsman’s Club
exceed 7 collisions per year which is considered higher than what is normally expected for
signalized intersections. There are no scheduled improvements identified by WSDOT for these
intersections.
Collisions involving pedestrian and cyclists
The State accident report indicates there were 19 injury accidents involving pedestrians (6) and
cyclists (13) along the SR 305 Corridor for the ten-year period. The highest concentration of
accidents was near the ferry terminal. The vast majority of these collisions outside of the
Winslow area involved cyclists. Non-motorized improvements on SR 305/ Olympic Drive near
the ferry terminal are in progress.
Apart from SR 305, there were 121 injury accidents reported involving pedestrians (27) and
cyclists (94) for the ten-year period. There was at least one fatality involving a pedestrian
struck crossing New Brooklyn in December of 2010. The highest concentration of accidents
occurred on Madison Avenue (17), Winslow Way (16), High School Road (14), and Wyatt Way
(10). In 2012, Winslow Way was reconstructed including pedestrian and bike facility
improvements. Non-motorized improvements are planned for Wyatt Way and Madison
Avenue.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 5 Safety and Maintenance
5 - 5 February 2017
Addressing Safety Problems
Addressing safety problems requires a combination of approaches ranging from educating the
driver, better enforcement, to improving the roadway. Roadway improvements fall into two
major categories — improvements designed to prevent collisions from occurring, and
improvements that minimize the severity of collisions that occur. Types of improvements
include:
▪ Clear Zones—Areas of open space with gentle slopes adjacent to the road giving motorists
room to safely regain control of their vehicles if they run off the road. These areas should
include features such as signs and utility poles which break away on impact, barrier walls or
guardrails that redirect vehicles away from hazards, and collusion cushions that absorb
energy and lessen the severity of collisions.
▪ Guardrails – The Island along its perimeter has many medium and high bluffs. In the
interior, the island’s topography is hilly in many areas. Guardrails are employed at many
locations. Many of these guardrails are older and do not meet current design standards
and some are in disrepair. There are some locations where new guardrails may be
warranted due to roadway configuration, topography, travel speed, and traffic volumes.
▪ Signing, Pavement Marking, and Delineation — Traffic signs, pavement markings, rumble
strips, and reflective devices improve driver perception of important roadway features and
alert them to changes in roadway geometry or other conditions.
▪ Pavement Improvements and Preventive Maintenance — Greater smoothness and friction
of the road surface are provided by pothole repair, resurfacing, rehabilitation, and
reconstruction.
▪ Intersection Controls – Stop signs, roundabouts, and
traffic signals can better control traffic flow and
reduce intersection conflict points.
▪ Adding or Widening Shoulders – Shoulders provide
drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists additional room to
maneuver on narrow roads or to pull out of travel
lanes.
▪ Channelization – Separate lanes for left or right-
turning traffic avoid impediments to traffic flow and
can reduce rear end collisions.
▪ Pedestrian/Cyclist Facilities—A variety of techniques
can be used to separate pedestrians and cyclists
from motor vehicle traffic to improve safety.
How study addresses safety
The IWTP proposes improvements that will improve the safety of the roadway system through
targeted improvements at intersections and roadways. Safety-related elements of this study
include:
• Reviewing roadway geometrics and promoting safety enhancements,
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 5 Safety and Maintenance
5 - 6 February 2017
• Identifying and mitigating high collusion locations,
• Identifying and mitigating intersections with poor LOS operations, and
• Including safety as a factor in the evaluation of the roadway system.
Safety Programs
Current Safety Programs provided by Public Works include:
• Roadside Safety Program – This program provides for the inventorying and inspection of
roadside elements of the Island’s secondary arterial streets and higher volume collector
streets. The program also provides for contracting work that is beyond the capacity of
Operations and Maintenance. Roadside elements include items such as guardrails,
shoulders, and clear zones. This program provides for the prioritization of guardrail
repairs, replacements, and installations.
• Focused Traffic Studies Program – This program provides for the study of traffic control
measures implemented on the Island’s roadways. As conditions change with factors
such as population growth and development, it is necessary to evaluate the
effectiveness of roadway signage and other traffic control devices. Many residents are
concerned about vehicular speeds, and this program provides for the evaluation of
speed limits.
Maintenance
An important function of the City of Bainbridge Island is preservation and maintenance of the
existing roadway system. Careful maintenance allows existing travel corridors to maintain their
function, prevents damage from water and vehicle loads, and maximizes the use of City
resources. Periodically the City evaluates the condition of the roadway system and computes a
Pavement Condition Index (PCI). The latest condition assessment is included in Appendix H.
Maintenance Issues
The City of Bainbridge Island’s Public Works Department oversees roadway maintenance
activities for the Island.
Key maintenance issues for the City include:
Vegetation growth – Overgrown vegetation requires the trimming of foliage to retain
roadway safety and sight distances.
Pavement maintenance – As roadways age, the pavement surface and underlayment
can be damaged by traffic, heavy vehicles, weather, and water seepage if not property
maintained. Poor pavement condition can affect the safety of the road for drivers and
bicyclists.
Gravel road grading – The surface of gravel roadways can deteriorate quickly, producing
potholes in the roads. These roads need regular re-grading to maintain the surface.
Dirt and gravel on shoulders and roadways – Regular sweeping of roadways is
necessary to provide a clean, smooth surface for travel. Bicyclists are particularly
concerned about gravel, dirt and debris accumulating on shoulder areas.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island-Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 5 Safety and Maintenance
5 - 7 February 2017
Stormwater – Maintaining good roadway stormwater drainage is important to protect the
roadway and to prevent flooding hazard.
Roadway erosion – Roadway erosion on shoreline and steep slope areas is an issue for
the City. Repair of these roadways often is expensive and may require special permits
and consistency with shoreline management goals and objectives.
Maintenance Programs
The City’s roadway system has a number of on-going programs to keep the current roadway
system functioning, and to prevent major failures that would require extensive roadway
reconstruction.
Street sweeping program – Street sweepers collect debris and litter before they enter the
stormwater collection systems or roadside ditches. This function is important to protect
stormwater run-off from the roadways and to provide a safe surface for automobiles and
bicyclists.
Brush cutting program – Island-wide mowing of vegetation to maintain roadway
clearance and sight lines.
Roadway ditches and shoulders – These components of the roadway system are
periodically maintained, cleaned, and reshaped to ensure they function as designed.
Roads preservation program – The City of Bainbridge Island has an annual road
program focused on preserving, maintaining, and repairing the existing roadway
infrastructure. Each street is evaluated for 1) reconstruction, 2) overlay, 3) seal coat
and/or 4) patching. Where the roadway does not require complete reconstruction, the
City can repair damaged sections (patch with asphalt), apply chip seal layer (an oil
emulsion and crushed rock layer), or overlay new asphalt over the existing pavement.
Gravel grading program – The City fills and regrades the surface of a limited number of
gravel roads annually.
Trail and pathway maintenance program – The City cuts brush and restores trail
surfaces to maintain its separated pathway and trail network.
Special maintenance – The City also performs maintenance activities not addressed in
the above programs such as the removal of large trees that may present hazards to the
traveling public.
Sign inventory – The City maintains a data base of signage and routinely maintains or
replaces signs to meet reflectivity and other requirements.
6-1 February 2017
CHAPTER 6 NON-MOTORIZED SYSTEMS
Non-motorized users – people walking, cycling, horseback riding, and using
wheelchairs – have an important place in Bainbridge Island’s transportation
system. Many peak hour commuting trips as well as other trips are made by
walking or riding. Having non-motorized choices available is important to
many Island residents. Facilities that accommodate non-motorized users pro-
vide for safety, mobility, support development density, encourage healthy life-
styles, reduce impact to the environment, and ultimately provide for improved quality of life for
island residents, workers, and visitors.
Background / History
Non-motorized modes of transportation have been and continue to be an integral part of is-
land life. From the late 1800’s to the early 1900’s, the main transportation to the island was
provided by a small fleet of steam ships referred to as the “Mosquito Fleet”. Roads originated
at or near the “Mosquito Fleet” docks. Early residents walked, rode horses, and biked before
the proliferation of automotive transportation. Auto ferry service was brought to the island in
the 1920’s at Agate Passage. The Agate Pass Bridge was constructed in 1950. Auto ferry
service to Seattle followed in 1951. With the onset of the age of the automobile, reliance on
non-motorized transportation declined in most places. However, walkability, biking, and
horse-friendly neighborhoods remained an attractive part of the Bainbridge lifestyle. Walking
and biking continued to be an important aspect of mobility within and near the Town of Wins-
low and other outlying island centers. With reliable transportation to Seattle, a commuter cul-
ture developed and Bainbridge evolved to be more suburban. With an increasing population,
bus transit linking residential areas to the ferry terminal became an important element of the
transportation system. In more recent times, greater awareness of health and environment
have made walking and biking more attractive modes of transportation.
The entire Island incorporated as the City of Bainbridge Island in 1991. Since incorporation,
there has been a greater emphasis on non-motorized transportation planning. Following the
development of the 2003 Island-Wide Transportation Study, non–motorized transportation
became a significant driver of the City’s Capital Improvement Program. The City has invested
heavily in non-motorized improvements over the past decade. The following is a summary of
major milestones in the City’s non-motorized planning and implementation:
• Inclusion of bicycle system planning and maps in the Transportation Element of the
1992 Comprehensive Plan.
• Development of a Trail System Master Plan in 1994.
• Recommendations for sidewalk and bicycle improvements in the 1995 Winslow Mas-
ter Plan.
• Formation of a Non-Motorized Transportation Advisory Committee (NMTAC) to advise
Council and support staff in December of 2002.
• Drafting of an island-wide Non-Motorized Transportation Plan in 2003. This plan in-
cluded a comprehensive set of policies and goals that were later adopted in the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. Extensive Island-wide non-motorized existing and planned facil-
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-2 February 2017
ities maps were developed. These maps were subsequently adopted in the City’s
Comprehensive Plan and have evolved through several comprehensive plan updates.
• Inclusion of extensive non-motorized planning in the transportation element of the
City’s 2006 Comprehensive Plan following the 2003 Non-Motorized Transportation
Plan.
• Identification in 2007 of the Core 40 Program to provide a 40-mile integrated island-
wide shoulder network for bicycles. The intent is to provide shoulder improvements on
the Island’s arterial roadways to achieve bicycle connectivity along 40 or more miles
of roadways. Refer to Map G. Delivery of several Core 40 projects, including Bucklin
Hill and North Madison.
• Delivery of capital improvement projects (mostly grant funded) in the Winslow area
providing pedestrian and/or bicycle facilities including Bjune, Ericksen, Ferncliff, High
School, Madison, and Winslow Way.
In the 2004 Island-Wide Transportation Study, the 2003 Non-Motorized Plan was included as
a separate volume. In this update, the Island-Wide Transportation Plan includes the
Non-Motorized Plan.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-3 February 2017
System Overview, Inventory, and Attractions
The City’s existing non-motorized transportation system consists of sidewalks, bike lanes,
and trails. The City’s existing non-motorized facilities are shown in Maps A and B and
Appendix I.
Sidewalks are prevalent in Winslow and to a lesser extent in Lynwood. The City’s network of
shoulders on arterial streets is largely built out in Winslow. Outside of Winslow only a few
roadways have paved shoulders for cyclists.
Most city trails of significant length are located within the City’s rights-of-way. Other city trails
connect to or through neighborhoods in formalized easements. City trails are mostly gravel
surfaced and constructed to 6 feet in width although many neighborhood trails are smaller in
width. The Bainbridge Island Metropolitan Park and Recreation District (Park District) owns
and operates a network of trails within, between, and connecting to parks that comprises
most of the length of trails on the Island.
There is a huge potential to improve non-motorized access to transit, goods and services, to
provide recreational opportunities on Bainbridge Island and to improve the quality of life for
citizens. The following nodes are identified for consideration:
- Ferry Terminal
- Agate Pass Bridge
- Winslow
- Designated Town centers of Day Road, Island Center, Lynwood, and Rolling Bay
- Residential neighborhoods
- Schools
- Churches
- Parks
- Road ends and shorelines
- Equestrian facilities
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-4 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-5 February 2017
Non-Motorized Use
A large number of people use active modes of transportation on Bainbridge Island. Washing-
ton State Ferries reports ridership statistics each year. For 2015 it was reported that
3,093,016 foot passengers including 382,207 cyclists rode the ferry. This number grows
substantially each year and WSF expects this trend to continue.
Each year, on a weekday falling between Tuesday and Thursday in the month of September,
community volunteers count bike and pedestrians at major intersections on the Island, sup-
porting the Washington State Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project. The State Ped
Bike program keeps data that are summarized in the following tables for the past 5 years.
Table 6-1a, Bicycle Counts, 7-9 AM
Location/Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
SR 305/ Winslow Way 125 204 114 192 138
SR 305/ High School - - - 69 51
SR 305/ Day - - 26 24 17
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-6 February 2017
Madison/ Wyatt - 39 - 37 -
Madison/ High School - - - 38 53
Blakely/ Bucklin - - - 44 36
Table 6-1b, Bicycle Counts, 4-6 PM
Location/Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
SR 305/ Winslow Way - - 211 168 117
SR 305/ High School - 49 - - 59
SR 305/ Day - 26 24 35 33
Madison/ Wyatt - 45 9 - -
Madison/ High School 89 - 68 67 68
Blakely/ Bucklin - 28 - 45 47
Table 6-1c, Pedestrian Counts, 7-9 AM
Location/Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
SR 305/ Winslow Way 126 185 176 28 196
SR 305/ High School - - - 24 51
SR 305/ Day - - 6 4 0
Madison/ Wyatt - 39 - 48 -
Madison/ High School - - - 76 127
Blakely/ Bucklin - - - 2 3
Table 6-1d, Pedestrian Counts, 4-6 PM
Location/Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
SR 305/ Winslow Way - - 526 309 471
SR 305/ High School - 43 - - 68
SR 305/ Day - 1 - 3 1
Madison/ Wyatt - 80 21 - -
Madison/ High School 238 - 182 30 142
Blakely/ Bucklin - 5 - 5 2
Barriers to Use and Connectivity Improvements
Barriers are physical characteristics of a transportation system that limit or restrict mobility for
non-motorized users. Some common barriers on the Island are as follows:
• Inadequate maintenance including lack of shoulder sweeping for cyclists, joints at set-
tled sidewalk panels, and poor trail surfaces in need of re-grading and compaction;
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-7 February 2017
• Deficiencies in design such as lack of ADA-compliant ramps, facilities that are not of
adequate width to be comfortable for many users, and facilities with materials that are
not ADA-compliant;
• Discontinuities in system networks such as gaps in sidewalks or roadway shoulders,
or bike lanes;
• Inadequate facilities at roadway intersections;
• Lack of facilities when systems do not exist or do not extend far enough to meet
needs;
• Physical barriers such as naturally occurring ravines or existing developed properties
that do not provide for access.
To address barriers and other limitations on non-motorized connectivity across the island,
connectivity improvements are identified in a set of figures and tables which are intended to
be living documents updated as new areas are identified and considered warranted.
Table 6-2 Identified barriers on SR 305 and on City roadways.
Table 6-2, Roadway Network Barriers
1 SR 305 at Vineyard
Lane
A separated grade crossing is needed to unite the
two sides of Winslow that are divided by the SR
305 superblock between Winslow Way and High
School Road.
2 SR 305 Signalized
Crossings
Wide crossings can be a barrier to some users. As
capacity improvements are made to SR 305, me-
dians, islands, and other pedestrian related im-
provements should be provided.
3 SR 305 Shoulders Shoulder widening is needed to address gaps be-
tween Hidden Cove Rd and the Agate Pass
Bridge.
4 City Secondary arterial
and collector roadways
Where pedestrian and cyclist facilities do not exist,
shoulders and/or separated pathways are needed.
Many of these areas are identified for improve-
ments shown in Map E, F, and G.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-8 February 2017
Non-Motorized Travel Routes and Network
The vision and goals for non-motorized transportation are established in the Transportation
Element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. To meet the vision and mobility and connectivity
goals in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, a non-motorized network is
proposed in this section.
Providing facilities for accommodation of non-motorized modes of transportation has consist-
ently ranked high on past Bainbridge Island Community surveys.
This section describes the current needs and identifies the best opportunities given geogra-
phy, existing development, and other constraints.
Context sensitive solutions for non-motorized modes will depend upon site specific conditions
such as existing and planned land uses, the location of origins and destinations such as
schools and parks, motor vehicle speeds and volume, and the overall network connectivity.
The non-motorized transportation system seeks to create a network of facilities that makes it
safe for all ages and abilities of people to get around their neighborhoods and the island with-
out a car. This will require facilities that will be evaluated for the context but may include.
A. Sidewalks and bicycle lanes along streets in the island’s designated centers.
B. Road shoulders can provide connectivity for commuter and more experienced cyclists,
as illustrated in the City’s Core 40 Program. The Core 40 goal is to provide an inte-
grated network of shoulders for safe non-motorized use that, when combined with
multi-use trails and lower volume roadways, provides 40 miles of bicycle routes on the
island.
C. Separated non-motorized facilities that provide a non-motorized transportation option
for a wide range of people walking, riding bikes, riding horses, or using wheelchairs.
This pathway network is envisioned to connect to the City’s sidewalk and bike lane in-
frastructure and connect to main destinations like the ferry terminal, Agate Pass
Bridge, Winslow, designated centers, schools, parks, shoreline road ends, equestrian
facilities, and other amenities. These facilities will vary depending on purpose but in-
clude:
1. The Sound to Olympics (STO) trail, which serves as a centralized spine for non-
motorized users and is a separated multi-use path connecting the Bainbridge Is-
land Ferry Terminal to the Agate Pass Bridge and linking to other regional loca-
tions.
2. Intra-island trails, which combine separated multi-use pathways and low volume
roadways to link designated centers, schools, and parks.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-9 February 2017
3. Connecting pathways provide local connectivity and link to the regional and intra-
island trails.
4. The system will integrate with Bainbridge Island Metropolitan Park and Recreation
District trails to provide both intra-island and local connectivity.
D. On low-volume neighborhood streets, specific non-motorized infrastructure may not
be necessary if vehicular speeds are low (20-25 mph).
This combination of facilities is designed to make up a functional network that provides con-
nectivity to the attractions previously identified and mobility for the greatest number and wid-
est range of users.
Sidewalks, Shoulders, Multi-use Trails, and Connecting Pathway planned facilities are identi-
fied and located in attached Maps C and D (Appendix J). These facilities are integrated to
optimize connectivity for alternative modes of transportation for users of all ages and abilities.
Refer to Maps C and D for trail connection zones. Trail connection zones are identified as
opposed to specificity of routes to allow flexibility. The City’s past practice has been to ac-
quire easements for trails from private property owners on a voluntary basis or when there is
significant development.
Table 6-3 identifies potential connectivity for trails. The focus of this table is for regional and
intra-island multi-use pathways and roadway shoulder improvements. These maps depict
one set of possibilities for intra-island trails for the purposes of demonstrating connectivity
that may be achieved by an integrated trail network. Some connectivity is identified for con-
necting pathways that are branches of regional and intra-island trails. Local connectivity is
beyond the scope of what is listed.
Table 6-3, Regional and Intra-Island Trails
1 Sound to Olympics
Trail Separated Grade
Crossing at Vineyard
Lane
A non-motorized bridge to connect the center of
Winslow which is divided by SR 305, requiring
easements for accommodating a non-motorized
bridge and its approaches.
2 Sound to Olympics
Trail at Hildebrand Re-
tail Area
A multi-use pathway to serve as a cross-
connecting route at the north end of Winslow.
3 Sound to Olympics
Trail north of High
School Rd
A multi-use pathway to serve as a regional non-
motorized transportation corridor connecting the
Winslow Area north to the Agate Pass Bridge and
Kitsap County. This route would connect to transit,
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-10 February 2017
schools, and parks facilities.
4 Waterfront Trail
Connector at Harbor
Drive
A separated pathway to connect the Waterfront
Park to the ferry terminal. Permission is needed
from WSF to use the area west of the roadway for
a separated pathway.
5 Waterfront Trail Con-
nector from Bjune to
Parfitt.
A separated pathway and/or boardwalk along the
shoreline connecting the Waterfront Park to the
commercial waterfront district along Parfitt Way.
6 Cave Avenue Trail
Connector
A connecting pathway to connect local neighbor-
hoods to the STO trail and the center of Winslow.
Easements may be needed near the ravine for ac-
cess from the STO trail to Ferncliff Avenue near
Wing Point Way.
7 Knechtel Trail
Connectors
A network of connecting pathways and low volume
local access roadways to connect local neighbor-
hoods to the center of Winslow and the STO trail.
Easements are needed from private property own-
ers to link local access to the roadway for east-
west connection from STO trail to Weaver.
8 Schools Intra-Island
Trail
A multi-use pathway to serve as an east to west
connecting route at the north end of Winslow. This
route would connect to schools and parks facilities
and serve as a transportation corridor. Formalized
routes and easements are needed from the Park
District at the “Sakai Park” and the School District
at the High School campus and the City’s Suzuki
property.
9 Wardwell Intra-Island
Trail
A multi-use pathway is envisioned to serve as a
route connecting points north to the Winslow area
school and parks facilities. Formalized route and
easement are needed from the School District at
the Middle School campus.
10. Shepard Intra-Island
Trail
A network of multi-use pathways and low volume
streets along this corridor to better accommodate
non-motorized use. Easements will be needed
from private property owners to link local access
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-11 February 2017
roadway for east – west connection from Weaver
to Finch.
11. Head of the Bay
A trail and/or shoulder improvements is needed
along this corridor. Additional right-of-way may be
needed from fronting property owners to widen the
roadway and mitigate for wetland impacts.
12 Bucklin Hill Road A trail and/or shoulder improvements are needed
along this corridor. Additional right-of-way is need-
ed to widen the roadway and drainage for shoulder
improvements.
13 Lost Valley Intra-Island
Trail
A multi-use pathway through the Lost Valley. The
trail would provide a more direct route to the west
from the Winslow area at lesser grades than sur-
rounding road networks. Easements are needed at
the east end of the proposed trail to connect
through to Fletcher Bay Road.
14
Lynwood Center Intra-
Island Trail
A multi-use pathway separated from the roadway
on the east side of Fletcher Bay Rd and Lynwood
Center Rd. This pathway would provide non-
motorized connectivity south to Lynwood Center.
Easements are needed along the east side of
Fletcher Bay Road.
15 North Island
Expeditionary Intra-
Island Trail
A continuous network of multi-use trails connecting
Wardwell road on the south end to Lovgreen Rd at
the north along mostly unopened rights of way.
This system would connect with Meigs Farm Park
Land trails.
16 Mandus Olson
Corridor Intra-Island
Trail
A continuous network of multi-use trails and low
volume roadways to link to the Lost Valley at the
south and the North Island Expeditionary Trail /
Lovgreen Rd at the north.
Table 6-4 identifies gaps and deficiencies in sidewalks in Winslow. This information is used to
facilitate the planning of the City’s sidewalk infill program and pedestrian elements for capital
improvement projects.
Table 6-4, Winslow Area sidewalk gaps and deficiencies
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-12 February 2017
1 Madison Avenue from
Wyatt Way to High
School Rd
The existing 4-foot plus wide sidewalk is not ade-
quate to accommodate a range of users.
2 Madison Avenue from
Winslow Way to Wyatt
Way
Sidewalk ramps not to current standards
3 Madison Avenue from
Winslow Way to Parfitt
Way
Sidewalk ramps not to current standards
4 Wyatt Way from
Ericksen to Madison
Ave
Sidewalk needed both sides
5 Wyatt Way from Madi-
son Ave to Lovell
Sidewalks and bike lanes needed
6 Wyatt Way from Lovell
to Weaver
Sidewalk is needed on north side to fill in the cur-
rent gap.
7 Winslow Way from
Madison Ave to Grow
Ave
Existing sidewalks are incomplete for roadway
segment. Complete sidewalks are needed on both
sides.
8 Grow Ave from Wins-
low Way to Wyatt Way
Sidewalk needed. Possible greenway (bike & ped
prioritized roadway).
9 Grow Ave from Wyatt
Way to High School
Rd
Sidewalk needed. Possible greenway (bike & ped
prioritized roadway)
10 Wood Ave from Grow
Ave to Parfitt Way
Sidewalks are incomplete on both sides.
11. Cave Avenue Gap in sidewalk on east side.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-13 February 2017
12. Waterfront Park Trail
at Harbor Drive
The sidewalk is narrow along a steep street grade.
A separated pathway on the ferry property to the
east with switchbacks would improve accessibility
for persons with disabilities and cyclists.
13. Waterfront Park Bridge
and approaches
The bridge needs to be widened to accommodate
cyclists and resurfaced for all users.
14. Trail from Parfitt Way
to Finch Place
The existing gravel trail serves an area that is used
by many senior citizens and is inconsistent in width
and surfaced with gravel
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-14 February 2017
Table 6-5 identifies gaps and deficiencies in shoulder facilites for cyclists. This information is
used to facilitate the implementation of the “Core 40 – shoulder program“ to create a 40 plus
mile network of safe roadway routes for cyclists.
Table 6-5, Island-Wide Network of Shoulder Facilities for Cyclists
1. Eagle Harbor Drive Bicycle lanes both sides from Bucklin to McDonald
2. Miller Rd & Day Rd Bicycle lanes both sides for entire length of roadway and
for Day Road West of SR 305 to Miller
3. Bucklin Hill Road Bicycle lanes both sides from Blakey to Lynwood Ctr.
Road
4. High School Road Bicycle climbing lanes both directions
5. Blakely Avenue Bicycle climbing lanes both sides from Bucklin to
Oddfellows
6. Valley Avenue Bicycle climbing lane from N. Madison to Sunrise
7. New Brooklyn Rd. Bicycle climbing lanes both directions
8. Baker Hill Road Bicycle climbing lane from Lynwood Center and Palimino
9. Lynwood Center Rd. Bicycle lane on the west side in the south bound direction
assuming seperated shared use pathway is also
constructed on the east side
10. Sportsman’s Club Rd.
& Finch Rd.
Complete bicycle lanes both directions
11 Fletcher Bay Road Complete bicycle lanes both sides
12 Day Road Bicycle climbing lane from SR 305 to N. Madison
13. North Madison Ave. Complete bicycle lanes both sides from SR 305 to Day
14. High School Rd. Complete bicycle lanes both sides
15. Blakely Ave. Complete bicycle lanes in both sides from Bucklin to
Country Club
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-15 February 2017
Map G, Core 40 Shoulder Improvements
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-16 February 2017
Facility Types
The System Maps C and D (Appendix J) identify facility types for roadway shoulders and
trails. Refer to Recommended Capital Improvement Plan Maps E and F (Appendix K) for
regional and intra-island trail designations.
Sidewalks are not depicted on system maps. Sidewalks are required per City Design and
Construction standards in designated centers.
Shoulders are required at locations shown in system maps. Minimum shoulder widths are
designated as 6-feet (Type B) or 3-foot (Type C).
Type B shoulders are intended to provide space that is adequate to accommodate cyclists
riding with traffic and pedestrians walking facing traffic.
Type C shoulders are intended to ballast the paved roadway in suburban areas or provide
shy distance from curbs in urban areas. While three-foot gravel shoulders are not considered
a non-motorized facility, they provide limited space between the paved edge and the ditch for
pedestrians when vehicles are traveling in both directions. In suburban locations, this facility
type is best suited for low traffic volume when the frequency of conflict is low and where
drivers can most often maneuver to provide additional room for non-motorized users.
Trails: Regional trails, intra-island trails, and some connecting pathways are shown in system
plan maps. Explore ways to secure connecting pathways in locations not depicted in the
system plan maps to preserve existing connectivity or provide connectivity to facilities. The
City’s minimum trail width is 6-feet. Type A facilities (regional trails, intra-island trails) require
a 10-foot minimum width plus 1-foot or greater ballasted shoulders. All trail facilities are to be
hard surfaced. Trails along roadways should be separated from the vehicular traveled way.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-17 February 2017
Levels of Service
Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS) and Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS) are established for
each of the facility types for Secondary Arterial Streets and High Volume Collector Streets
over 1500ADT with posted speeds up to 35mph..
Table 6-6, Non-motorized LOS Guideline
LOS Description
A Separation from vehicular modes that is comfortable for the
majority of users. Minimum 7 feet of separation or curb with 3
feet of separation.
B Separation from vehicle modes that may not be comfortable for
some users. Minimum curb or two feet of separation.
C Space provided for non-motorized modes. Meets AASHTO
minimums.
D Space provided for non-motorized modes but may be sub-
standard and not considered a non-motorized facility.
Table 6-7a, Non-Motorized Level of Service for Designated Centers
Facility Description BLOS PLOS
10-foot wide multi-use pathway separated 7 or more
feet from the roadway or separated by physical
barrier
A A
6-foot wide trail separated 7 or more feet from the
roadway
C A
5-foot wide sidewalk or trail with curb and gutter and
planter strip 3 or more feet wide
N/A A
5-foot wide sidewalk N/A B
5-foot wide paved shoulder w/ 2 foot buffer B C
5-foot wide paved shoulder (6 foot total width) C C
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-18 February 2017
Table 6-7b, Non-Motorized Levels of Service for Conservation Area
Facility Description BLOS PLOS
10-foot wide multi-use pathway separated 7 or more
feet from the roadway or separated by physical
barrier
A A
6-foot wide trail separated 7 or more feet from the
roadway
C A
5-foot wide paved shoulder w/ 2 foot buffer B C
5-foot wide paved shoulder (6 foot total width) C C
8-foot wide shoulder N/A B
6-foot wide shoulder N/A C
3-foot wide shoulder * N/A D
* 3 foot shoulders are not intended as a non-motorized facility but may provide space to avoid
run out into a ditch or vegetation for non-motorized users, as well as recovery for vehicular
traffic.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-19 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-20 February 2017
Non-Motorized Improvement Plan
Programs and projects to achieve the proposed Non-motorized Transportation System Plan
are identified in Maps E and F and Appendix K.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-21 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-22 February 2017
Design Considerations
Consider the following aspects when developing designs for public and private projects to
improve non-motorized safety. Note that these design considerations may be above minimum
established standards and should be provided for all public and private projects.
A. Incorporate accessibility requirements in accordance with the United States
Access Board Proposed Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Rights-
of-way (PROWAG) to the extent feasible and incorporate universal principles in
design to the extent practical.
B. Provide safe at-grade crossings at signalized intersections on SR 305. Consider
refuge areas at busy locations. Consider separated grade crossing for regional
trails and other high volume locations.
C. Provide marked crosswalks in high traffic areas at safe and appropriate intervals,
particularly in locations where pedestrian routes cross secondary arterials. Provide
marked crosswalks at driveways on secondary arterial streets in busy locations.
D. On designated bike routes, provide wider (8“) fog lines adjacent to paved shoulder
facilities for cyclists and bike lane markings and bicycle climbing lanes. The use of
sharrow markings to raise awareness awareness of cyclists is discouraged.
Incorporate the use of sharrow markings for directional purposes at high-bicycle-
volume locations in designated centers when engineers consider the design to be
a significant safety enhancement. Examples include the use of sharrows adjacent
to angle parking and at transition areas from bike lanes to shared lanes on
Winslow Way.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-23 February 2017
E. Provide separation for non-motorized from vehicular uses at higher speed (over
30mph) and higher volume (over 2000 ADT) motorized traffic locations. When
separation is not practical, alternative routes should be provided to accommodate
users of all ages and abilities. A particular emphasis for separated facilities is on
roads connecting to schools and along SR 305.
F. Consider lowering speed limits on secondary and collector streets with significant
bicycle and/or pedestian traffic that lack non-motorized facilities.
G. Post walking and biking warning signs on roadways in high non-motorized use
areas lacking adequate facilities.
H. Incorporate traffic calming elements such as narrow lanes (9-10 feet depending on
roadway classification), center island/crossing islands, chichanes, or winding
roadways, and maintain native vegetation or provide street trees in all designs.
Consider speed humps, and/or raised crosswalks at local access streets with a
desired speed limit of 20mph when there are large vehicular traffic generators or
very high volumes of pedestrians.
I. Provide street lighting on secondary arterials and collector streets in designated
centers and marked crosswalks on arterial streets.
J. Provide bicycle-activated sensors at signal locations.
K. Avoid placement of utility facilities, such as manhole covers and utility poles, within
non-motorized travelways.
L. Design of new parking lots and garages to include covered bike storage or parking
facilities. Where existing bicycle parking is sufficient and conveniently located, the
City Engineer may omit this requirement.
M. When bike racks are required for commercial development and public facilities, the
racks shall be conveniently located to the building entrance, appropriately
designed to be compatible with the design and development of the site, and
sheltered from inclement weather.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-24 February 2017
Standards
The City’s existing Design and Construction Standards were recently updated in order to
come into compliance with Low Impact Development requirements of the City’s NPDES
permit.
Preservation and Maintenance
Non-motorized facilities need to be preserved and maintained to ensure continued useful-
ness. As the system grows, so does the demand for resources to maintain it. Facilities deteri-
orate over time and the City needs to plan for expenditures to repair and/or reconstruct these
assets.
Areas of emphasis for maintenance:
• Annual raised sidewalk grinding or replacement of sidewalk panels to address de-
ficient disability access.
• Annual sidewalk and cross walk power washing where needed to maintain slip re-
sistance and contrasting color.
• Monthly sweeping of separated pathways.
• Annual cleaning of separated pathways.
• Seasonal brush cutting of trails.
• Annual grading and graveling of unpaved trails where needed to address uneven-
ness and traction issues.
• Maintenance of roadway surfacing to consider serviceability of shoulders for cy-
clists when prioritizing repairs.
• Trimming of roadside brush to maintain use of shoulders by cyclists and pedestri-
ans.
• Monthly shoulder/bike lane sweeping with higher frequency at problem areas.
• Pulling and re-ballasting shoulders with gravel.
• Repair and adjustment of lids and grates to maintain even surfaces for cyclists and
pedestrians.
• Annual pavement marking maintenance of cross walks, bike lane symbols, and
other surface markings.
• Washing and replacement of signage such as no parking signs, wayfinding signs,
and others.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-25 February 2017
Education, Encouragement and Enforcement
The City in coordination with School District, Park District, Fire District, Kitsap Public Health
District, and community groups, will work to further the education goals of this plan. This in-
cludes developing programs, or adopting programs used successfully elsewhere, to encour-
age use of non-motorized modes and promote safety.
• Listen to the community to identify transportation system deficiencies and opportuni-
ties for improvement
• Coordinate and support programs and projects that encourage active modes of trans-
portation
• Support community outreach and involvement for the development of transportation
projects
• Support safe routes to school programs
• Support “Adopt-a-Trail” and “Adopt-a-Route” programs
• Develop and distribute guide maps and provide wayfinding signage. Public non-
motorized facilities such as trails should be identified with signage in order to desig-
nate routes and access points. This is especially important where facilities are adja-
cent to or run through easements on private property.
The City routinely support the following efforts:
• ‘Bainbridge Shares the Road’ program and signage.
• League of American Bicyclists ‘bicycle friendly community’ designation.
• Walking, Cycling, and Paddling Map supported on the City’s web site.
• Walking Map of Winslow, produced by Sustainable Bainbridge and supported on the
City’s website.
• Waterfront Trail Map supported on the City’s web site.
• Map of accessibility features in the Winslow area, produced in cooperation with the
Kitsap County Accessible Communities Advisory Committee.
• Participating in Bike to School Day and Bike to Work Day.
• Community engagement for connectivity opportunities and easements.
• Participating in public outreach involvement opportunities for City transportation pro-
jects.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 6 Non-Motorized Systems
6-26 February 2017
• Coordinating with the Police Department to identify areas with higher non-motorized
use that may need education and enforcement emphasis for safety due to collision
history, speeding, observed poor behaviors by either motorized and/or non-motorized
users.
• Promoting police bicycle patrols for enforcing laws for cyclists and patrolling multi-use
pathways.
7-1 February 2017
Credit: WSF
CHAPTER 7 OTHER TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS
On Bainbridge Island, non-city transportation systems have an extremely important role in the
movement of people, vehicles, and goods. Ferry and transit systems are the primary means of
moving people to and from their destinations, from commuter trips to Seattle, to tourists visiting
Bainbridge Island. This chapter describes each of these systems and their relationship to the
Bainbridge Island transportation system.
Ferry System
The Washington State Ferries (WSF) service is the primary provider of ferry transit services in
western Washington. The Seattle-Bainbridge ferry run provides an integral connection between
greater King County and locations east of Puget Sound to the Kitsap Peninsula and the Olympic
Peninsula regions. System-wide, the WSF system carries more than 23 million passengers per
year (2014 Washington State Ferries Rider Statistics Report).
Washington State Ferry Operations
The Seattle/Bainbridge Island ferry provides daily crossings between Bainbridge Island and
downtown Seattle’s Colman Dock. The 35-minute crossing covers 8.6 miles and connects
Bainbridge Island and the SR 305 Corridor with downtown Seattle and the Interstate 5 and 90
Corridors. Two Jumbo Mark II Class auto/passenger ferries, the M/V Tacoma and M/V
Wenatchee, serve the route. Each vessel has a travel speed of 18 knots and maximum capacity
for 2,499 passengers, 202 vehicles and 60 commercial vehicles.
Table 7-1 lists the ridership, schedules, crossing times, and service frequencies for the Seattle-
Bainbridge Island route and alternative ferry routes that serve the central Kitsap County region.
These alternative routes include the Seattle-Bremerton (passenger-vehicle and passenger-
only), and Kingston-Edmonds runs. The Seattle-Bainbridge run carries the largest share of
ridership with more than 6.32 million passengers per year. The Kingston-Edmonds runs carries
approximately 4 million annual passengers and the
two Seattle-Bremerton ferries carry about 2.5 million
riders.
Table 7-1. WSF Schedules and Headways
Route
2002
Ridership
Vehicles
Carried
Hours of Operation
(first-last sailing)
Crossing
Time
Service
Frequency
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 7
7-2 February 2017
Seattle/Bainbridge Island 6.72 million 2.19 million 4:45 am-2:10 am 35 min 40-50 min
Seattle/Bremerton 2.21 million 0.72 million 4:50 am-12:50 am 60 min 70-140 min
Seattle/Bremerton
Passenger-Only 0.68 million -- 5:00 am-1:30 am 30 min 40-270 min
Kingston/Edmonds Ferry 4.49 million 2.34 million 4:55 am-12:55 am 30 min 40-70 min
Source: Washington State Ferries
Figure 7.1 Ferry Routes
Ferry LOS
WSF uses daily percentage of vessels at vehicle capacity as the measure of the Level of
Service for ferry services. The methodology places an emphasis on using existing capacity as
opposed to an earlier method of measuring length of wait times at peak sailings which
emphasized commute times for motorists.
Table 7-2 Ferry Operation LOS
Source: WSF 2009 Long Range Plan
Route Level 1 Level 2
Seattle/Bremerton 25% to 30% 50% to 60%
Seattle/Bainbridge Island 25% to 30% 65% to 75%
Edmonds/Kingston 25% to 30% 65% to 75%
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Other Transportation Systems
7-3 February 2017
Level 1 LOS represents the percentage of sailings at peak vehicle capacity. At 25% capacity,
peak sailings are filled to capacity but other sailings are not. Exceeding the LOS standard is
an indicator that adaptive strategies should be employed to reduce peak demand.
Level 2 represents the percentage of sailings at peak vehicle capacity. Standards are set to
65% to 75% for routes that reflect the ability to spread demand throughout the day due to more
time flexibility amongst customers. Exceeding the LOS standard is an indicator that additional
investment is needed to address capacity.
The WSF Long Range Plan forecast that percentage of vessels sailing at peak capacity will not
exceed 67% through 2030, nor exceed the LOS threshold of 75% for the peak summer month of
August. Thus, capacity improvements in the planning period are not driven by the LOS
standard.
Kitsap Transit Passenger-Only Ferry Proposals
WSF discontinued passenger-only ferry service in 2003. A private company, Aqua Marine and
the Port of Kingston have attempted to restore high speed passenger-only service from
Kingston and Seattle. Both services have proven to be financially unsustainable due to limited
ridership and high passenger fares. The Port of Kingston ended its service in 2012.
Kitsap Transit proposed to develop a passenger-only ferry service directly to Seattle supported
by a sales tax increase in Kitsap County in 2003. This proposition was not supported by the
voters at that time. In 2016 Kitsap County voters approved the Kitsap Transit passenger-only
ferry proposal, and service will be implemented to serve Bremerton, Kingston, and Southworth
in coming years.
Ferry System Issues
The primary issue for ferry service is funding. With citizen initiatives to reduce car tab fees and
the erosion of the gas tax with more fuel efficient vehicles, transportation funding has been in
decline. Since the taxpayer backed tax cuts in the early 2000’s, WSF has been faced with
raising fares, deferring maintenance of its fleet and terminals, and foregoing expanded
operations. Challenges include:
Maintain operating funding to provide 80% fare box recovery
Fund vessel maintenance and replacement reserves
Fund terminal reconstruction including the Seattle Ferry Terminal
Develop long range plans and funding strategies for expanding services including
investments in expanding existing service, additional routes, and multimodal
transportation to meet more sustainably the region’s growing transportation needs.
Examples may include upgrading the Edmonds-Kingston ferry terminals to better serve
bus and other multimodal transportation, introducing ferry service from Southworth to
Seattle and upgrading walk-on capacity and level of service to Bainbridge Island using
three smaller auto capacity ferries to reduce traffic congestion impacts to SR 305.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 7
7-4 February 2017
Recommendations for Ferry Services
The City supports the retention and expansion of ferry systems to reduce the dependency on
the Bainbridge Island terminal and SR 305, and to promote a more convenient and equitable
ferry system. Elements of the recommendations include:
Parity of ferry services – The City promotes services closer to home origins to reduce
demand at the Bainbridge Island ferry terminal and on SR 305. Examples include
vehicle/passenger ferry service from Southworth to Seattle, and high speed passenger-
only ferry service from Kingston to Seattle, and direct bus service from Kitsap County to
King County via the Kingston-Edmonds Ferry.
Ferry Priority – The City supports the WSDOT and Kitsap Transit’s programs to
encourage non-SOV use through priority boarding and through the development of
facilities for bicycles and pedestrians.
Passenger Ferry Options – The City supports passenger-only ferry services through
public and private initiatives.
Walk-on and bicycle capacity - The City supports long range planning for capital
improvement expenditures to enhance walk-on and bicycle capacity at peak sailings.
Motorized capacity – The City supports long range planning for capital improvement
expenditures to maintain a two-boat maximum wait-time for motor vehicle capacity at
peak sailings.
Fare box recovery – Maintain affordable fares for service to Bainbridge Island and Kitsap
County. The City supports long range planning and investment for State funding to
subsidize operation and maintenance for the ferry system.
Kitsap Transit bus and other services
Kitsap Transit, as the public transit service provider in Kitsap County, serves the County
including the City of Bainbridge Island. Bus service is provided for commuter hours to and from
the ferry terminal. Kitsap Transit has an Access program providing transportation for seniors
and disabled persons who are unable to use regular-route buses. Starting in June 2014, BI Ride
service was introduced providing daytime intra-island bus service. Kitsap Transit also provides
park-and-ride lots, vanpool programs, and rideshare programs.
Existing Routes
Eleven bus routes serve Bainbridge Island providing service mainly to and from the Winslow
ferry terminal. Figure 7-2 shows the routes as they relate to the roadway system and areas of
the Island.
Table 7-3 provides details about the origins and destinations of the routes, the 2014 ridership
levels, hours of operations, and service frequency. Most service is provided to meet peak
morning and evening demand related to ferry terminal travel, with little or no mid-day service.
Service also tends to be one-directional with transit vehicles “deadheading” back (not in service)
to meet the demand from arriving ferry passengers.
A total of 534,226 annual passengers in 2014 used the Kitsap Transit routes that serve the ferry
terminal (Routes 33, 90-106). WSF reports 3,087,786 walk-on passengers for 2014. If the
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Other Transportation Systems
7-5 February 2017
assumption is made that all of the ridership also used the ferry system, approximately 1 out of
every 6 ferry riders use Kitsap Transit service.
Figure 7-2 Kitsap Transit Routes
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 7
7-6 February 2017
Table 7-3. Kitsap Transit Services
Route
2014
Ridership Hours of Operation
Service
Frequency
# 33 – Silverdale/Bainbridge 29,500 4:30-7:45
15:30-19:45 45-50 min
# 90 – Poulsbo/Bainbridge 254,200 4:50-8:05
15:50-20:05 45-50 min
# 91 – Kingston/Bainbridge 97,500 4:45-8:10
15:45-20:10 35-50 min
# 93 – Manzanita 35,600 4:55-7:40
15:55-19:40 40-55 min
# 94 - Agate Point 21,400 4:50-7:40
15:55-19:40 40-55 min
# 95 - Battle Point 38,000 4:50-7:40
15:50-19:40 45-55 min
# 96 – Sunrise 27,800 4:50-7:40
15:50-19:40 45-55 min
# 97 – Crystal Springs 36,500 4:50-7:40
15:50-19:40 45-55 min
# 98 - Fort Ward 26,200 5:00-7:40
16:00-19:40 45-55 min
# 99 - Bill Point 26,700 4:50-7:40
15:50-19:40 45-55 min
# 100 - Winslow Shuttle 28,300 5:30-7:40
16:30-19:40 45-50 min
# 101 – Ferncliff Shuttle -- 7:00-13:45 45-60 min
Source: Kitsap Transit (www.kitsaptransit.org)
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Other Transportation Systems
7-7 February 2017
Park-and-Ride Lots
Kitsap Transit has developed a number of park-and ride facilities along SR 305 and in North
Kitsap County at hubs where passengers can leave a vehicle prior to boarding a bus. Park-and-
ride facilities are used by Kitsap Transit bus riders, and also serve as meeting locations for
vanpools and carpools.
Table 7-4 indicates the park-and-ride facilities located on transit routes that serve Bainbridge
Island as identified by Kitsap Transit.
Table 7- 4. Park-and-Ride Facilities
Park-and-Ride Facility Location Spaces
Served by Bus
Routes
Clearwater Casino Suquamish 96 90, 91
Georges Corner Kingston 225 91
Gateway Fellowship Poulsbo 138 33, 90
Liberty Bay Presbyterian Church Poulsbo 75 33, 90
No. Kitsap Baptist Poulsbo 57 90
Poulsbo Junction Poulsbo 35 33, 90
Poulsbo Church of Nazarene Poulsbo 100 90
Suquamish United Church of Christ Suquamish 65 91
American Legion Post Bainbridge Island 5 98
Bethany Lutheran Church Bainbridge Island 80 94
Island Church Bainbridge Island 37 93
Day Road Bainbridge Island 25 90, 91
Source: Kitsap Transit (www.kitsaptransit.org)
Kitsap Transit assessed use of park-and-ride facilities in 2014. Table 7-5 summarizes the park-
and-ride lots’ capacity, the number of observed vehicles, and parking utilization rates for the lots
on Bainbridge Island.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 7
7-8 February 2017
Table 7-5. Park-and-Ride Lot Utilization
Park-and-Ride Facility Capacity
Observed
2014
Parking
Utilization
American Legion 5 10 200%
Bethany Lutheran Church 80 65 81%
Island Church 37 18 49%
Overall 122 93 76%
Source: WSDOT Office of Urban Mobility
The study shows that area park-and-ride lots are well used and still have adequate capacity. It
appears that additional capacity at the American Legion location would be a benefit if a lease
can be secured.
Transit System Issues
Most transit agencies in the region, including Kitsap Transit, have not developed LOS
measurements at this time. However, general assessments can be made about areas service
frequency, capacity and access. Kitsap Transit has provided a morning and afternoon peak
period transit service that meets the needs of many Island commuters. Mid-day (9:15am to
3:30pm) intra-island service is also provided. Review of the transit service reveals that the main
issues are related to the expansion of transit services and improving the frequency of service.
Issues related to transit include:
With ferry passenger service expected to grow and increasing congestion on SR 305,
ridership capacity for commuter buses is a critical element for achieving a viable
multimodal transportation system. Capacity is an important aspect of level of service.
With more congestion on SR 305 attributed to commuting to employment both on- and
off-island, improving bus service within Kitsap County is an increasingly important
element of a viable transportation system. Frequency of service and transfer efficiency
are important aspects of level of service.
Park-and-ride lots and bicycle parking at park-and-ride lots and bus stops are important
to support commuters and encourage ridership.
To better serve seniors, youth, and persons with disabilities, intra-island bus transit is
an important element of an effective transportation system. Locations served and hours
of service are important aspects for level of service.
Improving access to the transit center near the ferry terminal is needed. Currently the
pedestrian facilities are sub-standard and do not provide adequate accommodation for a
wide range and number of users and there are no bike facilities on Olympic Drive.
Improving access to bus stops is needed in Winslow and at the City’s designated
centers. Both lack of infrastructure and deficient infrastructure are barriers to access in
some areas.
Improving King County Metro transit services at the Seattle ferry terminal to provide
better connections to popular destinations including the airport.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Other Transportation Systems
7-9 February 2017
Recommendations for Transit System
The City supports the development and improvement of transit services on Bainbridge Island
and services that provide options for non-Island commuters.
Transit LOS – Encourage Kitsap Transit to monitor system use to ensure that current
and forecasted demand is met for the SR 305 Corridor. Monitor underserved island
locations for transit service expansion as island development occurs.
Public Transit Ferry Access – Support changes to transit services that promote ferry use,
including service to Sea-Tac airport, popular destinations, and special events in the
Seattle area.
Expansion of Island Transit – Support the expansion of bus services on the island to
better serve commuters, non-commuters, disabled users, residential areas, and
neighborhood centers. This includes the Access Bus and BI Ride services.
Ferry Commute – Improve service with high capacity buses as needed to meet demand.
This should include expanding accommodation for riders with bicycles.
Route 90 to Poulsbo – Improve frequency of service between the Bainbridge Ferry
Terminal to the Poulsbo Transit Center with transfers to Kingston at Suquamish and
Bremerton and other locations from Poulsbo.
BI Ride – Extend hours of service to include evenings and Sundays.
Non-Motorized System Connectivity to Transit
Active modes of transportation such as walking and bicycling are important to many island
residents. The City has invested in planning and implementation for pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure to accommodate a wide range of
users. Providing connectivity to transit is important
for non-motorized improvements. Opportunities
include development of a network of bike lanes that
link commuters to the ferry terminal and regional and
intra-island trail systems that link pedestrians and
cyclists to transit stops along SR 305 and throughout
the island.
Multimodal – Transportation Demand
Management
A key to the development of a multimodal system is through the use of Transportation Demand
Management (TDM). TDM is a series of methods and strategies that discourage the use of
single occupant vehicles and encourage non-motorized and transit travel. TDM includes
measures that provide travel alternatives such as transit, carpools, park-and-ride facilities, or
passenger ferry service. TDM strategies are focused on increasing the use of alternatives to
single occupant automobile trips through a mix of incentives and disincentives. These programs
tend to be lower in cost than roadway or other capital projects.
While TDM programs may increase the number of person trips through a corridor by increasing
use of buses, carpools, and diverting trips to off-peak hours, traffic levels may not decrease due
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 7
7-10 February 2017
to unmet travel demand replacing any reductions from TDM programs (latent demand for
travel).
There are many TDM programs currently in effect on Bainbridge Island. Agencies and major
employers have implemented these programs to discourage single occupant vehicle (SOV) trips
during commute periods.
The City of Bainbridge Island, Kitsap Transit, and Washington State Ferries have programs that
encourage the use of transportation alternatives to the SOV.
Examples of TDM programs promoted by these agencies include:
Ferry Terminal Parking Restrictions – The City has limited amount of parking at the ferry
terminal and charges an hourly or daily fee to reduce the number of persons who drive
to access the ferry. As parking becomes more difficult or expensive, fewer drivers will
desire to use the parking areas. On the other hand, restricted parking may increase the
amount of drop-off/pick-up activity at the terminal or encourage parking in adjacent
neighborhoods.
Commercial Parking Tax – The City has charged a tax on commercial parking lots since
1999. The current rate is a 30% tax that provides funds for the City’s general fund. This
tax, if added to the parking fee, increases the out-of-pocket costs for automobile
commuters, encouraging ridesharing, non-motorized travel, and transit use.
Carpool Parking Areas –The City provides reserved parking areas for carpools at its
ferry terminal lot. Providing reserved spaces or reduced parking rates encourages
drivers to form carpools, increasing the occupancy of vehicles.
Rideshare Programs – Programs that promote the formation of carpools and vanpools
can increase the rate of vehicle occupancy by increasing the number of persons moved
during peak times. Kitsap Transit has a program to match interested commuters with
carpools and vanpools using the RideshareOnline.com database.
Vanpool Programs – Kitsap Transit also administers a vanpool program that provides
vans for commuters for a monthly fee. WSF provides additional incentives to registered
carpools and vanpools through preferential boarding. Vanpools also receive a reduced
ferry rate.
Land Use Policies – The City’s promotion of higher-density residential in the Winslow
area promotes increased opportunities for residents to walk or use bus service rather
than drive.
Parking Restrictions and Enforcement – The development and enforcement of parking
policies and rules may reduce undesired parking behaviors, such as in neighborhoods
adjacent to the ferry terminal area. Types of parking restrictions include hourly parking
limits and residential parking zones
Car sharing Program – A car sharing program allows people to have access to a vehicle
that they rent on an hourly and/or mileage basis. This type of program reduces vehicle
ownership, encourages transit and non-motorized travel, and lowers overall driving
behavior.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Other Transportation Systems
7-11 February 2017
Employer-Based Programs
Major employers (100 or more employees) are required by the State’s Commute Trip Reduction
law to promote ridesharing and transit use by developing in-house incentive programs that
encourage employees to use ridesharing, transit use, and non-motorized travel. Kitsap Transit
administers the program within the county. According to Kitsap Transit data only two island
employers have formal CTR programs. Each major employer is required to designate an in-
house coordinator and develop a Commute Trip Reduction Plan indicating how the employer
will meet the required trip reduction targets. Some of the examples of employer-based programs
in use include.
Transit subsidies – Employers can fully or partially subsidize the cost of monthly transit
passes for their employees.
Flextime programs – Employees are allowed to shift their work schedule to avoid travel
during peak travel periods, or to meet transit schedules.
Telecommute programs – Employees are allowed to work from home offices in order to
reduce the amount of commute travel.
Guaranteed ride home program – This program provides employees who commute by
transit, carpool, vanpool, bicycle, or foot a free taxi ride in the event they need to return
home on an emergency basis during mid-day or after working late evening hours.
Commute subsidies – Employees are eligible for a monthly subsidy if they commute by
transit, bicycle, foot or carpool to work.
Regional Coordination
The Growth Management Act requires that cities coordinate planning efforts with adjacent
jurisdictions, by county and region. This coordination effort is particularly important, where
transportation plans by one jurisdiction may have a significant impact on its neighboring
counterpart. Regional planning allows a long-range vision to be established for the region
allowing predictability and consistency between jurisdictions, while still maintaining flexibility to
meet community goals.
There are a number of regional plans that affect the transportation system of Bainbridge Island.
Implementation of many of the regional concepts depend on the availability of funds in the
future.
WSDOT Plans
The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) identified a number of
improvements to the state route system in its Washington Transportation Plan (WTP). In the
Puget Sound Region, these projects are first identified in the Puget Sound Regional Council’s
Metropolitan Transportation Plan “Transportation 2040” (MTP) plan. This plan sets the
transportation plans and policies over a 30-year period, with the emphasis on the first 20-year
time frame. The MTP identifies improvements to the SR 305 Corridor.
SR 305 Corridor Improvements (Winslow Ferry Terminal to Agate Pass Bridge) - Access
management, intersection improvements, and HOV queue jump lanes improvements.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 7
7-12 February 2017
Consistency with IWTP
These projects should improve the overall mobility of the SR
305 Corridors. The improvements along SR 305 between the
ferry terminal and Agate Pass Bridge are unlikely to affect
overall traffic levels, but may shorten transit travel times and
enhance safety for bicyclists. The off-island improvements
will complement the SR 305 alternatives considered on
Bainbridge Island, but will not significantly affect the City’s
traffic situation.
Kitsap Transit Plans
Kitsap Transit has plans to develop future alternatives to expand transit throughout its service
area. Kitsap Transit has considered a variety of approaches including dedicated high-capacity
bus service, passenger rail or monorail service, and passenger ferry services.
• High Capacity Transit Facilities: – This “long-range” concept of the high-capacity
transit service would improve transit travel times by developing dedicated transit
lanes. A Bus Rapid Transit system has been identified as a priority.
Consistency with IWTP
Any of the transit proposals would be compatible with the IWTP SR 305 Alternative A and
Alternative B scenarios. Depending on the level of transit ridership, and the success of
Transportation Demand Management programs to control single occupant vehicle use would
likely improve SR 305 levels of service if constructed.
8 - 1 February 2017
CHAPTER 8 FINANCING
The City of Bainbridge Island, uses a variety of funding resources for the
design, right-of-way procurement, and construction of transportation
facilities. Taxpayers, developers, and County, State and Federal programs
all contribute to the development of the transportation system. The City
prepares a biennial budget, a financial capacity analysis, and a 6-year
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to provide an updated look at the projects
to be completed for the year and in the years ahead, as well as financing
plans for those projects. The State of Washington’s Growth Management Act requires that the
transportation element of a comprehensive plan include:
An analysis of funding capability
A multi-year financing plan based on the needs identified
A discussion of how the jurisdiction will address funding shortfalls through a
reassessment strategy.
This chapter describes how the City plans to pay for the transportation improvements identified
in the IWTP along with projects that appear in the current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
Included in this section, is a discussion of the City’s funding capabilities, potential funding
sources, the 6-year and 20-year transportation improvement plans, and reassessment strategy.
Funding Capabilities
The City of Bainbridge Island has implemented a variety of revenue sources and financing
mechanisms to fund City services and capital
improvements. One indication of the City’s
funding capability is the analysis of historic
revenue sources.
Table 8-1 summarizes the revenue sources
from 2011 to 2014 for the City’s Streets Fund,
Capital Project Grants, and for overall City
revenues. The City has consistently
allocated a large portion of its funding outside
of the operating budget for transportation.
Over the last few years, the City has
aggressively pursued transportation grant
funding from State and Federal sources. The City recently implemented a Transportation
Benefit District and Transportation Impact Fees providing for more revenue. The City
supplements dedicated transportation revenues to pay for operating costs such as salaries,
benefits, and other associated costs.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 8 Financing
8 - 2 February 2017
Table 8-1. Historic Transportation Funding Sources
Actual Actual Actual Actual
(All numbers are in 1000s) 2011 2012 2013 2014
Commercial Parking Lot Tax $552 $588 $715 $753
Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax 484 471 477 478
Parking Fees (City lots) 337 4 0 0
Interest and Other 72 1,334 50 738
Total Street Fund Revenue $1,446 $2,398 $1,242 $1,970
Transportation Grants (Federal) 1,987 200 809 1,502
Transportation Grants (WA State) 1,379 288 465 0
Total Capital Grants $3,366 $488 $1,273 $1,502
Transportation Benefit Dist. funding 0 0 122 391
Total City Non-Utility Revenue Sources $22,901 $19,629 $20,781 $22,048
Source: City of Bainbridge Island financial statements
Overall, the City has annual non-utility revenues of more than $20 million. The City’s 2015-2016
biennial budget projects relatively flat revenue trends for both years. In addition, the City has
significant additional bonding capacity. As of the end of 2014, the City is at 28% of its general
obligation bond limit (not requiring a vote of the taxpayers) and 7% of its limit for special levy
bonds that could be used for transportation projects (requiring a 60% majority vote of the
taxpayers).
Types of Funding Sources
The implementation of the 6-year CIP and 20-year CFP depends on the availability of
transportation funds. This section describes the sources of transportation funds available to the
City of Bainbridge Island.
General Funds
City general funds are made up of a variety of revenue sources and can be used to pay directly
for transportation improvements or to meet the City’s local funding requirement or “match”, for
other funding sources. Some revenues are specifically dedicated for transportation projects,
such as the City’s share of the State Motor Fuel Tax are dedicated to popular activities like
roadway repair and construction. Other City revenues from the general fund can also to be used
for transportation according to City funding priorities or to pay for transportation improvements
that also benefit other funds such as water, sewer and stormwater. For 2015, the City budgeted
approximately $1.5 million of dedicated operating revenues and $6.1 million for capital
expenditures.
Grants
There are numerous state and federal grant programs for improving the mobility or safety of the
transportation system. Some sources of funds allow a local agency to apply directly, while other
grant programs require submittals though a coordinated application process through the
jurisdiction’s Metropolitan Planning Organization (Puget Sound Regional Council). In addition,
there are other sources of funding available to only counties or WSDOT, requiring the City to
advocate for improvements through coordination with these eligible agencies. Most grants are
issued on a competitive basis and require local jurisdictions to contribute between 10-25% of
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 8 Financing
8 - 3 February 2017
the cost. A higher local match percentage can make a project more competitive for grant funds.
In 2015, the City received $4.4 million for transportation projects.
General Obligation Bonds
General Obligation Bonds are an important method for the building and construction of
transportation facilities. The City can issue bonds up to 1.5% of the assessed property values
within the City without a vote of the people and an additional 2.5% with a vote of the people. A
bond can allow the rapid development of the transportation system within a short period of time.
Bonds are used by cities to finance major improvements and are repaid either through general
funds, special taxes or assessment, or roadway tolls. Between 2007 and 2011, the City used
two general obligation bond issues for street, sidewalk and other non-motorized improvements
throughout the Island. General obligation bonds can be funded by revenues from growth and
are an alternative method to fund infrastructure to accommodate growth as it occurs.
Developer Contributions
Development provides an opportunity for the portions of the system to be built without the
expenditure of public funds. Where roadway improvements are required (as indicated in the
City’s Comprehensive Plan), developers construct the facilities along the length of the property
as part of their street frontage improvements. Typically, two to three projects are developer-
funded during each year.
Impact Fees
An impact fee or transportation mitigation fee was established by the City in 2015 to collect fees
for every new vehicle trip added to the roadway system. Developments are charged the fee
based upon the number of new vehicle trips added to the road. These fees must be used to
improve roadways that will be impacted by the new development.
Transportation Benefit District (TBD) Fees
Cities and counties are provided a mechanism to raise revenues for transportation programs
charging a fee for vehicles licensed in their jurisdictions in accordance with Washington Code
(RCW 36.73.020). The City currently levies a fee of $20 per year on qualifying licensed vehicles
and collects approximately $400,000 per year in revenue.
Local Improvement Districts
Another funding option is the development of Local Improvement Districts (LIDs). Generally, an
LID requires a petition or survey with approval from a majority of property owners for the
formation of the special assessment district and is repaid by members of that district. LIDs are
most often used in places where the improvements also have an economic incentive, for
example, a retail area may form a LID to widen sidewalks to create a more pedestrian-friendly
area that could translate into higher sales. The City has used LIDs for transportation and utility
improvements.
User Fees
This funding mechanism attempts to pay for all or part of the cost of an improvement by
charging the users of the facility. Roadway and bridge tolls, and the WSF ferry service are all
examples of transportation-related user fees. Tolls are usually tied to the repayment of General
Obligation Bonds for a specific set of transportation improvements. Tolls are most common for
the funding of bridges and other major improvements. The City is not currently using tolling at
this time.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 8 Financing
8 - 4 February 2017
Proposed Projects and Funding Needs
The development of a transportation development plan identifies a schedule for planned
expenditures over a six-year period. Table 8-2 is a list of recommended improvements to meet
Level of Service (LOS) standards and accompanying proposed funding sources. Table 8-3 is a
list of transportation projects that have been identified in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP), including discretionary projects in addition to those needed to meet LOS standards.
Funding for the projects needed to meet LOS standards will come from a combination of local,
state, and federal sources. The Wyatt Way Reconstruction project will be funded with significant
support from a state grant. In the next six years, given the past history of federal grant funding, it
can be anticipated that grant funding can be secured for the Sportsman’s Club/New Brooklyn
Intersection Improvement project. In summary, the City is well positioned to address projects to
maintain LOS standards over the next six years.
The City plans to address all the LOS issues on City streets within the 6-year CIP. The 6-year
CIP therefore meets the need for the 20-year CIP. For other discretionary projects to be
considered for the 20-year planning, refer to Maps E and F in Chapter 6 – Non-Motorized
System or Appendix J.
Many non-motorized improvement projects have been identified in the City’s CIP. Over the
coming six years, the number of discretionary transportation projects exceeds the City’s ability
to fund them. Establishing priorities for funding and securing new funding sources is needed if a
sizable portion of these projects are to be delivered.
The most significant and expensive current needs to meet LOS standards are along SR 305. At
this time, WSDOT is responsible for planning and developing capacity projects to meet LOS
standards on SR 305, while the City performs much of the routine maintenance along the SR
305 Corridor. The City’s population is approximately 23,000 and is expected to reach 25,000 in
the next five to seven years. At that time the City may become responsible for improvements on
some segments of SR 305 depending on access requirements. The City should consider
partnerships with WSDOT to address current needs. This plan identifies needs for capacity
improvements and includes a special study that proposes both at grade and separated grade
solutions. The City has developed projects along the corridor such as the Olympic Drive project
that was funded by a State grant and could consider implementing additional projects. This
could include funding elements of WSDOT projects or the City undertaking and funding its own
projects along the corridor by obtaining development permits from the State.
Proposed Sources of Funding
To increase funding capacity both in the short term for non-motorized projects and in the long
term for capacity projects, the City could consider increasing the TBD fees and/or issuing
bonds. A bond issue could provide for investments in non-motorized transportation so that more
complete networks of bicycle and pedestrian facilities could be realized in a shorter time frame.
Alternatively, revenues from the current mix of resources could be directed to transportation
rather than to other City programs and services.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 8 Financing
8 - 5 February 2017
Reassessment Strategy
At the time of this plan, no funding shortfalls for capacity projects to meet LOS standards were
anticipated for the CIP six-year time horizon. However, if the City is unable to secure grant
funding or suffers other financial setbacks, the City may need to reassess in future years.
The Growth Management Act requires that jurisdictions develop a reassessment strategy in the
event that funding shortfalls occur that limit the City’s ability to carry out the transportation
improvement plan. In the event that the City cannot fund the transportation capital
improvements needed to maintain the adopted roadway LOS standards (as identified in the
Level of Service section), then the City shall take one or a combination of the three following
actions as directed by the City Council:
1. Phase proposed land developments that are consistent with the City’s land use plan until
such time as resources can be identified to provide adequate transportation
improvements.
2. Reassess the City’s transportation financing strategy to identify additional funding
opportunities with federal and regional grants and funding programs, and through the
development of new partnerships with WSDOT, Kitsap County, and the private sector.
3. Reassess the City’s adopted roadway LOS standards to reflect service levels that can
be maintained under the known financial resources.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 8 Financing
8 - 6 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 8 Financing
8 - 7 February 2017
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Plan
Chapter 8 Financing
8 - 8 February 2017
CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND
ISLAND-WIDE
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Appendix to Report
February, 2017
Appendix
A Glossary of Terms
B References
C Traffic Data
D Level of Service Forecast Information
E Land Use Forecast and Assumptions
F SR 305 Level of Service Forecast Information
G Traffic Accident Data
H Roadway Condition Assessment
I Non-Motorized Existing Facilities Maps
J Non-Motorized Planned Facilities Maps
K Non-Motorized Capital Improvements Projects Map
APPENDIX A:
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Study
Appendix - Glossary
A-2
access management A major street carrying the traffic of local and collector streets to and from
freeways and other major streets. Arterials generally have traffic signals at
intersections and may have limits on driveway spaci ng an street intersection
spacing.
alternative work
schedules
Programs such as compressed work weeks that eliminate work trips for affected
employees.
arterial A type of roadway that carries a high level of traffic at the high speed for long
distances.
buildout The maximum amount of housing and jobs that can fit within the current zoning
calibration (calibrated
model)
A process where the land use and traffic volume inputs into a transportation
model are balanced to provide a representation of the workin gs of the existing
roadway system.
bikeway Any road, street, path, or right-of- way that is specifically designated in some
manner as being open to bicycle travel, regardless of whether such facilities are
designated for the exclusive use of bicycles or a re to be shared with other
vehicles or pedestrians.
bypass lane A reserved traffic lane on a metered freeway entry ramp which permits buses or
high-occupancy vehicles to have preferential treatment when entering the
freeway.
calibration The process of “balancing” the transportation model to provide a representation
of the transportation system. For the TMODEL2 traffic model, this could include
adjustment of trip generation rates, vehicle volumes, vehicle speeds, roadway
capacity or other factors of the roadway system.
capacity The maximum amount of vehicles that a roadway can hold. The capacity is
based on a variety of factors including lane and shoulder widths, vehicle types,
roadway grades, etc.
capital costs Nonrecurring or infrequently recurring costs of long-term assets, such as land,
guideways, stations, buildings, and vehicles. These costs often include related
expenses, for example, depreciation and property taxes. See also operating
costs.
capital improvement
program
A six-year plan created by the City to schedule major improvements and sources
of funds to pay for those improvements. See also Transportation Improvement
Program
carpool An arrangement in which two to six people share the use, cost, or both of
traveling in privately owned automobiles between fixed points on a regular basis.
See also vanpool.
channelization Roadway facilities that accommodate turning movements. Typical examples are
left and right turn pockets at an intersection.
Commute Trip
Reduction (CTR)
A state law passed in 1991, requiring certain jurisdictions to enact ordinances to
require major employers to implement programs to reduce commuting VMT and
SOV rates of their employees (RCW 70.94.521-551).
collector A type of roadway that connects traffic from local roads and to arterials.
Collectors have lower speed and carry lower levels of traffic than arterials.
compressed work
week
An alternative work schedule, in accordance with employer policy, that regularly
allows a full- time employee to eliminate at least one work day every two weeks
by working longer hours during the remaining days, resulting in fewer commute
trips by the employee.
concurrency A part of the Growth Management Act that requires that needed roadway
improvements be constructed within 6 years of a development
congestion A condition which does not permit movement on a transportation facility at
optimal legal speeds. Characterized by unstable traffic flows. Recurrent
congestion is caused by excess volume capacity. Nonrecurring congestion is
caused by actions such as special events and/or traffic accidents.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Study
Appendix - Glossary
A-3
congestion
management system
A federally mandated program directed at specific urbanized areas to provide for
programs to reduce traffic congestion.
corridor In planning, a broad geographical band that follows a general directional flow or
connects major sources of trips. It may contain a number of streets and
highways and transit lines and routes.
criterion/criteria Measures or factors used in the development or in the decision -making process
for a transportation improvement.
cut-through traffic Traffic that uses the local street system to get around congested intersections or
corridors.
design speed
facility A physical structure allowing a transportation mode to operate (including travel,
as well as the discharge and loading of passengers). This includes highways,
guideways, terminals and administrative support locations.
fixed cost A cost that remains relatively constant irrespective of the level of operational
activity; expenditures that do not vary with output. Examples include land,
guideways and rent.
flex-time An employer policy allowing individual employees some flexibility in choosing the
time, but not the number, of their working hours.
forecast A future projection of traffic volumes based on expected future land use patterns
and population estimates.
free-flow traffic The speed which a vehicle would travel if congestion did not exist
grade crossing A crossing or intersection of roadways, railroad tracks, pedestrian walks, or
combinations of these at the same level or grade.
grade-separated A crossing of roadways, railroad tracks, pedestrian walks, or combinations of
these that do not intersect. Overpasses, underpasses, and bridge structures are
common examples.
Growth Management
Act
(GMA) Legislation passed in the State of Washington in order to allow the
orderly development of land consistent with the construction of roadways and
other provide for better growth management. (RCW 36.70A)
high-occupancy-
vehicle (HOV)
Vehicles that carry two or more passengers. Carpools, vanpools, and buses are
examples.
impacts Impacts are the consequences either positive or negative of actions. For
example, environmental impacts would be those consequences that affect the
environment.
infrastructure The basic facilities and installations needed for the functioning and growth of a
community.
intermodal Accommodation or interconnection between different modes of transportation,
both public and private, serving the movement of people and goods.
Intermodal Surface
Transportation
Signed into federal law on December 18, 1991, it provides Efficiency Act
(ISTEA) authorizations for highways, highway safety and mass transit for the
next 6 years and serves as the basis of federal surface transportation programs.
Island Wide
Transportation Study
(IWTS)
The name of this study. The name reflects that the analysis considers the entire
transportation system of the Island.
Level of Service
(LOS)
A method for evaluating the quality of service on the transportation system.
Level of Service
(LOS) standard
A standard that identifies the maximum level of congestion acceptable to the
community. When traffic causes an intersection to exceed the standard, then
changes must be made to bring the intersection back below the standard.
mitigation The specific improvements made to a roadway or intersection to bring a deficient
facility back or below the minimum standard.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Study
Appendix - Glossary
A-4
mobility A transportation system user characteristic referring to the ability of the user to
take advantage of the available transportation service.
mode A particular form of travel (e.g., walking, traveling by automobile, traveling by bus
or traveling by train).
multimodal Concerning or involving more than one transportation mode.
network 1. In planning, a computerized system of links and nodes that describes a
transportation system. 2. In highway engineering, the configuration of roadway
that constitutes the total system. 3. In transit operations, a system of transit lines
or routes, usually designed for coordinated operation.
non-motorized Generally referring to bicycle, pedestrian and other modes of transportation not
involving a motor vehicle.
operating costs The sum of all recurring costs (e.g., labor, fuel) that can be associated with the
operation and maintenance of the system during the period under consideration.
origin-destination
study
A study of the origins and destinations of the trips of vehicles or travelers. It may
also include trip purposes and frequencies.
parking utilitization A meaurement the degree of use of the available parking. A high utilitization
percentage means that few space are available.
park-and-ride An access mode to transit and other HOV modes in which patrons drive private
automobiles or - ride bicycles to a transit station, stop, or carpool/vanpool waiting
area and park the vehicle in the area provided for that purpose (park - and-ride
lots, park-and-pool lots, commuter parking lots, bicycle rack or locker).
peak period The period of the day during which the maximum amount of travel occurs. It may
be specified as the morning (a.m.) or afternoon or evening (p.m.) peak. Usually
from 6:00-9:00 a.m. or 3:30-6:30 p.m.
peak hour The single hour of the day which the maximum amount of travel occurs. Usually
defined by identifying the highest of four consecutive 15 minute traffic counts
along primary roadways.
person-trip Trip made by a person from one location to another whether as a driver,
passenger or pedestrian.
programmed
improvements
Projects found in the Transportation Improvement Program. See Transportation
Improvement Program.
PSRC Puget Sound Regional Council, the MPO for the central Puget Sound region
comprised of King, Kitsap, Pierce and Snohomish counties.
public transportation Transportation service by bus, rail, paratransit, van, airplane or ship, offered by
an operator on a regular basis to the general public.
reassessment
strategy
A strategy adopted by the City to identify the actions the City it does not have the
money to complete its schedule list of transportation projects.
refuge lane A protected lane in the center of a road that allows people or vehicles to cross
half-way before completing their crossing or turning movement.
ridematching A process by which people who are interested in carpooling or vanpooling are
linked with others based on origin and destination of their commutes.
roadway section A roadway section is a cross-section of a roadway which displays, travel lanes,
turning lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks, and medians with their respective
dimensions. Each classification of roadway has a corresponding
roadwaysection.
roadway standards The standards set by the City for the construction of roadway and related
improvements.
single-occupant
vehicle (SOV)
A motor vehicle occupied by the driver only.
City of Bainbridge Island – Island Wide Transportation Study
Appendix - Glossary
A-5
steering committee A selected group of citizens that are appointed to participate in the development
and review of a planning document.
street design
guidelines
Standards for the design of a roadway including the width, shoulder area, and
subsurface material. See also roadway standards.
traffic calming A variety of techniques used to reduce the speed or volume of traffic. Often
applied to neighborhood areas.
transportation
analysis zone (TAZ)
A TAZ is a geographically defined area of the City that is used for the
development of the transportation model. For each of the TAZ, land use
information is gathered and then entered into the model.
transportation
demand
The quantity (of transportation) desired by users.
transportation
demand management
(TDM)
The concept of managing or reducing travel demand rather than increasing the
supply of transportation facilities. It may include programs to shift demand from
single-occupant vehicles to other modes such as transit and ridesharing, to shift
demand to off-peak periods, or to eliminate demand for some trips.
transportation
improvement
program (TIP)
A six-year plan of transportation improvements that is used to develop the City's
Capital Improvement Program.
vanpool An organized ridesharing arrangement in which 7 to 15 people travel together on
a regular basis in a van. The van may be publicly owned, company owned,
individually owned, leased, or owned by a third party. Expenses are shared and
there is usually a regular volunteer driver. See also carpool.
vehicle trip Trips made by vehicles, including drivers and passengers. A bus with driver and
passengers is one vehicle trip; one person driving a car with no passengers is
one vehicle trip.
volume-to-capacity
ratio
A measure of potential roadway capacity. The ratio of the amount of vehicular
travel for a roadway(s) in a travel corridor as opposed to the amount of designed
capacity on the roadway(s) in the corridor.
APPENDIX B:
REFERENCES
APPENDIX C:
TRAFFIC DATA
APPENDIX D:
LEVEL OF SERVICE FORECAST INFORMATION
APPENDIX E:
LAND USE FORECAST AND ASSUMPTIONS
APPENDIX F:
SR 305 LEVEL OF SERVICE FORECAST INFORMATION
APPENDIX G:
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT DATA
APPENDIX H:
ROADWAY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX I:
NON-MOTORIZED EXISTING FACILITIES MAPS
APPENDIX J:
NON-MOTORIZED PLANNED FACILITIES MAP
APPENDIX K:
NON-MOTORIZED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS MAPS