HomeMy WebLinkAbout5789RESOLUTION NO. 5789
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
AUBURN, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2024
COMPREHENSIVE SAFETY ACTION PLAN AND
COMMITTING TO VISION ZERO TRANSPORTATION
SAFETY GOALS
WHEREAS, the City has developed a Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP)
that uses crash data, community input, and equity considerations to identify and prioritize
locations with a history of crashes that led to fatalities or serious injuries and locations
with risk factors that indicate a higher probability of crashes that lead to fatalities or serious
injuries (KSIs); and
WHEREAS, the CSAP identifies actions intended to reduce the likelihood of
serious injury and fatality crashes at the priority locations through a safe systems
approach; and
WHEREAS, actions include establishing safety emphasis corridors and a list of
countermeasures intended to potentially reduce the likelihood of serious injury and fatal
crashes; and
WHEREAS, actions also include identification of projects that address vulnerable
roadway users (bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorcyclists), roadways where speed
reductions, curve treatments, and/or street lighting could help potentially reduce serious
injury and fatal crashes; and
WHEREAS, the City of Auburn is committed to a goal to reduce serious injury and
fatal crashes with a vision to eventually have zero roadway serious injuries; and
WHEREAS, the preparation, adoption, and implementation of the CSAP followed
by periodic updates to the CSAP will help the City work towards its goal and vision.
Resolution No. 5789
September 19, 2024
Page 1 of 2
Rev. 04/24
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, RESOLVES as follows:
Section 1. The 2024 Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP) attached as
Exhibit A is hereby adopted.
Section 2. The Mayor or Designee is authorized to prepare and adopt periodic
updates to the CSAP.
Section 3. The City of Auburn's goal is a 30% reduction in fatalities and serious
injuries by 2040, with a vision to eventually have zero roadway fatalities and serious
Injuries.
Section 4. The Mayor or designee is authorized to adjust the goal as needed to
maintain realistic progress towards the vision.
Dated and Signed this 7t" day of October, 2024.
ATTEST:
Shawn Campbell, MMC, City Clerk
Resolution No. 5789
September 19, 2024
Page 2 of 2
CITY OF AUBURN
U;�
N NCY BA S, MAYOR
4OV
ED AS TO F
ason Whalen, City Attorney
Rev. 04/24
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
S
Prepared r.
AuburnCity of
Adopted by Resolution 5789
/1 /22
FEHR,�PEERS
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Table Contents
ExecutiveSummary .......................................................................................................................
AuburnToday........................................................................................................................................................................7
OurApproach........................................................................................................................................................................8
TheFuture: of Auburn.........................................................................................................................................................9
Indexof Key Terms .....................................................................................................................10
Chapter1: Background .................................................................................................. ........ 1
SafeSystem Approach...............................................................................................................................................................1
AuburnToday................................................................................................................................................................................2
Demographics.......................................................................................................................................................................3
Buildon Prior Safety Investments.........................................................................................................................................6
Plans,.. ...... - ............ --.- .... . ............... . ... . ............................. ... -- ...... .................... ............................ ...... . . ..... 6
Projects....................................................................................................................................................................................8
Limitationson Use.............................................................................................................................................................10
Chapter2: Engage .......................................................................................................................11
OnlineEngagement .......... ............................................... -............................... ........................................................................ 11
Safety Specific Survey Questions and Interactive Map.......................................................................................11
Comprehensive Transportation Plan...........................................................................................................................11
Citywide Public Request Tool (See-Click-Fix).........................................................................................................12
Transportation Advisory Board and City Council Presentations.............................................................................12
Chapter: Analyze ......................................................................................................................14
KeyCrash Trends........................................................................................................................................................................14
Safety Priority Index System (SPIS) Analysis....................................................................................................................16
FactorsInfluencing Crash Likelihood.................................................................................................................................18
CrashLikelihood Mapping.....................................................................................................................................................19
Chapter 4. Assessment ................................................................................................................
22
PriorityLocation Assessment................................................................................................................................................22.
Step 1 Preliminary Priority Location Identification...............................................................................................22
Step 2 Preliminary Priority Location Screening......................................................................................................27
Source: Fehr 8t Peers, 2024............................................................................................................................................28
Step 3 Equity and Community Feedback.................................................................................................................28
Resolution 5789 Exhibit
Step 4Project and Countermeasure Identification .............................................................................................. 28
FinalPriority Project Locations .................................... ........................ .............. ....... —.... .............................. 44
Chapter5: Identify ,..^...,`^^.^..,.,,.,,~,^—.~_...~`,.~.,^,.,,,,~~~^....~....^.^~^.^..^^,~,,..^~,...^^^..^^~^^^^~....,~,,,,.46
Proven Safety Countermeasures .................. ................ --_--__—................. .............................. _—....... 46
SafeSystem Action Plan ................. ---........... —'........................ —........ .................... ----...... --- .................. 46
ImplementationStrategies ..................................................................................................................................................... 51
EvaluationStrategies ............ .............. --'........ ................... .................................... .... .......... ........ ...................... 54
Appendix A/Online Engagement Results
Appendix 8: SMS Intersection Analysis
Appendix C: Countermeasure Toolbox
FEAR��l�EERS '
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
List of Figures
Figure 1: Disadvantaged Communities (ETC Explorer)..........................................................................................................5
Figure2: Completed Capital Projects...........................................................................................................................................9
Figure3: Online Engagement......................................................................................................................................:..:`............13
Figure4: Crashes by Mode, by Year...........................................................................................................................................15
Figure6: SPIS Intersections...........................................................................................................................................................17
Figure7: Vehicle Crash Likelihood...............................................................................................................................................20
Figure 8: Vulnerable Road User Crash Likelihood Factors................................................................................................21
Figure 9: Road Segments w/3 or More Crash Likelihood Factors Score.....................................................................
23
Figure10: Top 15 SPIS Intersections..........................................................................................................................................26
Figure11 Safety Emphasis Corridor Focus..............................................................................................................................30
Figure 12: Speed Reduction and Curve Treatrent Locations.........................................................................................39
Figure 13: Reconnecting Vulnerable Road User Locations...............................................................................................42
Figure 14: Final Priority Project Locations...............................................................................................................................45
List of Tables
Table1 Key Crash Trends...............................................................................................................................................................16
Table 2 Factors Influencing Crash Likelihood.........................................................................................................................18
Table 3: Highest Value SPIS Intersections................................................................................................................................24
Table 4 Screened Preliminary Priority Project Locations...................................................................................................27
Table 5: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Auburn Way North.....................................................................................................31
Table 6: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Auburn Way South.....................................................................................................32
Table 7: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Auburn Way South.....................................................................................................33
Table 8: Safety Emphasis Corridor: 15th Street NW/NE.....................................................................................................34
Table 9: Safety Emphasis Corridor: A Street SE.....................................................................................................................35
Table 10: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Harvey Road/M Street NE.....................................................................................36
Table 11: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Lea Hill Road SE........................................................................................................ 37
Table 12: Speed Reduction and Curve Treatment Locations...........................................................................................38
Table 13: Reconnecting Vulnerable Road User Locations.................................................................................................41
Table 14: Citywide Street Lighting Improvements...............................................................................................................44
Table 15 Safe System Action Plan Recommended Strategies.........................................................................................47
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Table16 Safety Funding Sources................................................................................................................................................ 52
Table 17: Target Performance Measures.................................................................................................................................54
Table18: Initial Safety Report Card.............................................................................................................................................55
Table19: SPIS Intersections...........................................................................................................................................................60
FEHR/` PEERS
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Executive
It is the City's goal to significantly reduce or eliminate the number of people getting seriously
hurt or killed while traveling on Auburn's streets, no matter who they are or how they travel.
Auburn's commitment to safety is exemplified by the adoption of a safe system policy in the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan to:
"Significantly reduce or eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries through a safe
systems approach."
The Safe System approach includes a robust arsenal of potential policies and actions that can
be taken by government agencies, as well as other entities, including the private sector, non-
governmental organizations, community groups, and individuals. This Comprehensive Safety
Action Plan ("CSAP") serves as the City's blueprint to meaningfully advance this goal through
prioritized investments in infrastructure, education, emergency services, enforcement, and
culture change.
Who Lives in Auburn?
Auburn is a diverse City. As of 2022 US Census Data, Auburn's population is 44% White, 22%
Hispanic,12% Black, 11% Asian, 3% Islander, and 2% Native. The median age in Auburn is 34.4
years old, with an even split of Auburn's population being 49.4% male and 50.6% female,
What's Happening on our Streets?
Police reports record the circumstances associated with people killed or seriously injured
(KSI) while traveling on our roadways, From the most recent five years of available data (2018
to 2022), on average there were 34 KSI crashes with 7 people killed and 32 people seriously
injured each year'.
What are the top crash types?
- Almost 18% of KSIs were related to distracted driving.
- About 15% of KSIs were under the influence of alcohol or drugs,
- About 24% of KSIs involved a fixed object.
- About 19% of KSIs were related to not granting right of way to other vehicles or non -
motorists.
- About 19% of KSIs involved a turning movement.
ca�.irc;e: Way>hintll:c:an DOT Crash Data, 2018-2022, Av<nage c:rashe:, aver fMel years
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
- Almost 18% of KSIs were related to high speeds.
Where do they occur:
- Nearly 88% of KSI crashes occurred on a Principal or Minor Arterial Roadway.
- Nearly 78% of KSI crashes occurred on a roadway with a speed limit of 35 mph or
higher.
- More than half (59%) of KSI crashes have occurred on just 6% of streets.
What did we hear?
Conversations with City stakeholders and the community provided critical input into the
development of this CSAP, the feedback we heard is:
- Challenges faced in Auburn:
o Sidewalk gaps
o Gaps in bicycling infrastructure
o Limited access to transit
- Greatest transportation safety concerns:
o Speeding
o Distracted driving, walking, or bicycling
o Drivers disregarding traffic signals and signs
1-low were projects prioritized:
To guide future investments, the City developed a
prioritization framework that is both responsive to
historic crash locations and proactive in identifying
areas where crash likelihood may be higher due to
the combination of land use and roadway
characteristics present. The steps taken for this
assessment included:
1. Identification of priority locations selection
using Safety Emphasis Corridors, Safety
Priority Index System (SPIS) Analysis, and
Crash Likelihood Factors
2. Evaluation of each location to determine
what, if any, recently completed, underway,
or planned City or private development
.Im.oB...y wemnu .UU „Ae¢vnlu, Wnxl lPw �yrvo.k
axs. 4Y,ry i,.flnu+{nni.A>tt-,H..,,•Vp.erirM.li+lu.,�xlfunrvii�uleirle*xylnr.,le
,.. (II.M.nry �<.ifnnu�.rs„In< Cf,�.j$N,nrt. vy yllnq
FEHR PEERS
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
projects may include safety countermeasures relevant to the identified safety
concerns
3. Evaluation of disadvantaged communities and community feedback
4, Project and countermeasure identification
Successful implementation of this Plan will include:
Proven Safey Countermeasures Utilize a list of proven safety countermeasures that can be
implemented to make transportation facilities safer by design.
Oversight & Accountability Forming an advisory committee made up of stakeholders to
help maintain sustained focus and success in implementing projects and actions identified
in the CSAP.
Communication Communicate regularly with stakeholders and community members to
build trust and support for the City's safety goals,
Funding Stay up to date on relevant grant opportunities and proactively pursue grant
funding for the most competitive projects as match funding is available.
Identify Target Metrics & Measure Performance Set targets to measure safety outcomes
and investments, track, and report performance.
Phasing & Sequencing Commit to ongoing, long-term investment from the City, with
different areas of focus over different time horizons.
Update the Plan Regularly Update the action plan every other year to assess whether new
direction is needed as conditions within the City and region change.
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
!,ndex
& 1 Terms
CTP Comprehensive Transportation Plan
CRF Crash Reduction Factor
CSAP Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
DUI Driving Under the Influence
FHWA Federal. Highway Administration
HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
KSI Killed or Severe Injury crashes
LRSP Local Roadway Safety Plan
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
PCF Primary Crash Factor
PDO Property Damage Only Crashes
PHB Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
RAISE Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and
Equity program (USDOT)
RRFB Rectangular Rapid -Flashing Beacon
SS4A Safe Streets for All program (USDOT)
TAB Transportation Advisory Board (Auburn)
USDOT US Department of Transportation
WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation
FEN R PEERS
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
(".."."hapter I: Background
It is the City's goal to significantly reduce or eliminate the number of people getting seriously
hurt or killed while traveling on Auburn's streets, no matter who they are or how they travel.
Auburn's commitment to safety is exemplified by the adoption of a safe system policy in the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan, With the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan ("CSAP"),
Auburn affirms its goal to:
"Significantly reduce or eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries through a safe
systems approach."
This Comprehensive Safety Action Plan ("CSAP") serves as a blueprint for Auburn to achieve
the above goal through prioritized investment in infrastructure, education, emergency
services, enforcement, and culture change. The Safe System approach includes a robust
arsenal of potential policies and actions that can be taken by government agencies, as well
as other entities, including the private sector, non -governmental organizations, community
groups, and individuals.
FHWA, WSDOT, and the City of Auburn share the goal to systematically reduce fatal and
serious injury crash potential through the Safe System Approach, which considers safety for
all road users in the planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of
transportation facilities. The Safe System Approach encompasses more than just
government actions, and applies the following principals:
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
• Eliminate deaths and serious injuries:
While no crashes are desirable,
eliminating crashes that result in
fatalities and serious injuries is a priority.
• Support safe road use: Road users
inevitably make mistakes that lead to
crashes, and the transportation system
and vehicles can be designed and
operated to reduce injury outcomes from
those errors. A forgiving system
accommodates reasonable and
predictable human limitations and
behavior (such as diligence, perception,
and attention). Roads developed in this
manner and that serve as "self -enforcing
and self -explaining roads" make it less
likely for human errors to occur, and
Source: F iWA,
._rep\+yUS tNJVRY (S-VN,4(, . .
when the errors do occur, they result in fewer fatal and serious injury crashes.
• Reduce large crash forces: Road users have limits for tolerating crash forces before
death or serious injury occurs. Therefore, it is important within the Safe System Approach
to adopt designs and operational elements that account for and reduce crash speeds and
improve impact angles to be within survivable limits.
• Responsibility is shared: Eliminating fatal and serious injury crashes requires that all
stakeholders (transportation system designers, managers, road users, vehicle
manufacturers, policymakers, etc.) work together. The intention is to identify and address
the elements of road safety over which a given stakeholder has influence.
• Strengthen all parts: All parts of the transportation system are strengthened to reinforce
each other so that if one part fails, the other parts still protect road users. In this way,
redundancy is provided for the elements that make up the Safe System.
• Safety is proactive: Proactive (systemic safety) approaches address context, contributing
factors, and crash types to help reduce the potential or likelihood for fatal and serious
injury crashes.
As of 2024, Auburn is home to 88,950 people. It is primarily located in southern King County,
although a portion of the City extends into northern Pierce County. Auburn is connected to
the region by three state routes (SR 167, SR 18 and SR 164) and Auburn Station, located in
Downtown Auburn, which provides local and regional transit service including connections
to Seattle and Tacoma.
Auburn is considered a suburb of Seattle and Tacoma and is the 141" most populous
community in Washington.z Auburn has a walkable downtown that has historically served
rrtt�:�:>://err.wiki�:x:;diva.or<�Iwil<i/Ar.ak:�urn,.....W�aK>hiir�c�tc>rr
FEHR/PEERS
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
several unique, primarily single-family neighborhoods. In recent years, mixed use
development projects have added several multi -family residential and commercial buildings
to downtown, Unique aspects of the City include the Green and White Rivers, which provide
aesthetic and recreational amenities; the industrial West Valley that provides employment
opportunities; and the Muckleshoot Indian Reservation, which is located south and southeast
of Downtown, including the Muckleshoot Casino Resort and White River Amphitheater.
Auburn residents are served by 28 public, private, and charter schools. Auburn is also home
to Green River College.
Demographics
Auburn is a diverse City. As of 2022 US Census Data, Auburn's population is 44% White, 22%
Hispanic,12% Black,11% Asian, 3% Islander, and 2% Native. The median age in Auburn is 34.4
years old, with an even split ofAuburn's population being 49.4% male and 50.6%female.
Equity considerations are an important component of analyzing and improving roadway
safety through the Safe System Approach. Low-income communities and communities of
color have experienced disinvestment and neglect in transportation throughout the history
of the country and are disproportionately impacted by transportation safety issues. The CSAP
seeks to begin redressing these systemic inequities.
In addition, the USDOT Equitable Transportation Community Explorer Tool3 utilizes 2020
census data to explore the burden communities experience because of underinvestment in
transportation. It measures the burden these communities experience in the following ways:
• Transportation Insecurity occurs when people do not have access to regular,
reliable, and safer transportation options, Nationally, there are well -established
policies and programs that aim to address food insecurity and housing insecurity,
but not transportation insecurity.
• Climate and Disaster Risk Burden reflects changes in precipitation, extreme
weather, and heat which pose risks to the transportation system, as do natural
disasters such as flooding and volcanic eruptions. These hazards may affect
system performance, safety, and reliability, As a result, people may have trouble
getting to their homes, schools, stores, and medical appointments.
• Environmental Burden includes variables measuring factors such as pollution,
hazardous facility exposure, water pollution and the built environment, These
environmental burdens can have far-reaching consequences such as health
disparities, negative educational outcomes, and economic hardship.
• Health Vulnerability assesses the increased frequency of health conditions that
may result from exposure to air, noise, and water pollution, as well as lifestyle
factors such as poor walkability, car dependency, and long commute times.
f t:.:>s: c: x teric r7ce.arc i 7.(.,orn�ex�:>uric: ric:c/(D.. 9)e� +a a8OC� 4362b87`78d'779bO9O723 _agge ETC -Ex ,lorcffr
212i.1,-1 estai_t
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
• Social Vulnerability is a measure of socioeconomic indicators that have a direct
impact on quality of life. This set of indicators measure lack of employment,
educational attainment, poverty, housing tenure, access to broadband, and
housing cost burden as well as identifying household characteristics such as age,
disability status and English proficiency.
35% of Auburn residents (approximately 30,000 people) live in these disadvantaged
Census Tracts. These census tracts are shown in Figure 1.
FENRERS
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure.-i: Disadvantaged Communities (13TC.Explorer)
--j
City Boundary
Park
Disadvantaged Communities
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
In recent years, Auburn's efforts to improve safety have been visible through a range of plans
and infrastructure projects. This CSAP builds upon those prior efforts taken to both tackle
safety explicitly and enhance safety through mode shift goals.
Local [tiIoad Safety Plan 2024
Auburn's Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) is a data -driven plan that uses crash trends and
contributing risk factors to identify city street segments and intersections with
characteristics that may lead to a higher risk of crashes, These street segments and
intersections are then narrowed down to a discrete list of projects that the City can prioritize,
which is key for implementing successful crash reduction strategies. This program follows
the methods prescribed in Target Zero; Washington State Strategic Highway Safety Plan,
the statewide safety plan and identifies low-cost, systemic, near -term projects to improve
roadway safety, which could be funded by WSDOT's City Safety Program. In this plan, the City
identified a Project List that includes the following projects:
1. Corridor project: I Street NE (451" Street NE to 37t" Street NE)
2. Corridor project:37th St NE (I Street NE to I Street NW)
3. Intersection projects: Lakeland Hills Way and Oravetz Road Mills Pond Drive and
Lakeland Hills Way
4. Intersection project: 21st Street SE and M Street SE
5. Intersection project: Lakeland Hills Way and 69th Street SE
6. Corridor project: SE 312th Street (SE 312t" Way to 12St" Avenue SE)
7. Citywide project: Streetlighting Improvements along 151" Street NE (Auburn Way N to
W Valley Hwy N), Lake Tapps Parkway (Sumner Tapps to City Limits), Sumner Tapps
Parkway (Lake Tapps Parkway to City Limits), Oravetz Road (Joyce Ct SE to Kersey
Way)
Comprehensive Plan Update 2024
Auburn's Comprehensive Plan is the leading policy document that guides the City's evolution
and growth over a 20-year period. The Comprehensive Plan identifies the desired type,
configuration, and intensity of land uses throughout the City, as well as the character and
capacity of public facilities and services like streets and utilities. Its policies address critical
topics such as housing, the environment, transportation, public safety, and economic
development. The Comprehensive Plan also serves as the basis for the City's adoption of
special purpose plans for the City such as transportation or utilities plans and serves as the
FEHR./PEERS
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
basis for development standards and regulations such as City zoning and critical area
regulations.
Transportation Elernent and Systern Plan
The 2024 Comprehensive Plan includes several elements, one of which is the Transportation
Element. The Transportation Element is a summary document that provides an overview of
the City's Comprehensive Transportation Plan or CTP. The CTP is also referred to as the
Transportation System Plan and was updated in 2024 with the 2024 Comprehensive Plan
Update.
The CTP establishes Auburn's Safety Goal to significantly reduce or eliminate traffic fatalities
and serious injuries through a Safe System Approach. This goal is supported by the below
policies, which are also included in the CTP:
TR3-1-1. The City shall apply the Safe System Approach for pursuing its
transportation safety goal through the different elements associated with the
safety of the City's transportation system which the City has the ability to influence
including: roadways, roadway users, speeds, vehicles, and post -crash care.
TR3-1-2, The City will study, plan, and implement safety improvements prioritized
based on the occurrence of fatal and serious injury crashes and/or the presence of
systemic characteristics indicative of serious or fatal crash likelihood.
TR3-1-3. The City will seek internal and external funding to both implement safety
strategies and on -going maintenance improvements.
The goal and policies are supported by the below actions:
• Implement, maintain, and regularly update the Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) and
Comprehensive Safety Action Plan (CSAP).
• Document the actions taken to improve transportation safety and corresponding
performance metrics identified in the LRSP and CSAP,
• Establish a program and funding in the Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP) for safety data collection, study, planning, and implementation of safety
improvements.
• Identify, evaluate, and pursue grant funding and other outside funding sources for
safety programs and improvements.
Auburn Transponation h-nprovernent Prograrn
The TIP is a 6-year plan for transportation improvements that supports the City of Auburn's
current and future growth. The TIP and the CTP serve as source documents for the City of
Auburn Capital Facilities Plan which is a Comprehensive Plan element required by
Washington's Growth Management Act. The program may be revised at anytime by a
majority of the City Council following a public hearing,
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Some key TIP projects and programs currently in the 2025-2030 TIP include the following4:
Roadway Projects:
• Neighborhood Traffic Safety Program
• East Valley Highway Widening
• R Street SE Widening from 22nd Street SE to 33rd Street SE
• M Street NE Widening from Main Street to 4th Street NE
• Auburn Way South Improvements from Hemlock Street SE to Poplar Street SE
Non -motorized and Transit Projects:
• Active transportation - safety, ADA, and repair program
• Active transportation - mode shift program
• Downtown Bike to Transit
• Regional Growth Center Pedestrian Improvements
Intersection, Signal, and ITS Projects:
• Downtown Infrastructure Improvement Project
• R Street SE/21st Street SE Roundabout
• Lea Hill Road/104th Avenue SE Roundabout
• SE 304th Street/116th Avenue SE Roundabout
Capital transportation infrastructure projects related to Safety that were completed from
2014-2024 are illustrated in Figure 2, 60 projects are shown in the map, with additional
projects are shown in the City's online web mapping applications.
httra l/auburn maps arcais corn/apps/dashboards/088kicfcl aeo748cle94f8a7964c�))36aa6
I�tt.ps: ar.aburn.rrra�a.arc is.corrr a as MaxaScrins1inc�ex.rrirr,I�a �i��=a91c:06ef9e72136aka3r>1c602F7...e34
de
FEHR/"PEERS
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure 2: Completed Capital.Projects
�.j
City Boundary
Pa rk
MCompleted Transportation Capital Infrastructure Projects
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Under 23 U.S. Code § 409 and 23 U.S. Code § 148, although they are subject to records
requests, safety data, reports, surveys, schedules, lists compiled or collected for the purpose
of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of potential crash 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.
The analysis and recommendations in this report are based upon limited information. Before
using any of its information for design or construction, more detailed analysis and data
collection, such as field survey, is needed.
The scope of this work, including study locations, time frame, and topics, was determined in
collaboration with the City of Auburn. It is possible that some locations or issues were not
addressed in this report, and nothing should be inferred by their omission.
FEHR PEERS '10
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Conversations with Auburn staff, stakeholders, and the community provided essential input
to the development of the CSAP, including the following:
• Safety Specific On-line Survey Questions and Interactive Map
• Online Engagement for the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP)
• Comments Received through See -Click -Fix
• Presentations and discussion with the Auburn's Transportation Advisory Board
• Presentations and discussion with the Auburn City Council
In total, 351 public comments related to safety concerns were received through the following
engagement tools over the last five years (2019 to 2024). Figure 3 illustrates the locations of
the concerns received during this time frame.
Safety Specific Survey Questionsand Interactive Ma
Auburn distributed an online survey to gather the community's input on transportation
safety. Survey questions and a map were given to residents to provide feedback on both
general challenges and specific locations. Both the map and survey were available online
from February 23, 2024, to June 6, 2024. Appendix A includes the summary of the responses,
Overall, 33 responses were received, Respondents shared their priorities for roadway safety,
including:
Challenges faced in Auburn:
o Lack of Sidewalks
o Lack of bicycling infrastructure
o Limited access to transit
- Greatest transportation safety concerns:
o Speeding
o Distracted driving, walking, or bicycling
o Drivers disregarding traffic signals and signs.
As part of the CTP, Auburn conducted an online survey to gather the community's input on
proposed bicycle facilities, sidewalk gaps, and the proposed bicycle network. The survey was
promoted through specific in -person outreach efforts to reach target demographics, posters,
and flyers. Overall,18 responses were received which identified the following priorities:
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
• Sidewalks desired on:
o K Street NE
o 32nd Street SE
o 33rd Street SE
o M Street SE
o SE 316th Street
o Lea Hill Road
• Multiuse path desired next to Kersey Way SE
• Protected bike lanes
• Continuous sidewalks and bicycle network
Citywide lip Request Tool (See -Click -Fix)
Auburn's public request tool for collecting community feedback (See -Click -Fix) was analyzed
to extract data from 2019-2024 to understand traffic and safety issues in the community to
supplement the data collection from the online engagement tool. Auburn received 300
safety -related concerns during this period. Appendix A includes a summary. Community
members' input related to transportation safety touched on the following themes:
• Adding or upgrading stop control measures
• Adding pedestrian crossings
Addressing unsafe driver behavior including speeding and careless driving
Increasing bicycle infrastructure
• Increasing pedestrian infrastructure
PresentationsTransportation Advisory Board and City Counc
Updates during the CSAP development were provided to the TAB and City Council in May
2024, and July 2024. These meetings provided an opportunity for appointed and elected
officials to learn about and discuss the current state of transportation safety in Auburn and
provided input on the policies and plan goals to accomplish the City's goals.
FEHR'EERS i'
Figure 3: Online.Enyagetnent
--I
City Boundary
Park
* Safety Specific Interactive Map Comments
* Comments f roin CTP
0 Citywide Public Commenting Tool
Resolution 6789 Exhibit A
'13
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Chapter I Analyze
The CSAP's development was informed by data, including crash records, as well as input
from City staff and the public, Crash records on roadways in Auburn from 2018 to 2022 are the
primary resource for the CSAP. The data -driven process and the following section describes
this process in the CSAP:
Examination of Crash Trends: Review of crash statistics to evaluate when, where, and why
crashes occur and who is involved.
Development of Safety Emphasis Corridors: Identification of roadways where most KSIs
are concentrated for targeted intervention,
Development of Factors Influencing Crash Likelihood: Identification of factors related to
the most prevalent crash types and contexts.
n
To better understand road safety performance in Auburn, crash data was analyzed from
2018-2022 (the most recent five years of data) on all City streets, as shown in Figure 4 and
Figure 5 Over that period, on average each year, there were 34 KSI crashes with 7 people
killed and 32 people sustained serious injuries while traveling on roadways in the City 6, The
effect of the COVID-19 pandemic may also be present in the most recent years of crash data
in 2020 and 2021, when the City experienced reduced travel overall and the related benefit of
fewer crashes.
Sc>r.arce: Washairigt.on I.DOT Cr<a; h Data, 2018.202.2, Avcarage cr:asher� s (aver five years
FEHR/°PEERS .I4
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure 4: Crashes by Made, by Year
1400 , ..
_ 50
45
1200 ,., ...,
40
1000 ..,. , . _.
35
"
a,
800 . , _. ..
_ _ 3a
u w
"
25
600
20
400 .... ,. _.
._ a.>
10
200 .....,.,.
5
a._..._. „
a
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Year
Vehicle Bicycle —Pedestrian--Motorcycle
Figure 5: Fatalities and Serious Injury Crashes by Mode by Year
50
45
40
35
U
0 30
25
20
> 15
m 10
5 ._
ru
cu
o�
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Year
Vehicle Bicycle —o Pedestrian mawpMotorcycle —TotalKS[s
'€ 5
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Several patterns appear in Auburn's crash history over the five-year period from 2018-2022,
indicating trends in the movements, modes, locations, and time periods associated with KSIs
on Auburn's roadways. Table 1 indicates some key trends emerging.
Table 1 Key Crash Trends
Vehicles were involved in 95% of crashes and 58% of KSIs.
Pedestrians were involved in 3% of crashes and 23% of KSIs.
Mode -Based Trends
Bicyclists were involved in 1% of crashes and 5% of KSIs.
Motorcyclists were involved in 2% of crashes and 15%KSIs.
Almost 18% of KSIs were related to Speeding.
About 19%.of KSIs were related to not granting right of way to other vehicles or
Circumstance -Based ,non -motorists.
Trends
Almost 18% of KSIs were related to Distracted Driving,
About 15%`of KSIs were under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
.About 24% of KSIs involved a Fixed Object,
Movement -Based Almost 18% of KSIs involved a movement going straight and hitting a
Trends pedestrian.
About 19% of KSIs involved a left- or right -turning movement.
Over 48% of reported KSIs occurred when it was Dark outside (between the
Time -Based Trends hours of 7pm-4am); 44% with Streetlights On, 4% without Streetlights.
Most KSIs occurred Thursdays (17%), Fridays (19%), and Sundays (18%).
Nearly 88% of all KSIs occurred on a Principal or Minor Arterial Roadway.
Nearly 78% of KSIs occurred on a roadway with a speed limit of 35mph or
higher,
Location -Based
Trends Nearly 48% of KSIs occurred not at an intersection and not related to an
intersection (as defined 'byJunction Relationship).
About 62% of KSIs occurred in a location with No traffic control type, whereas
38% occurred at a Signal, Stop Sign, or other.
Source: WSDOT Crash Data 2018-2022; Fehr & Peers, 2024
The City collects and reviews crash data to identify intersection and roadway locations where
potential hazards exist. Potential safety problems are identified using the Safety Priority
Index System (SPIS) methodology, an effective problem identification tool for evaluating
locations with higher crash histories, The SPIS score for a location considers five years of data
and considers frequency, crash rate, and severity. SPIS information for all intersection
analyzed is included in Appendix B. All SPIS intersections are shown in Figure 6.
FEHRf PEERS 16
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure 6: SPIS Intersections
j__j City Boundary High -Tier SPIS Intersections
Park
Disadvantaged Communities
SPIS Value
Low -Tier SPIS Intersections
Medium -Tier SPIS Intersections
'17
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
To reduce the likelihood of future crashes, it is helpful to understand the potential factors
influencing crash occurrence and severity. To identify those factors, a review of five years of
crash data (2018-2022), land use, and roadway data was conducted to assess contributing
factors and discern trends; see Table 2 Factors Influencing Crash Likelihood. These were then
organized into potential factors influencing the occurrence of KSIs or bicycle and pedestrian
crashes. The City's street network was then analyzed to identify locations with the most
factors present.
Table 2 Factors Influencing Crash Likelihood
.Posted speed limit on Arterials
This factor looks at arterials where the
Posted Speed
.greater than or equal to 35
posted speed is 35 MPH or higher. The
Limit on Arterials
All
mph accounts for 74% of KSI
City's street network dataset classified
than or
Greater t
crashes but is only 19% of the
arterials as minor or principal. This
equal to mph
City street network.
factor includes both types of arterials.
Road locations without a street light
present within 150 feet, which include
roadways without street lighting or
roadways with sporadic or widely
In locations that do not have
spaced lighting at more than 300 feet
Streetlight
streetlights within 150-feet, 47%
apart, are considered a'factor for all
All
Spacing
of total KSI crashes and 60% of
KSI crashes and pedestrian KSI
pedestrian KSI crashes occur.
crashes. This factor looks at crashes
that occur in areas not covered by
streetlights as coded by the WSDOT
crash data and Auburn Streetlight
database.
Commercial land use makes up
14% of the City's total land area,
Location on streets within a
Commercial Land
All
:yet 42% of KSI crashes occur on
'commercial land use area is
Use
roadways adjacent to this land
considered a factor for KSI crashes.
use.
Corridors where 85th percentile.
This factor is determined by the
Speedpresence
speeds exceeded the posted
of posted speeds to speed
Differential over Vehicle
speed limit by 10 mph or more,
studies completed by the City in the
l0 mph
accounted for 19% of KSIs.
last five years. A difference of over
lOmph was selected for this analysis.
FEHR PEERS 18
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
The presence of horizontal curves is
Average KSI crashes per mile of
I considered a factor for KSI crashes.
.roadway with horizontal
Horizontal curves are defined by the
Horizontal Curves ,Vehicle
curvature is more than double
City as curves with horizontal
.the average KSI crashes per
curvature that may require warning
mile throughout the city.
signage or other lane departure
prevention improvements.
Where the City bike route
This factor accounts for bicyclists
facility does not meet bicycle
riding on a bike network route that
Facility Does Not
LTS standards, 28% of total
does not meet level of traffic stress
Meet Bicycle LTS Bike
bicycle crashes occurred. On
(LTS) standard or a bicyclist riding on a
Standard
streets without a bicycle facility
non -bike network route that does not
or not identified as a bicycle
have bike lanes or a separated bike
route 65% of crashes and 89%
path'.
of bicycle KSIs occurred.
This factor accounts for pedestrians
walking along an Arterial or Collector
Sidewalks
Where sidewalks are missing
f roadway, defined by the Citys street
missing on one or
on one or both sides of Arterial
network dataset, where there is a
both sides on Pedestrian
or Collector streets,16% of
'sidewalk missing on one or both sides
Arterials or
pedestrian crashes and 28% of
of the roadway, This data analysis uses
Collectors
pedestrian KSIs occur.
the City's missing sidewalk data to
make that determination.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024
Utilizing the factors identified above, streets were evaluated forth e presence of each factor.
Roadways were then symbolized based on the number of factors present in a given segment.
A higher number corresponds to a higher likelihood of a crash. See Figure 7 for Crash
Likelihood Factors (Posted Speed, Streetlight Spacing, Commercial Land Use, Speed
Differential, Horizontal Curves) and see Figure 8 for Vulnerable Road User Factors (Posted
Speed, Streetlight Spacing, Commercial Land Use, Facility does not Meet Standard, Sidewalk
missing on one or both side of Arterial or Collector).
� N(:)'k.e t:r'ii:at the C.11:y s C.iraft 2024. C„OY'r11:)r(:'I"ieTl>IVC' 1"rari�:spc:)rl:cxtic:)n PIF:#Y'1 e`,s1:i:)I:)il;>i le`.:> t'.I"1f:? C,i'l:y'`i bike r(A,l'l:.e:?
network and the I..,.Tri st.andi:)rds'I"or thos(:) ro1.11:.3 s.
'f 9
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure 7: Vehicle Crash Likelihood
�-
j__j City Boundary Vehicle Crash Likelihood Factors
Park
3
4
saw— 5
FEHRPEERS 20
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure 8: Vulnerable Road User Crash Likelihood Factors
.—j
j__, City Boundary Vulnerable Road User Crash Likelihood Factors
Pa rk 1 -2
3
4
5
21
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
The following section identifies preliminary priority locations, screens and evaluates the
locations to establish priority locations, and establishes approaches to address safety
concerns at each priority location. The steps taken for this assessment are as follows:
1. Preliminary priority location identification using SPIS Intersection Scores and Crash
Likelihood Factors.
2. Screening of preliminary priority locations to determine which locations have recently
completed, underway, or planned safety countermeasures.
3. Evaluation of remaining priority locations related to disadvantaged communities and
community feedback,
4. Establish approach to address priority locations including countermeasure
identification.
7
one of the central objectives of the CSAP is to develop projects and programs to address
priority safety locations. Prioritizing locations helps the City to focus its resources and better
align with the prerequisites of several grant programs the City may pursue. Improvements
that address priority locations complement past, current, and planned City and private
development projects by adding systemic and site specific improvements that address crash
trends and crash likelihood factors identified in the CSAP. The following steps were taken to
prioritize locations:
To guide its investments, the City will focus on advancing its safety priorities based on criteria
that account for both crash history (responsive) and crash potential (proactive) measured
through the presence of crash likelihood factors, which are categorized into Vehicle and
Vulnerable Road Users.
Street Segments
Street segments were analyzed separately for Vehicles and Vulnerable Road Users,
Preliminary priority locations were identified on roadway segments with the presence of
either 3 or more Vehicle or 3 or more Vulnerable Road Users crash likelihood factors present.
These roadway segments were included as preliminary priority locations due to their
potential greater need for safety improvements.
FEHRPEERS 22
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure c): Road SegMents w/3 or, More Crash I.Jkelihood Factors Score
City Boundary
Pa rk
awmam Vulnerable Road User Crash Likelihood Factors 3 and over
mm- Vehicle Crash Likelihood Factors 3 and over
2 3
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Vehicle Crash Likelihood Factors:
• Arterials with Speed Limit 35+
• Commercial Land Use
• Roadways sections without streetlighting within 300 feet
• Speed Differential over 10mph
• Horizontal Curves
Vulnerable Road User Crash Likelihood Factors:
• Arterials with Speed Limit 35+
• Commercial Land Use
• Roadways sections without streetlighting within 300 feet
• Facility Does Not Meet Bicycle LTS Standard
• Sidewalks missing on one or both sides on Arterials or Collectors
Intersections
The SPIS analysis was used to identify intersections as preliminary priority locations. The 15
intersections with the highest SPIS values were selected due to their potential greater need
for safety improvements and are listed below in Table 3 and all high scoring SPIS
intersections are shown in Figure 10:
Table 3: Highest Value SPIS Intersections
1
S 277TH ST & AUBURN WAY N
74
45,990
0
24
50
94.85
RIVERWALK DR SE &AUBURN WAY
2
S
33
31,585
1
15
16
86.90
3
..... ..
WEST VALLEY HWY N & 15TH ST NW
i 27
20,550
1
13
11
81.77
4
HARVEY RD NE &15TH ST NE
51
34,150
0
19
30
81.35
DOGWOOD ST SE &AUBURN WAY
5
S
29
28,069
1
i 12
16
81.28
6
SR167-NORTHRAMP &15THSTNW';18
26,890
!2
5
10
79.77
7
R ST SE & 21ST ST SE
47
29,244
0
16
.30
75.96
WEST VALLEY HWY S & PEASLEY
8
CANYON RD S
28
30,763
1
8
19
74.95
WEST VALLEY HWY S & SR 18-EAST
9
RAMP
S8
22,672
0
11
47
71.48
10
AUBURN WAYS &6THSTSE
38
34,940
0
13
25
69.09
11
SE 312TH ST & 124TH AVE SE
32
18,335
0
14
17
68.59
fs Within %a distaar)(:e of'100 f,)et frorY'i 1:he inteIrse(:td(:)n
9 SPIS i Vclll.l(:' is ric;t.c r'rriir�(: <f key adding l:he (:;r<a >I� Pr'E cfi.ac>ri(::y, r'at(?, arid sev@?rily iridicI al::(:)r'values t:o(�<?ther.
FEHR PEERS 24
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
12
A ST SE & 3RD ST SE
.42
30,310
0
'12 29
68.57
13
AUBURN WAY N & 8TH ST NE
:35
28,070
0
!13 21
:68.02
14
A ST SE & 41ST ST SE
50
39,093
0
10 37
67,42
15
MSTSE&AUBURN WAYS
30
41,631
0
15 14
67.1
Source:
WSDOT Crash Data 2018-2022 City of Auburn Volume Data 2018-2022;
Fehr & Peers, 2024
25
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure 1 o: Top 1.5 SMS Intersections
�-j
City Boundary
Park
SP IS Value
M High -Tier SPIS Intersections
FEHRPEERS 26
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Step 2 Preliminary Priority Location Screening
Each preliminary priority location was evaluated to determine if the City would identify a
priority project to address the location. In this consideration, the City evaluated each location
to determine what, if any, recently completed, underway, or planned City or private
development projects may include safety countermeasures relevant to the identified safety
concerns or risks. The City also evaluated if the location was an area that is within the City's
jurisdiction and other relevant factors. Table 4 below lists the preliminary priority locations
that were screened based on these considerations and determined to not move to the next
step in the assessment process.
Table 4 Screened Preliminary Priority Project Locations
R St SE/21st St SE
Intersection Ye
Sr 167-South Ramp at No
15th St SW
SR 167-North Ramp & 15th `, No
St NW
West Valley Hwy/SR 18 No
East Ramp
Yes
CStSW: SR18to
Ellingson Rd
S 277th St: Auburn Way N Yes
to City Limits
Yes
SE 304th St: SE 306th St
to 132nd Ave
Riverwalk Drive SE:
Howard Road to Auburn Yes
Way S
R St SE/21st St SE Roundabout Project is currently underway.
Existing non -motorized facilities are provided by a separated
trail along the west side of the roadway. The east side of the
roadway is along the BNSF Railway railyard where no access
is allowed. No additional applicable countermeasures were
identified,
A project was completed that widened S 277th from the
intersection of Auburn Way North to L Street NE, including
the construction of a separated multi -use trail, street
lighting, and other countermeasures.
The Lea Hill Safe Routes to School Project, Citywide
Uncontrolled Crossing Improvements Project, and various
'other development projects are completing sidewalk gaps
and improving crossings on Lea Hill in the vicinity of
Hazelwood Elementary School, Lea Hill Elementary School
.and Rainier Middle School.
.The Riverwalk Drive Non -Motorized Improvements project
installed sidewalks, street lighting and other safety
countermeasures.
27
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Various City projects are complete or underway that are
installing multiple safety countermeasures. These projects
R Street:17th Street SE to
Yes
include the R Street Widening and R Street preservation
White River Bridge
projects,
Additionally, the Citywide guard Rail Project was completed,
The Garden Avenue Improvements Project and the Lea Hill
104th Ave SE and Lea Hill
Roundabout Project are constructing improvements that
;Yes
Rd SE
include safety countermeasures on 104t" Ave SE near Lea Hill
Road.
Lake Tapps Parkway near
No pedestrian access is intended or provided directly across
Bridge of East Valley Yes
the bridge, Instead, access is provided adjacent to the bridge
Highway
via a tunnel underneath the railroad to a trail connection.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024
Step 3 Equity and Community Feedback
Equity considerations are an important component of the Safe System Approach. Low-
income communities and communities of color may be disproportionately impacted by
transportation safety issues, Additionally, conversations with stakeholders, and the
community provided essential input to the development of the CSAP. This step evaluated
priority locations based on presence in the Disadvantaged Community layer identified in
Chapter 1 and presence of Community feedback identified in Chapter 2.
Step 4 Project and Countermeasure Identification
The City's prioritization framework provides a rigorous yet flexible approach to advancing
corridor and intersection safety projects across the city. Based on the framework of this
assessment, the following top priority safety project themes emerged to identify project
intersections and corridors which are identified below (final locations shown in Figure 14):
• Safety Emphasis Corridor Focus
• Speed Reduction and Curve Treatment
• Reconnecting Vulnerable Road Users: Filling in Auburn's Sidewalk and LTS Gaps
• Citywide Street Lighting Improvements
Safety Emphasis Corridor Focus
Safety Emphasis Corridors were identified to show where there is a history of KSIs, the
highest number of Crash Likelihood Factors, or the most SPIS intersections. In Auburn 59%
of KSIs have occurred on these Safety Emphasis Corridors. Figure 11 shows the Safety
Emphasis Corridors, Tables 5 through 11 provide suggested countermeasures for the Safety
Emphasis Corridors in Auburn. It's important to note that not all countermeasures are
intended to be implemented and not all may be appropriate for each situation present on
FEHR PEERS 28
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
the corridors. The countermeasures are potential options that would be considered as safety
improvement projects and programs are developed,
29
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure.1.1 Scifety Emphasis Corridor Focus
�-
j__j City Boundary
Pa rk
Safety Emphasis Corridors
Disadvantaged Communities
FEHR/'PEERS 30
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Table 5: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Auburn Way North
Total Crashes
:551 Total Crashes
KSI Crashes
26 KSI
KSI Involvement
14 Vehicle KSI 3 Bicycle KSI 9 Pedestrian KSI
35%vehicle going straight hits pedestrian
19%fixed object
KSI Type
12/o entering at angle
12%vehicle going straight hits bicyclist
19% under the influence
KSI Circumstance
19%distracted driving
15% involved speeding
KSI Location
58% not at an intersection
Percent of Corridor w/3 or
More Vehicle Crash
70% of the Corridor
Likelihood Factors Present
% of Corridor w/3 or More
VRU Crash Likelihood
6% of the Corridor
Factors Present
S 277TH ST & AUBURN WAY N
Top 15 SPIS Intersection
HARVEY RD NEr& 15TH ST NE
AUBURN WAY N & 8TH ST NE
Disadvantaged Community
98% of the Corridor
Community Feedback'
8 Comments
Fixed object/pole removal or relocation
Identify desired pedestrian and bicycle crossing locations not at
.signals or beacons and install enhanced pedestrian crossings (high -
intensity activated crosswalk beacon (HAWK) or pedestrian signal)
- Consider left turn channelization enhancement at intersections when
,possible
Add Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) at existing signalized
Recommended Safety
intersections
Countermeasures
- Lane narrowing
- Evaluate signals for coordinated timing, protected left -turn phasing
,and timing at existing signalized intersections
- Prioritize pedestrian movements at signalized intersections
- Access management with U-turns and driveway consolidation
Widening sidewalks and/or creating buffers or barriers
- Encourage safer driver behavior through camera speed enforcement,
DUI emphasis patrols/campaigns and/or education
Source: City of Auburn and Fehr &
Peers, 2024
31
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Table 6: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Auburn Way South
KSI Type 32%vehicle going straight hits pedestrian
14/o fixed object
_._
23% vehicle not granting right of way
KSI Circumstance 18% under the influence
9% speeding
KSI Location 59% not at an Intersection
Percent of Corridor w/3
or More Vehicle Crash 6% of the Corridor
Likelihood Factors
Present
% of Corridor w/3 or
More VRU Crash
Likelihood Factors
Present
Top 15 SPIS Intersection
15% of the Corridor
RIVERWALK DR SE & AUBURN WAYS
DOGWOOD ST SE & AUBURN WAY S
AUBURN WAY S & 6TH ST SE
M STSE&AUBURN WAYS
.
Disadvantaged
100% of the Corridor
Community
Community Feedback
12 Comments
- Fixed object/pole removal or relocation
- Add Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) at existing signalized intersections
- Convert existing enhanced pedestrian crossings to a high -intensity
activated crosswalk beacon (HAWK)
- Consider left turn channelization enhancement at intersections when
possible
Recommended Safety
- Lane narrowing
Countermeasures
- Evaluate signals for coordinated timing, protected left —turn phasing and
timing at existing signalized intersections
Prioritize pedestrian movements at signalized intersections
- Access management with U-turns and driveway consolidation
- Widening sidewalks and/or creating buffers or barriers
- Encourage safer driver behavior through camera speed enforcement, DUI
emphasis patrols/campaigns and/or education.
Source: City of Auburn and Fehr & Peers, 2024
FEHRPEERS 32
Resolution 5789 Exhlbit A
Table 7: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Auburn Way South
Total Crashes
KSI Crashes
KSI Involvement
KSI Type
KSI Circumstance
KSI Location
Percent of Corridor w/3
or More Vehicle Crash
Likelihood Factors
Present
% of Corridor w/3 or More
VRU Crash Likelihood
Factors Present
Top 15 SPIS Intersection
Disadvantaged
Community
0% of the Corridor
92% of the Corridor
n/a
45% of the Corridor
Community Feedback 1 Comments
- Fixed object/pole removal or relocation
Identify desired pedestrian crossing locations and install enhanced
pedestrian crossings (high -intensity activated crosswalk beacon (HAWK)
or pedestrian signal)
- Lane narrowing
Recommended Safety Add Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) at existing signalized intersections
Countermeasures Increase lighting focused at intersections and desired crossing locations
- Evaluate signals for coordinated timing, protected left -turn phasing, and
no right on red at existing signalized intersections
Install pedestrian and bicycle facilities following City and WSDOT
standards
Encourage safer driver behavior through camera speed enforcement,
DUI emphasis patrols/campaigns and/or education.
Source: City of Auburn and Fehr & Peers, 2024
33
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Table 8: Safety Emphasis Corridor: 15th Street NW/NE
Total Crashes
141 Total Crashes
KSI Crashes
12 KSI
KSI Involvement
9 Vehicle KSI 1 Bicycle KSI 2 Pedestrian KSI
.33%turning movement
KSI Type
25% entering at angle
__..
8% fixed object
.33% involved speeding
KSI Circumstance
17% involved vehicle not granting right of way
KSI Location
83%were located at an intersection or driveway
...........__ ............................ .
Percent of Corridor w/3
or More Vehicle Crash
25% of the Corridor
Likelihood Factors
Present
% of Corridor w/3 or
More VRU Crash
65% of the Corridor
Likelihood Factors
Present
WEST VALLEY HWY N & 15TH ST NW
Top 15 SPIS Intersection
HARVEY RD NE & 15TH ST NE
ISR167-NORTH RAMP &15TH ST NW
Disadvantaged
100% of the Corridor
Community
Community Feedback
`1 Comments
- Fixed object/pole removal or relocation
- Consider left turn channelization enhancement at intersections when
possible
- Construct new and continuous sidewalks through the corridor to
.eliminate gaps.
- Lane narrowing
Widening sidewalks and/or creating buffers or barriers.
Recommended Safety
- Evaluate signals for coordinated timing, protected left -turn phasing and
Countermeasures timing at existing signalized intersections
- Prioritize pedestrian movements at signalized intersections
Access management with U-turns and driveway consolidation
- Add Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) at existing signalized intersections
- Complete street lighting gaps.
- Encourage safer driver behavior through camera speed enforcement,
speed emphasis patrols/campaigns and/or education.
Source; City of Auburn and Fehr & Peers, 2024
FEHR PEERS 3d
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
5 Pedestrian KSI
.__ ........ I . .
39%turning movement
KSI Type 18%vehicle going straight hits pedestrian
14% rear end
KSI Circumstance 39%vehicle not granting right of way
18% speeding
KSI Location 55% at an intersection or driveway
Percent of Corridor w/3
or More Vehicle Crash
Likelihood Factors :3% of the Corridor
Present
% of Corridor w/3 or More
VRU Crash Likelihood 71% of the Corridor
Factors Present
Top 15 SPIS Intersection A ST SE & 3RD ST SE
A ST SE & 41ST ST SE
Disadvantaged 100% of the Corridor
Community
Community Feedback 12 Comments
Fixed object/pole removal or relocation.
- Consider left turn channelization enhancement at intersections when
possible
- Construct new and continuous sidewalks through the corridor to
`eliminate gaps.
i- Install new traffic signals.
- Lane narrowing
Widening sidewalks and/or creating buffers or barriers.
Recommended Safety - Evaluate signals for coordinated timing, protected left -turn phasing and
Countermeasures .timing at existing signalized intersections.
Prioritize pedestrian movements at signalized intersections.
- Access management with U-turns and driveway consolidation.
-Add Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) at existing signalized
intersections.
Complete street lighting gaps.
- Improve Neighborhood Greenway offset from A Street for bicycle
facilities.
Encourage safer driver behavior through camera speed enforcement,
speed emphasis patrols/campaigns and/or education.
Source: City of Auburn and Fehr & Peers, 2024
35
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Table 10: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Harvey Road/M Street NE
Total Crashes
282 Total Crashes
KSI Crashes
!8 KSI
KSl involvement
7 Vehicle KSI 1 Pedestrian KSI
2 object
KSI Type
o%fixed
,13/o entering at angle
_ ....... _ _ ...... . .....
25% improper turning
KSI Circumstance
25% under the influence
25% speeding
KSI Location
75%at an intersection
Percent of Corridor w/3
or More Vehicle Crash
46% of the Corridor
LikelihoodFactors
Present
% of Corridor w/3 or More
VRU Crash Likelihood
13% of the Corridor
Factors Present
possible
- Construct new and continuous sidewalks through the corridor to
,eliminate gaps.
- Install new traffic signal,
Lane narrowing
Recommended Safety - Widening sidewalks and/or creating buffers or barriers.
- Evaluate signals for coordinated timing, protected left -turn phasing and
Countermeasures timing at existing signalized intersections.
Prioritize pedestrian movements at signalized intersections,
- Access management with U-turns and driveway consolidation.
Add Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) at existing signalized
intersections.
- Complete street lighting gaps.
Encourage safer driver behavior through camera speed enforcement,
DUI emphasis patrols/campaigns and/or education.
Source: City of Auburn and Fehr & Peers, 2024
FEHR PEERS 36
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Table 11: Safety Emphasis Corridor: Lea Hill Road SE
Total Crashes
288 Total Crashes
KSI Crashes
9 KSI
KSI Involvement
6 Vehicle KSI 3 Pedestrian KSI
...........
33%vehicle going straight or turning hits pedestrian
KSI Type
.22% entering at angle
11% fixed object
ll% improper turning
KSI Circumstance
22% did not grant right of way
22% speeding
KSI Location
55% at an intersection
Percent of Corridor w/3
or More Vehicle Crash 4% of the Corridor
Likelihood Factors
Present
% of Corridor w/3 or More
VRU Crash Likelihood ' 38% of the Corridor
Factors Present
Top 15 SPIS Intersection SE 312TH ST & 124TH AVE SE
Disadvantaged 42% of the Corridor
Community
Community Feedback .9 Comments
- Fixed object/pole removal or relocation.
- Construct new and continuous sidewalks, trails, or bicycle facilities
through the corridor to eliminate gaps.
Install roundabouts.
- Evaluate signals for coordinated timing, protected left -turn phasing and
Recommended Safety timing at existing signalized intersections.
Countermeasures Prioritize pedestrian movements at signalized intersections.
- Access management with U-turns and driveway consolidation.
- Add Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPI) at existing signalized
intersections,
- Complete street lighting gaps.
Encourage safer driver behavior through camera speed enforcement,
speed emphasis patrols/campaigns and/or education.
Source: City of Auburn and Fehr & Peers, 2024
37
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Speed Reduction and Curve Treottnent
The final priority locations selected for Speed Reduction and Curve Treatment are shown in
Table 12 and Figure 12:
Table 12: Speed Reduction and Curve Treatment Locations
S 331st Street/Mountain View Dr:
SIst Ave S to W Valley Highway S
Peasley Canyon Rd S: W Valley
Highway S to City Limit
.No 0%
.W Valley Hwy
3 :and Peasley 0% No
'Canyon Rd
FEHRPEERS 38
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure 12: Speed. Reduction and Curve TreatmentLocations
�-j
City Boundary
Pa rk
Disadvantaged Communities
121',OAM Speed Reduction and Curve Treatment Segments
33
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Recommended countermeasures for these locations could include, but not limited to:
Speed indicator signs
Suggested .
Reduce posted speed limit
Countermeasures10 0
Median treatment
Raised intersections and raised pedestrian crossings
•
Chicanes and narrowed intersections
•
Right turn on red restrictions
•
Protected turns
•
New traffic signals
Roundabouts, mini roundabouts, traffic circles
s
Lighting
•
Refuge island and medians
Curb bulbs to reduce crossing distances
•
Lane narrowing
•
High friction surface treatment
•
Redesign intersection approaches to improve sight distances and
improve intersection visibility on approaches
Road diet
Left -turn channelization
Install tubular (candlesticks) delineators
Removal/relocation of fixed objects
Install/revise curvature warning signage
Source: City of Auburn and Fehr & Peers, 2024
MolQi', t:l@?t:i:af) <aru:3 additional In Appendix R
FEHRPEERS 40
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Peconnecting Vulnerable Road U;ser'.s, 1"illing in /1c.rburn's Sidewalk and D'S Gaps
The final priority locations selected for Reconnecting Vulnerable Road Users are shown in
Table 13 and Figure 13.
Table 13: Reconnecting Vulnerable Road User Locations
SE 312th Street at 124th Avenue SE
3
Lakeland Hills Way SE at Lake Tapps
3
Pkwy SE
West Valley Hwy N at 37th St NW
3
15th Street SW: Interurban Trail to C
3
Street SW
132nd Avenue SE: SE 304th Street to SE
3
288th Street
37th Street NE/NW: I Street NE to West
!3
Valley Highway N
No
100%
Yes
No
100%
...... _ ...
:No
No
0%
Yes
No
100%
Yes
W Valley Highway N: 37th Street NW to 3 West Valley Hwy
W Main Street N & 15th St NW
West Valley Hwy
W Valley Highway N: SR18 to City Limits:3 S & Peasley
Canyon Rd S
I Street: 451" Street NE to 37t" Street NE i3 :No
........ _._.............
Lake Tapps Parkway: Lakeland Hills 3 No
Way to City Limits
Sumner Tapps Parkway: Lake Tapps
3
No
Parkway to City Limits
............
SE 320t" St:112t" Ave SE to SE 3191" PI
3
No
Ron Crockett Dr: 15th St NW to 37t" St
3
No
NW
112t" Ave SE: SE 304t" St to City Limits
3
No
124t" Ave SE: SE 3041" St to City Limits
3
No
124t" Ave SE: SE 320t" St to SE 312t" St
3
SE 312th St &
124th Ave SE
Lea Hill Rd: SE 312t" Way to 132"d Ave SE
i3
No
104t" Ave SE: SE 320t" St to SE 304t" St
3
No
100% Yes
100% No
100% No
0% Yes
0% !Yes
0%
Yes
100%
Yes
25%
Yes
0%
Yes
0%
Yes
0%
Yes
0%
No
Kersey Way: White River Bridge to 50t" 3 No 0% Yes
St SE
Source: Fehr& Peers, 2024
41
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
FigtWe 13: Reconnecting VulnerableRoad User Locations
,- -
I__,1
City Boundary OMM Reconnecting Vulnerable Road User Segments
Pa rl( Reconnecting Vulnerable Road User Intersections
Disadvantaged Communities
FEHRPEERS 42
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Recommended countermeasures for these locations could include, but not limited to;
Reduce posted speed limit
Suggested .
Median treatment
Countermeasures" •
Consolidate driveways
Speed cushions, raised crosswalks, and speed tables
Chicanes and narrowed intersections
•
Install delineators/flex posts
•
Right turn on red restrictions
•
Protected turns
Left -turn restrictions
Leading bike interval
Leading pedestrian interval
Additional pedestrian crossing time
Enhanced pedestrian crossings
•
Signal timing changes
•
Bicycle signals
New and/or widened sidewalks
•
ADA curb ramps
Roundabouts
Bike lanes and buffered bike lanes
Bicycle boulevards on low volume streets
Separate shared -use or bicycle path
•
Bike box
•
Lighting
•
Refuge island and medians
Shorten crossing distance including curb extension construction
•
Lane narrowing
•
Redesign intersection approaches to improve sight distances and
improve intersection visibility on approaches
•
Road diet
Source: City of Auburn and Fehr & Peers, 2024
" More: dcat.<:iil and a
. (jdIr.1om..fl Counterrn(::n sure<s in Ar:)pendix B
43
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Otywide Street Lighting Improvements:
Streetlights help bring visual awareness to users of the roadway and can help reduce the
incidence of crashes at specific locations. Setting street lighting guidelines can help provide
illuminance lighting values for different street classifications, Minimum lighting levels should
rise with street functional classification. Higher lighting levels are recommended at
intersections and mid -block pedestrian crossings, and sometimes to supplement pedestrian
scale lighting if it is determined that overhead lighting is inadequate.
Specific locations were identified in Table 14 and the 2024 Local Road Safety Plan and have
additional crash likelihood factors associated with them and/or KSIs12:
Table 14: Citywide Street Lighting Improvements
West Valley Hwy N
& 15th St NW
15th Street NE (Auburn Way N to W
3
SR 167 North Ramp °
100% No
Valley Hwy N)
&15th St NW
Harvey Rd NE &
15th St NE
Oravetz Road (Joyce Ct SE to Kersey `3
No 0% Yes
Way)
Lake Tapps Parkway (Sumner Tapps '3
No 0% Yes
to City Limits)
Sumner Tapps Parkway (Lake Tapps 3
No 0% No
Parkway to City Limits)
Source: Fehr& Peers, 2024
Figure 14 shows the final priority project locations identified from steps 1 though 4.
Additional engineering study is needed prior to permitting, design, and construction phases
of any of the projects listed in this plan.
12 These locF:a't:Ions i;aa'<? not limited to these k:)ulletI)pintsAll I(:)(:i;at:l(:)f'a!i IY1 t".Ll(' City are <:al:)pIC.;a) f?. T'a3ri Is
pulled frOrY'1 the 2024 Local Road Safety Plan,
FEHR PEERS 44.
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Figure 14: Finai.Prior•i.tX/ Project Locations
_j City Boundary US= Reconnecting Vulnerable Road User Segments
Park Reconnecting Vulnerable Road User Intersections
Safety Emphasis Corridors Speed Reduction and Curve Treatment Segments
Disadvantaged Communities Street Lighting
45
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Chapter 5: Identify
This section presents safety countermeasures covering the Safe System elements that
address the crash trends identified through the crash analysis process. This section also
builds upon the work that Auburn has already done to prioritize safer roadway design
through efforts such as project implementation, grant applications, maintenance activities,
and adoption of planning documents that identify priorities and future projects. The focus on
the Safe System Approach, along with the emphasis on equity, helps to provide alignment
with the CSAP's vision and goals, and sets Auburn up for success in recognition of emerging
safety best practices.
F
Engineering countermeasures are physical, infrastructure -based improvements that can be
made to roadways to make them safer by design. Engineering countermeasures help
address the Safe Roads and Safe Speeds elements of the Safe System Approach.
A toolbox of engineering
What, You See in its Toolbox
countermeasures is included in
Appendix B, Many of these
6UUkTt..Y.... "
countermeasures can help
Rumble Strips
address the crash likelihood'''
7utr tenerx sav e
t?]wite+Te7eus'JtYLCsvi
-(,
factors and crash trends"
included in the Analyze Chapter
R,MNOstrips create ,alseondvlf�uon Insidethe— 1.
cxtvnt�eermeasr
of this plan. Most of the
vehM)e that aterto drhw as they crass the centerw .,,.
edger+IoftenthAoler2Is9trong0 aa��trgetthB �
countermeasures have been
- oInd ofoa7stracied asdrpaysy
R�1`x`yma�rea"rrec"'�ateer�sa°"°a`ei
theraadxaysare{ytFumhtestrdµsaisaaiertdrlvcreia'.
ddraG,4vlta cast
""°
"
Lhs lone J7rnl�ivi+an cwtdlUanesach
aerahy fio�snow,
identified by FHWA as "Proven
ordIreduaa&her°s&Oy
Safety Countermeasures" and
cost: $
can be advantageous for use in
"
Craash'Typer iSll
Highway Safety Improvement
e °^
CRR 19%
Program (HSIP) grant fundingrt��itlni�,,t�n
iNa4s2 Rf aiM:.attnx46lueV.d SNi�4tN5R'h1NYwxA'95Nt%e}!btifeA`ttxrtaz7 R9:JG
applications. There are also many
effective safety countermeasures beyond those listed in FHWA, and several are included in
this toolbox.
To supplement the CTP, Auburn has listed CSAP strategies to advance its safety goals and
institutionalize safe system practices in its policies, programs, and operations. The safety
action plan is organized into six core elements, including five aligned with the Safe System
F HR PEERS 46
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Approach — safe users, safe roadways, safe vehicles, safe speeds, and post -crash care — and
one additional category capturing planning and culture in Table 1S. For every action
anticipated responsible party, timeline, and cost is identified:
• Near -term actions are priorities within 1-3 years as staff resources allow;
• Mid-term actions are priorities within the following 4-7 years as staff resources allow;
and
• Long-term actions are priorities beyond 7 years as staff resources allow,
• Several actions are identified as Ongoing, indicating that they are actions already
underway in the City and anticipated to continue through continued investment.
• $ is low-cost and low staff resources;
$$ is medium cost at medium level of staff resources; and
• $$$ is the highest cost to implement and the highest level of staff resources.
Table 15 Safe System Action Plan Recommended Strategies
monitoring process to evaluate progress of safety
public
performance indicators. Publicly share annual
Works
$ Near
!updates regarding implementation progress and
Leadership
performance indicators.
and
Commitment
Safe System training: Develop and implement an
.ongoing Safe System training program as
Public
appropriate, focused on management and key staff
Works
$ Near
in City departments whose work touches
, HR
transportation.
Safety website: Expand the City's existing project
Planning
website into a program website to inform the
Public
and
;public about Auburn's safety program goals and
Works
$ Near
Culture
progress and the effectiveness of implemented
Meaningful
safety projects.
Engagement
Materials in Title 6 Languages: Provide
Public
community engagement materials about traffic
Works
Mid
safety in-Auburn's Title 6 residents whose first
Office of
language'is not English.
Equity
Auburn See -Click -Fix (SCF) System: Review the
Data and
'Auburn SCF process for reporting concerns to
public
On -
Analysis
ensure effective tracking of requests for safety
Works
$ going
interventions. Establish a data -driven approach for
evaluating the reports/requests.
WA
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Innovative data: Explore opportunities to better
.leverage the City's existing data platforms, and
Public
:research innovative data collection and analysis
$$$ Long
Works
approaches, such as crowdsourcing or video
detection data.
:Data dashboard: Create and maintain a data
Public
:dashboard and update schedule to provide regular
Near
works
progress updates on Safety implementation.
:Project evaluation framework: Develop a project
evaluation framework that prioritizes funding
Public
.based on KSI crash reduction opportunities,
:$$ Mid
Works
especially for under-resourced and underserved
:populations.
Grant funding: Proactively pursue grant funding to
Public .On -
Funding
implement projects from the Plan.
Works going
'Safety in transportation projects: Institutionalize
safety considerations in all project types to
:systematically implement safety improvements.
'Public On -
Develop and update the City's Transportation
Works going
Improvement Program (TIP) to enhance safety
benefits as funding allows,
Safety impact assessment: Develop a process to
Public
Works
Development
conduct safety impact assessments of new land
Community .$$ Long
Review
use developments to identify required or
Developmen
recommended safety improvements.
Underserved communities in plans and projects:
Set goa Is based on project needs related to safety
improvements for populations that have been
Public
Mid
traditionally under-resourced and underserved.
Works
;Incorporate into project planning, design,
'implementation, and assessment.
Community engagement: Continue to engage
Public
Underserved
traditionally under-resourced and underserved
Works
communities
'communities in safety projects and programs by
'Mid
Office of
:establishing a process of community engagement
Equity
for Safety projects.
:Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) Feedback:
Use the Transportation Advisory Board to help
PuOn-
,advise on safety project development and build
:$
Worksblic :going
relationships and trust with community leaders in
,under-resourced and underserved communities.
FEHR/�PEERS 48
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Improving road user behavior campaign: Focused
outreach campaign and educational programs on
Public
the behaviors and target audiences most linked to
Works
On -
fatalities and serious injuries, including improper
Administrati
$$
turning, obeying traffic signs and signals, and high
on
going
speeds. Leverage partnerships with community -
based organizations and advocacy groups.
'Motorcycle outreach and education: Facilitate
outreach and educational opportunities for
public
motorcycle riders and similar road users to
Works
encourage safe and informed riding. Collaborate
police
Safe Users Education
with external partners to support a diversion
program.
SRTS Program: Continue to implement safe
walking and biking curriculum to elementary
Public
On -
schools and implement safe walking and bicycling
Works
$
curriculum to middle school students throughout
Parks
going
Auburn.
Youth leadership:, Develop targeted engagement
for middle and high school students and families in
public
traffic safety, with a focus on empowering youth
Works
$$ Mid
leadership to promote safe transportation in their
school communities.
Educational Messaging at Safety Emphasis
Corridors: Provide clear safety education
public
'messaging and public awareness along the Safety
Works
$ Mid
Emphasis Corridors to increase awareness among
travelers,
Bicycle network: Build LTS transportation facilities
that provide high -quality, low -stress connections
public
Crash
for people bicycling to key destinations, including
Works
$$$ On -
Avoidance
schools, libraries, and community centers,
going
supporting an age -friendly environment.
Pedestrian network: Build sidewalk facilities that
public
Safe
provide high -quality connections for people
Works
$$$ On -
Roadways
walking to key destinations,
going
Priority safety projects: Review roadway design
Public
On -
standards to integrate with the Safe System
Works
$ going
Roadway Design Hierarchy.
Intersection design: Evaluate intersection design
and control decisions in the planning or scoping
public
On
!Speed
Reduction
stage of projects for opportunities to better
Works
$$$ ;going
prioritize using design and control strategies that
separate users in time and space.
Signal timing: Adopt signal timing policies that
Public
$$ Mid
prioritize pedestrian safety.
Works
9
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
:Maintenance: Prioritize routine maintenance of
Public
On-
.infrastructure on Safety Emphasis Corridors,
Works
going
Quick builds: Systematically apply low cost safety
countermeasures Citywide, including through
Public
$$ 'Mid
adoption of policies to streamline and expedite
Works
project delivery,
Crosswalk policy: Develop a citywide crosswalk
Public
!$ Mid
practice to enhance safety of pedestrian crossings.
Works
Design Standards and standard details: Update
Design and
City design standards and standard details to -
'Public
include best practices in speed management, LTS
Near
Works
Operations
standards (e.g., roadway geometries are designed
for context -appropriate speeds).
Photo Enforcement: Continue school zone photo
Police
enforcement and expand photo enforcement into
Public On -
more school zones and into non -school zones as
going
Works
allowed by state law and authorized by city council.
Safe
Speed feedback signs: Develop and implement a
Police
Speeds
program to install rotating speed feedback sign
Public $$ 'Mid
Jocations and ensure accuracy and maintenance of
Works
Enforcement
signage.
Speed management plan: Develop a speed
management plan with the goal of slowing vehicle
speeds on the Safety Emphasis Corridors using
tools such as speed limit reductions, traffic signal
Public
'Mid
re -timing, installing traffic calming devices, and re-
Works
purposing travel lanes. The plan will include
complementary tools like education and outreach
and high visibility enforcement to slow speeds.
�Vehicle Safety: Coordinate with other local,
regional and state agencies to advocate for vehicle
Public
Coordination
safety enhancements as well as technologies used
k'Mid
Works
Safe
in private automobile industry.
Vehicles
Emerging Trends: Review, update, and maintain
Policies and
local ordinances regarding the appropriate use of
Public $ Mid
Programs
emerging micromobility technologies such as e-
Works
scooters and e-bikes.
Crash reporting: Employ crash reporting practices
Post Crash Crash
that promote complete and accurate data
Police Long
Care Investigation
collection and documentation of road user
behavior and infrastructure.
FEHR/`PEERS 50
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
:Data sharing: Share data across agencies and
organizations, including first responders and
hospitals, to develop a holistic understanding of the
safety landscape and improve data accuracy to
reduce the likelihood of crash underreporting.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024
All $$ Long
Implementation is a critical step in the CSAP process. Considerations for successful
implementation include:
Oversight & Accountability- Forming an advisory committee force made up of stakeholders
(such as Public Works and representatives from Police, Fire, Schools) and community
members helps maintain sustained focus and success in implementing projects and actions
identified in the CSAP. Such a committee would meet regularlyto discuss delivery of
projects, status of action items, and provide general support to advancing CSAP
implementation.
Coordination &Partnerships - Providing regular updates on action plan progress and
coordinating with agency partners (see Responsible Parties column in Table 15) helps create
sustained support, creates opportunities to bundle safety projects or initiatives with other
related ongoing efforts, and facilitates CSAP implementation.
Communication - Continued communication with stakeholders and community members
in collaboration with the TAB builds trust and support for the City's safety goals. These can be
completed through strategies such as communication across diverse channels, publication
of factsheets on action plan progress, and regular public conversation on the topic of safety.
Phasing & Sequencing -To see meaningful progress in road safety performance, sustained
commitment and investment is needed.
Near -term implementation efforts may focus on successful completion of ongoing
safety efforts and lower -cost improvements that can be constructed within three
years.
Mid-term implementation goals may target larger and more comprehensive safety
infrastructure projects and more complex programmatic efforts that require
extensive cross -department collaboration.
Long-term implementation goals may focus on initiating significant shifts in the
City's approach to planning and design to formalize the institutionalization of the Safe
System Approach.
51
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Funding - Funding can be a major hurdle to CSAP implementation. Staying up to date on
relevant grant opportunities and proactively pursuing grant funding for the most
competitive projects can aid in overcoming funding hurdles. Auburn can take advantage of a
variety of regional, state, and federal funding sources to finance safety project planning,
design, and construction. Funding (including required matches) and resources must be
available from the City to provide a successful grant application. See Table 16 for potential
safety funding resources to consider.
Table 16 Safety Funding Sources
Federal Sources
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program is a flexible
Community Development
program that provides communities with resources to address a wide
Block Grant (CDBG) Program
range of unique community development needs. Communities often
use CDBG funds to construct and repair streets and sidewalks.
.The Safe Streets & Roads for All (SS4A) grant program is a new Federal
,grant program established by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
Safe Streets and Roads for All
:centered around the USDOT's National Roadway Safety Strategy and its
(SS4A) Grant Program
goal of zero deaths and serious injuries on America's roadways. It will
provide $5 billion in grant funding over 5 years to implement safety
projects.
The Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity;
Rebuilding American
(RAISE) program supports surface transportation infrastructure projects
Infrastructure with
that will improve safety; environmental sustainability, quality of life,
Sustainability and Equity
mobility and community connectivity, economic competitiveness and
(RAISE)
opportunity including tourism, state of good repair,, partnership and
collaboration, and innovation.
State Sources
The Urban Sidewalk Program (USP), ran by Transportation
Urban Sidewalk Program
Improvement Board, is for counties with urban unincorporated areas
(USP)
and cities with a population greater than 5,000 and funds sidewalk
projects.
The Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program (ATIIP),
(funded by FHWA, will award planning and design grants and
Active Transportation
construction grants for eligible applicants to develop plans for active
Infrastructure Investment
transportation networks and spines. A goal of both types of ATIIP grants
Program (ATIIP)
is to integrate active transportation facilities with transit services, where
available, to improve access to public transportation.
Financed by the TIB, the Urban Arterial Program (UAP) funds projects in
Urban Arterial Program, (UAP)
one of the following bands: Safety, Commercial Growth and
Development, Mobility, and Physical Condition. `
FEHRPEERS 52
neoo|utiomo78oExhibit A
|Financed bythe T|B.the Active Transportation Program (AJP) provides
Active Transportation
|funding tnimprove pedestrian and cyclist safety, enhanced pedestrian
Program (ATP)
|and cyclist mobility and connectivity, orimprove the condition of
:existing
Complete Streets Program
Financed by the TIB, the Complete Streets Program is a funding
(CSP)
cities and counties that have an adopted complete
streets ordinance.
WSIDOT offers funding to improve the transportation system to
.enhance safety and mobility for people who choose to walk or bike, The
Pedestrian and Bicycle
purpose of the program is to eliminate pedestrian and bicyclist fatal
and serious injury traffic crashes, increase the availability of connected
Program
peclestrian and bicycle facilities that provide low traffic stress and serve
.all ages and abilities, and increase the number of people that choose to
walk and bike for transportation,
The purpose of the Safe Routes to Schools Program (SRTS) offered by
Safe Routes to School
MSIDOT is to improve safety and mobilityfor children by enabling and
encouraging them to walk and bicycle to school. Funding from this
Program (SRTS)
program isfor projectswithin two -miles of primary, middle, and high
:The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) focuses on
Highway Safety
:infrastructure projects with nationally recognized crash reduction
Improvement Program
factors (CRFs). Local HSIP projects must be identified on the basis of
(HSI P)
:crash experience, crash potential, crash rate, or other data -supported
Local and Regional Sources
Auburn has an adopted transportation impact fee (TIF) program to
Transportation Impact Fees
facilitate transportation and promote economic well-being within the
(OR
!City. TlFfunds can bespent onprojects identified inthe T|Frate study,
iwhich was derived from the Cit/sprevious CTP.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024
53
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Ongoing safety program evaluation provides an indication of progress towards goals and can
help inform future decision making about safety investments. Effective program evaluation
includes:
Ujodote the Plan Pegulorly- Update and track the CSAP every other year to assess whether
new direction is needed as conditions within the City and regional change.
lc.�er�lify Target: Metrics ar)(1 Mecxsure Performance - Safety metrics for tracking include the
following identified in Table 17:
Table 17: Target Performance Measures
Reduction in average annual KSi crashes involving vulnerable road users. Every two years'
Reduction in average annual vulnerable road user crashes. Every two years
Reduction in average annual fatalities. Every two years
Reduction in average annual KSI crashes on the Safety Emphasis Corridors. Every two years
Reduction in Intersection SPIS Score for Previously Identified Top 15 SPIS
Every two years
Intersections
The target performance measures will be evaluated and reported with a Safety Report Card
that will be included with action plan updates. The Safety Report Card will high successes
and areas in need of additional attention and resources. The initial Safety Report Card is
shown in Table 18 below and includes the performance metrics for 2018-2022. Safety Report
Cards included in future action plan updates will include a comparison of previous vs current
metrics to evaluate performance measures and progress towards the safety goal. In addition,
future Safety Report Cards will include a comparison of past to present SPIS scores for the
top 15 SPIS scoring intersections.
F'EHR PEERS 54
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Table 18: Initial Safety Report Card
KSI crashes
29
.29
33
32
47
34
KSI crashes involving
vulnerable road users
13
6
10
9
9
9
Vulnerable road user
crashes
:64
43
37
.36
36
43
Fatalities
10
5
6
5
8
7
KSI crashes on the Safety
18
14
22
21
30
21
Emphasis Corridors.
Source: WSDOT Crash Data 2018-2022;
Fehr & Peers, 2024
Stc:rkehold r' 1wngagement - To supplement quantitative measurement of performance
targets, input from diverse partners is valuable in adapting the City's safety priorities as
projects and programs are rolled out and conditions change.
55
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
ApperAm '?� :��
ms- ''a � Results
�u
Auburn distributed anon line survey to gather the community's input on transportation
safety. Survey questions and a map were given to residents to provide feedback on both
general challenges and specific locations. Both the map and survey were available online
from February 23, 2024, to June 6, 2024, Overall, 33 responses were received. Respondents
shared their priorities for roadway safety, including:
Challenges faced in Auburn:
o Lack of Sidewalks
o Lack of bicycling infrastructure
o Limited access to transit
Greatest transportation safety concerns:
o Speeding
o Distracted driving, walking, or bicycling
o Drivers disregarding traffic signals and signs
The below charts show the online mapping results:
Concerns from Online Mapping Exercise
w Walking concerns Biking concerns r, Driving concerns a Transit concerns W of
FEHRPEERS 56
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
1
57
Lack of sidewalks
III
1. 2 3 4
Mow dry you primarily travel around Auburn?
Q 5 10 15 20
Walk/Roll (using a wheelchair/stroller/mobility device etc) 10 Bike M [give otTransit
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Prefer not to disclose
6:3+
43 to 63
22 to 42
Under21
0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
7
4.5
FEHR PEERS 58
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Race
Caucasian Prefer not to
answer
59
Disability?
m Yes m No a
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Appendix ,,#, SPV%� Intersection
Analysis
Table 19: SPIS Intersections
S 277TH ST & AUBURN WAY
1
N
74
45,990
0
24
S0
94.85
RIVERWALK DR SE &
2
AUBURN WAYS
33
31,585
1
15
16
86.90
.....
WEST VALLEY HWY N & 15TH
3
ST NW
_ .
27
20,550
1
13
11
81.77
4
HARVEY RD NE & 15TH ST N E
' 51
34,150
0
19
30
81.35
DOGWOOD ST SE & AUBURN
5
WAY S
29
28,069
1
12
16
81.28
SR 167-N0RTH RAMP & 15TH
6
ST NW
18
26,890
2
5
10
79.77
7
R ST SE & 21ST ST SE
47
29,244
0
16
30
_...
75.96
....
WEST VALLEY HWY S &
8
PEASLEY CANYON RD S
28
30,763
1
.8
19
74.95
WEST VALLEY HWY S & SR 18-
9
EAST RAMP
._.__..
58
22,672
_.._
0
11
47
71.48
10
AUBURN WAYS & 6TH ST SE
_
38
34,940
0
13
25
69.09
_ _ .. ......_
11
SE 312TH ST & 124TH AVE SE
_.._.. ..........
32
18,335
0
14
17
68.59
12
A ST SE & 3 R D ST SE
42
30,310
0
12
29
68.57
.__
13
AUBURN WAY N & 8TH ST NE
35
28,070
0
13
.21
68.02
14
A ST SE & 41 ST ST SE
50
39,093
0
10
; 37
67.42
15
MSTSE&AUBURN WAYS
30
41,631
0
:15
14
67.1
r:s Within a distance of 100 feet from the intFsrsec:tion. This analysis used 8 or more crashes; at an
intersection to be included in the table, The nw-nber of injuries, fatalities, and property darTrage only
crashes will not necessarily equal the number of total crashes.
14 COUnt based on 2022„ 2020, or 2019 TMC Data from the City of ALrk)urn SPIS Data sheets;
Within a distance of 100 feet from the intc rs>ection.
Within is distance of 100 fc:;e?t from the ir"ltersection,
1; Within Fa distance (:)f'100feetfrorT'1 the Inters(:?cdon.
' SPIN V<.3 t.1(:? 1'w c c:)ficar'r-nir'rca(:. :,y adding Ir1g l"".'7f? crash f'r't?C:�t.1(:?rlC:.y, rate, <ar'rd srVe:arl't.y 1r'iCil<:i:at:C,)r Yi:ill.iF`ta t.cag(?t:il('r,
FEHRPEERS 60
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
16
A ST SE & 29TH ST SE
20
27,996
1
6
.13
66.55
17
SE 320TH ST & 104TH PL SE
:19
22,040
1
4
14
65,40
18
15TH ST NE & D ST NE
26
25,000
0
13
12
65.09
AUBURN WAY N & 37TH ST
19
N E
25
25,040
0
13
12
64.90
20
SE 320TH ST & 104TH AVE SE
17
15,930
1
4
12
64.74
21
M ST NE & 8TH ST NE
34
10,029
0
111
22
64.72
AUBURN WAY N &22ND ST
22
N E
33
24,820
0
11
22
64.57
LAKELAND HILLS WAY SE & A
23
ST SE
28
30,742
0
12
16
64.45
24
A ST SE & 6TH ST SE
.. ..... _...
20
29,580
1
5
.14
64,39
LEA HILL RD SE &104TH AVE
25
SE
17
22,921
1
74
12
62.73
AUBURN WAYS&ACADEMY
I
._
26
I DR SE
12
16,754
1
5
5
61.19
27
E MAIN ST & AUBURN WAY N
23
19,220
0
11
12
161.17
...... _. -
28
M ST SE & 12TH ST SE
i19
10,460
0
.12
7
61.09
29
A ST N E & 15TH ST N E
27
16,100
0
10
14
60.60
30
R ST SE & 29TH ST SE
25
18,928
0
10
15
60.40
31
S 277TH ST & FRONTAGE RD
24
30,260
0
10
__.......
14
_.
58.84
GREEN RIVER RD SE & 104TH
... .
32
AVE SE
20
9,859
' 0
10
10
58.50
..
33
I ST NE & HARVEY RD NE
20
5,570
0
10
9
:58.34
34
AUBURN WAYS &12TH STSE
23
26,395
0
9
14
..
58.11 _
35
AUBURN WAYS & 2ND ST SE
:19
25,958
0
11
8
57.43
36
M ST SE & 29TH ST SE
23
12,386
0
8
15
56.67
37
A ST SE & 17TH ST SE
23
30,440
0
9
12
56.06
38
F ST SE & 21ST ST SE
;21
4,790
0
8
13
55.90
39
F ST SE & AUBURN WAYS
20
26,249
0
9
11
55.33
40
M ST SE & E MAIN ST
24
25,272
0
7
15
55.21
41
S 277TH ST & B ST NW
19
10,410
0
8
11
55.09
42
A ST SE & 21ST ST SE
24
29,244
0
7
17
54.75
43
R ST SE & 33RD ST SE
18
17,971
0
8
;10
54.67
61
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
TERRACE VIEW DR SE & EAST
44
VALLEY HWY E
15
17,870
0
9
6
54.30
45
A ST SE & 37TH ST SE
19
30,050
0
10
46
C ST NW & 15TH ST NW
24
31,700
0
7
.17
53.79
47
AUBURN WAYS & 4TH ST SE
.22
23,740
0
6
16
53.29
48
AUBURN WAY N & 4TH ST NE
. ...... . .. I-- ...... ....... - -
.18
7,730
0
7
.53.17
EAST VALLEY HWY E & EAST
49
VALLEY ACCESS RD
.15
17,200
0
8
.6
53,09
50
SE 284TH ST & 124TH AVE SE
�14
8,630
0
8
5
52.66
.INDUSTRY DR SW&ISTH ST
51
SW
:17
19,687
7
10
52.56
52
AUBURN WAY S & 17TH ST SE
9
20,790
1
4
.4
:52.00
53
SE 312TH ST & 116TH AVE SE
.19
19,260
0
6
12
:51.93
LAKELAND HILLS WAY SE &
54
LAKE TAPPS PKWY SE
.17
28,048
0
:9
.8
51.31
55
SE 304TH ST & 124TH AVE SE
. .. . .........
17
......... ....
13,728
. 0
6
.51.24
56
S DIVISION ST & 3RD ST SE
..........
.17
7,570
0
6
57
C ST SW & 15TH ST SW
16
13,630
0
6
10
.50.78
AUBURN WAY N & 17TH ST
58
NE
.13
11,330
0
5
50.65
59
M ST SE & 21ST ST SE
15
10,067
0
6
50.1s
SR 167-SOUTH RAMP& 15TH
60
ST SW
20
24,658
0
.5
15
.50.08
61
R ST NE & 8TH ST NE
.20
19,590
0
4
16
.49.50
62
M ST NW & 15TH ST NW
.10
26,478
1
:3
6
..........
..... -
.49,50
HEMLOCK ST SE & AUBURN
63
WAY S
.13
12,000
0
6
SR 18-WEST & AUBURN WAY
64
S
.23
27,560
0
3
20
48.59
65
A ST NE &14TH ST NW
.14
5,317
0
5
9
48.33
66
DST NE&IOTH STNE
�12
15,220
0
6
.6
47.51
67
D ST SE &AUBURN WAYS
20
27,071
.0
4
16
.47.46
68
SR 18-EAST & AUBURN WAY S
24
34,940
0
3
.21
.46.62
69
SE 288TH ST & 132ND AVE SE
11
8,808
:0
5
S
:46.55
70
W MAIN ST & C ST NW
16
8,000
0
3
FEHREERS 62
Resolution 6789 Exhibit A
AUBURN WAY N & 15TH ST
71
NE
17
34,150
0
7
.10
45.94
W MAIN ST& MOUNTAIN
72
VIEW DR SW
10
13,180
0
'6
4
45.89
73
S 277TH ST & D ST NW
18
29,770
0
5
...........
:13
45.71
74
SE 304TH ST & 112TH AVE SE
16
25,520
0
5
11
45.26
STUCK RIVER DR SE & R ST
75
SE
12
13,080
.0
3
9
44.28
LEA HILL RD SE &112TH AVE
76
SE
8
9,760
0
5
3
43.98
77
AUBURN WAY N & 1ST ST NE
'9
7,084
0
4
5
43.97
78
D ST SE & 37TH ST SE
11
10,720
0
3
8
43.72
AUBURN WAY N & 30TH ST
79
NE
14
23,610
0
5
8
43.47
80
A ST SE & 2N D ST SE
8
22,172
l
0
7
43.12
WEST VALLEY HWY S & SR 18-
81
WEST RAMP
10
8,740
0
3
7
43.11
WEST VALLEY HWY S & 15TH
82
ST SW
18
25,916
0
2
15
42.71
83
A ST N E& LOTH ST N E
.................
8
10,897
0
5
3
42.66
AUBURN WAY N & 45TH ST
_.
84
N E
10
11,550
0
3
5
42.64
85
AUBURN AVE & 2ND ST NE
12
11,460
0
2
9
42.61
86
S 277TH ST & L ST NE
11
15,650
0
4
7
42.57
WEST VALLEY HWY N & 37TH
87
ST NW
11
16,520
0
4
7
41.92
88
1 ST N E& 14TH ST N E
9
10,878
0
3
6
41.79
89
I ST N E& 22N D ST N E
13
21,664
0
4-
9
41.77
90
C ST SW & 8TH ST SW
_..
10 _.
16,266
0
4
6
40.36
..........
91
A ST SE & 7TH ST SE
_ _..
8
9,050
0
2
6
40.28
92
SE 284TH ST & 112TH AVE SE
10
21,480
0
6
4
40.01
AUBURN WAY N & 12TH ST
93
NE
8
14,130
0
4
3
37.87
94
SE 281ST ST & 108TH AVE SE
10
22,900
0
5
5
37.75
LEA HILL RD SE &105TH PL
95
SE
8
5,970
0
0
'8
37.28
63
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
96 :S292NDST&37THSTNW 11 24,550 0 :4 .7 3715
PERIMETER RD SW & ISTH ST
97 SW 8 10,540 :0 :0 8 35.56
AUBURN WAY N & 49TH ST
98 NE 10 21480 0 7 7 -zr- cl
101 S 288TH ST & SSTH AVE S
102 1 ST NW & 37TH ST NW
103 A ST SE & 44TH ST SE
104 M ST SE & 4TH ST SE
105 A ST SE & 12TH ST SE
106 HARVEY RD NE & 10TH ST NE
107 IS 296TH ST & 51 STAVE S
10
.. .........
19,260
0
:2
�7
35.16
13
34,200
0
3
10
34.78
10
29,770
0
5
.34.42
17,326
0
3
5
34,08
12
32,032
0
:3
9
.34.07
24,282
0
4
5
.33.63
12
29,330
0
2
10
.33.63
10
24,950
0
:2
..
.7
32.05
25,164
:0
.
3
. . .... ....
.6
131.70
FEHR/�PEERS 6d
Resolution 5789 Exhibit A
Ani-pendix C: Countermeasure
r
Toolbox
65
L�J
� 9qq
v
sbn
yN
s
Ar;
V1
6®
tllltllllltlll.l
�r
Q
v
�
w
U
5vOao
H O D
ay
:.z O
a ` IQ Uo -C
c
su
aC 3 C aLn
�i
f..
b N o Ou,
o a o
v
y N
O a 0 i �_
uvCb'oa3a`
Q
n
n a 6 u V, ID
4-
w o
o& I�
>
a0
ai c E.0
jai U � C Y � ��
{`I (/�
a8 T
w a a� `o'
40
U U
U
`a
sv
n
h
�
U
11
'>) J.e
{�) O O ' 0
j`a>,1�'v Camts� Ua
( 0 4-1.0 Ci O. O 0 v �. C
U0 t �U
U) (.Q... .. ; O ;;, -o O � v
C. (i) t.) tA '4UJ O O ;� b a t7 O N O O
y'
fU1J tt7 O O ,C 4-1 .0 N 0 Qv)i QCi 01 QCi
` .y
°O' D q k. O q 4.1 � O
Q Q O R
O C U., N
C? UU Q.DU� j= O '
•j o
u)
C3 U v N
44
O -0 O 131 5 C V j `J U qC u
0- U Q) C C V 0 � 4-1
'� 0 0
Ct? O 0)4 0 U *4' v N �`"` Q N Q N® OD
Ck a�� V1 47 Q Lo U U U Cl ® U) QC Q Q
. ........... ......... .....
Qa
C31 L7 C •,� Q)
O i
d ��• C
N M tl1 � C 0) G Z! j. Q i
NLO "Cb. "QU
'Sa, a ba J~Z Nay
C ®
Q, w
� C C IAO ZCC)
a Q) ) C® 0 0W N 0
C mca "C -0
EaJLCCC UQ) -0
:3
U4cx�t7Qv1�J�v�440.4�aacKQ
C
4� q .0 0ca
C
O C O► 0 C
QJ 1 C a)
v OLD O Q -j C U.- i 0� U b
u1 E C '*, Q) C7 w m Q) `tE � F- Q) a C
U CY >C N C Oq 4; N CO to a U C
U U V � ® �' � C •� C � � •� Qbi
OQ CO tt1 m 40 ®0 tt1 W U W co C4 Q U
N)
41 IA
v1 U
v
C C a) 4 O V) •� `O
Qi v C C i C i C
O C E U 0 j a MLn
`O a
vi 'U a 0 rn o 'o ``' a o a c a
v n c a U z c vai a L v N =
ao
v a a u o
m �' 4 p w o o° �,�n o in u
° La- C a° m Cul z a n° a° a °
a +� _' ° a m o u u c o m, °o c
° m u a: c v o U w°
~ a v� v t� v v i a ; v v) a .o.0 c o: U o a r
a acvv o w 44 v— Qom,
c m o o o ,� i o a`, p 4 a° -c
a�a�a"o v a 00-
uZ) Loi >> Z la
a)
C e a
v c = L +
U Q) o °
i= a
�caa v
= Ln Ll
c Ecc
Lco c ° N a U
aaE
tno°4� aUQcc Cnocs a.9 �N '3a p � a �
ao
c�UaWo° s u u aIn o Uc o c ID= _ c 0 +� a
� D +� aai � Q) � a v v v v 'a m i'n a U c '+� v v �
cia} c a C—C`na �" u uQ C: ca°'Cw`'-0
c �� n n v u as a s c c �, w Eb a -0
° °�' °�' in 'vo 0 o a o 0 0. `o C o W ° ° 0 m p .0 'U) avi a, .�
a k k a v 2 2 t L l v s a)o a s a a a a .0 w 'a a v Q, av
Q W W W a Q. a a a a v) ' iA u v) > I Q Q U W U J a Q, a V)� Z
a c c
cm
tn
o Ln
v ` a a m
o a a c o c o
p a C L a �_ i= o ,Q �n Q)w n° v a a c c T
J 0)a _ v
c
° o au a v, (n
o in om C °ate a Qc
o +,
o >, o >, a v v 0) (A w Q a a
41 D
i O m to 0 0 V 41
C
rnu 'n a 0O i= — v a�.vWu
C Q u
° a a) aizz
uaU a a
ul c va)
Q)u c %i o n�
ac Q)ov o�,oaavQ) a
Q Q c =a a 0°ao u 1%
w
1' 'A a., r T T r -r Tr 11 T I r t T r T T T T tss r r
go
V
U
Lo'
S
4
s
4
Lu
U
.�u
in4-
a, o
avb
?
�—
m�
o2
44
o4
n
a•°a
U°
aai v
c a, S
m o
rn `a•' o'
a �
u
"a�
o i V 4S
00�-0
(n L. '' �
2"•a�o'
av�a�
U M;u 0)
:`a
La:Q.
�oa.�
a� �
>,toi�,D
:�•u`^a3
a 'n
ZC=o
avi ° > N �
o0C
o 0) to
v,•44ca°''-
o
N u 4-1avi
U
o c a a
o
Q _ U Q'
U
LL
cra
al
o m;
N U
U
G �
oa
as
as
oa
a CL
Us
c � °
vas'
N
tU
U
GO
LU
CK�I
4-
0
C 0
O � O
U
a C.c•-
4•a�o�'
o4j rn'
Y 4-0Q ,� `•o
U �
0.oa
� 1 E' '
o �a
, 41
�a,aa�aa
aiac��u
U t �_ �` U •a,,
C -0
N O a p C
C U a i
41
v a a u
a0D)��.Cv
N O = C O
C 41�
vuE'y��.c
�b�ccc�ia:c
Qaoa:n°3
0
U
tn
U
Q)
m
Q
U
co
to
�1
r�
fl=
�i
4i
LL
U
c C
0 D 0 b U'C
++ L71 '+, v 3
C C U U C C
U
0
a a C
c 0 y0 > Q i
Q
,Q O b 4-
414
Co (0a ca
u
v
q 0) �; O
� 4-j .4 72
u4DUv3
C O C 1
U in U U V)
a i N > � Q
� 0 4; � Q C'O
tA
O
u
C V 4,
Q
C
'b v
,4
U
ate; o
m
o
r�
p'� �,d
,>
U Q Q
U
coo`
a'
`Q
0 C
4. U
C e Q,O
C
t11
C `
c
Qum-Qu
u
t'
0
cc
° `C
i, c 4- U
4 ° c 'u
4
�v34v
'C
.v
Jo°-C
a;4Q a>
�
ca0vo
�
C
� cac °
m�
0
0
c�' n�'c
D V z -C �
-C U a, ]
U
\
• �
4� c
v 1
U �
0aacc
+'
:0Qmo
e (
v a
= a, a
u
ao
aoaC,+.
U
0
a= U
41
�a�,Zao°:
v-0u
n ai
N
�aaa rno c c
ti . c ca a o
V,
. 44>co>,�o>,�,Q
a�,a,�a��°3�''c
+1
o V V j
Q
c
m
m
o
oa
d�
b
a
4 :n'
Q) oa
\Jio'��
N
.�
° Z E E to i°
D p uC
0
LI)
ua)
Uqa
U�o
aa ° � c'Q,
U
U1 • D
D p pa
0- c c > ='
ai
�a'��•�ua0) a)��
>, >> s o v >
cn
D
Z
Q 4 a0a >.nQ as
U
U
Ct
U
2
LLi
c
0
0
0
4-
0 CL
40—)
0
0
c
rj
4-j
0
c
CY
4-
V) u
6) U,
a�
c
Q)
<rT'.
'rxy
•
A q
me
C
a,
'a c c
vL
a.
Ucoi
u41
C
+(ova
--�tA—C
�`-��U
Ua��
�
.0 -o
.a ,,
0 v
40-
ooQo
C
Q
o U o'
C
•0
0 L.
N O
do
0ul
.r�3�,
�'°
U z))o
oaa'a
oL. 2 cL
i
Sao•`=��•
u°c3-ova
uaaoo_
44
v4.1 �4-1� v
Q
4o
0) o'b .0 v
.0
riEa,rna)
°, z
b a
DONS*' p
o�_o•w�D
CUa-�
00
®
U
L�
U
b
U
m-Q
U '0
d �
4
C)
a)
44
0
i
�a
L
a�
o°0
0_C
O
ut
C
U 44
C
p
�.+ i •�
0aa
ova•• -°ate
'a) 0
v
n 0 -0
o
�a,0o�
n
a
a:c 41;�_�0
>
D
4
D O
.
r1
I . Q)
V 0
`• 7
Nb�
ab
O
0:
> N 1
cr o
U
O v1
41
j � U
a
toy
4 4Q
rno
a '^
LZ
ob ��
'0.tA
b t 2 D
n � a
c o=
u
Zz-
�
a
c
4
0
U
u
2.
UA
C
0
®
— C �,, a O tn tn a) tn O i 0
�
� O V) 4.1 � o °?
Z�
`.�
tA
V
O'yj0U`������'
�0
V7
v a`C,+ O � a � O
i *' •i Q. 0 0-'5 '..
0cuoo Q otre
w O U
O 2 C Q) In I Q O O `+�
,�
c°ov�a'¢U'-A
0 0 O E
,� C to •c C
O
O 0 U r'C+ C 4-1 N
o °'a
a n o
a
0
I
C
V)
0 0
-0
0
0
U
u
Q) c
in
u
L 0
. C
Q) LZ
Lc
0 r_4�
U
ri
I-
_0
"zz
f) Q)
CY
1--, Q)
4- >
Ln
CL
4-1
0
u
C)
U
1 44
U)
cra
M
U
_° oauzL
c �,_ u,c:rn
O u +r b C o0 0-0 b
3 m u L
a,Q)L v: 0(n'41 ccUa
c
Ql>o•L°
� C 'i �`3oao 0:-°
. 6c0 Ua o c^as o as �vNarn
c
c
ab`C C C i Cib N
N+ �u+'p•=i'CaaE
O L.r 0 C 0 F- '' O O
�.� Qc a u° 0 a E
a 3 o-c �'= °ram
L
b o
�_c�,a���,�a,cc��►
r3
c
Q
0,
fx
U
Q
4,4
U
U
U
U
40
+j 'Z
c Q) 4-10 0)
0) CO I-
'o c
E 0
S2 :-, 0 t))
c u
c
6 -t, a)
'o
C: 4-� c
E 0 0 0
0 U
E 4� W
0oj
0 0
X
4-j 0 tj
Z)
41
v)
0 tn
4-j
0- in
-C
0 th -c C
Ln
U C
zz
fA
to
v)
cl,
Lu
li
yr C .4,
i
O j
p
u 0
v
Vrl
p
va
•C .�
U
top
p 5 a� to
n U) > .....
C 0 U
p�►�Gk
VC)
4' n:
O dj O O
.0
Q �
m b a)
t�J tt� ~ .T_
CU ,, v1 (> )
�
(i7
+G
, a s
v
n s n ty
(0 i�(5
0"
V
U
,
�+ (!l
V
�? -0 U)
V
Is
C p 0,o.0
a +j i � -G
i' L- r,, a) O ++ u
aG�G
p v N� U� L1 p Lt VI
0 ooaa�
��G�uc�a�Q'
c0U4-41v0°0u
iGQ,E,�aQ
o'—a,p�G��a,
L •� 4-1 V1 E► ice., �
v_ p G G N +', u1 O
ob.o�- u w G
a o a i Q)
a �G ++ 0
a c a•'� �.c 0.�.
V1 .Q +, G p � p q C3 ,�
p 14 7j a
caab' 'c ��'3u
p G a'� p•� O u a G
L.a ci,� °s �'ov o,
a u av GU 0 Q
O
U
co
t�
C/�
C �
a
_
. c
V)aoa
Cc•-.��
b a�4-1
b
c rru,4 v
aYnoa5o
4-1 QB a
.® .� ui +n O
4-1
O Q D a C C Z3
�+ .Q (A N
.q
41
•�, C (A p C D'u`1 ii
Dba)'� o
V� fi N O O V p
a N Lw. n
a) r
u
r.` V L Q
Ln N J
C c D
#K C a1 O O b 4
f C D
`E
U U 0 C
3vaNi��Da e4�
a
a� o� o C
•=' v '�
O C U � U
4-+ c a .00 p TJ 41 -C
® a�Z,bb0u
4-1 U 0C Dl O ,� ; 0
O O b O
a�i Vi o'n�UO0Q
a a
�•® °o'�v4-1 c'-
o :°� v
a bov= o
Q ® CC�Zfiovs
w +, 41 4�
44
+�oapoc0
4Q� V V 4�
��
jE
f aQ��aa,b
o
Ql
�
V
m
tad
Ll�>
��
O
U
4-1
O
U
0
N
Lu
c�
4
4
/
/
/
/
/
d
«
U4
LM
.44
E
0
(D
Ln
Q)
u I
,Z.4
U -L,)
.—U
U
a)
14
c 4
(A
C
0
u 0,
L- 0
0 4�
00
U 0 to
U f:
a
q) -6
tn
LI) V)
4� -0 4.0
C:
_
0
a) C tA
E
0 Z 0
W Ln
�,. '0
�
u 0
U
0
E
-0
c
r
W
c
4.j (A
Ln r
Q) to
.0
U to
a b w
0 to
tn
2
ol
u
ri Ll c 0-
o
0
o
as
u C
44 U
r3
4� 14 r
a0
IA 74-Z
4, u
0 ai
2 o u
0
u
I
ZZ,
tn
uj
I'M
0 E
U U
u
o
u
44
U
44
EZ i2
,b m
I a
M11,
u o. c�
IQ
25
E 6
co
44%
\
7'j
c 6
1)
44
i,"E
E eo o X.
QLU
oj
10
4�
'21
0 41
-0
0
0
: 01 Lq
o
t on 0 0-
0 4�
cow (n
-0
co
acu
0
o kD 'o x
_0
'n
-C
a)
_0
a)
V) U
u
fw
CC
4 to Ln
u
H
Z)
Z: V)
44 0 C
in
cN
r U
(1) 0
toU E
ucca)OC3
v) tA o 2
0 Q 4-- V- 4- C)
0 :� 0 C
ri C 0
u U U
r 4-a 0 4j
E o
64
r
C
0 u r 0
u c
Ln 00 V)
O'o u 0
5
C w 0 0 V) c 4i
0 U
Q)
E r c - 0
a) N
w 0 C C --a r
44 0 .-a +1 0
dr-, *-;- 0) 1) 1 0- :3
0) U U .� 13 L� t3
C4 Q) -0 'A U
C Lq .!? 14-
Z) 0 2 0
V)
4-1
0 0) E
o
aa�tj
c•0
4� U
tn
.cau 0
0
00)
--u — C
GO —Q
,
-C 0 0 .U —
u
4Q
I
CL
I
L
U
a
C u O
a 4�4,
Ow.
r a o L
o�.•c o
u
_�a,.,c
�
p�, c „� � u
oc
c o
0
�x
�, a
4�UZZ
Q
_ O in in
� ° cc
ccaQ)
o�
�o�>J
®
>
�.
�
- `-
V
F-
aj•°-
O +r 4w
tA
o
i
a)D
4-1
V
U
+O, 'c Q) T3
U
.D1
O 41 -:
'p
Q�
O
+Q O N
L c
to �i Uct
�LZ� �:
cb4,, a
o4° Q 0
0
U
to
U
4n
im
UI
N
O U +'
b � � C
Duo
u aob a)
aCL
� 40 o
0 C v
i
40t7��
>, 0 i
D v •+0+ V b
0 0 0 Q
tq u
b
a
0 -0
O ,� , � t))
0 i O .-
ouo�- 4
lu-
�{y
Lu
0
4
L:z
m
c4l
41
.N
0
U
.0
S o
0 p a,,p
U 4�
w U
0-0
Q)
a4Z
c C
.0 4
-0
o uo 4� Ln
vrn
to
I
Ci
Q)
u
*E3 S"
00
4,1
c�a
L1=:
xaa
r�
a)
4-4�
C ado
�o�ooa�
ob Qz�
u1 4Q.' V rn C V C
O
Lnm �k C
a ' C O
4 a
c `b V 3 V 4
a v a�''u
Qua
44
Q) 1 0) n aoi
_��,�.aUv
16,o
4 *'
a
�< O Ln C
u`a aai o"'c �
v
ac,oQ.'coab ma�•�>.+jw
V
co-Q
U
d
4
o
U
J �3
C
p'o o Q � � � �' a ° °n
a o
a O a D j •,� C 4 o p 'v: 4 �:
4O
a U v.Xm
E4-V)via-c�aO,
u°��" a �OJ Nu
-C O V `'v O O v a p •�
3.a - L u a_ 3. u�
Oa'a°�cnD°�N
Z 4,v .ac
oc cvi o a'" o a u'+�
o , v, C -n
Q(31 aU �1 Q— o
4-1
ba,,cCL
a4�a,oa.0QCL
�o'�a°'�
a --. °'Q c a rn
4--- 0 0 0i� , u -Q 3 VQi Z 0
Q
'
c
b0
ai
M40
do
I.i
wC
Ln
VUO
�
u 0
4-0
.0 4- U
S; (1) 0)
T)
C: rj) 44 _Q
4-j 4-j
C:
Ln
— a
U Ln
F.
U"o`�
v) -
00
Wft
o c
4. T
4-j
4� U 0)
0 L0 ��b
- .-L,) (D
c
0 E P CL
c Dq),
Tj tA INA 0
C Cas
1 V)
.0
S'I
u U -0
III-, l 4j
P M,
4-j 40 ZZ.01
C-
0
0 3
(1) 0
-- 0 C
. ...... ...... .
u
. .................
u
... . ..... ........
o fl.
u o (A
ci
u 0
Q) U
+L 16
a) V)
O c V) ri
tJ Q
'04
c
ti
Q) tn
a P .1,
0
Zi g
4�
_K:
uLn
N u
-6— a)
tn
c (6
o 6i
4Q IA
T.)
(o o
u tA
U
ai
U 0
0
c c c
0�
0
c
4� 0) -0
4-j a,,c
c
au
-o a
7.)
U- C.
L')
2
U
-r
0
lul
0)
N
V)
4-
c .4-
() 4- C
u o 'o 0
z w -W
41 4� L.Z
--0 0
W '0
r- -9) 4'+
44
0 C:
zz 0
U)
o
u 'o
0•N
a-Q
-z:
0
0- u
0
Ln
-C
0
0
><
r3
r
+-j V)
;3 41
4�
0 U
0
Ln
`
0
0 0
Q)OO ntnur-c
+, 4-0 Q) Qju
- aQ) N o
C
N
U
C
0 U
4-1
� 41
0 C
1) 't') Ln
0 C
C_LC -C
cu
r- o
-0 4 C
c u u
C c
u
4'j
0 U
c
0 - C
-Q
a 0 44 -C f3
b
2
u
E
V) 0 -4-jC C
cc
L,
c u
C Z3 N
0 4� 1.0
0
0)
To
�3
E
Al,
u
00
N
C
u 0)
a,
c
(A
U
E "'o r- c
Q)
Zg
0
u 2 'j CL
2
............
0 0
Z: 2 U
u CL
4-
42
0,0 o
0) CL
20 -C E
C:
L� r
u 0
4�
4-1
4� u
u
0
10
41 0 Lrj
u
I
0
u
U
u
uj
Q)
I
ip,
ml
�j
LA
0
u
f:r,
Ti
a;048 UC
0 41
ua�ao��
44
c;U.Q�•� o QU,
cs a av,�,c
a 44 L ' ,
MUOUZ40%OZO
y v 0 O r
4 A a
O4; N C ,a
4t --I C � D
a aoa,4-,L
� -j 'o
a
a==ago`
u 0 4—; E ,
4,1
o
U O i ul a
G
Lo o -0 U
L
L (1) NL' .V
U
J-Z 44
a
a �
b a
aUocva
°;a�,o°a
L
OL
ai
_ N U
au �3
avow._'
N C
O•i
C -I U U -a ;rj
41 wp
a 0 U O
LO
O O
N p
vba,caa.n
ru
n
U
�v
Lu
Q
%41
am,61,
4�
41
0
Q 41
0 +j
u u
V ) . .0 u
(1) -0 ty
c
— 0
4�
:zz cc w
-0 4�
0--Q 4'1-
'o
o
4-- U
4-1
4�
Ua.,0
u Q)
CL Q) E 0
4-j
f4
.4
a
O.L
0
U
fA
Q)
ono
2
—0- -C 4,1
Q) 4j u
Ln 0
u
�
I10
Q)
(u
U
0
0
4+
in Qj
'
o
Q.
w
.'.j
0 -Z: -61
�
-0
0
-0
kn
z
o 0
41
V)
u
0
u
4-
0
c
Q)
u
Qw
0
-
va
Q) a) .2
EEOZc.c
4- Q)
o Q)
0
—
E
orv;L-
u
0
Q)
u
u
U-1
0
u
ln
C:L
2
Y
m
d
�v V)
41,
D 2 (D
(I) z -i5
c E
C
1.) o
cy
t:
U)
V1 b c.:
L CL �
u Q
O c:
) O
U e css
C C m
a
U
C9 a m °' a
.0 .0 as
0) vi N
LL
dry L � � � •V ,C C � � � r�s
'p o 'o N
s V LZ U o 0 Ol J Z3 cii
.44
b a)arno � c
{ N L C C
2 o
NCD
aOv I.L, •:r.
0;... CL L. 4• L.
a
4
_ a)
O Y
Q uEo�
4
.�-jv- o
+o� rr
;#••+ 3 44 o
css
a E C o
BOO o v7
r� U
e✓ I .i Q `Q 0 U
C 41 w a1 0
o 0 C �, o
0
C
O U o N „v
® C ate+ i O
44
p : 0 aej
� ••• O � .� � L ni
ov�041 0 wry
a
uj
•1•+i
48
a
M7
C: J
0) b M >,
U C Q
a j D w iE
v 3 b
0 V)
ut
r'aUV,
ca�Q) tAv� *' u
U�' a� a
LA
� 4 0
v.
o a v o
orn�t
o
v 0 QQU
a '^ : 40
a�a�•�ao�;
E�cEQ)v
0
0'�. 00�
a N p
U'�, O
0
0
U
NI
41
Q)
Iq
t:
C
4-j
c 0
0
U
u
0 io)
o O.0
Q,
rj
rj 0
0 02
Ln
OL-2 an)
Q) 5.
0
Z C3
0
a)
Lq
t3
II
'0
Q)
44
.0 U
u
0 0— a r3
4Z.
u
r3 0
Ll u
u
�CO
0085tAcl
LZ
.4-1
c 0
u
41
4-j
E
u
ri) u
0 tp
U
o
EQ J--
Co
(A to
V)
C C u C)
0 o u
44 c Q;
4-j rj
41
.2 u
41 #A
tol 41 V)
CL
(J)
Tj
iir
sh
D V)
ar
C.A.
0\01
(0.2
00
11) 1, -
JXN cn )
LL
0
0
ul C,
-Z'.2,
41
0
E
CL
ILI o
40.
C
44
YI
4-j
0
:71 W
u
V
W
.,-I: f.).
O
_0) .2 C V
CL (n Z r,
a
O 4 ` Q c -Q
O C:
0 C C
O Q
++ N
41
0U00C�c
IOYia�,
C N
o0+4Q)
ai
a t •� c 'i
S•..
u•���3�0
i
O. i O (n c
N N a, I
� b
� to u 04 a
M
Q)
P'Z
Lk�
Wu
41)
'
C(1)
0 Ln
1� ®
4� Q)
-0 Q
-0
al
ro U
0 .0
U
c 'T c
+j (A a)
— 7''o
c C
0
&g
4Q
4.0
4-i
4
a)
u rj0 U
4�
41
ri
U Q)
Qr-, c
Q) U
(n 0 (n Q) 0
0
E U U 4-1 C. IC hn
00
tj a) U) 1p
'Q-) Q)
S
In
Z -0 0 U 10
F,
u U) (1)
4-1
LU i4- Ln O x Q)
-C
0 Lo
4- tn
z
IJ
V) o Ln
tQ
c (A u
C
Q)
u 4j
5; Ul ::z 10. t3 0
. . . . ... . ..
Mu UQ
�,g, "",
'§ u
Q) c -C 5 0
-,
NO
ol
Ln
N
_0
�
(A
0
qi
v< C
U)�',C�,
C C
avuo
by
v
via
aE
o ao 0
CL ` o
au�a'aa,
O b p
Q.
'a U U
P C C
i
v,�vo
a 0 ca
(n2c�
v .c
bath
\
j Utn
Ln
Qj
rj
co
04�+ o
C
®
u 44
b
U°,off°o
v
U
0
4
CD
41
b v
4 a0) `, v a,
�fl
.C:° rnaa
•.
QL
� a0,_ao
's
v•°'''�+a a
u
a
0
M
Ln
V) V)
C
•0
'o u
C
4-j
0 Q) V)
4-1
0a c o
3bao
Z CL
0 4 0
rj C
r3 c 0)
o
4�
rj0 (D ri
0)
0 ul rj
lv-
tn
4 41
0 4�
-0
7
TiPr
.61
Ln
4-j
u) 4-1
Jz
ag
�j
th
11.0
0
u
cr
c
40 . Ui
u
0 �T.
. j.
. U)
,10
n.
ca
E
(A
(A
CC
0
(1) V) .1
M
U
0 R
44
V
LZ C '
O
u
CC) -0
U
V C3
4
U
2
O
4
Ln
N
f�
U
V
I
I
N
-C
44
0 0
4-
U) 0
u
E
0
u 0
r
0
L�,C'E
0
u
z
E
0 E
C3 -C
) U
a)Vo
C Qj
o 0
41
v)
0
�
�
4- 0
V, 10 0-
w 0 E
0 "0
0
4.,
Ell
�j
u
z
m
Nt
UJ
U.m
0 Ln
0
m
0
u
e
mLn
L-Q
'ow,i
f J
a�
41
0
a�a > -�
U
4-j
44 :3 i
OL v O N O a a
IA
v �.'co
O .O
C
� a v � � �%q c ru^
•i � � •U
Q. "Ou1 .0
L
U
(1)
T3
13
C1
U
17
V
in
Cr
Cil
�n
(1)
ct>
�7
a
4�
6
i7
CC
V
V
V
l.l..
ZZ
L
CC
U U
Lu
V)
SR
Vl�
I
�v
c o ,T
v u��oa
o4�a4,A
avai
.0v.a
i0a�
a, cu0
v
_®
CD
4o � a
U
-.. a"'
LLi--
c v)
Zv o ca
oaoo0
IA
a�
a�4:
U
Q
3'0`3oo.
U
I
O
D Z B
Qj
�b
C 0 q'0
a1 D � )
O uOi 3 b
i
.-°,
W o a n
�uE�'
0
0
U
44 LI)
44
Q) in
Q) *j
u v) V)
Q) to (D U
rj 0-
o
1 0 41 r,
V) M V)
V) (3)• a E
-0 lu-
4
0)
0 cx 0
E tn lb
0 th
0 -Z t) tn 0-
u E w CL
Q) -j r, U
L'I u
Q) Q) o
tf) C
r
o u 0
Q 4'J 4i tn
CL
F-
tn
in r, +a
33) Q)
0)
A4
in
4�
acvz W 410
4�
0Q) c (1) c
u Q C3
0
u
V) -0
O Q) 0)
N
0 4�
U (A J- 0 0
4_
4� -r-
41
() 0.
-0 0 E
u C 4- :j CL 0
0 '- 0 4�
CX C) :�'j 0) Z E u
" -- C:
Q) U :3
c o
o 'o C
r.T 44 0
:, -r- o 3. v)
4.1 It (D 01 U
5 , 44 tn O. V)
00- -to) 0) in -A o
u o C C C C
0— -S
Q)
N
cl b
41 4" E -U
41 4- 0
Q) 0 r C c
U U44 +4 U +2 404
C U
2 0Q'S4� U
u 0 0 40- IS
6
CC
Q
u
r✓>
Grp
Cr'.3
Crn
U D C C
1 0
0 O
4
�a,arn�aO
•-aCac�a
J
fi 4-j
iV O
a v
C U N
•a,a���,a��
C N
a �
a20
�u
0 1 C
°
L_
0
n
Ln
N
O .
� Z) o
j44
�4-�10�041Zo
°u. ;o
ao
0`cocL
�
aoO05
.a.V>
iE a`C., ° • U W
C o
a N -C U
1= ' IS U
o 0 U
E
o
4 t,n
v � '-
�sVv '0
a `o`0�'
.��or � �oo�,a
a M44'o a
v)•.. 0 a)�vb•,
v
a 0a t i
Cuu�O*�oya
a-o
0 a at3)a)Q,
c
ca41 U 4tA
u 'u a c 'a
o00
44
L Q th LO
th
O a 0 .tn v 0 O '� 0
t '�'', `O i N i b
Q D 0 ,a; 4 II O 4
;ua,.
�+ O L C Q a
Q 4..
a
Q v aO+ 'OOQ Q•N Q
41 j� ,C
� 3 � Q•�► V V u ++
_ U
bOv�o-Qv0
pva .-v
u .cl 0 a� b
�v3a�
a a,o.-q�aZo
aN`mv�"°3°0
N fi4� 0 u
0 u
'A
aiO o41 U4f N a Ln r,c
a2a0a 0. Q)aa)
0 0
vao• `oc°�avo0,
0
0
U
m
cl V)
02-
4.1 V)
kn -0
0) Q)
U
4rno
0 44 0
QJ tn u ,
w 0 U
U r-
0. C
tn 10
tQ
4-1 C
o
Vtn ) .,N 0 4� U
.4�
0
tA
4.#
5 kn
0 o r- Cyr
0
41 Q)
44
tj U C U 0
u —0
CL tn
4'
4R
to 4.+
Mj 11, y
u
0 42) U U
LL Q 44
b
4Q Z
U
C.aai
4t
U r
'i m 0
0
S. c 'u
in
0—
Z 10
:j 44
C:
'u C)
u (n C
Ln
2 c
4-1
4z
3 0 C) CL
u E;
WN
I
P�'l
cllll"�)
c1-
(XII)
vi
3 as .6) u
16
0
� CO
-0
-C u L�
4,j
-0
u
ul o)
(1) u d U.0 u
Q) r_ 4:� 5; Q)
4Q -C U -C
0 41
CU
co
C—
c u
44
V) .0
CY
c u 0) Lf) -0
Q)
,I r 44 10) 0
0 Ll
(A
u
c) 4-
Ln
Cq
4-1 0
t3 V)
0
4.
.+1
0-
11 3 o
u a . 0) -4s
�
%:� iz
uo
0
u
�Lmp]
aE
CD
o ,o'' o
oa�ib
v)v
vw
Ls
C.c�oo�
ra
0
oU.Q�
`rj
N
� p
u
C
> = 3pi
� L
� b
C'N
a D L
U
0-
U+,
0
O
a 'A
p
C U
V C
o
N
°a o44
0-
0-
0
o
a
c 'o CL
�►r,op�,
�
r4
p
a.p
C
i
p-C
b
o U�
ba,ov°v,'°
c Eqz
a � .
• C
p
+, C
U
c Qpapoa
L
CO
'C C
•�
V
O10
0-0V
s) 0
Q5c
C v
�� (
Z
oa
m -Q
4�
tz-
�
o
t,J
U
U
511's
h
••C
U
U
U
x
1
1
•
�
1
c:;ta
CUM
S2
V)
a
CO
U
•3 S
d
4
O 4�
U
O
UA
ra
CAI
0
0
Lo
I
40-
U o 0-0
4- 4,
0 o
v.� �,
V)
co -Q
Q) -�c U
U 0
ri
0 >., V)
CY
0 Q)
>
�
4-- u
U 0
aj 0)
:3 C
u
rj
'o
TQ
Qj Q)
tn- 0) 0)
0 2 o
.q R- (on- a —tA
W
IN
r3„
a)
E
44`
c ,a
ab
o o�aE
4-4
of
a,
o o�4-1
3
cx
'O
o-0 0�
a>ua,�,ma
c��a.nca
v o.�,vv9
>+ o44
�c`oyaE,c
xca�,ca4;E
oou.oao
•_
.
ca
oo
ouaci
aio`�tnc
.�acc
a'iz 0
cm
Cry
Co
CZ)
4-1
Uate>41
C�aC'v
4-1 U
� Ds�v
o
� U M
-C
tn
c�
m cb
o
3`�O
a`",_�',
v
:N
v
a .c •�
a
3
a :v
a�
�o
a
> me
cca•a
acaD,.c
D
D
>vca)
as
�
Q
4-1
i a
E `--
a.�vicU
aa°
c
-0' u
O
0.'a
D
O r i
1
V
vvi
Q, o
�Y)aEoc_
a,
41
x
Q)
i1y
t"3
CID
a
U
U
�
N
°
CL c
•�
C
° c
Q
C v
m
U
a�
c� c
✓
ry P
t '
0
0)
Ln
�1J
4-1
Q.i
CL
5
cm
CII)
a�
.1` o
5
O b V
41
N � 0
v�
b a D
0 (AC v
Drna
O
�`�•rno
IA
aca'
i C +r 0
�. aO C
N 44 o
b 0
o CL
�o�
Z u C
b a U
21) li
a 0
'n. 'a
r`vn
� Dt
yam. 0 44 C
3;Q.o c
D a
Lin
0
::
w.vn
U U
0
F.0
t�
qI
91
I
40-
C 0
.� V�
0 C
0.0
E *+j
10 0
u
c
0 0
0-
u
o
0
u6
0
.
(A
..r o -C ri C
c -C
4w (1) u
� 0 L� U
ri t3 E E - a) ri CL
E
0 :�. -0 0 00 u -E w u)
0-0
C) E 0)
0 u 0 C
0-
o rj -a o
'0.- '0 Z
rj 4� 0 .0
t) Q) c o rJ
&Z 41
4
u 0
Q) —0
0 u w
u 6 r- C
41 U
a) 4�
t -3) 0- a
0-
() t3 0 0 0
u 0
Q) 0. U 41
4� 0
rj 0 01 '0
U CL CL .0 u c
0
'ar—)
-j u 44 u u .Q
19
a
a� a "ate
a C •� �� 0 'o 0ri a
jLuvi Z a p
W �� a� �b a C ri
a
��a`��o0
E v`x• .0 0,0 o c b
tn CS O V i 44 O N
UCPO Efioma�a
•� •°y�,C 4� 0 �a� vim •�w
u(A c0EC.0V) n0 �
C` ava a tn "c v c0 c U
c 0 U 0 ao,o E U a �
Q aUL.uaa.S0) 0 °v
U4a ,CUi44 iE
Q 0 vi 0 T w C
N 0
a N O C
R a
41
° ao u >-°n
U y
0) o
o
C a` :� E
.® _ ao
L'a 3
c
O Ln
occ
a°a 42
C
E
�. 0E vC
a 4 °C
4� w 0
:0.
a U
LLJ
� p
v E
UA
a
a;,
-rn
0
41
4.0
°v
o
V
ou
i
uj
�
aL
o
o
w 'Q'
a)
c.r
o
c
a
o �
C
a. 0
C
0 v0.
°C
a •� a
°C
o 4° W
E a) C
t 0 o
Q Z
v
t�
�s
t:�
0
4w
C3 O0 .-u .4
Q)
o 44
u
4w
0 Q) tj
Chu
ID
U 0 .0
0 4-1
u
p Q- r3
u
0
io -0 u
0)
41 -W
Q.
4� 0 U W
0 Z 0
r-
0)
0 - :3 r_
0 0-
0 u
0 C)) 4�
4-1 U
0 Ln
0
0 f-
-0 0Q)
4� tn U
o0 IA
:T -
0
Q c u
Z
1-4
Em
42
c
u
0)
S
LLJ
0
z
NJ
4-1
C vi
42
a�iv`oaoo.Qn��o
O0 u ! c o kO p :3 u a)0 T 1
tva0ouO'o�-C
c QD L� i 4ti Q i vQ U 4 0 O ton
QJ orvo'^3 a,tvo3
C
N4 0"�a•'.Q azo o
av° ��ra-aa�
a c�'i�°4-1 �zbo C
to o .� t �
c °';'�t1 �;a
4-1
o,
aO .-4N .0
,f �fMA ���a�bUbQC of
o N Q O o o to O
avtocvc=�'a, W
js �b o D v��`z o C
to O
a U '0bbQ-C a 0)
ko
ix�