HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-20-2015 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA PACKETCIITTY TOFF T
WAS11INGTON
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 20, 2015
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER — 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers
II. ROLL CALL /ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM (Pledge of Allegiance)
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. September 9, 2015
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT
Comment from the audience on any item not listed on the agenda for discussion or public
hearing.
V. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Update on Planning and Development Department activities.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
There are no items for Public Hearing.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
A. 2015 COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN - INITIAL BRIEFING* (Webb)
Summary: Initial briefing on the update of the 2015 Comprehensive Transportation
Plan as part of the overall Comprehensive Plan.
B. INTRODUCTION OF THE CORE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN* (TATE)
Summary: Staff to review the Core Comprehensive Plan.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
The City of Auburn Planning Commission is an eight member advisory body that provides recommendations to the
Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning.
Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council.
Actions taken by the Planning Commission are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the
City Council who must ultimately make the final decision.
ATY
Au&u OF
WASI 11 N GTON
DRAFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 9, 2015
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers
located on the first floor of Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA.
II. ROLL CALL /ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM
Planning Commission Members present were: Chair Judi Roland, Vice -Chair Copple,
Commissioner Mason, Commissioner Baggett, Commissioner Lee, and Commissioner
Smith.
Staff present included: Assistant Director of Community Development Jeff Tate, City
Attorney Dan Heid, and Community Development Secretary Tina Kriss.
Members of the public present: No Members of the Public were present.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. July 7, 2015
Commissioner Copple moved and Commissioner Lee seconded to approve the minutes
from the July 7, 2015 meeting minutes as written.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6 -0
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments on any item not listed on the agenda for discussion or
public hearing.
V. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
Assistant Director Tate reported that last year the City Council approved a 10 year
Economic Development Strategy line item for $250,000.00. A Request for Proposal
went out nationally last month to obtain a consultant to begin assisting the City with an
Economic Development strategy, the consultant has been selected. Staff will be
providing various updates on the progress of this process as an Economic Development
strategy is formed.
A Facade Improvement Program for the 2015 -2016 years, in the amount of $100,000.00
per year, was also approved last year by City Council. This is a pilot program that allows
business and property owners to apply to the City for grant funds to make improvements
to their properties. Four (4) businesses have been awarded the following grants:
• Approximately $6,000.00 was awarded to Nelson's Jewelry to restore their
marquee sign.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 9, 2015
• The Auburn Masonic Temple, located at 10 Auburn Way South, received
$22,000.00 to restore the masonry and first floor of their building.
• The owner of the property at 230/240 Auburn Way South was granted
$30,500.00 to redesign their facade to modernize the look.
• Hello Gorgeous Boutique & Cafe was awarded approximately $5,000.00 to
update their sign and lighting.
In addition to the businesses above, other area businesses would like to begin the
process to apply for grant money for updates and restoration to their property when it is
more prudent for them to go forward.
Staff is also consulting with various businesses on ideas for improvements and how best
to use their space or property.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Code Amendment for Recreational Vehicles as Dwelling Units* (Tate)
Chair Roland opened the public hearing on the Code Amendments for Recreational
Vehicles as Dwelling Units at 7:26 p.m.
Assistant Director Tate provided background information on discussions that have
gone before the Planning Commission and Council Study Sessions regarding
Recreational Vehicles as Dwelling Units.
The Commission and staff reviewed the draft code amendments in proposed
Ordinance No. 6565 which include a new provision allowing a Recreational Vehicle
(RV) to be placed on a property, and lived in, for duration not to exceed 90 days,
provided that the property owner registers the RV with the City at no cost.
The Commission pointed out that on Page 1 of 16 of proposed Ordinance No. 6565,
the June 2, 2015 date under paragraph 5 should be noted as September 9, 2015 as
the date of the Public Hearing before the Planning Commission.
The Commission and staff discussed section H on Page 7 of 16, the language "not
more than ninety (90) calendar days in any calendar year ". The Commission raised
concerns of having a strict period of 90 days with no extensions. They discussed
times where an individual needs a longer period for alternative housing rather than
being homeless.
A discussion was held regarding homeowner association covenants and restrictions
and issues with regard to Recreational Vehicles as Dwelling Units and how in some
cases it is viewed as having the potential to deteriorate the neighborhood. City
Attorney Heid pointed out that the covenants and restricts of homeowner
associations would be enforced by the association regardless of Auburn City code.
With no further discussion from the Planning Commission, Chair Roland invited
anyone for or against the proposed code amendment regarding Recreational
Vehicles as Dwelling Units to come forward for testimony.
Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES September 9, 2015
With no public present for testimony, Chair Roland closed the Public Hearing on
Recreational Vehicles as Dwelling Units at 7:42 p.m.
The Planning Commission deliberated.
Commissioner Smith moved and Commissioner Copple seconded to recommend
moving Ordinance No. 6565, amending sections 18.04.330, 18.07.020, 18.46A.050,
and 18.46A.070 of the Auburn City Code relating to Recreational Vehicles as
Dwelling Units, forward to City Council for approval as written.
Commissioner Smith expressed his concern that a total of 90 days would not be
sufficient for a folks who may be living in their Recreational Vehicle.
Commissioner Smith moved and Commissioner Lee seconded to amend the motion
on the floor and remove the language under Section H. of page 7, Ordinance No.
6565, "not more than ninety (90) calendar days in any calendar year" to one
hundred - eighty (180) calendar days with the ability to have one (1) extension of one
hundred - eighty (180) calendar days in any calendar year.
The Commission deliberated on the motion to amend and a vote was taken.
MOTION TO AMEND WAS DENIED. 3 -3 (Because of a tie vote there was no
majority and the motion was denied.)
Commissioner Smith moved and Commissioner Lee seconded to amend the motion
on the floor and add language under Section H. of page 7, Ordinance No. 6565, to
include an extension of ninety (90) calendar days for a total of 180 in any one
calendar year.
The Commission deliberated on the 2nd motion to amend.
MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6 -0
Chair Roland called for a vote of the amended motion.
AMENDED MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6 -0
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
There were no business items for discussion.
Staff informed the Commission that the October 2nd, 2015 meeting would be
rescheduled to October 20th at 7:00 p.m.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland
adjourned the meeting at 8:02 p.m.
Page 3
AUBURN
WAS 1IING10N
Comprehensive
Transportation Plan
Adopted by Ordinance No. XXXX
December X, 2015
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Table of Contents
Chapter 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
Chapter 2
2.1
2.2
2.3
Chapter 3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
Chapter 4
4.1
4.2
4.3
Chapter 5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
Chapter 6
6.1
6.2
6.3
Chapter 7
7.1
7.2
Introduction
Purpose
How the City Uses the Plan
Regional Coordination
Accomplishments Since the Last Plan
Plan Organization
Staff Resources
The Street System
Existing Street System
Street Standards and Levels -of- Service
Future Street System
Non - Motorized Transportation
Pedestrian Travel
Bicycle Travel
Equestrian Travel
Future Non - Motorized System
Transit
Needs Assessment
Transit User Needs
Transit System Recommendations
Policies
Coordination, Planning and Implementation
Street System
Non - Motorized System
Transit System
Air Transportation
Funding
Financial Planning and Programming
Funding Sources
Funding Strategies and Project Prioritization
Monitoring and Evaluation
Annual Updates
Multi -Year Updates
List of Maps and Figures
Map 1 -1
Figure 1 -1
Map 2 -1
Adjacent Jurisdictions
Transportation Program Staff Resources
Functional Roadway Classifications
Pacje
2 -1
2 -1
2 -8
2 -13
3 -1
3 -1
3 -9
3 -12
3 -14
4 -1
4 -1
4 -5
4- 10
5 -1
5 -2
5 -14
5 -22
5 -27
5 -28
6 -1
6 -1
6 -2
6 -6
7 -1
7 -1
7 -2
AUBURN
Map 2 -2
Map 2 -3
Map 2 -4
Map 2 -5
Figure 2 -1
Map 2 -6
Map 2 -7
Map 3 -1
Map 3 -2
Map 3 -3
Map 4 -1
Map 4 -2
WASIIINGTON
Average Daily Traffic Volumes (2013)
Truck Route Map
Freight Route Classification Map
Auburn LOS Corridors
Population, Housing and Job Growth (2000 - 2035)
Transportation Improvement Projects
Intelligent Transportation Systems
Existing Sidewalks and Future Priority Sidewalk Corridors
Existing and Future Bicycle Facilities and Multi -Use Trails
Bicycle Corridors and Connectors
Auburn Transit Routes and MIT Shuttle Route
Auburn Transit Routes and Transit Dependent Areas
*Map located following the chapter corresponding to the Map number.
List of Tables
*
2 -13
*
*
Paae
Table 1 -1 Transportation Improvements Completed Since 2009 1 - 8
Table 2 -1 Existing (2014) Corridor Levels of Service 2 - 10
Table 2 -2 2022 Capacity Projects 2 - 14
Table 2 -3 2022 Corridor Levels of Service 2 - 19
Table 2 -4 2035 Capacity Projects 2 - 21
Table 2 -5 2035 Corridor Levels of Service 2 - 25
Table 3 -1 Existing Equestrian Facilities 3 - 13
Table 3 -2 Future Trail Projects 3 - 14
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
CHAPTER 1.
INTRODUCTION
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The transportation system is a vital component
of Auburn's social, economic, and physical
structure. The primary purpose of the
transportation system is to support the
movement of people and goods within the City
and connect the City to the broader region. Secondarily, it influences patterns of growth,
development and economic activity by providing access to adjacent land uses. Planning for the
development and maintenance of the transportation system is a critical activity promoting the
efficient movement of people and goods, ensuring emergency access, and optimizing the role
transportation plays in attaining other community objectives.
Auburn Station
1.1 PURPOSE
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan is the framework for transportation planning in Auburn.
It functions as the overarching guide for changes to the transportation system. The Plan evaluates
the existing system by identifying key assets and improvement needs. These findings are then
incorporated into a needs assessment, which guides the future of the transportation system.
This Plan is multi - modal, addressing multiple forms of transportation in Auburn including the
street network, non - motorized travel, and transit. Evaluating all modes enables the City to address
its future transportation needs in a comprehensive and balanced manner.
VISION
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan reflects the current and future needs of the Auburn
community and, in doing so, seeks to:
• Enhance the quality of life for all Auburn residents;
• Encourage healthy community principles through non - motorized travel;
• Promote a transportation system that supports local businesses and enhances economic
development opportunities;
• Create a transportation system that is efficient, uncomplicated, and welcoming to visitors; and
• Provide a balanced, multi -modal transportation system that addresses both local and regional
needs.
Chapter 1. Introduction Page 1 -1
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
GMA REQUIREMENTS
Washington State's 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that transportation planning
be directly tied to the City's land use decisions and fiscal planning. This is traditionally
accomplished through the adoption of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Auburn fulfills this mandate by adopting the Comprehensive Transportation Plan as the
Transportation Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. In order to be GMA compliant, the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan must:
• Inventory the existing transportation system in order to identify existing capital facilities and
travel levels as a basis for future planning;
• Identify level -of- service (LOS) standards for all arterials, transit routes, and state -owned
facilities as a gauge for evaluating system performance;
• Specify actions and requirements for bringing into compliance locally owned transportation
facilities or services that are below an established level -of- service standard;
• Determine existing deficiencies of the system;
• Use land use assumptions to estimate future travel, including impacts to state -owned facilities;
• Identify future improvement needs from at least ten years of traffic forecasts based on the
adopted land use plan;
• Include a multiyear financing plan based on the identified needs;
• Address intergovernmental coordination; and
• Include transportation demand management strategies.
1.2 How the City Uses the Plan
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan provides policy and technical direction for development
of the City's transportation system through the year 2035. It updates and expands the 2009
Comprehensive Transportation Plan by recognizing network changes since the last plan, evaluating
current needs, and identifying standards for future development and various infrastructure
improvement scenarios. The Plan underwent a major update in 2005 and a midterm update in
2009 to incorporate the Lea Hill and West Hill annexation areas into the Plan.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A system -wide, multi -modal needs assessment was conducted throughout plan development to
ascertain which aspects of Auburn's existing transportation system work well and which ones
need improvement. An evaluation of potential solutions and investment priorities was also
conducted as part of this process. The end result is that Auburn has a more thorough
understanding of system deficiencies, how best to address these deficiencies, and direction for
expanding the system in a sustainable manner.
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Public outreach is an important component of the ongoing needs assessment process. During
2014 the City held a number of community meetings through the Imagine Auburn visioning
Chapter 1. Introduction Page 1- 2
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
process. The meetings included discussions of capital investments in transportation infrastructure
and other transportation related issues which have been incorporated into this document.
As part of the adoption process, the Plan is also reviewed by the City of Auburn Planning
Commission, including a hearing where members of the public are provided the opportunity to
provide input on the plan, and is then reviewed and adopted by the City Council.
POLICY DEVELOPMENT
The City creates policies to state preferences for preservation of the existing system and
development of the future transportation system. Policies can be qualitative in nature, but often
they are quantitative and prescribe a specific standard.
Policies are also important for communicating the City's values and needs to neighboring
jurisdictions and regional and state agencies. Having established policies in place enables the City
to more effectively influence change in keeping with its needs and objectives.
LOS AND CONCURRENCY
The concurrency provisions of the 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA) require that local
governments permit development only if adequate public facilities exist, or can be guaranteed to
be available within six years, to support new development.
The GMA requires each local jurisdiction to identify facility and service needs based on level -of-
service (LOS) standards. Auburn ensures that future development will not cause the system's
performance to fall below the adopted LOS standard by doing one or a combination of the
following- limiting development, requiring appropriate mitigation, or changing the adopted
standard.
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM
The City uses the Transportation Improvement Program (11P) and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP)
to develop a financial plan for capital improvements in Auburn, thus enabling the City to fulfill
the GMA requirement of having a multiyear financing plan based on the identified transportation
needs.
The TIP, is a financial planning tool used to implement the list of transportation improvement
projects identified in the Transportation Plan. It is a six -year plan which is reviewed and updated
annually by the City Council to reflect changes to project priorities and funding circumstances.
The first three years of the plan are fiscally constrained. Traffic impact fees on new development
are determined by the cost of the capacity projects included in the TIP.
The Capital Facilities Plan is also an annually adopted six -year financing plan. However, it is
fiscally constrained for all six years. Unlike the TIP, the CFP is an adopted element of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
Chapter 1. Introduction Page 1- 3
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
1.3 REGIONAL COORDINATION
In addition to being influenced by factors within the City, Auburn's transportation system is
influenced by what happens beyond its City limits- growth in neighboring communities,
infrastructure maintenance by regional agencies, the lack of funding for road maintenance, new
capacity projects, and competing demands for transit services. This Plan calls for effective
interjurisdictional actions to address cross - border issues and to mitigate the impact of new
development. The Plan also recognizes that other jurisdictions, particularly state agencies and
transit providers, are responsible for a major share of the transportation facilities serving Auburn.
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has jurisdiction over three major
routes connecting Auburn to the region: SR -167, SR -18, and SR -164 (Auburn Way South).
Auburn coordinates with WSDOT to study these corridors and implement roadway
improvements. WSDOT also serves an important role as administrator of federal and state
transportation funds.
SOUND TRANSIT
Sound Transit provides a variety of regional transit services for King, Snohomish, and Pierce
counties. In Auburn, Sound Transit provides commuter rail and express bus service. Auburn
Station also serves as a hub and transfer station for local transit service provided by King County
Metro Transit and Pierce Transit.
The transit chapter provides more detail on current Sound Transit services, remaining needs for
regional transit service, and the role Auburn plays in coordinating with the agency.
KING COUNTY
King County Metro Transit, a division of the King County Department of Transportation,
provides local bus service for the Auburn area. Planned service for the City of Auburn is
described in the Metro Strategic Plan for Public Transportation 2011 -2021 and in Metro's Long
Range Public Transportation Plan now under development and expected to be completed in 2016.
The City has developed an employee Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program in cooperation
with Metro Transit. Details of the CTR program are summarized in the Non - motorized and
Transit chapters of this plan.
Auburn partners with King County Metro Transit on the 497 bus route, which provides peak
hour service from Lakeland Hills to the Auburn Station. Auburn and King County Metro Transit
hope to continue this relationship and develop future partnerships to expand transit service in
Auburn.
King County Road Services Division is responsible for maintaining and regulating the roadway
network in King County, including the Totem and Klump portions of King County located inside
the City limits King County Road Services has a number of programs and plans in place that
regulate development and other activities affecting their roadway network.
Chapter 1. Introduction Page 1- 4
AJBU �*
WAS H
NGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
PIERCE COUNTY
Auburn partners with Pierce Transit on the 497 bus route, which provides peak hour service from
Lakeland Hills to the Auburn Station. Auburn and Pierce Transit hope to continue this
relationship and develop future partnerships to expand transit service in Auburn.
Auburn also participates in The Regional Access Mobility Partnership (RAMP), a regional
coalition comprised of both public and private sector interests dedicated to improving mobility in
the South Puget Sound and Washington State.
COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES
Under the Growth Management Act, King and Pierce Counties have adopted Countywide
Planning Policies to guide development in both incorporated and unincorporated areas of their
jurisdictions. The policies support county and regional goals to provide a variety of mobility
options and establish LOS standards that emphasize the efficient movement of people and not
just vehicles. The Countywide Planning Policies are also important because they provide direction
for planning and development of potential annexation areas.
PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL
The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) sets policy for King, Pierce, Kitsap, and Snohomish
counties through its long -range planning document, Vision 2040, and its regional transportation
plan, Transportation 2040. Both documents encourage future growth to be concentrated in regional
growth centers. They also seek to provide a multi -modal transportation system that serves all
travel modes, actively encouraging the use of alternatives to single occupant vehicles. Another
important policy theme is a focus on maximizing the efficiency of the transportation system
through transportation demand management (TDM) and transportation system management
(TSM) strategies, as well as completing critical links in the network.
Auburn's Transportation Plan is required to be consistent with PSRC's regional planning efforts.
ADJACENT CITIES
The City recognizes the importance of coordinated and strong inter- jurisdictional action because
transportation impacts do not stop at local boundaries The City works closely with neighboring
cities and the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe to address transportation issues. These neighbors adopt
goals and policies that directly impact Auburn. In developing this plan, analysis was undertaken to
ensure that all transportation system improvements are compatible with neighboring jurisdictions.
CITY OF KENT
The City of Kent shares Auburn's northern border and several regional transportation corridors
including S 277th Street, SR 167, and the West Valley Highway. Most recently, Auburn has
completed coordination with Kent on the annexation of the S 277th Street from Auburn Way
North to the Green River into the City of Auburn to allow the widening of S 277th Street
between Auburn Way N and L Street NE.
Chapter 1. Introduction Page 1- 5
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The City of Federal Way is located west of
Auburn. Several roadways, most notably SR 18,
connect Auburn and Federal Way. Auburn and
Federal Way regularly coordinate on both
motorized and non - motorized roadway
improvements affecting both jurisdictions.
CITES OF SUMNER /ALGONA/ PACIFIC /BONNEY
LAKE
The City partners with its southern neighbors in
many respects, including street system planning,
transit planning, and regional trail planning.
Auburn is also working with Sumner, Pacific and
Algona on roadway improvement projects,
including the recent preservation of Boundary
Boulevard in partnership with Algona, and
financial support of Pacific's project to widen
Stewart Road to the west of the White River. The
City coordinates primarily with Bonney Lake for
provision of water service in the Pierce County
portion of the City. However, efforts to coordinate transportation systems and services will likely
occur in the future. Partnerships with neighboring cities will continue to be an important factor in
successful transportation planning.
Map 1 -1 Adjacent Jurisdictions
MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE
The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (MIT) is situated in the southeastern portion of the City and in
unincorporated King County, generally to the east of Auburn Way South (SR -164) and south of
SR -18. The Muckleshoot Tribe operates two major attractions in or near Auburn: the
Muckleshoot Casino and the White River Amphitheatre. Both of these activity centers generate a
large number of vehicle trips. Commercial development on tribal lands is expected to increase in
the future and must be evaluated during transportation planning efforts.
The City and tribe coordinate on a variety of transportation planning issues, both to accommodate
the capacity needs derived from traffic generated by tribal land uses and to ensure the tribe has a
functioning transportation system for its members.
The Muckleshoot Tribe has developed their own Comprehensive Land Use Plan. In addition, a
Transportation Plan and a Tribal Transportation Improvement Program have been created to
identify transportation needs and plan for the next seven generations. One theme that is emerging
from this effort is the need to build a well - connected internal roadway system on the reservation.
Currently, Auburn Way South is the primary route for drivers and pedestrians traveling within the
reservation. This extensive internal network will increase transportation efficiency and most
importantly improve safety along the Auburn Way South corridor. The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
and the City of Auburn have created a partnership to provide safety improvements along Auburn
Chapter 1. Introduction Page 1- 6
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Way South. These improvements are currently under construction and are anticipated to be
complete in the Spring of 2017.
During July 2015, the State Legislature passed a transportation package which included a $15
million project to construct a new off -ramp from eastbound SR -18 to SR -164. At this time the
scope and alignment of this new connection are not know, however, the City will be working with
the MIT and WSDOT in the design process.
1.4 Accomplishments Since the Last Plan
Since 2009, the City has completed numerous transportation improvements, with an emphasis on
providing new road capacity, improving pedestrian and bicycle safety, preservation of existing
infrastructure, and providing better access to regional transit services including commuter rail.
Table 1 -1 shows the key projects completed since the 2009 plan. The completed projects list
includes the grade separation of M Street SE and the A Street NW corridor, which provides a
parallel connection to Auburn Way N between downtown Auburn and S 272nd Street.
Chapter 1. Introduction Page 1- 7
C[TY OF
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Table 1 -1. Transportation Improvements Completed Since 2009
#
Project Name
Location
Type of
Improveme
1
M Street SE Underpass
M St SE (3rd SE to 8th SE)
Roadway
2
A Street Corridor NW
New Road (3rd NW to 14th NW)
Roadway
3
ITS Improvements, Phase B
S 277th to City Hall
Signal and ITS
4
8th Street NE and R Street
8th St NE & R St NE
Signal & ITS
5
A Street SE Pedestrian Improvements
A St SE (3rd St SE to 6th St SE)
Non - Motorized
6
37th Street SE and R Street SE Pedestrian
Connector
37th St SE (Olympic to R St SE)
Non - Motorized
7
SE 316th Place Traffic Calming Improvements
SE 316th Place (112th to 116th)
Safety
8
Terrace Drive Re- channelization
Terrace Dr. NW (15th to W St)
Safety
9
2009 Sidewalk Improvements
Citywide
Non - Motorized
10
2009 Citywide Arterial Pavement Patching
Citywide
Preservation
11
Citywide Guardrail Improvements
Citywide
Safety
12
F Street SE and 4th Street SE Traffic Signal
F St SE & 4th St SE
Intersection, Safety
13
West Valley Highway Improvements
WVH, W Main St to SR -18
Roadway
14
Citywide School Zone Flashing Beacons
Citywide
Safety
15
2010 Local Street Preservation
Citywide
Preservation
16
South Auburn ITS Improvements
C St SW, A St SE
Signal and ITS
17
S Division Street
Main St to 3rd St SE /SW
Roadway
18
8th Street NE Re- channelization
M St NE to 104th
Roadway
19
2010 Traffic Signal Improvements
Citywide
Signal & ITS
20
Auburn Way South & M St Improvement's
AWS & M St SE
Intersection, Safety
21
2011 Local Street Preservation
Citywide
Preservation
22
8th and 104th Signal Improvements
8th St NE & 104th Ave SE
Intersection, Safety
23
2011 Citywide Sidewalk Improvements
Citywide
Non - motorized
24
Auburn Way South Phase 1 —
Dogwood to Fir
Roadway
25
Auburn Way South Phase 2 —
Fir to Hemlock
Roadway
26
Lea Hill Safe Routes to School
116th Ave SE, SE 312th St
Safety
27
2011 Local Street Reconstruction
Citywide
Preservation
28
2012 Local Street Preservation
Citywide
Preservation
29
15th and WVH SW Repairs
15th St SW & WVH
Signal & ITS
30
Traffic Signal Battery Backup Improvements
BNSF Grade Crossings
Signal & ITS
31
Citywide Traffic Signal Safety Improvements
Citywide
Signal & ITS, Safety
Chapter 1. Introduction
Page 1- 8
clry or
AUBURtJ
WASH 1 NGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
* These projects were constructed by others as part of private development projects
1.5 Plan Organization
The following three chapters are organized according to the three primary transportation modes
in Auburn: the street system (Chapter 2), the non- motorized system (Chapter 3), and the
transit system (Chapter 4). Each chapter contains a needs assessment and discussion of the
future system, including proposed projects or improvements.
Chapter 1. Introduction
Page 1 -9
roject Name
Type of
mprovement
32
2013 Local Street Preservation
Citywide
Preservation
33
West Valley Highway Preservation
WVH, 15th NW to 37th NW
Preservation
34
8th Street NE ITS Improvements
8th St NE (M St to 104th Ave SE)
Signal & ITS
35
2013 Sidewalk Repairs
Citywide
Non - Motorized
36
2013 Arterial Pavement Patching
Citywide
Preservation
37
37th and B Street Pre - Signal
37th St NW & B St NW
Signal & ITS, Safety
38
29th and A SE Repairs
29th & A St SE
Signal & ITS
39
E Main Signal Pole Replacement
E Main St & Auburn Way
Signal & ITS
40
East Valley Hwy Overlay
Peirce County Limits
Preservation
41
2013 Arterial Crackseal
Citywide
Preservation
42
2014 Traffic Signal Improvements
Citywide
Preservation
43
2014 Local Street Improvements
Citywide
Preservation
44
2014 Citywide Arterial Pavement Preservation
Citywide
Preservation
45
2014 Citywide Arterial Crackseal
Citywide
Preservation
46
R Street SE Bicycle Lanes
17th St SE to White River
Non - Motorized
47
B Street NW Bicycle Lanes
3rd St NW to 30th St NW
Non - Motorized
48
Terrace Drive NW Bicycle Lanes
15th St NW to W St NW
Non - Motorized
49
Dogwood Street SE Bicycle Lanes
21st St SE to Skyway Lane
Non - Motorized
50
West Valley Highway Bicycle Lanes
Main St to SR -18
Non - Motorized
51
14th Street NW Bicycle Lanes
B St NW to A St NE
Non - Motorized
52
116th Avenue SE Bicycle Lanes
SE 304th St to SE 312th St
Non - Motorized
53
124th Avenue SE Bicycle Lanes
SE 316th St to SE 320th St
Non - Motorized
54
132nd Avenue SE Bicycle Lanes
SE 304th St to SE 312th St
Non - Motorized
55
M Street SE Bicycle Lanes
4th St SE to 8th St SE
Non - Motorized
56
Evergreen Way SE*
New Roadway
Roadway
57
I Street NE*
New Roadway
Roadway
* These projects were constructed by others as part of private development projects
1.5 Plan Organization
The following three chapters are organized according to the three primary transportation modes
in Auburn: the street system (Chapter 2), the non- motorized system (Chapter 3), and the
transit system (Chapter 4). Each chapter contains a needs assessment and discussion of the
future system, including proposed projects or improvements.
Chapter 1. Introduction
Page 1 -9
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The remaining chapters cover subjects pertaining to all three system types. Chapter 5 details the
City's transportation objectives and policies. Chapter 6 discusses funding sources that can be used
to finance future network improvements. Chapter 7 identifies a monitoring and evaluation
strategy to ensure the document remains relevant and that progress is made towards
implementation of the Plan.
1.6 Staff Resources
Implementation of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan requires numerous resources,
including staff time. All departments play a role in executing the Plan, but the Community
Development & Public Works (CDPW) Department is the implementation lead. The CDPW
Department employs engineers, planners, technical and support staff, and maintenance and
operations personnel to maintain and improve the City's transportation system. Nonetheless, staff
performs many functions and dedicating sufficient resources to carry out the goals of this plan
continues to present challenges. Figure 1 -1 identifies the basic organization of the CPDW
Department.
Figure 1 -1 Transportation Program Staff Resources (2015)
1
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT & PUBLIC WORKS
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF
PUBLIC WORKS OPERATIONS
STREET /VEGETATION
MANAGER
STREET
SUPERVISOR
MAINTENANCE WORKER 1 CDL
(2 POSITIONS)
Chapter 1. Introduction
MAINTENANCE WORKER 11 CDL
(6 POSITIONS)
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF
ENGINEERING /CITY ENGINEER
TRANSPORTATION
MANAGER
STREET SYSTEM
ENGINEER
ENGINEERING
AIDE
TRAFFIC
ENGINEER
TRANSPORTATION
PLANNER
1
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
ENGINEER
TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
TECHNICIAN
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
TECHNICIAN
Page 1 -10
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Chapter 2.
THE STREET SYSTEM
The City is served by an extensive street network, which
includes highways, arterials, collectors, and local streets.
The Auburn transportation system is designed to
accommodate all modes of travel. This chapter describes
the network and how well it serves the City both existing
and future.
2.1 Existing Street System
Auburn Way S at M Street SE
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
The street system functions as a network. Functional classification is the hierarchy by which streets and
highways are defined according to the character of service they provide. There are three main classes
of streets in Auburn: arterials, collectors, and local streets. Existing street classifications are shown in
Map 2 -1. All streets have been classified using the Federal Functional Classification system guidelines.
No significant changes have been made to the classification of City streets from the previous
Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
The Auburn Engineering Design Standards identifies design standards for each type of City street, in
conformance with WSDOT and AASHTO standards.
From a planning perspective, acknowledgment and proper designation of functional classifications
allows for the preservation of right -of -way for future transportation corridors, whether the corridor
provides access to car, HOV, transit, bike, or pedestrian use. Functional classification helps establish
corridors that will provide for the future movement of people and goods, as well as emergency vehicle
access. Proper designation is crucial to the planning effort; as development occurs, accommodation for
the appropriate transportation corridors should be incorporated into development plans.
STATE HIGHWAYS
SR -18 — connects I -5 to I -90 through Auburn. Within the City limits, SR -18 has interchanges with SR-
167, West Valley Highway, C Street, SR- 164 /Auburn Way S, Auburn Black Diamond Road, and SE
304th Street providing access to downtown Auburn and Lea Hill. It is classified as both a Highway of
Statewide Significance (HSS) and a National Highway System (NHS) route for the entire corridor
segment. SR -18 is a full control limited access highway, allowing access only at interchanges within the
City limits
SR -167 - also known as the Valley Freeway, serves as an alternative to I -5, connecting South King and
north Pierce counties to the I -405 corridor to the north. SR -167 is designated as both HSS and NHS.
Within the City limits, SR -167 has interchanges with SR -18, S 277th Street, 15th Street NW, and 15th
Street SW. SR -167 is a full control limited access highway, allowing access only at interchanges within
the City limits
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 1
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
SR -164 - is a 15 -mile roadway corridor beginning at the SR -18 interchange with Auburn Way S. The
corridor is aligned southeast through the City, connecting with the Muckleshoot Tribal Reservation
and White River Amphitheater, and unincorporated King County before terminating in the City of
Enumclaw at its junction with SR -410. SR -164 is a City street which is part of a State Highway. It is
classified as an urban minor arterial by WSDOT, and also a HSS. The City of Auburn classifies is as a
principal arterial. SR -164 does not have the same access restrictions as found on SR -18 and SR -167.
ARTERIALS
Arterials are the highest level of City street classification. There are two types of arterials in Auburn.
Principal Arterials are designed to move traffic between locations within the region and connect with
the freeway system. Design emphasis is placed on providing movement for both inter- and infra -city
traffic. As such, these facilities typically carry the highest traffic volumes, experience the longest vehicle
trips, and have the highest speed limits of all City streets.
Direct access to adjacent land uses is permitted, although these streets are most likely to have limited
access, in an effort to enhance safety along these corridors, and increase capacity for through vehicles.
These arterials are the framework street system for the City and usually extend beyond the City limits,
connecting with neighboring jurisdictions. They are typically constructed to accommodate five -lanes of
traffic with speed limits of 30 to 45 mph. The design year average daily traffic (ADT) is greater than
15,000 vehicles per day. Principal arterials are heavily utilized as bus routes, carrying both local and
regional service. Typically, on -street bicycle facilities are not appropriate for Principal Arterials and
bicyclists are accommodated on adjacent separated trails or on parallel bicycle routes. Pedestrians are
accommodated on sidewalks.
Minor Arterials interconnect and augment the principal arterial system by providing access to and
from the principal arterials and freeways. They serve moderate length trips with slightly less mobility
than principal arterials and distribute traffic to smaller geographic areas. Minor arterials may serve
secondary traffic generators such as business centers, neighborhood shopping centers, major parks,
multifamily residential areas, medical centers, larger religious institutions, and community activity
centers. While minor arterials should not enter neighborhoods, they do provide access between
neighborhoods. They are typically constructed to accommodate four to five lanes of traffic with speed
limits of 30 to 35 mph and a design year ADT of 10,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day. Minor arterials are
frequently utilized as bus routes, have sidewalks to comfortably accommodate pedestrians and may
include bicycle lanes, as appropriate.
COLLECTORS
Collectors are a step below arterials in the City classification system. There are three types of collectors
in Auburn.
Urban Residential Collectors are used to connect local streets and residential neighborhoods to
community activity centers and minor and principal arterials. Urban Residential Collectors are typically
constructed to accommodate two travel lanes with medians and turn pockets at intersections or two
travel lanes with bicycle lanes. The posted speed limit is generally 30 mph and the design year ADT is
2,500 to 10,000 vehicles per day. Urban Residential Collectors have sidewalks and may be utilized for
some transit service, including dial -a -ride transit and paratransit services.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 2
AUB
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Residential Collector, Urban
Rustic Residential Collectors are routes located in
areas with less intensive land uses associated with
the Residential Conservancy land -use designation.
They carry traffic between local and arterial streets.
Rustic Residential Collectors provide access to all
levels of arterials, are typically constructed to
accommodate two lanes with gravel shoulders on
both sides, and have a speed limit of 30 to 40 mph.
The gravel shoulder may be reduced on one side to
provide a wider shoulder on the other for equestrian
access or bicycle travel. Rustic Residential Collectors
do not have sidewalks and generally do not carry
transit services except for paratransit and possibly
dial -a- ride - transit. The design year ADT is 1,000 to 5,000 vehicles per day.
Non - Residential Collectors provide infra- community access by connecting non - residential areas
such as industrial and commercial areas to minor and principal arterials. They may serve neighborhood
traffic generators such as stores, elementary schools, religious institutions, clubhouses, small hospitals
or clinics, areas of small multifamily developments, as well as other commercial and industrial uses.
Non - Residential Collectors are typically constructed to accommodate two lanes and a center two -way
left -turn lane, with a speed limit of 30 mph and may include bicycle lanes. The design year ADT is
2,500 to 5,000 vehicles per day. Non - Residential Collectors have sidewalks and may be utilized for
some transit service, including dial -a -ride transit and paratransit services.
LOCAL STREETS
Local Streets are the most common street type in the City. Local streets comprise all facilities not part
of one of the higher classification systems. Local streets primarily provide direct access to abutting land
and to the higher order streets. Service to through traffic is discouraged. There are four categories of
local streets.
Urban Local Residential Streets provide access to abutting residential parcels. They offer the lowest
level of mobility among all street classifications. The street is designed to conduct traffic between
dwelling units and higher order streets. As the lowest order street in the hierarchy, the street usually
carries minimal through traffic and includes short streets, cul -de -sacs, and courts. The speed limit is
generally 25 mph and the design year ADT is 200 to 1,200 vehicles per day. Urban Local Residential
Streets have sidewalks to accommodate pedestrians. Bicyclists may travel either on the sidewalk or
within the travel lane depending on their level of comfort. Transit service is generally limited to dial -a-
ride transit and paratransit.
Rustic Local Residential Streets serve areas associated with the Residential Conservancy zoning
designation. They provide access to adjacent land and distributing traffic to and from the arterials,
residential collectors, rustic, and local streets. Rustic Local Residential Streets are two -lane roadways
with gravel shoulders and a speed limit of 25 mph. The design year ADT is 100 to 1,000 vehicles per
day. Because these streets have low traffic volumes, bicyclists can comfortably share the travel lane
with motorized vehicles. Since Rustic Local Residential Streets do not have sidewalks, pedestrians walk
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 3
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
along the shoulder of the road. Transit service is very infrequent and most likely limited to paratransit
and possibly dial -a- ride - transit.
Local Non - Residential Streets provide direct access to higher order classification streets and serve
primarily industrial and manufacturing land uses. They offer a lower level of mobility and
accommodate heavy vehicle traffic. Typically they have two travel lanes with a speed limit of 25 mph
and the design year ADT is 400 to 1,200 vehicles per day. Local Non - Residential Streets have
sidewalks to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists may travel on the shoulder of the road (Class IV
bicycle facility), although bicycle travel may not be as comfortable as on Local Residential Streets due
to a greater frequency of trucks and other heavy vehicles. Transit service is generally limited to dial -a-
ride transit and paratransit.
Private Streets can be appropriate for local access in very limited usage. They provide direct access to
City streets and should be limited to those streets accessing properties within a planned area and
immediately adjacent properties. Private streets at a minimum are built to the same design and
construction standards as a local residential street.
ALLEYS AND ACCESS TRACTS
Alleys provide vehicular access to abutting properties, generally through the rear or side of the
property. Alleys can be public or private and serve several purposes including access management and
the alleviation of traffic problems on city streets. Alleys should provide through access to city streets or
adequate turnaround space if through access is not feasible. Alleys shall be constructed to allow for
general- purpose and emergency access at all times.
Access Tracts, sometimes referred to as shared driveways, provide vehicular access for lots that do
not abut a street or alley. They are most common in panhandle lots or rear lots that do not have street
or alley access. Access tracts are privately owned and maintained. They must provide for sufficient
vehicular movement and turnaround space, be free of temporary and permanent obstructions, and
provide for emergency access.
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Average daily traffic counts were obtained from data collected during 2013. Map 2 -2 shows the
existing average weekday daily traffic volumes on City arterials.
A major contributor to the high traffic volumes on City arterials is traffic passing through the City.
This pass - through traffic originates in surrounding jurisdictions and uses City streets to access the
major regional highways, such as SR -18 and SR -167. Between 25 and 30 percent of all vehicle trips on
the Auburn street system begin and end outside the City. The City is committed to working with
WSDOT to improve the state highway system, thereby reducing the demand on the City street system.
SPEED LIMITS
The City designates speed limits as a means of alerting drivers to safe and appropriate travel speeds for
a particular corridor segment. Typically, the higher the classification of roadway, the higher the posted
speed limit. Except for school zones which are posted at 20 mph when children are present, speed
limits in the City range from 25 mph (typically for local roads) to 45 mph on some principal arterials
The City routinely monitors corridors to ensure appropriate speed limits are in place. Unless otherwise
posted the statutory legal speed limit in the City is 25 mph.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 4
AUB
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND SIGNS
Traffic signals, signs, and pavement markings are used to inform road users, thereby increasing the
effective use of the roadway by moving traffic more efficiently and safely. The City uses the Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) as guidance for design, construction, and placement of
these design elements in the right of way.
FREIGHT
Auburn is an important freight hub in the Puget Sound region, and the efficient movement of freight,
through and within the City, is critical to Auburn's economic stability. Both rail and truck freight,
originating largely in the Ports of Tacoma and Seattle, pass through Auburn regularly
RAIL
The Union Pacific Railroad (UP) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) have rail lines
running through Auburn. The UP line runs north- south, to the east of the Interurban Trail. BNSF has
a double -track, federally designated, high -speed railroad line running north - south. BNSF and Sound
Transit are planning to add a third track to this north -south line by 2016. This third track is being
installed to handle increased commuter rail traffic and freight traffic. The BNSF Stampede Pass line
runs east -west through downtown Auburn, entering Auburn at the east end of town near Auburn -
Black Diamond Road and merging with the north -south line just south of the Auburn Station.
In addition, BNSF operates a rail yard between A Street SE and C Street SW, south of SR -18. In the
future, this area may develop as a multi -modal rail yard, prompting the need to mitigate increased truck
traffic through capacity improvements. BNSF also has plans to increase traffic on the Stampede Pass
line, the east -west rail line running through Auburn. To accommodate this increase the City recently
completed the grade separation of M Street SE. Both the BNSF north -south line and the Stampede
Pass line are handling an increase in rail freight traffic. BNSF handles a number of unit (solid) coal
trains traveling to terminals in northwest Washington state as well as unit oil trains carrying crude oil to
northwest Washington state refineries. While loaded coal and oil trains are usually handled on the
.north -south line, some of these empty trains return east to Wyoming or North Dakota via the
Stampede Pass line.
The pavement at the crossing of the Union Pacific Railroad at 15th Street SW is in very poor
condition. Rehabilitation of the pavement is a high priority for the City, and a project has been
programmed to reconstruct 15th Street SW from C Street SW to the railroad tracks.
TRUCK
The City has designated truck routes for through freight movement in an effort to maximize the
efficiency of and protect the roadway infrastructure. Current City of Auburn truck routes are shown in
Map 2 -3. Truck routes, established by City ordinance, are designated for roadways that incorporate
special design considerations such as street grades, continuity, turning radii, street and lane widths,
pavement strength, and overhead obstruction heights.
In addition, the Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) is used to
classify roadways, freight railroads and waterways according to the annual freight tonnage they carry as
directed by RCW 47.05.021. Map 2 -4 shows the 2013 classifications of City streets. The FGTS is
primarily used to establish funding eligibility for Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB)
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 5
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
grants, fulfill federal reporting requirements, support transportation planning process, and plan for
pavement needs and upgrades. The FGTS classifies roadways using the following categories:
• T1: more than 10 million tons per year
• T2: 4 million to 10 million tons per year
• T3: 300,000 to 4 million tons per year
• T4: 100,000 to 300,000 tons per year
• T5: at least 20,000 tons in 60 days and less than 100,000 tons per year
Truck freight tonnage values are derived from actual or estimated truck traffic counts and converted
into average weights by truck type.
The City expects that the majority of regional truck trips will take place on state highways. However,
recognizing that trips through the City are sometimes necessary, Auburn has designated a network of
north -south and east -west corridors as truck routes, which are built to truck standards. In addition, the
City has designated future truck routes, which will be designed and constructed to accommodate truck
traffic, as opportunities arise. FMSIB has expressed an interest in these first and last mile connectors
which provide access between these classified freight facilities and port, rail yard, distribution centers
and truck terminals.
Auburn has significant industrial and commercial development throughout the City. The City
encourages local delivery trucks to use the designated truck network as much as possible, but
recognizes that trips on non -truck routes are necessary. The City is committed to supporting local
industry, business, and residential needs and recognizes that the ability to ship and receive freight is
essential to the success of many businesses. To implement this policy, the City will collaborate with
local businesses to improve freight access, while maintaining the roadway infrastructure, whenever
possible. This may include adopting City Code and updating the Auburn Engineering Design and
Construction Standards in a manner that favors these priorities. However, in a limited number of key
locations, trucks may be prohibited due to existing design elements which do not support trucks,
protecting sensitive areas such as downtown and residential neighborhoods, and to extend pavement
life.
Truck Traffic Using S 277th Street
SAFETY
The City places the highest priority on providing a
safe transportation system for all travel modes.
Continual efforts are made to make changes to the
street system in a manner that improves safety and
decreases the likelihood and severity of collisions.
Pedestrian crossings and other non - motorized
safety issues are discussed in the following chapters.
At grade railroad crossings, emergency response
needs and collisions related to the street system are
discussed below.
At Grade Railroad Crossings
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 6
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
At grade railroad crossings create conflict points between vehicles and non - motorized road users and
rail traffic. Auburn has several at grade railroad crossings: the Union Pacific tracks cross 44th St NW,
37th Street NW, 29th Street NW, West Main Street, and 15th Street SW. The BNSF tracks cross 37th
Street NW, 29th Street NW, 3rd Street NW, W Main Street, and Auburn -Black Diamond Road.
With more than 60 trains passing through the City each day, the City has many at grade crossings, each
with unique safety implications. The City coordinates with railroad operators and the State to upgrade
the crossings whenever possible. For instance, the project to grade separate M Street SE at the BNSF
Stampede Pass tracks by lowering M Street SE under the railroad overpass was completed during 2013.
Recent upgrades include the construction of a pre - signal where 37th Street NW crosses the BNSF
tracks, to stop westbound vehicles on 37th Street NW to the west of the grade crossing in advance of
the traffic signal at B Street NE. The pre - signal will prevent vehicles from stopping on the crossing.
BNSF is currently constructing a third rail mainline between Seattle and Auburn to improve service
and reliability for passenger rail. The new mainline is located on the west -side of the existing tracks.
The third mainline will reduce vehicle storage for westbound vehicles on W Main Street and 3rd Street
NW between the tracks and traffic signals with C Street NW. The City is working with BNSF to
upgrade the crossings to provide additional time to clear vehicles and pedestrians from these crossings
before the gates come down.
Impacts at the remaining grade crossings are anticipated to worsen in the future due to increased
vehicle demands at the crossings, combined with increased rail traffic, resulting in more frequent, and
longer duration, closures.
BNSF Freight Train at West Main Street
EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND MANAGEMENT
Providing residents with quick responses in
emergency situations is a high priority for the City.
The City maintains a Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan and supporting plans which
identify critical facilities that should be maintained
as a first priority during catastrophic events. Critical
transportation facilities, generally include Principal
Arterials, bridges and major evacuation routes.
In addition, the City works to provide a street
network that will ensure multiple alternate routes for
emergency vehicles. Fire and police response
vehicles are equipped with traffic signal controls
that enable emergency vehicles to secure safe and rapid passage along signalized corridors. In addition,
the City has mutual -aid agreements with nearby emergency response operators to ensure adequate
coverage in case of road closures or other obstacles that would otherwise prevent timely emergency
response.
COLLISIONS
The City collects and reviews collision 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
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 7
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
collision histories. The SPIS score for a location considers three years of data and considers frequency,
collision rate, and severity.
If a hazard is identified, corrective measures can then be identified and implemented as appropriate.
While the City relies primarily on its own data, collision data from other sources, including neighboring
jurisdictions and the State, is utilized whenever available.
2.2 Street Standards and Levels -of- Service
The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires the City to establish service levels for the street
network and to provide a means for correcting deficiencies and meeting future needs. Transportation
professionals use the term level -of- service' (LOS) to measure the operational performance of a
transportation facility, such as a street corridor or intersection. This measure considers perception by
motorists and passengers in terms of speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions and
delays, comfort, and convenience.
The City currently uses a single -mode LOS system based upon vehicular travel. In the future, a multi -
modal system which includes transit, pedestrians, and bicyclists should be developed and adopted.
The currently adopted LOS methodology gives letter designations from `A' through `F', with LOS A
representing the best operating conditions, and LOS F representing the worst. LOS can be quantified
in different terms, depending on the transportation facility. Definitions for each level -of- service and
the methodologies for calculating the level -of- service for various facilities are contained in the Highway
Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000). The City most commonly uses corridor level -of-
service for accessing facilities. Generally, this is considered the most comprehensive way to determine
vehicular traffic impacts. The following descriptions provide some guidance for interpreting the
meaning of each LOS letter for corridor LOS on city streets.
• LOS A describes primarily free -flow operations at average travel speeds, usually about 90 percent
of the free -flow speed (FFS) for the given street class. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their
ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Control delay at signalized intersections is minimal
FFS is the average speed of vehicles on a given facility, measured under low- volume conditions,
when drivers tend to drive at their desired speed and are not constrained by control delay.
Control delay is the total elapse time from a vehicle joining the queue until its departure from the
stopped position at the head of the queue. This includes the time required to decelerate into the
queue and accelerate back to free -flow speed.
• LOS B describes reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel speeds, usually about 70
percent of the FFS for the street class. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only
slightly restricted, and control delays at signalized intersections are not significant.
• LOS C describes stable operations; however, ability to maneuver and change lanes in midblock
locations may be more restricted than at LOS B, and longer queues, adverse signal coordination,
or both may contribute to lower average travel speeds of about 50 percent of the FFS for the
street class.
• LOS D borders on the range in which small increases in the number of vehicles may cause
substantial increases in delay and decreases in travel speed. LOS D may be due to poor
progression through the signalized intersections along a corridor, inappropriate signal timing, high
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 8
AUB
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
traffic volumes, or a combination of these factors. Average travel speeds are about 40 percent of
FFS.
• LOS E is characterized by significant delays and average travel speeds of 33 percent or less or the
FFS. Such operations are caused by a combination of adverse signal progression, close signal
spacing, high volumes, extensive delays at critical intersections, and inappropriate signal timing.
• LOS F is characterized by urban street flow at extremely low speeds, typically one -third to one -
fourth of the FFS. Intersection congestion is likely critical at signalized locations, with high delays,
high volumes, and extensive queuing.
CITY LOS STANDARDS AND CURRENT LOS
It is necessary to define LOS standards for transportation facilities to enforce the concurrency
requirements of the GMA. If development causes a facility to degrade below a defined LOS standard,
concurrency requires that the development make improvement to restore operations to the LOS
standard or better, or the permit for that development be denied.
Auburn defines unsatisfactory LOS as: an unacceptable increase in hazard or unacceptable decrease in
safety on a roadway; an accelerated deterioration of the street pavement condition or the proposed
regular use of a street not designated as a truck route for truck movements that can reasonably result in
accelerated deterioration of the street pavement (typically addressed through the payment of the truck
impact fee); an unacceptable impact on geometric design conditions at an intersection where two truck
routes meet on the City arterial and collector network; an increase in congestion which constitutes an
unacceptable adverse environmental impact under the State Environmental Policy Act; or the inability
of a facility to meet the adopted LOS standard.
The City uses corridor LOS as its primary measurement of transportation system impacts. The City
corridors typically used for analyzing LOS are shown in Map 2 -5, although the City may require
analysis of a different segment in order to assess the full LOS impacts. All arterials and collectors in
Auburn have designated LOS standards. The LOS standard for these corridors is primarily LOS D
with the exception of some corridors that may operate as LOS E or F, with a specified maximum
travel time.
While the City uses a weekday PM peak hour based LOS system, weekday AM peak hour LOS impacts
may be required to be analyzed in situations where unique conditions are likely to result in a LOS
deficiency during the weekday AM peak hour.
Table 2 -1 identifies Auburn's LOS Standards, as well as the 2014 corridor LOS. As indicated in the
table, LOS was calculated for many of Auburn's street corridors using traffic count data collected
during 2014.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 9
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Table 2 -1 Corridor Level of Service — Existing 2014 Weekday PM Peak Hour
LOS 2014 LOS
ID Corridor From To Standard* NB /EB
1 Auburn Way N 15th St NE S 277th St D C
SB/WB
C
2 Auburn Way N E Main St 15th St NE E D
D
3 Auburn Way S E Main St M St SE D C
D
4 Auburn Way S M St SE Academy Dr SE D B
C
5 M St/Harvey Auburn Way N E Main St E D
D
6 M St/Harvey E Main St Auburn Way S D D
C
8 37th St NE /NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N D C
C
9 15th St NE /NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N F ** D
D
10 Auburn Ave /A St 6th St SE E Valley Access Rd D B
C
11 Main St West Valley Hwy R St D D
D
12 15th St SW West Valley Hwy C St SW D D
D
13 C St SW Ellingson Rd SR -18 D B
C
14 West Valley Hwy 37th St NE 15th St NE E B
C
15 S 277th St Frontage Rd L St NE E C
C
16 R St SE /Kersey Way Howard Rd Lake Tapps Pkwy D B
B
17 Lake Tapps Pkwy East Valley Hwy Kersey Way SE D C
C
18 A St NW /B St NW 3rd St NW S 277th St D C
B
19 8th St NE /Lea Hill Rd Harvey Rd 124th Ave SE E C
B
22 SE 312th St/132nd Ave SE 124th Ave SE SR -18 D B
B
25 105th PI SE /SE 320th St Lea Hill Rd 124th Ave SE D A
C
26 Lakeland Hills Wy SE Lake Tapps Pkwy A St SE D D
C
27 29th St SE /Riverwalk Dr A St SE Auburn Way S D D
C
31 3rd St SW /Cross St C St Auburn Way S E F
E
33 41st St SE /Ellingson Rd A St SE C St SE E F
F
35 West Valley Hwy 15th St NW 15th St SW E D
E
* Corridor segments within Downtown Auburn may operate at LOS E in accordance with the Auburn Downtown
Plan. All other arterial and collector corridors must operate at LOS D or better, unless otherwise indicated.
** Total travel time in the eastbound direction cannot exceed 1,000 seconds for this corridor to meet LOS
standards.
As shown in the table, each of the corridor segments currently meets LOS standards except for
eastbound Cross Street and both eastbound and westbound 41st Street SE, all of which currently
operate at LOS F. The poor operations on these segments can be attributed to their short length,
closely spaced signalized intersections, and limited storage lengths, combined with high volumes of
turning traffic.
In the majority of cases it is the traffic operations at the intersections along a corridor which limit the
capacity of the corridor, rather than the capacity of the roadway segments between intersections. This
is especially true along corridors with closely spaced intersections, such as Cross Street and 41st Street
SE, and corridors where two principal arterial roads intersect, such as Auburn Way S and M Street SE.
Along other corridors where the number of intersections is limited and the distances between them are
greater, the corridor LOS may not identify a bottleneck at one or more of the intersections along the
overall corridor. An example of this is along the Kersey Way corridor, where the overall corridor
operates at LOS B, but the intersection with 29th Street SE operates at LOS D, with the highest delays
and longest vehicle queue associated with southbound traffic on Kersey Way.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 10
AUB
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
STATE HIGHWAY LOS
Amendments to the GMA in 1998 added new requirements for local jurisdictions to address state -
owned transportation facilities, as well as local transportation system needs in their comprehensive
plans (RCW 47.06.140). House Bill 1487, adopted by the Washington State Legislature in 1998,
requires that the transportation element of local comprehensive plans include the LOS standards for
Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS). HB 1487 clarified that the concurrency requirement of the
GMA does not apply to HSS or other transportation facilities and services of statewide significance.
HB 1487 also requires local jurisdictions to estimate traffic impacts to state -owned facilities resulting
from land use assumptions in the Comprehensive Plan.
THE WSDOT STANDARD
WSDOT has identified a LOS D standard for all urban Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS)
according to the State Highway System Plan (HSP). All state highways within the City of Auburn,
including SR -18, SR -167, and SR -164 are classified as urban Highways of Statewide Significance, and
therefore have a LOS D standard.
LAND USE /TRANSPORTATION RELATIONSHIP
Land use and the transportation system are intertwined, each influencing the development of the
other. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate how the future transportation system can be improved to
best support both existing and proposed land -uses.
In 2003 Auburn was designated as a Regional Growth Center by the Puget Sound Regional Council as
part of the Vision 2040 plan. Designated regional growth centers are identified for housing and
employment growth, as well as being eligible for regional transportation funding.
A broad overview of Auburn's Comprehensive Plan land use map's more intensive land use
designations shows industrial (light and heavy) designations in the west side of the valley floor portion
of the City, extensive commercial development (light and heavy) located along Auburn Way N,
Auburn Way S, and A Street SE, and sizable heavy commercial designated areas near the SR -18 and
15th Street SW interchange (The Outlet Collection) and between 15th Street NW and 37th Street NW
(Emerald Downs). Downtown Auburn is near the geographic center of the City, located generally east
of the Interurban Trail, north of SR -18, west of F Street SE /NE, and south of 3rd Street NW /NE and
4th Street NE. Residential development generally exists along the east side of the valley floor and the
surrounding hillsides of West Hill, Lea Hill, and Lakeland Hills. A major land use activity in Lea Hill to
the east includes the Green River College located on SE 320th Street.
As with many cities in South King and North Pierce counties, especially those along the SR -167
corridor, the local land use plan is characterized by a predominance of industrial land use designations.
The land use element identifies "Industrial" as the City's second most predominant zoning designation
(residential being first). Consequently, the City's land use plan establishes a development pattern that
has traffic generated by these industrial uses directed towards the State Highway System.
Another key feature in the Comprehensive Plan land use element is a "Heavy Commercial"
designation at 15th Street SW, adjacent to SR -167 and SR -18. This commercial designation is the site
of The Outlet Collection. The Outlet Collection attracts customers on a regional basis and impacts use
of the State Highway System, even more than the downtown, or the commercial development along
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 11
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Auburn Way and A Street SE. The same can also be said for Auburn Way N to the north of
downtown which serves as an automall, which attracts both local and regional traffic.
Downtown Auburn contains a mix of land -uses including residential, commercial and industrial uses.
Commercial uses in the Downtown are focused along Main Street, Auburn Way and A Street SE and
tend to serve more local needs. Historically, this commercial development has served predominantly
local needs. However, the presence of the Auburn Station, Multi Care, City Hall, and recent and
proposed new development projects, combined with regulations and policies that encourage transit
oriented developments, downtown commercial development will serve a broader range of needs in the
future. Downtown Auburn also has the Cities most robust non - motorized infrastructure, including
both extensive pedestrian and bicycle facilities. This provides the opportunity for both residents and
employees to rely on proximate transit services at the Auburn Station, combined with a robust non -
motorized transportation system for a portion of their transportation needs. The goal of this plan is to
continue to grow and expand the non - motorized transportation system to provide the same
transportation choices throughout the City.
The City's Comprehensive Plan land use map focuses residential development in the eastern portion of
the valley and in the West Hill, Lea Hill, and the Lakeland Hills area. Access to the State Highway
System in Lea Hill is limited to SR -18 at SE 304th Street. Future impacts on the State Highway System
in the Lea Hill area will primarily be commuter traffic due to the predominance of residential compre-
hensive plan designations in that area, and continued growth of Green River College. The
development of Lakeland Hills will also principally result in increased commuter traffic.
Future impacts to the State Highway System can generally be gauged by projected arterial link ADT
volumes at or near state highway ramps. This is, at best, only a general estimate since not all traffic
passing through these street segments is utilizing the State Highway System. Further, traffic using the
arterial segment may be originating from outside Auburn, and may therefore not result from
assumptions in Auburn's land use plan.
Several city arterials connect directly to SR -167 and SR -18. Some examples include C Street SW, West
Valley Highway, and Auburn Way South connections with SR -18, and 15th Street NW and 15th Street
SW connections with SR -167. These streets are among the most heavily used in the City, a function of
their relationship to the State Highway System. SR -164 is also within the city limits Year 2013 average
daily traffic (ADT) volumes along SR -164 range from a low of 21,700 near the eastern city boundary
up to 35,900 along Auburn Way South near SR -18. These volumes are forecast to continue to increase
over the next 20 years. However, the growth is limited by the capacity of the roadway.
The State Highway System also impacts the City's local street system. A "pass- through" traffic pattern
results in significant traffic volume increases on the local arterial street system. For example, many of
Auburn's weekday PM peak hour trips are work to home trips originating outside of the Auburn area
and destined for residential areas outside of Auburn, including Pierce County and the Enumclaw
Plateau. This traffic exits state routes and travels through Auburn to avoid congestion on the State
Highway System. This is evidenced by increases in traffic counts within the City that clearly exceed
that which might be expected through anticipated growth and development patterns outlined in the
City's land use plan, such as at SR -164 at the eastern City limit The City may implement measures that
encourage local traffic movements and discourage pass - through trips.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 12
CI FY OF
AUBTT Comprehensive Transportation Plan
WASHINGTON
2.3 Future Street System
METHODOLOGY FOR EVALUATING FUTURE S .., fEM
TRAVEL FORECASTS
HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
Auburn has grown rapidly during the past decade, and housing and employment are expected to
continue to increase significantly by 2035, with the population reaching approximately 95,000
residents, as shown in Figure 2 -1. Much of the housing growth will come from higher density re-
development in the downtown area and the rapidly growing Lakeland Hills and Lea Hill areas.
1
2
3
Figure 2 -1. Population, Housing, and Job Growth
FOR CITY OF AUBURN 2000 — 2035
100,000
90,000
—
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
2000 2010 2025 2035
■Population ■Housing Units ❑Jobs
— Population and housing data for 2000 and 2010 taken from US Census.
— Population and housing projection for 2025 and 2035 from City of Auburn
— Covered employment data and estimates derived from PSRC.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 13
CITY OF
I EN .R, ..
WASHINGTON
TRAFFIC GROWTH
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The City of Auburn relies on traffic forecasts using the VISUM travel demand model, which is based
upon the land use plan and assumptions found in the land use element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) household and employment forecasts are also used. The model
is calibrated to include existing land uses and local knowledge, including large traffic generators such as
Boeing, the Outlet Collection, Emerald Downs, Muckleshoot Casino, and White River Amphitheater.
Areas outside of the current city limits that are expected to significantly impact the City transportation
system are included in the model. The model enables the City to conduct traffic forecasts for all arterial
and collector streets based upon a number of if -then development and land use scenarios.
The more dramatic traffic increases are often caused by development outside the City, especially along
the roadways serving the Enumclaw Plateau. Other areas of major traffic increase include A Street SE,
M Street SE, and the West Valley Highway.
In order to address the growing traffic volumes and congestion levels on city streets, traffic operations
were evaluated for a near term horizon year of 2022 and a long term horizon year of 2035. This
approach was taken to help identify which improvement projects need to be included in the
Transportation Improvement Program (UP) to accommodate short term growth, vs. those longer
term projects which are needed to accommodate additional growth forecast to occur between 2022
and 2035.
FUTURE 2022 CONDITIONS
City Projects
The current Transportation Improvement Program, adopted during 2015, identifies programmed
projects for the years 2016 to 2021. Therefore, the analysis of 2022 traffic operations includes City
projects which would increase capacity along both roadway segments and at intersections which are
anticipated to be constructed by 2022. The included projects are listed in Table 2 -2 and illustrated on
Map 2 -6. This includes a project programmed in the TIP that is not included in the travel demand
model: a new crossing of the BNSF Rail yard between SR -18 and 41st Street SE (UP #12). This is
discussed in more detail in the Future System Recommendations section of this chapter and may be
included in future updates to this plan.
Regional Transportation Projects
In addition to the City of Auburn projects identified above, a number of regional transportation
projects are planned to be completed, predominantly WSDOT projects planned for the freeway
system. However, none of these projects are anticipated to be completed by 2022.
Additional Projects
In addition to the projects identified in Map 2 -6, four intersections outside of the City were identified
as potential level -of- service concerns during the plan development. While the following intersections
have not been analyzed in detail because they are situated outside of Auburn's jurisdiction, they should
be evaluated by the appropriate jurisdiction and programmed for improvements as needed:
• 51st Avenue S/S 316th Street (King County)
• S 321st Street /46th Place (King County)
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 14
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
• S 321st Street /Peasley Canyon Road (King County)
• West Valley Hwy /Peasley Canyon Rd (WSDOT)
As mitigation for an adjacent development project located within the City of Auburn, the eastbound
stop - controlled S 316th Street approach to 51st Avenue S is being widened to provide separate left -
and right -turn lanes. This improvement was required to mitigate a development related impact to LOS
at this intersection. The same development project also identified a traffic operations impact at the S
321st Street intersection with 46th Place S. As mitigation for that impact the development dedicated
ROW to the City to allow the 46th Place S approach to S 321st Street to be realigned to the east to
create two offset "T" intersections. This project is included in the City of Auburn TIP (11P #9) and
included in Table 2 -2 below.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 15
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Table 2 -2. Future Capacity Projects and Cost Estimates — 2022
Ma
No.
ocation Total Cost
corridor and segment) description (2015 dollars)
City Projects
Included in the 2022 Ana ysis
1
Auburn Way S
Dogwood St SE to Fir St SE
Widen to 5- lanes, pedestrian
improvements, and access control
$1,739,163
2
I Street NE Corridor
45th St NE to S 277th St
Construct 5 lane arterial
$6,763,892
3
S 277th Street
AWN to Green River Bridge
Widen to 5 lanes total and install a
Class 1 trail
$8,293,101
4
A Street NW Phase 2
W Main St to 3rd St NW
Construct multi -lane arterial
$3,150,000
5
F Street SE
4th St SE to Auburn Way S
Add a center turn lane and non -
motorized improvements
$2,457,620
6
M Street NE
E Main St to 4th St NE
Widen to 4 lanes
$1,525,000
7
8th Street NE
Pike St NE to R St NE
Add EB lane to south side of 8th
Street NE
$1,450,000
8
49th Street NE
Auburn Way N to I St NE
Construct multi -lane arterial
connection
$3,350,000
9
46th Place S Realignment
S 321st St and 46th PI S
Realign 46th Place S to the east to
create two new T intersections
$825,000
10
124th Ave SE Corridor
SE 318th St to SE 312th St
Widen to 4 lanes and bike lanes
$4,000,000
11
SE 320th Street
116th Ave SE to 122nd Ave
SE
Roundabout at 116th Avenue SE
and safety improvements
$4,644,100
12
Auburn Way S
Muckleshoot Plaza to
Dogwood St SE
Additional turn lanes and vehicle
storage, access control, and non-
motorized improvements.
$2,892,550
Chapter 2. The Street System
Page 2 -16
AUBURN
WASH INGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
City Projects Included in the 2022 Analysis (Continued)
13
W Valley Highway
Improvements
15th St NW to W Main St
Roadway widening, re-
channelization, non - motorized
improvements and ITS upgrades
$3,700,000
14
W Main Street
W Valley Hwy to Interurban Trail
Re- channelization, non - motorized
improvements, ITS upgrades
$4,444,938
15
Auburn Way S
Fir St SE to Hemlock St SE
Widen to 5- lanes, signalize
Hemlock St SE
$4,609,899
16
M Street SE Corridor
8th St SE to Auburn Way S.
Construct multi -lane corridor
$6,675,000
17
Lea Hill Road Segment 1
R St NE to 105th PI SE
Widen to 2 lanes each direction
including widening of the Green
River Bridge. Includes bike lanes
and sidewalks.
$13,030,000
18
Lea Hill Road Segment 2
105th PI SE to 112th Ave SE
Widen to 2 lanes each direction.
Includes bike lanes and sidewalks.
$12,000,000
19
Lea Hill Road Segment 3
112th Ave SE to 124th Ave SE
Widen to 2 lanes each direction.
Includes bike lanes and sidewalks.
$4,000,000
20
W Valley Highway
SR -18 to 15th St SW
Re- channelization, non - motorized
improvements, ITS upgrades
$3,100,000
21
R Street SE
17th St SE to M St SE
Construct a new roadway
connection
$10,000,000
22
M Street SE at 12th Street SE
Install a new traffic signal
$625,000
23
M Street SE at 29th Street SE
Install a new traffic signal
$450,000
Chapter 2. The Street System
Page 2- 17
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
City Projects Included in the 2022 Analysis (Continued)
24
124th Avenue SE at SE 284th
Street
Safety and capacity improvements
$700,000
25
Lake Tapps Parkway
Lakeland Hills Wy to E Valley
Hwy
Add ITS system
$1,005,000
26
29th Street SE at R street SE
Increase intersection capacity
$1,800,000
27
A Street SE at 37th Street SE
Install a traffic signal and
southbound u -turn for future
access management
$934,500
28
I Street NE at 22nd Street NE
Construct a new roundabout
$1,425,000
Subtotal for City Projects $109,589,763
Non -City Projects included in the 2022 Analysis
11
51st Avenue
S 288th Street
Add signal
2022 LEVELS OF SERVICE
Weekday PM peak hour levels of service were calculated for 2022 conditions using the same
methodology used to calculate the 2014 levels of service shown previously. The same corridors were
analyzed in both cases. The 2022 levels of service account for the growth forecast to occur between
2014 and 2022 and the capacity improvement projects identified above. The 2022 levels of service are
shown in Table 2 -3. Is should be noted that without the projects shown in Table 2 -2, the traffic
operations presented in Table 2 -3 would be significantly worse, with additional corridors operating
below adopted LOS standards.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 18
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Table 2 -3. Corridor LOS — Future 2022 Weekday PM Peak Hour
LOS 2022 LOS
ID Corridor From To Standard* EB /NB SB/WB
1 Auburn Way N 15th St NE S 277th St D C D
2 Auburn Way N E Main St 15th St NE E D D
3 Auburn Way S E Main St M St SE D C E
4 Auburn Way S M St SE Academy Dr SE D C C
5 M St/Harvey Rd Auburn Way N E Main St E D D
6 M St/Harvey Rd E Main St Auburn Way S D D D
8 37th St NE /NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N D C C
9 15th St NE /NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N F ** D D
10 Auburn Ave /A St 6th St SE E Valley Access Rd D C C
11 Main St West Valley Hwy R St D C D
12 15th St SW West Valley Hwy C St SW D D D
13 C St SW Ellingson Rd SR -18 D B D
14 West Valley Hwy 37th St NE 15th St NE E B C
15 S 277th St Frontage Rd L St NE E C C
16 R St SE /Kersey Way Howard Rd Lake Tapps Pkwy D B C
17 Lake Tapps Pkwy East Valley Hwy Kersey Way SE D C C
18 A St NW /B St NW 3rd St NW S 277th St D C B
19 8th St NE /Lea Hill Rd Harvey Rd 124th Ave SE E C B
22 SE 312th St/132nd Ave SE 124th Ave SE SR -18 D B B
25 105th PI SE /SE 320th St Lea Hill Rd 124th Ave SE D B B
26 Lakeland Hills Way SE Lake Tapps Pkwy A St SE D D D
27 29th St SE /Riverwalk Dr A St SE Auburn Way S D I C C
31 3rd St SW /Cross St C St Auburn Way S E E E
33 41st St SE /Ellingson Rd _ A St SE C St SE E F
35 West Valley Hwy 15th St NW 15th St SW E D C
* Corridor segments within Downtown Auburn may operate at LOS E in accordance with the Auburn Downtown Plan. All
other arterial and collector corridors must operate at LOS D or better, unless otherwise indicated.
** Total travel time in the eastbound direction cannot exceed 1,000 seconds for this corridor to meet LOS standards.
As shown in the table, all of the evaluated corridors would meet LOS standards in 2022 with the
inclusion of the improvements identified above with the following exceptions:
• Southbound Auburn Way S between E Main St and M St SE;
• Eastbound 41st Street SE between A St SE and C St SW; and
• Westbound 41st Street SE between A St SE and C St SW.
In order to be able to meet LOS standards on these corridor segments additional improvements
beyond those already included in this analysis are required. A review of the segment of Auburn Way S
between E Main St and M St SE shows that traffic operations through the SR -18 interchange and at
the intersection with M St SE cause the overall corridor segment to degrade to LOS E. The
interchange area is constrained by the existing SR -18 overpass, the configuration of the SR -18 on- and
off - ramps, and the close spacing of the ramp intersections which provide limited vehicle storage. As a
result the ability to increase capacity along this section of the corridor is limited. It is possible that the
construction of the new eastbound off -ramp from SR -18 to SR -164 in the vicinity of the Muckleshoot
Casino could draw traffic away from this area; however the scope of this project has not yet been
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 19
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
determined so it was not accounted for in this analysis. It may also be appropriate, as with certain
other corridor sections, for the City to consider changing the LOS standard for this corridor to reflect
that the existing corridor is built -out and further improvements are neither desirable nor cost effective.
Similar circumstances exist for Corridor #33, 41st Street SE /Ellingson Road. This corridor is forecast
to operate at LOS F in both the eastbound and westbound directions in 2022. This corridor is
constrained by the BNSF bridge, the close spacing of the C Street SW and A Street SE signalized
intersections, and the limited storage space between the two intersections. Providing additional
capacity would likely require the BNSF bridge to be reconstructed, an expensive proposition, with a
limited increase in capacity. It is possible that other capacity projects may reduce traffic volumes on
this by constructing additional capacity on alternate routes. These include the crossing of the BNSF
railyard to the north which would provide another east -west connection across southern Auburn, and
the completion of the improvements to Stewart Road to the south, including the replacement of the
White River bridge, which would provide additional capacity between SR -167 and the Lakeland Hills
area. The BNSF railyard crossing project is included as project #12 in the TIP, however construction
is shown beyond 2021, so this project was not included in the analysis of 2022 conditions. Completion
of the Stewart Road capacity improvements are being planned by the Cities of Sumner and Pacific.
The City of Auburn supports these improvements, and has programmed the project in the TIP as
project #73, which will provide the City of Pacific with some funds to support construction of their
portion of the project. Construction of these improvements is not anticipated until beyond 2022, so
this was not accounted for in this analysis. Another potential option could be to revise the LOS
standard for this corridor to reflect that the existing corridor is built -out and further improvements
may not be cost effective.
The transportation system can be compared to a three legged stool in terms of the improvement
strategies which are available to reduce congestion. The three options are to construct improvements
to add capacity, make better use of the existing infrastructure which is available, and to manage
demand. The analysis presented above accounts for the construction of additional capacity, and
making better use of the available capacity through expansion of ITS infrastructure and the
optimization of signal timing. The analysis does not account for demand management strategies which
could result in improvements to traffic operations through the use of such things as:
• Road Pricing (Tolling)
• Parking Management and Parking Pricing
• Car Sharing
• Pay -as- You -Drive Insurance
• Ridesharing and HOV Lanes
• Transit Incentives
• Transit and non - motorized Improvements
• Telecommute, compressed work week, off -peak schedule
Many of these solutions have been implemented at the state level, with additional consideration being
given to expanding the options which are currently in use.
Decisions need to be made regarding how these three potential congestion management tools are
balanced to provide the most cost effective solutions. It is unlikely that the City will be able to
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 20
AUB
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
implement all of the capacity projects documented above by 2022 due to the cost of the project
portfolio being in excess of available funding. Therefore, the focus should be on the most cost
effective projects which reduce congestion at locations where it is a recurrent problem, and improving
the efficiency of the existing system. Transportation system management and transportation demand
management are included in the future system recommendations section at the end of this chapter.
FUTURE 2035 CONDITIONS
City Projects
In addition to the projects identified above which were included in the 2022 analysis, a number of
additional projects were included in the analysis of 2035 conditions. These additional projects include
those which are included in the TIP but which are not anticipated to be constructed until beyond 2022,
and the longer term projects included in the previous Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The
included projects are listed in Table 2 -4 and illustrated on Map 2 -6.
This includes a project programmed in the TIP that is not included in the model: the crossing of the
BNSF Rail yard. This is discussed in more detail in the Future System Recommendations section of
this chapter and will likely be included in future model runs and updates to this plan.
Regional Transportation Projects
In addition to the City of Auburn projects identified above, a number of regional transportation
projects were included in the development of the forecast volumes. These are predominantly WSDOT
projects planned for the freeway system. Table 2 -4 summarizes the included projects, along with
planning level cost estimates.
Additional Projects
Another future project with significant area -wide impacts is the addition of the Auburn Bypass
connecting SR -18 to SR -164. A draft Bypass Feasibility Report (September 2009) was prepared in
partnership with WSDOT, the City of Auburn, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and other regional
partners. While a preferred alternative for the bypass has not yet been developed, the Washington State
Legislature included funding in the 2015 transportation budget for the design and construction of this
new connection. It is anticipated that the new roadway will include an eastbound off -ramp from SR -18
to SR -164 in the vicinity of the Muckleshoot Casino, no additional details regarding the project have
been determined. Therefore, this was not accounted for in the traffic forecasts. The impacts of this
project will be identified and mitigated as part of the process to determine the ultimate alignment. The
project will be included in future updates of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 21
CITY OF
■ ION i
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Table 2 -4. Future Capacity Projects and Cost Estimates — 2035
Map Location
No. (corridor and segment)
Description
Total Cost
(2015 dollars)
Additional City Projects Included in the
2035 Analysis
29
SR -164
Hemlock St SE to Academy Dr
SE
Widen road to two lanes each
direction plus a center two -
way left turn lane. Upgrade
the intersection of Auburn
Way South and Dogwood
Street to accommodate
Bypass traffic.
$61,000,000
30
R Street Bypass
MStSEtoSR -18
Construct a new bypass road
$6,200,000
31
S 312th Street
112th Avenue SE
Add NB right turn lane, EB
right turn lane, WB left turn
lane, and signal. Provide
sidewalks and bike lanes on
all legs.
$1,720,000
32
SE 304th Street
112th Avenue SE
Add signal and NB left turn
lane. Include sidewalks and
bike lanes both sides.
$1,300,000
33
GRCC Improvements at 124th
Ave SE
SE 318th St to SE 320th St
Construct 500' section from
SE 320th to SE 318th Way
with three SB lanes and one
NB lane. The southbound
lanes will be two left turn into
GRCC and one right turn
onto SE 320th. Bike lanes
and sidewalks included.
$510,000
34
A Street Loop
A St SW to A St SE
Add one -way (EB) road with
unsignalized free right turn at
A Street SE. Include
sidewalks both sides of new
road.
$1,700,000
35
A Street SE /C Street SW
Ellingson Road
Coordinate signals at A and
C Street together. At A
Street, add additional WB
through lane; At C Street,
restripe to allow SB left turn
lane. Include sidewalks on all
legs of both intersections.
$1,500,000
Chapter 2. The Street System
Page 2- 22
AUB
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Additional City Projects Accounted for in the 2035 Analysis (continued)
36
SE 284th / SE 288th St
124th Ave SE to 132nd Ave SE
Construct new
collector linking
284th Street at 124th
Ave. to 288th Street
at 132nd Ave. Road
will be one lane each
direction with bike
lanes and sidewalks.
$7,700,000
37
51st Avenue
S 296th S
Provide protected
SB left turn phase
and signal and SB
left turn lane; Include
bike lanes and
sidewalks on all legs
$1,400,000
38
108th Avenue /112th Avenue
SE
S 277th St to S 286th St
Realign / improve
radius at doglegs
(SE 281st St) for
safety, and realign
intersecting streets
to improve site
distances. Widen to
4 lanes north of
284th Street. At
286th Street, widen
to allow for turn
pockets. Include bike
lanes and sidewalk
both sides of
108th/112th Ave SE.
$7,700,000
Subtotal for City
Projects $90,730,000
Additional City Projects NOT Accounted for in the 2035 Analysis (continued)
39
BNSF Yard Grade Separation
TBD
Construct road
across BNSF yard
$32,125,000
40
Auburn Way S Bypass
Riverwalk Dr to SR -18 at R St
SE
Construct an Auburn
Way S Bypass
between Riverwalk
Dr and R St SE with
new connection to
SR -18 at R St SE
$60,450,000
Chapter 2. The Street System
Page 2 -23
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Non -City Projects included in the 2035 Analysis
SR -167
1 -405 to SR -509
From 1 -405 to SR -18, add one NB and one SB general
purpose lane; From SR -18 to SR -161, add one NB HOT
lane and one SB HOT lane; Add direct NB /SB HOV /HOT
lane connection ramps between SR -167 & 1 -405; Add NB
and SB auxiliary lanes between 1 -405 and S 180th Street;
Add NB and SB auxiliary lanes between SR -516 and S
277th Street; Extend SR -167 from SR -161 to SR -509.
SR -18 at SR -167
Complete ramp from EB SR -18 to SB SR -167 and
eliminate SR -18 access from West Valley Highway near
Peasley Canyon.
SR -167
15th Street NW to 8th Street E
Add HOV lane each direction
Stewart Road
SR -167 to East Valley Highway
Widen to 2 lanes each direction and center turn lane in
the Cities of Sumner and Pacific. Includes widening of the
White River bridge.
2035 LEVELS OF SERVICE
Weekday PM peak hour levels of service were calculated for 2035 conditions using the same
methodology used to calculate both the 2014 and 2022 levels of service. The 2035 levels of service
account for the growth forecast to occur by 2035 and the capacity improvement projects identified
above. The 2035 levels of service are shown in Table 2 -5. As shown in the table, all of the evaluated
corridors would meet LOS standards in 2035 with the inclusion of the improvements identified above
with the following exceptions:
• Southbound Auburn Way N between S 277th St and 15th St NE;
• Southbound Auburn Way S between E Main St and M St SE;
• Northbound M St between E Main St and Auburn Way S;
• Eastbound 37th St between W Valley Hwy and Auburn Way N;
• Westbound 15th St SW between W Valley Hwy and A St SE;
• Southbound Lakeland Hill Way SE between Lake Tapps Pkwy and A St SE;
• Eastbound 3rd St SW /Cross St between C St and Auburn Way S;
• Westbound 3rd St SW /Cross St between C St and Auburn Way S; and
• Westbound 41st Street SE between A St SE and C St SE.
The additional traffic anticipated by 2035 is expected to degrade a number of additional corridors
below adopted level of service standards relative to the analysis of 2022 conditions.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 24
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
There are two locations where corridors would operate at improvement levels of service in 2035
relative to 2022 conditions:
• Eastbound 41st Street SE between A St SE and C St SE, which would improve from LOS F to
LOS E, the result of the improvements identified above, combined with the planned
improvements to the Stewart Road corridor and SR -167 which would attract traffic currently
using the 41st Street SE /Ellingson Road corridor to access A Street /East Valley Highway to
the south.
• Southbound West Valley Highway between 15th Street NW and 15th Street SW, which would
improve from LOS D to LOS C. This is also likely due to improvements to SR -167, which
would reduce the use of West Valley Highway as a parallel bypass route.
Table 2 -5. Corridor Levels of Service - Future 2035 Weekday PM Peak Hour
2035 LOS
LOS
ID Corridor From To Standard* NB /EB SB/WB
1 Auburn Way N 15th St NE S 277th St D D E
2 Auburn Way N E Main St 15th St NE E D D
3 Auburn Way S E Main St M St SE D C F
4 Auburn Way S M St SE Academy Dr SE D D C
5 M St/Harvey Rd Auburn Way N E Main St E D E
6 M St E Main St Auburn Way S D E D
8 37th St NE /NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N D E C
9 15th St NE /NW West Valley Hwy Auburn Way N F ** E E
10 Auburn Ave /A St 6th St SE E Valley Access Rd D C C
11 Main St West Valley Hwy R St D D D
12 15th St SW West Valley Hwy C St SW D D E
13 C St SW Ellingson Rd SR -18 D C D
14 West Valley Hwy 37th St NE 15th St NE E B C
15 S 277th St Frontage Rd L St NE E E C
16 R St SE /Kersey Way Howard Rd Lake Tapps Pkwy D B C
17 Lake Tapps Pkwy East Valley Hwy Kersey Way SE D C C
18 A St NW /B St NW 3rd St NW S 277th St D C C
19 8th St NE /Lea Hill Rd Harvey Rd 124th Ave SE E C B
22 SE 312th St/132nd Ave SE 124th Ave SE SR -18 D B B
25 105th PI SE /SE 320th St Lea Hill Rd 124th Ave SE D C C
26 Lakeland Hills Way SE Lake Tapps Pkwy A St SE D D E
27 29th St SE /Riverwalk Dr A St SE Auburn Way S D C C
31 3rd St SW /Cross St C St Auburn Way S E F F
33 41st St SE /Ellingson Rd A St SE C St SE E E F
35 West Valley Hwy 15th St NW 15th St SW E C C
* Corridor segments within Downtown Auburn may operate at LOS E in accordance with the Auburn Downtown Plan. All
other arterial and collector corridors must operate at LOS D or better, unless otherwise indicated.
** Total travel time in the eastbound direction cannot exceed 1,000 seconds for this corridor to meet LOS standards.
In order to be able to meet LOS standards on these corridor segments additional improvements
beyond those already included in this analysis may be required. However, it may not be cost effective
to construct the additional capacity needed along all of these corridor segments. However, it may be
Chapter 2. The Street System
Page 2- 25
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
possible to improve traffic operations at key intersections along these corridors to reduce congestion.
However, these improvements may not be sufficient to improve operations to below adopted LOS
standards.
The City, and the broader region, will need to identify strategies and adopt policies, including
transportation demand management, transportation system management, and public- private
partnerships, to be able to manage congestion while
reaching projected growth targets.
FUTURE SYSTEM RECOMMENDATIONS
FUTURE STREET IMPROVEMENTS
The proposed future street plan consists of a
combination of city street and regional
transportation improvements, described in Table 2-
3 and shown in Map 2 -6. The City cannot
adequately solve traffic congestion by making City
street improvements alone. Partnerships with
WSDOT, King and Pierce Counties, and other
agencies are essential to implementing the future
street system in Auburn. The following actions are proposed:
1. Implement street projects prioritized in the City's TIP and CFP;
2. Program and seek additional funding for street capacity projects not currently identified in the TIP
and CFP;
3. Work collaboratively with WSDOT and other partner agencies to implement roadway
improvements to the regional highway network; and
4. Work to implement TSM, TDM and non - motorized improvements.
West Main Street, Downtown Auburn
DOWNTOWN CIRCULATION PLAN
Auburn's Downtown is undergoing considerable growth and transition to a higher density, mixed -use
town center. Major redevelopment, including the Trek Building and Merrill Gardens mixed -use
projects is occurring to the south of Main Street.
The transformation of downtown Auburn will include many changes to the public right -of -way and
streetscape. The Downtown Circulation Plan will accommodate the many types of travelers that will be
using downtown streets including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, truck operators, and personal
vehicle users. An improved pedestrian and bicycle environment will need to be designed into the fabric
of downtown Auburn. At the same time, there are several major north -south corridors which traverse
the downtown, so accommodation for high traffic volumes and the potential repercussions of
modifying the existing street system will need to be considered in the development of the Downtown
Circulation Plan.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 26
AUB
WASHINGTON
ENVIRONMENTAL PARK DISTRICT
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
In the vicinity of the Environmental Park, to the west of downtown Auburn, the City is evaluating the
use of low impact roads and projects that add sidewalks, trails, and additional connectivity between
Clay Street and Western Avenue. This area will be examined in more detail for transportation
improvements as the concept for the Environmental Park District is further refined.
41ST STREET SE /ELLINGSON ROAD BETWEENA ST SE AND CST SW
The area around 41st Street SE /Ellingson Road between A Street SE and C Street SW continues to be
a bottleneck for Auburn drivers, especially with additional development in the Lakeland Hills PUD and
the Pierce County cities to the south. The close spacing of these two intersections, coupled with the
numerous business and residential accesses in the area warrant a more in depth study of the area. This
study will likely also include the entire A Street SE and C Street SW corridors, and an evaluation of the
BNSF rail yard crossing projects discussed below.
BNSF RAIL YARD CROSSING
The City has identified the need for a new east /west grade separated crossing of the BNSF rail yard
between C Street SW and A Street NE.
There are a variety of criteria that the City will consider to determine the alignment of the crossing,
including potential development of the BNSF property as a multi -modal rail yard, commercial
development on Auburn Way S and A Street SE, re- development of the GSA property, funding
feasibility, neighborhood impacts, transportation impacts, and engineering feasibility. The crossing
project was not accounted for in the 2035 traffic model. Therefore, it is difficult to access the specific
impacts of the crossing project. However, it is anticipated that the project could significantly improve
east -west mobility in southern Auburn, relieving the existing bottlenecks at 3rd Street SE and 41st
Street SE, by providing an additional alternative for the residential neighborhoods to the east of the rail
yard to connect with the commercial and retail land -uses and SR -167 to the west of the yard. One
potential impact of the crossing project, depending on the alignment selected, could be an increase in
traffic through the Terminal Park neighborhood.
AUBURN BYPASS
Another future project with significant area -wide impacts is the addition of the Auburn Bypass
connecting SR -18 to SR -164. A draft Bypass Feasibility Report (September 2009) was prepared in
partnership with WSDOT, the City of Auburn, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and other regional
partners. While a preferred alternative for the bypass has not yet been developed, the Washington State
Legislature included funding in the 2015 transportation budget for the design and construction of a
portion of this new connection. It is anticipated that the new roadway will include an eastbound off -
ramp from SR -18 to SR -164 in the vicinity of the Muckleshoot Casino, no additional details regarding
the project have been determined. Therefore, this was not accounted for in the traffic forecasts. The
impacts of this project will be identified and mitigated as part of the process to determine the ultimate
alignment. The project will be included in future updates of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT
Transportation system management (TSM) techniques, which make more efficient use of the existing
transportation facilities, can reduce the need for costly system capacity expansion projects. These
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 27
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
techniques can also be used to improve LOS when travel corridors reach adopted LOS standards.
TSM techniques used by the City include:
• Re- channelization /restriping, adding turn lanes, adding /increasing number of through lanes;
• Signal interconnect and optimization;
• Turn movement restrictions;
• Access Management; and
• Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).
The City will continue to use these TSM techniques to maximize the efficiency of the existing street
network. Of the various TSM strategies available, the City continues to invest in and expand its ITS
infrastructure as a cost effective means of increasing system capacity. The ITS system enables the City
to change traffic signals in real -time, thereby accommodating unexpected increases in traffic or traffic
obstacles such as event related traffic and collisions. For example, ITS has proven to be a useful tool in
helping to manage the impact of event traffic traveling south on Auburn Way South, often during the
PM peak, to the White River Amphitheatre. The City will continue to roll out ITS capabilities on
corridors around the City, as referenced in Map 2 -7 and detailed in the ITS policies included in
Chapter 5.
In addition to TSM strategies, the City strives to provide viable alternatives for travelers, to ensure
freedom of choice among several transportation modes, including transit, biking and walking as
alternatives to the automobile. The City will prioritize the development of pedestrian - friendly
environments such as bicycle routes and pedestrian paths as the non - motorized system expands.
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
Reducing congestion includes strategies to reduce demands on the transportation system. The State of
Washington emphasized the importance of transportation demand management (TDM) by adopting a
Commute Trip Reduction law. That law requires all major employers, with over 100 employees
arriving between the hours of 6:00 and 9:00 AM, to develop programs and strategies to reduce the
number of commuter automobile trips made by their employees. Transportation demand management
reduces demand on the street system. While TDM and TSM employ a different suite of strategies, they
share many of the same benefits. Both increase the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce the
need for costly capacity expansions, help improve LOS, and contribute to an enhanced quality of life
for those who use and benefit from the transportation system. TDM strategies include:
• ride - sharing through vanpools and carpools;
• preferential parking for high- occupancy vehicles;
• car sharing programs;
• transit use incentives;
• parking management to discourage single occupant vehicle (SOV) travel;
• telecommuting;
• alternative work schedules to compress the work week or shift the commute outside the typical
commute hours; and
• urban design encouraging non - motorized travel through design features.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 28
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The City of Auburn will continue to encourage drivers of single occupancy vehicles to consider
alternate modes of travel such as carpools, vanpools, transit, non - motorized travel, and alternative
work schedules.
STREET MAINTENANCE & REHABILITATION
The City is responsible for maintaining the physical structure of the roadway system. However,
pavement maintenance is expensive, and adequate funding is generally not available. Recognizing this
dilemma, Auburn residents approved Proposition 1, the "Save Our Streets" (SOS) Program, in
November 2004. The SOS program created a dedicated local street fund for repair, rehabilitation, and
maintenance of local roadways from property tax revenues. In 2013, after the original programs tax
increases ended, the City Council modified the funding source for this program to be from sales tax on
construction.
The City has created a similar program to fund the repair and maintenance of arterials and collector
streets. The program is funded through a one percent utility tax. While the available funding through
this program is limited, which makes prioritizing projects challenging, the City has been able to
maximize the value of the available funds by using them to leverage grant funds, enabling significantly
more arterial and collector street repair and maintenance to be completed.
Local Residential Street Before SOS Rebuild
Local Residential Street After SOS Rebuild
NEIGHBORHOOD NEEDS
Transportation systems and facilities can impact adjacent neighborhoods. Potential impacts result from
increased traffic resulting from drivers seeking alternate routes to congested arterials, in an effort to
save time. These impacts can include higher vehicle speeds resulting in potential safety concerns, and
associated air and noise pollution. Neighborhoods throughout the City are concerned with these traffic
impacts and want to discourage cut - through traffic.
City policies discourage through traffic in neighborhoods. The City also has a traffic calming program
that addresses the pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile traffic safety concerns that impact
neighborhoods. The traffic calming program is a community -based program with the goal of
identifying potential problems and development of solutions to help mitigate these impacts. The
Chapter 2. The Street System
Page 2- 29
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
program raises public awareness of traffic safety issues and ways that people can help minimize traffic
problems in their own neighborhoods.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.070) provides that comprehensive plans should include a
discussion of intergovernmental coordination efforts, including "an assessment of the impacts of the
transportation plan and land use assumptions on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions."
Auburn works closely with neighboring cities, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and state and regional
agencies to ensure coordinated efforts are made in developing all modes of the transportation system.
Chapter 2. The Street System Page 2- 30
0 0 1
Miles
City of Auburn "V Future Minor Arterial
NHighway N Residential Collector
Future Non Resident Cdlectar
^/ Rural Cdlector
NPrincipal Arterial #.4, Future Residential Cdlector / Local
NMina Arterial N Non Residential Collector Rirate
Auburn Transportation Plan
Functional Roadway Classification
Map 2 -1
Printed On: 10P;
0 0 1
Miles
City of Auburn
100 -999
1,000 -9,999
- 10,000+
Source: City of Auburn GIS Department
Auburn Transportation Plan
Average Daily Traffic Volumes (2013)
Map 2 -2
Printed On: 10/6/2015 Map ID: 4592
S
L
mh 1
SE-288T-SS
S�JB7H -S`-
J
W
SELT44 8
8E 312THH ST
326
S3
r
18'
IAMOIVD—AQ SE_
22
0 0 1
Miles
Ntuenent Local. Truck Routes
• "V tue,eetT�lughekukRoute
• $ Future Through Truck Route
Priority 2
NCurrent Local Trull, aeu
•.•M, Future Local Truck Route
WSPGT
Parks
City &Auburn
Source: City of Auburn GIS Department
Auburn Transportation Plan
Truck Routes
Map 2 -3
Printed On: 10/0 /2015 Map ID: 4081
0 0 1
Miles
Source: City of Auburn GIS Department
City of Auburn "/ T3 (300 - 4,000)
^/ T1 (Over 10,000) /v T4 (100 - 300)
\01 T2 (4,000 - 10,000) T5 (Over 20 in 60 Days)
Auburn Transportation Plan
Freight Routes Classification Map
Class T -1 to T -5
Annual Tons (in thousands)
Map 2 -4
Printed On: 10/0 /2015 Map ID: 4588
uiiIf lam/
0 0 1
Miles
Corridor Sections
City of Auburn
Source': City of Auburn GIS Department
Auburn Transportation Plan
Auburn LOS Corridors
Map 2 -5
Printed On: 10/8/2015 Map ID: 4603
WOW
0 0 1
Miles
2022 City Improvement:
2035 City Improvement:
City of Auburn
Source: City of Auburn GIS Department
Auburn Transportation Plan
Transportation Improvement Projects
Map 2 -6
Printed On: 10
2015 Map ID: 4682
0 0 1
Miles
0 City of Auburn PED Signal
M Future Variable Message • County Signal
• City Signal • WSDOT
V ITS Copper
V ITS Fiber
X1.4,9 Future ITS Corridor
Auburn Transportation Plan
Intelligent Transportation Systems
Map 2 -7
Printed On: 10 /8/2015 Map ID: 4589
AUBURICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
CHAPTER 3.
NON - MOTORIZED
TRANSPORTATION
Non - motorized transportation is an integral
component of Auburn's transportation system.
Non - motorized travel includes walking, bicycling,
and equestrian travel. The City seeks to enhance the
non - motorized travel environment both for
recreational travel and trips that might otherwise be
taken via a car or bus in order to improve mobility
and environmental health.
Riding on the Interurban Trail
The City recognizes that the evolution of the
transportation system has prioritized the automobile as the primary travel mode. A side effect of
this process has been the erosion of conditions favorable to non - motorized travel. This chapter
seeks to redress the balance by enhancing conditions in which non - motorized modes are a realistic
and attractive travel option.
Planning and developing a strong non - motorized network supports several state and national acts
including Washington's Growth Management Act, Commute Trip Reduction Act, the federal Clean
Air Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), MAP 21 (Federal Surface Transportation Bill)
and its successors. Supporting the non - motorized system helps ensure compliance with these
initiatives and the healthy community principles espoused by PSRC through Vision 2040. It also
increases funding opportunities for City projects. Improving the non - motorized system also helps
address the findings of the citywide Health Impact Assessment process which recommended that
the City improve sidewalk connectivity, improve the pedestrian environment, eliminate natural and
man -made mobility barriers for pedestrian and bicyclists, improve transit access, improve traffic
safety, pedestrian safety and personal security.
This chapter is divided into three subsections: pedestrian travel, bicycle travel, and equestrian travel.
Each subsection contains an assessment of existing conditions and needs, followed by guidelines
for development of the future system.
3.1 Pedestrian Travel
As a Regional Growth Center, the City encourages transportation planning that emerges from a
clear land -use plan based on a community vision and the values expressed in Imagine Auburn. In
this vision, Auburn supports higher density housing in the downtown; neighborhood commercial
districts; and landscaped, pedestrian- oriented street and sidewalk design. This pattern of
development reinforces a positive pedestrian environment.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Transportation Page 3 -1
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
New Pedestrian Crossing at Green River
College on S 320th Street
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Auburn has many assets, which contribute to a
welcoming pedestrian environment, most notably a
pedestrian - scaled downtown and an extensive
network of trails. The needs assessment highlights
these existing assets and identifies improvement
needs.
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT
As a whole, Auburn's urban fabric in the downtown
has remained intact and supports a positive
pedestrian environment. Businesses, shops, and
single - family homes front streets with sidewalks and
street trees. However, some of the older sections of sidewalks need repair or replacement.
Since adoption of the 2009 Transportation Plan, there have been sidewalk, ADA and lighting
improvements to Main Street, S Division Street Promenade, City Hall Plaza and Plaza Park and
behind the shops on East Main Street. New growth in the downtown core has or will result in the
development of multi - story residential and office buildings and senior housing, helping renew the
pedestrian infrastructure and creating a need for continued effort to maintain and improve the
sidewalk system. In addition, the Sounder commuter rail station and transit hub at West Main Street
and C Street SW provide pedestrians more options for connecting to regional destinations. These
improvements contribute to a more hospitable environment for pedestrians. The city has an annual
sidewalk repair program which focuses on ADA improvements, responding to complaints,
repairing identified hazards, and improving areas with high pedestrian use.
Commercial development outside the downtown exists primarily along arterials and is dominated
by strip development and auto - oriented businesses. Although sidewalks are provided on most
arterials, pedestrians may feel exposed to the traffic. Surface parking lots border the sidewalks, and
driveways interrupt the continuity of the sidewalk system. The heavy volumes of vehicular traffic
and wide streets along arterials, such as Auburn Way, pose a barrier for pedestrians walking along
or crossing the roadway.
Sidewalk Inventory
A sidewalk inventory was conducted as part of the Plan update in 2005. A subsequent inventory
was conducted in 2008 to collect sidewalk data for the West Hill and Lea Hill where a large scale
annexation into the City took place in 2007. The inventory identifies sidewalks in the City, and rated
their condition. This inventory continues to serve as a guide to help the City identify problem areas
and program improvements according to prioritization guidelines, outlined later in this chapter.
The older residential neighborhoods tend to have sidewalks on both sides of the street, but they
vary widely in condition and construction standards. Some residential areas, such as southwest Lea
Hill, were built under King County's jurisdiction and sidewalk construction was not required.
Breaks in the sidewalk network require pedestrians to maneuver around parked cars, into private
yards, or into the street. In newer neighborhoods such as Lakeland Hills, sidewalks built to the city
standards applicable at the time of their construction are provided on both sides of the street.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -2
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The sidewalk survey of the Lea Hill and West Hill annexation areas revealed a sporadic and often
disconnected sidewalk system. Several of the newer residential developments have sidewalks, but
many of the older residential areas and arterial streets are missing large segments of sidewalk,
resulting in an inconsistent pedestrian environment. Map 3 -1 illustrates the existing and proposed
sidewalk network within the City.
Trail Network
Auburn's developing trail network provides local and regional connections for both recreational use
and commuting. Currently the only regional trails that have been developed include the Interurban
and portions of the Green River and White River Trails. The Lakeland Hills Trail network provides
connections to neighborhood parks, community center, and to the City of Sumner via a tunnel
under the BNSF railway. Map 3 -2 illustrates the existing and proposed trail network within the City.
SCHOOL ACCESSIBILITY
School safety is a major concern for parents, students, the school districts, and the City alike The
Auburn School District, working with an advisory committee, has established a safe walking area
for each elementary and middle school based on the presence of sidewalks, walking paths, and safe
neighborhood streets, as well as the availability of safe street crossings and the traffic conditions in
the surrounding neighborhoods. All routes within the safe walking areas are designated as `Safe
Routes to School'. Occasionally, individual schools will notify parents and students of preferred
walking routes within each area.
Since the last major update of the comprehensive plan the following Safe Walking Routes
improvements have been made throughout Auburn;
• School Zone Flashing Beacons were installed at all elementary and middle schools.
• Rectangular Rapid Flashing Warning Beacons were installed at the existing crosswalk at E St
NE and 4th St NE for Washington Elementary.
• A new crosswalk with warning signage and ADA pedestrian ramps was installed at K St SE
& 23rd St SE for Pioneer Elementary. This also improved drainage on the street.
• Rainier Middle School received improved crosswalks, signage, and ADA pedestrian ramps
along 116th Ave SE.
• Lea Hill Elementary received 600 feet of sidewalk, curb and gutter, and ADA pedestrian
ramps on the south side of SE 312th Street as well as pedestrian push buttons and
countdown pedestrian signal heads at the intersection of SE 312th Street and 124th Ave SE.
• The new Auburn High School created all new sidewalk and crosswalks with bulb outs on
both East Main Street and 4th Street NE.
• New crosswalks with warning signage, ADA pedestrian ramps, and curb bulb outs were
added at Terminal Park Elementary.
• New curb, gutter, ADA pedestrian ramps and pavement was constructed on H St SE
between 17th and 21st St SE for Olympic Middle School.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -3
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Some of these improvements were made possible by a Safe Routes to School grant. The flashing
beacons have been funded through a combination of grant programs and City resources.
Despite the progress that has been made over the past several years, there are still areas of need.
The following needs were identified to enhance and improve the safety for school children in and
around the school safe walking areas.
Pioneer Elementary School
Curb & gutter, sidewalks and ADA ramps along K St SE between 21st St SE and 25th St SE.
Cascade Middle School
The crossing at M Street NE and 24th Street NE experiences heavy traffic. The City and school
district continue to cooperate to increase the safety of this crossing near the school.
Dick Scobee Elementary School
The City will continue to coordinate with the School District in exploring ways to improve access
to surrounding neighborhoods to increase the school's designated safe walking area.
Terminal Park Elementary School
Curb gutter, sidewalks, and ADA ramps along B St SE between 12th St SE and 17th St SE.
Evergreen Heights Elementary School
Curb, gutter, sidewalks, and roadway improvements
along S 316th between 51st Ave S and the eastern
boundary of the school. This includes access and
circulation improvements to the school and
intersection improvements at 56th Ave S.
Hazelwood Elementary School
Sidewalk and ADA curb ramp improvements along
SE 304th Street between 112th Ave SE and 116th
Ave SE and along 118th Ave SE from SE 304th to
the north.
Lea Hill Elementary School
Sidewalks and ADA ramps along both sides of
124th Ave SE between SE 304th St and SE 312th
St.
Safe Walking Route to School
Mountain View High School
Sidewalks along 124th Ave SE between SE 284th St and SE 304th St, and along 132nd Ave SE
between SE 288th St and SE 299th St.
Riverside High School & Ilalko Elementary
Pedestrian crossing of A Street SE and the BNSF Railway would greatly benefit students at these
two schools. A 2015 study identified a preferred crossing alternative for future development.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3-4
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Lakeland Hills Elementary
Encouraging increased walking and biking to this school would provide the greatest benefit for
easing traffic congestion and safety concerns. Additionally an onsite parking and access redesign
would further reduce school pick up and drop off related congestion.
Chinook Elementary
Sidewalks along Auburn Way South between Hemlock St SE and Academy Dr SE. Additionally
intersection improvements have been identified to reduce conflicts and improve circulation for
buses.
Accessible Routes of Travel
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that all new public, commercial and
institutional developments meet ADA standards. Furthermore, existing public buildings, public
outdoor facilities, and public rights -of -way shall be retrofitted to achieve accessibility. An accessible
route of travel is designated to accommodate the needs of many different people, including those
who are blind, using wheelchairs, pushing a stroller or cart, or injured. The law requires that
municipalities have a transition plan in place to address ADA issues. The City of Auburn is in the
process of completing that plan and ADA design specifications can be found in the Auburn
Engineering Design Standards manual.
Site Design
Pedestrian conditions should be evaluated at the earliest stage of new development. The zone
between the development and the public right -of -way needs to contribute to pedestrian network
connectivity and continuity. In addition to the public right -of -way, the interior of the site ought to
be examined for suitable pedestrian circulation, and how the two are connected. Wherever possible,
walkways should be placed along the most direct routes to connect buildings, parking, bus stops,
and other attractions. In some cases, walking trails that link residential streets to collectors or
arterials can provide a more direct pedestrian connection than travel along the sidewalk network,
particularly in neighborhoods without a street grid system, specifically those with cul -de -sacs.
FUTURE SYSTEM
This section describes the City's vision for the future pedestrian system and identifies programs and
initiatives that will enable it to achieve this vision.
Downtown
The downtown is historically the social heart of the community, a place for people to interact. It is
considered one of the primary pedestrian- oriented areas in the City. Important existing pedestrian
downtown linkages include connections from W Main Street to the transit hub and commuter rail
station, and between W Main Street and the Multicare Auburn Medical Center. The Downtown Plan,
a special area plan adopted in 2001 as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan, anticipates high
pedestrian oriented developments in this area, particularly around the Auburn Station. The
Downtown Plan also identifies W Main Street, A Street SW, Division Street, and the alley south of
Main Street as high priority pedestrian corridors. In addition, several recently completed projects
have helped improve non - motorized access to the downtown and transit station, including the City
Chapter 3. Non - Motoried Tramportation Page 3 -5
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Hall Plaza and Plaza Park project completed in 2010, the Division Street Promenade Project
completed in 2012 and the A Street NW Extension project, opened in June 2013.
Auburn Station has created demand for new mixed -use development, including commercial and
residential elements. The City is committed to focusing new commercial and residential
development adjacent to the Auburn Station and has been working on partnerships to bring several
mixed -use developments to Downtown. These developments include pedestrian friendly design and
streetscape improvements.
A vital pedestrian network that extends beyond downtown is a key element in the revitalization of
the downtown core.
Commercial Corridors
The City should encourage major employers to locate near transit routes and stops. Furthermore,
pedestrian connections from residential areas to commercial corridors can be enhanced through site
design policies that encourage more direct non - motorized connections to major retail locations.
Future planning along commercial corridors should also include amenities such as landscaping
adjacent to the sidewalk, improved pedestrian crossings, and enhanced bus stops at high use
locations.
Auburn has several commercial corridors, most notably Auburn Way North and South, that are
frequently traveled by pedestrians. While most of these areas have sidewalks, there is the
opportunity to enhance the pedestrian environment by providing additional protected crossings,
making improvements to lighting, completing remaining sidewalk gaps and eliminating ADA
accessibility barriers. For instance, pedestrian crossing issues arise because pedestrians often cross
at uncontrolled or mid -block locations rather than walking to the nearest signalized crossing. This
dynamic is partially attributable to the location of bus stops in relation to employment centers.
Hence, efforts should be made to locate bus stops so commuters crossing to the opposite side of
the road are dropped off and picked up near a signalized intersection.
Residential Neighborhoods
Investment in Auburn's neighborhoods is an essential component of providing a comprehensive
and functional pedestrian network. As noted in the needs assessment, sidewalk conditions vary
throughout the City. This plan acknowledges the need to retrofit the pedestrian network in many
areas of the City and incorporate pedestrian facilities into new development. Financial mechanisms
to help accomplish this goal are described later in this chapter.
High Priority Pedestrian Corridors
Map 3 -1 identifies High Priority Pedestrian Corridors that are currently lacking a complete sidewalk
system. Some of the corridors have sidewalks on one side or for portions of the corridor. Others
are missing sidewalks altogether.
These High Priority Pedestrian Corridors were selected based on the following criteria: pedestrian
volumes; proximity to schools, parks, transit routes and commercial areas; and where missing gaps
can be completed.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -6
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The High Priority Pedestrian Corridors are roadway corridors where the City intends to target
investment in pedestrian facilities. The City's current half street policy requires sidewalk to be
constructed by developers whenever significant improvements are made to a property. This has
proven to be an effective means of building out the sidewalk network. However, it is a slow process
because it relies on new development or
redevelopment to occur, making it difficult to
complete whole corridors. By programming
specific pedestrian corridors for investment, the
City can leverage grant dollars and other
resources to more strategically complete gaps in
key pedestrian corridors.
The High Priority Pedestrian Corridors
identified in Map 3 -1 are regularly reviewed for
inclusion in the City's Six -Year Transportation
Improvement Program and for grant funding
opportunities.
NON - MOTORIZED TRAILS
Auburn Multi-Use Trail
The Auburn Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan is currently being updated and will identify
specific projects for the development of local and regional trails. Thus far the long term list
includes:
The Auburn - Pacific Trail provides a multi -use path that improves access from the White River to
the Interurban Trail. A planned pedestrian crossing, under the BNSF railroad tracks just north of
the BNSF Stuck River Bridge (over the White River), will improve the regional trail system by
providing a connection between the City of Pacific and Auburn's White River Trail connection to A
Street SE.
Funding is still needed for the Auburn section of the Green River Trail. Planning efforts are also
focused on the Auburn Environmental Park and connecting the park to the Interurban Trail. This
unique park project shows residents the diversity of the ecosystem along the Mill Creek corridor.
Additional trail planning is underway for connecting the Fenster Natural Park to the Green Valley
Road area.
An important component of Auburn's trail system includes trailheads. Trailheads should be inviting
to users and provide amenities such as parking, bicycle racks, information kiosks, restroom facilities,
water fountains, trash receptacles, and seating facilities. Trailheads should be constructed and
improved as Auburn's trail system further develops. See Map 3 -2 for existing and proposed trails
and trailhead locations.
FUNDING MECHANISMS
Sidewalk Improvement Program
The City of Auburn has an Annual Citywide Sidewalk Repair and Improvement Program to repair
damaged sidewalks, tripping hazards, and to complete small missing links in the sidewalk network.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -7
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
These funds are essential for promoting non - motorized travel and can be used to leverage other
funding sources, such as state and federal grants or other city capital projects.
Auburn has identified three principal areas in which sidewalk improvements should be prioritized:
corridors that provide access to and within the downtown, school zones, and parks with a focus
on addressing potential hazards and areas of known complaints. Additional criteria for priority
access improvement could include, but are not limited to, areas with high concentrations of senior
citizens or disabled citizens, areas with high volumes of pedestrian - transit interaction, areas where
private improvements such as trees have damage the public infrastructure and areas where property
owners are willing to financially participate in the construction of sidewalk improvements through a
local improvement district (LID) In considering projects, staff also review existing street deferral
agreements to determine if the improvements previously allowed to be deferred are now needed
and should be completed by the private party.
"Save Our Streets" Program
In November 2004, Auburn residents approved
Proposition 1, "Save Our Street" Program, which
created a dedicated local street fund. This money
was set aside for repair and maintenance of local
roadways which can sometimes also include
sidewalk repair and rebuild. In 2013, the city
council modified the funding source for this
program to be from Construction Sales Tax
revenues and no longer from property taxes.
"Arterial Preservation" Program
The City also currently implements the annual
arterial street preservation program funded by a
1% utility tax. Pedestrian, ADA, and safety
improvements are included in many of the arterial
improvement projects funded by this program.
Sidewalks will be prioritized:
• Where hazardous conditions are
present;
• On school walk routes;
• Where extensive improvements are
needed in a single neighborhood;
• Along streets with curb and gutter;
• Along Downtown pedestrian
corridors;
• Where curb ramps are missing; and
• Where they will complete a missing
link in a pedestrian network.
• Where property owners are willing to
financially participate in the
construction of sidewalk
improvements through an LID.
Local Improvement Districts
Local Improvement Districts (LID) enable city investment in a specified area by leveraging city
funds with contributions from property owners in the district. LID's use limited city resources to
improve neighborhood quality and can be used to finance new sidewalks.
Safety Education and Enforcement
Awareness of pedestrian safety issues should be promoted through educational programs and
enforcement efforts. This combination helps reinforce key safety issues such as safe pedestrian
crossings and speeding. The City will proactively work to identify problem areas and issues. The
following list contains examples of some techniques that can be employed in these efforts.
• Maintaining non - motorized travel information kiosks at key City destinations (e.g. Main Street, Outlet
Collection, Emerald Downs, trails).
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -8
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
• Displaying educational information in City publications, on the website, and on TV.
• Maintaining and expanding wayfinding signage to direct pedestrians and bicyclists.
• Partnering with the School District to teach children safe walking and biking behaviors.
• Launching public information campaigns for problematic locations and partnering with the Police
Department to provide enforcement.
• Increasing driver awareness of vehicle speeds through the presence of radar speed signs where
appropriate.
Enforcing pedestrian, bicyclist, and driver infractions.
3.2 Bicycle Travel
Bicycle facilities are an important component of Auburn's transportation and recreational
infrastructure. Bicycling provides an environmentally friendly travel mode and helps citizens to
maintain a healthy lifestyle. It also helps improve traffic congestion and air quality by providing an
alternative to driving. Increasingly, bicycle commuting is becoming a more popular alternative, and
the City must take steps to provide a more functional and attractive network for commute cyclists,
in addition to recreational cyclists.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Existing Conditions
The topography in the Auburn Valley is flat and conducive to cycling for a range of skill levels.
Areas along the Green and White Rivers provide recreational opportunities for multi -use trails that
accommodate bicyclists, pedestrians and equestrians. The Interurban Trail is part of a major north -
south regional trail system. The Green River trail is also an extension of a north -south regional trail.
Therefore, Auburn has a good network of existing or planned north -south recreational trails.
However, there are few existing cross -town connections and new connections onto the West Hill
and Lea Hill are needed.
Cross -town bike connections to the West Hill and Lea Hill areas of Auburn are more challenging
due to steep topography. Yet investing in these connections is important because a significant
number of Auburn residents live in these areas. Building these connections would improve bicycle
access to regional transit, local employment the regional trail system, and to downtown Auburn.
Recreational and commuter cyclists travel along the Interurban Trail to areas north and south of
Auburn. Cyclists also frequently ride along S 277th Street to the east side of Green River Road, and
down along the Green River to 8th Street NE, or down R Street NE to SE Auburn Black Diamond
Road. SE Auburn Black Diamond Road and SE Green Valley Road are popular routes for
accessing areas east of Auburn. However, these roads are characterized by challenging cycling
conditions and are not suitable for inexperienced cyclists. Once in Auburn, there is especially a need
to increase the number of east -west bicycle facilities. Investing in trail connections to improve
bicycle access in these areas should also be a priority.
Bicycle lanes are limited on city arterials and collectors, making it difficult both for regional and
local riders to navigate for any reasonable distance through the City Limited bicycle storage is also
a hindrance to cyclists. Map 3 -2 identifies existing and planned trails and bike facilities in the City.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -9
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Auburn Bicycle Task Force
In March 2010, the city formed the City of Auburn Bicycle Task Force. It was intended that the
Bicycle Task Force would further refine the City's goals and policies for its bicycle transportation
system. The Task Force was comprised of a broad cross section of community members and
interested parties that were charged to develop recommendations on bicycle facilities, issues and
opportunities centered on the following three principles:
• Connections — for example, how do bicycle riders get from the north end to the south end
of the City or from Lakeland to Lea Hill?
• Recreation Opportunities — for example, how does the City further build and capitalize
on a bicycle network to support and enhance the recreation options for its citizens?
• Economic Development — for example, how does the City capitalize on the Interurban
Trail as a conduit of customers for existing and new businesses?
Bike Improvements Completed and Planned in the Near - Term Future
The work of the task force has informed and guided city decisions on future bike lane and trail
improvements and connections. Its work is directly reflected in improvements already made as well
as the future bike lanes and trail improvements shown in Map 3 -2.
Since 2009 bike lanes have been added to 124th Ave SE, and SE 320th Street near Green River
College on Lea Hill, a new bike lane connection has been created by the construction of the new A
Street NW corridor. Bikes lanes have been added as part of the new M Street SE BNSF underpass
project and sharrows (share the road with bike symbols) have been added to East Main Street.
Bike lanes are part of the new planned West Main Street project and the F Street SE project
includes development of a Bicycle Boulevard and Bike Share Program.
Bicycle Facility Classification
The American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) has developed
classifications for bicycle facilities and parking. Bicycle classification is based on the design and
exclusiveness of use.
Bicycle Facility Classification
• Separate Facility (Class I) — A non-
motorized two -way paved facility, that is
physically separated from motorized
vehicular traffic by an open space or
barrier.
• Bike Lane (Class II) — An exclusive on
street one way lane for bicyclists
delineated with signing and striping
• Shared Lanes (Class III) — A lane shared
by vehicles and bicycles. Wider lanes that
may be delineated with shared use
markings and signage.
• Bicycle Boulevard— A bicycle focused
roadway designated with enhanced
signage and special pavement markings
and bicycle - friendly design standards
such as wide curb lanes and bicycle safe
drain grates. Typically designed to
connect key bicycle destinations.
Existing Class I multi -use trails in the City
include S 277th St, Interurban Trail, White River
Trail, and Green River Trails.
Class II bicycle lanes added since the last major
update include;
• Terrace Drive NW (15th to W St)
• A ST NW /B ST NW (3rd to 30th)
• 14th St NW (A NW to A NE)
• R St SE (17th to White River)
• M St SE (3rd to 8th)
• 116th Ave SE (SE 304th to SE 312th)
Page 3 -10
AUBURICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Class III shared facilities were tested on R St NE /SE, Auburn Black Diamond Road and E Main
St. They were well received by the cycling community and continue to be maintained. Shared
facilities will continue to be implemented on other appropriate roadways.
Bike parking facilities are classified by length of use: long term, medium term, and short term. The
longer bikes are to be stored, the more durable the facility's design must be.
Long term bike storage facilities are available at Auburn Station. The City currently provides short
term bike storage throughout the downtown core.
Improvement Needs
Cyclists desire safe routes that make connections throughout the City and to regional points of
interests. The existing facilities while being continuously improved still fall short of creating a well -
connected bicycle network in Auburn. The City plans to build out the bicycle network shown in
Map 3 -2 and provide better east -west connections. Upgrading bicycle facilities on city streets is a
very important component of this plan.
Auburn shall make greater efforts in the future to encourage bicycle use, particularly for commuting
purposes, as a form of transportation demand management (TDM). One mechanism of doing so is
to ensure that bike lanes and trails which serve major employers are prioritized. The City needs to
take a more aggressive role in programming implementation of the future bicycle network identified
in this chapter, ensuring that eventually all residents of and employees in Auburn feel comfortable
commuting on bike. In addition, Auburn should seek outlets, including the City's website, to
provide up -to -date information on bicycling options within the City and to regional destinations.
The Commute Trip Reduction (CI'R) program provides a formal mechanism for encouraging these
practices and is required by state law for employers with 100 or more employees arriving at a single
location during the AM peak. Auburn's CTR program calls out bicycle storage facilities, lockers,
changing areas, and showers as measures employers can take to meet CTR goals. In addition,
Auburn can use the SEPA process to encourage development of these facilities at the time of new
development or tenant improvements.
The Downtown Plan also discusses the need for improving bicycle facilities in the area. On -street
bicycle facilities will be sought in association with planned roadway improvements. In addition, the
City should investigate providing bicycle storage and other amenities on City owned properties.
FUTURE TRAVEL
The Work is Easier when Shared
The future bicycle network includes corridors for
regional, recreational, and cross -town
connections. The regional corridors will provide
connections to the Valley communities as well other
areas of King and Pierce Counties. Local biking
groups have identified the Interurban Trail and
Green River Trail as important regional connections.
Other planned regional connections will link Auburn
to attractions around the Puget Sound.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -11
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The Green and White River corridors are multi - functional, providing recreational opportunities for
regional and local bicycle trips. Therefore, the City has prioritized the completion of both these trail
systems. Also, Auburn will seek to enhance portions of City trail systems whenever possible, by
providing amenities for non - motorized travelers such as rest areas, as well as safety improvements
including warning signage and grade separated trails. As shown in Map 3 -2, the bicycle routes
identified for future development will consist of a mix of interconnected local trails and on- street
bike facilities linking Auburn's neighborhoods.
The future Bonneville Power Trail will be a separated, hard surfaced trail crossing the Lea Hill area
and connecting to the Interurban Trail and West Hill via on -street bicycle facilities. This new bike
route is planned from Lea Hill through Isaac Evans and Dykstra Park to connect to downtown
Auburn via the new A Street NW corridor. Numerous other on -street bicycle facilities and trails
are planned.
The selection of bike facility projects will be based upon safety, route continuity and connectivity.
In addition to new bicycle corridors, spot safety improvements are an important component of the
City's future bicycle network. Improvements including flashing beacons have already been made at
the Interurban Trail crossing of 15th Street SW and are planned at the Interurban Trail crossing of
West Main Street and C Street SW and Ellingson. In addition, safe access to downtown Auburn and
onto West Hill, Lea Hill and Lakeland are a priority for the City.
Typical bicycle route improvements along a Class I facility include purchasing the right -of -way,
designing the trail, and constructing the trail and trailhead. For a Class II pathway, improvements
include striping lanes, installing warning and directional signage, and painting bike symbols on the
pavement. For a roadway where bikes will share the lane with vehicles it may include the installation
of shared use markings and signage.
As this plan is updated in the future, emphasis should continue to be placed on developing a safe
and convenient bicycling environment for both recreational and commuter cyclists of all experience
levels.
3.3 Equestrian Travel
Auburn citizens have a long history of supporting the planning and development of equestrian
facilities. The City intends to increase its network of soft - surface, multi -use trails in more rustic
locations with appropriate facilities suitable for equestrian use.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Auburn's equestrian trail system is quite limited. The Parks Department currently manages a two -
mile, soft - surface trail, along the White River at Roegner and Game Farm Wilderness Parks.
Otherwise, there are no formal equestrian trails in Auburn.
Horse owners do have informal access to the soft - surface path adjacent to the Interurban trail, as
well as large open spaces in the rustic area just south of the White River and east of Kersey Way in
southeast Auburn. To reach the open areas, many ride along the edge of roads such as 53rd and
56th Streets SE. These are narrow roads with gravel shoulders. Drainage swales run parallel to many
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -12
AUBURICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
portions of these roads, and while conditions vary, typically there is a narrow unpaved shoulder or
grassed area alongside the road where horses can walk.
IMPROVEMENT NEEDS
The lack of equestrian trail miles in the City and connectivity to regional equestrian facilities are two
areas that need improvement. As indicated by Table 3 -1, there are currently two -miles of formal
equestrian trails in the City. This is a barrier to most equestrians, particularly those bringing horses
via trailer. In order to become a more equestrian friendly community, Auburn must undertake
planning initiatives to expand the current network.
Table 3 -1 Existing Equestrian Facilities
Facility
Potential Within
Primary Users Auburn
City Limits
Soft-
surface
Trail
Equestrians
Off -road Cyclists
Pedestrians
2.17 miles
Auburn, as a regional growth center, has elected to become increasingly urbanized. As the City
continues to urbanize, it will seek opportunities to include equestrian planning in its infrastructure
improvements. Special consideration for equestrian facilities should be given to southeast Auburn
and Lea Hill as both have existing equestrian communities.
Loop trail development is one strategy that can be employed to increase the length of equestrian
trails in Auburn. Loop trails can be linked to existing linear facilities, thereby increasing network
miles.
Opportunities to expand the equestrian trail system should be considered in all future infrastructure
planning and development. Features such as busy arterial streets, steep slopes and narrow bridges
are barriers to equestrian travel. Hence, equestrian trail planning should go hand in hand with other
planning activities the City is undertaking. When planning equestrian trails, other facilities such as
trailer parking and directional signage should be accommodated.
FUTURE SYSTEM
The southeast Auburn area, south of the White (Stuck) River and east of Kersey Way, should be
designated as an Equestrian District. Future development in this area should be consistent with that
designation. Southeast Auburn is particularly suitable as an Equestrian District because it contains a
City watershed, shorelines of statewide significance, and numerous critical areas. Equestrian trails
may be situated near some of these features, whereas more intense development may be unsuitable.
Equestrian trails may also be appropriate for parts of Lea Hill, and should be evaluated. When
locating equestrian trails along rustic roads, it may be appropriate to maximize trail potential by
constructing a wider shoulder able to accommodate equestrian travel on one side of the road.
Members of the equestrian community in Auburn have emphasized the desire for a trail connection
between Roegner Park and southeast Auburn. One potential alignment would be along a route
roughly parallel to Kersey Way and 53rd Street SE. The Parks Plan identifies this future trail as the
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -13
C[TY OF
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Williams Trail. Potential obstacles include critical area impacts and right -of -way acquisition. The
topography along Kersey Way includes steep hillsides and large drainage swales. As trail planning
progresses to a more detailed level, other alignments should be evaluated.
The equestrian routes identified for future development are concentrated along the White River, the
Green River, and in the properties in southeast Auburn. These routes are identified as soft - surface,
multi -use trails that are suitable for riding and walking but do not meet the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act. Construction costs and the extent of clearing needed are much less
for soft - surface trails than for paved trails. Some of the soft - surface trails are proposed to occur in
conjunction with a paved trail Summaries of trails that are appropriate for equestrian use are listed
in Table 3 -2. Design specifications for equestrian trails will be incorporated into the Auburn
Engineering Design Standards manual.
3.4 Future Non - motorized System
Auburn's future non - motorized system consists of an interconnected network of sidewalks, bike
lanes, multi -use trails, and equestrian paths. The list of proposed projects in Table 3 -2 is developed
for planning purposes. Map 3 -2 identifies the location of the trail projects identified in Table 3 -2
and maps the future trail and bicycle network.
Table 3 -2 Future Trail Projects
ray
Nam
Descripti
Potential
Users
Green River
Trail
This paved trail will be part of a regional recreational corridor. King County is the lead
administrator of the project but will work in collaboration with the City for the portion of the
trail in Auburn. The trail alignment will extend along the west bank of the Green River from S.
277th St., south to Brannan Park. From Brannan Park, the trail will then run south along M
Street SE to 22nd Street NE, where it will turn east towards Dykstra Park. It will then cross
the river at the Dykstra foot bridge to the east bank of the river. It will then parallel Green
River Road and 104th Ave SE. Once across Lea Hill Road SE the trail will follow 104th PL. SE
to the dead end. From the dead end the trail will follow the wooded bluff until it reaches a
point opposite of Fenster Nature Park. At the alignment of 2nd St. SE the trail will cross at a
future bridge location to the west side of the river and into Fenster Nature Park. The trail will
continue south through the park and into the King County owned Auburn Narrows area where
it will end near the intersection of Auburn Black Diamond Rd. and Green Valley Road.
Bicyclists
Equestrians
Pedestrians
Auburn
Environment
al Park Loop
This looped recreational path spurs off the Interurban Trail and will go through the Auburn
Environmental Park.
Off -road Cyclists
Pedestrians
Equestrians,
possibly
White River
Trail
The White River Trail runs along the south side of the White River from Roegner Park to the
eastern edge of Game Farm Wilderness Park. Future extensions of the trail are planned from
A Street SE to Roegner Park, across the White River via the future BNSF Railroad underpass,
on the south side of the river within the City of Pacific, and from Game Farm Wilderness Park
to southeast Auburn along the White River.
Bicyclists
Equestrians
Off -road Cyclists
Pedestrians
Chapter 3. Non - Motorized Transportation
Page 3 -14
AUBURICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Trail
Name
Description
Potential
Users
Williams
Trail
These recreational trails are intended to use public or quasi - public lands, including utility
corridors. A variety of loop trails may be possible within this large area.
Bicyclists
Equestrians
Off -road Cyclists
Pedestrians
Bonneville
Power Trail
This east -west trail will extend from Lea Hill to Dykstra Park Street, where it will connect to
downtown Auburn and West Hill via an existing and planned series of bike lanes. There
are topographical and environmental challenges that will need to be addressed during the
design phase.
Bicyclists
Pedestrians
Equestrians
Academy
Trail
The portion of Academy Drive from SR 164 to Green Valley Road is currently closed due to
slope failures.
Bicyclists
Pedestrians
Fquestrians
Lakeland
Hills Trail
This trail serves the Lakeland community and links Sunset Park and Dorothy Bothell Park via
a meandering sidewalk path along Lakeland Hills Way SE. k.
Pedestrians
This network will provide local and regional connections for a variety of non - motorized modes.
The completed portions of the Interurban and Green River Trails connect pedestrians, cyclists, and
equestrians to areas north and south of Auburn, while the White River Trail provides for east -west
travel. Additional bike lanes and completion of the paved trail network will guide cyclists safely to
points of interests and through congested areas of the City.
The establishment of an equestrian district and trails in the southeast portion of the City permits
more opportunities for equestrian travel in scenic areas.
Pedestrians will be able to travel more safely and comfortably with upgrades and expansion of the
sidewalk network, new crossings and street lighting, and better street design near schools and
frequently traveled pedestrian locations. The addition of a BNSF undercrossing, just north of the
White River and west of A Street SE, will provide safe passage for pedestrians. A new trail
connection along C Street SW will provide pedestrians and cyclists with a safer connection to
downtown and Auburn Station.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -15
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
White River Trail
White River Trail
Multi -Use Path
PROMOTING HEALTHY COMMUNITIES
The City of Auburn envisions a transportation system that will help promote healthy community
principles by coordinating land use, the non - motorized transportation system, and transit in a
manner that encourages walking and bicycling. The Puget Sound Regional Council has identified
several elements, which contribute to the desirability of walking, bicycling, and transit use.1
• Concentrating complementary uses such as restaurants, retail and grocery stores proximate to
residences and employment.
• Linking neighborhoods by connecting streets, sidewalks, and trails.
• Designing for safe and welcoming pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
• Enhancing transit opportunities and non - motorized connections to transit facilities.
• Reducing and mitigating the effects of parking.
These principles, many of which can be promoted by thoughtful transportation systems planning,
encourage healthier communities by increasing physical activity and decreasing air pollution caused
by vehicle emissions. Auburn has historically planned for a transportation system that incorporates
many healthy community principles, such as transit facility planning and regional trail planning. In
addition, the Downtown Plan calls for a mixed -use, high density, pedestrian oriented downtown.
Improving the non - motorized system also helps address the findings of the citywide Health Impact
Assessment process which recommended that the City improve sidewalk connectivity, improve the
pedestrian environment, eliminate natural and man -made mobility barriers for pedestrian and
bicyclists, improve transit access, improve traffic safety, pedestrian safety and personal security.
In the future, Auburn shall continue to promote these principles through long -range planning
efforts, capital facility improvements, development review, and community activities involving
active lifestyle elements.
1 Vision 2040 Update Issue Paper on Health: What's Health Got to Do with Growth Management, Economic
Development and Transportation ?, Puget Sound Regional Council, December 2nd, 2004.
Chapter 3. Non - Motorised Tramportation Page 3 -16
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The City has developed policies and identified funding strategies that will help implement the future
non - motorized network. They can be found in Chapters 5 and 6, consecutively, of this plan. The
planning direction outlined in this chapter shall be used as the foundation for implementing the
non - motorized policies and securing funding.
Chapter 3. Non - Motoried Tramportation Page 3 -17
n�. I. EP - -kigyvo. tt ` son
r r
"Iri \\innni�_�_
ii1�
inizatik
itm qmikAlm. w=
F-13 rffaiiiiingi .A r
0
1
Miles
Rioray Future Pedestrian Co
/ \ / Existing Sidewalks
Education Facilities
Parka
1 /4 Mile from Sellout
or 1/2 Mile from SChcol
City of Auburn
AeRecently Ccenpleted
RoIecIed Crosswalks
Source'. City of wbum GIS Department
Auburn Transportation Plan
Existing Sidewalks and
Future Priority Sidewalk Corridors
Map 3 -1
0 0 1
Miles
• Existing Trailheads .� ~ ∎ «�� Future Bike Facility
• Future Trailheads liNe Trail
Ale Bile? Facility
Al.. Future Trail
Parlor
City of Auburn
Source: City of Auburn GIS Department
Auburn Transportation Plan
Existing and Future Bicycle Facilities
and Multi -Use Trails
Map 3 -2
Printed On: 10/0 /2015 Map ID: 4004
0 0 1
Miles
Source: City of Auburn GIS Department
\/ Connectors
/ * Corridors
♦♦♦ ♦y♦♦
Interurban Trail
City of Auburn
OFocus Area
Auburn Transportation Plan
Bicycle Corridors and Connectors
Map 3 -3
Printed On: 10/6/2015 Map ID: 4593
OF �F
C[TY
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
CHAPTER 4
TRANSIT
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Transit service is a key component of Auburn's
transportation system, providing mobility within the
City and access to and from the City. Unlike the
street and non - motorized systems, Auburn does not
directly administer transit service. Rather, the City
works with local transit agencies to coordinate
service in Auburn. The transit agencies are publicly
funded and are responsible for providing transit
service within their service boundaries.
Auburn Station
Today, Auburn is served by local and regional bus,
as well as a commuter rail line that runs between Seattle and Tacoma /Lakewood.
4.1 NEEDS ASSESSMENT
EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES
The following section provides a brief summary of the public transportation services offered in
Auburn. Existing transit service for the Auburn area is identified in Map 4 -1 at the end of this
section.
KING COUNTY METRO TRANSIT
Bus Service
Metro Transit provides local bus services linking destinations within the community and
providing regional connections to the Auburn Station and the 15th Street NW Park - and -Ride.
Metro Transit offers the following services in Auburn:
Route 154 provides weekday service between the Auburn Station, the 15th Street NW Park -and-
Ride, the Kent Station, Boeing in Kent, the Tukwila Park - and -Ride, Boeing Field, and the Federal
Center South in Seattle.
Route 164 provides regional service between Kent, Auburn and the Green River College. It
connects with the Route 181 at Green River College.
Route 180 provides service daily between southeast Auburn, Auburn Station, and Kent Station,
connecting to Route 150, with service to Seattle. Route 180 also serves Sea -Tac Airport and the
Burien Transit Center.
C
Metro Transit Hybrid Articulated Bus
Courtesy: Metro Transit
Route 181 provides daily service between the Twin
Lakes Park - and -Ride, Sea -Tac Mall, Federal Way
Transit Center, the Outlet Collection, Auburn
Station, and Green River College.
Route 186 provides weekday peak hour service
between the Auburn Station and Enumclaw via
Page 4- 1
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Auburn Way South. The service is scheduled to meet Sounder Commuter Rail trains at the
Auburn Station.
Route 915 provides weekday midday service and some weekend service between the Auburn
Station and Enumclaw via Auburn Way South. The route also includes a small portion of Dial a
Ride Transit (DART) service with limited, variable routing in response to rider requests.
Route 917 provides weekday and Saturday service between A Street SE, 41st Street SE, Algona,
the Outlet Collection, and the Auburn Station. Peak hour weekday service is also provided
between the Auburn Station and the Social Security Administration and the General Services
Administration (GSA). The route offers DART service (limited variable route) in portions of
Pacific.
Route 952 is a weekday AM and PM peak hour route specifically designed to serve the Boeing
Everett facility. It operates from the 15th Street NW Park and Ride to the Boeing Everett Plant.
Route 910 is a DART route which was inaugurated in October 2010 in a partnership between
Auburn and King County Metro Transit, and functions as a community shuttle circulator service.
The route provides weekday and Saturday service between north central Auburn, the I Street NE
corridor, downtown Auburn and the Outlet Collection /YMCA on 15th Street SW.
Due to financially driven cuts by Metro Transit, Route 919 was recently discontinued. This was a
community focused route, which operated fixed route and some dial a ride service between
downtown Auburn, the Library, Senior Center, Les Gove Park and southeast Auburn in the
Dogwood area where it interchanged with the Muckleshoot Tribal Shuttle. Although service to
the area is still available on the Routes 186 and 915, Route 919 operated during the off -peak
hours filling gaps in the service offered by the Routes 186 and 915.
ACCESS
ACCESS Transportation is a King County Metro paratransit service, providing door -to -door,
shared -ride van transportation within most of King County. The Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) requires curb -to -curb paratransit service for persons whose disabilities prevent use of
accessible non - commuter, fixed route bus service. This service is intended to offer a comparable
level of service to that provided by regular bus service.
DART Vehicle
Courtesy: City of Kent
Chapter 4. 1 ranszt
Vanpool Services
Metro Transit sponsors vanpool services that serve
residents and employees in Auburn. Vanpool is a
shared -ride service that provides group transport for
commuters with proximate origins and destinations.
Vanpool is a popular and flexible service that
provides commuters with an alternative to driving
alone and fixed -route transit service. Vanpool will
continue to be an important strategy for mitigating
peak period congestion throughout Auburn and the
region.
Page4 -2
AUBURICT
WASHINGTON
Metro Transit Facilities
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Metro Transit owns and operates the Auburn 15th Street NW Park - and -Ride with 244 surface
parking stalls Metro also operates into the Auburn Station managed by Sound Transit.
Additionally, Metro maintains approximately 177 other bus stops in Auburn, 42 of which contain
passenger shelters.
Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)
Under state law, the City is required to administer a Commute Trip Reduction program for all
employers in Auburn with at least 100 employees arriving during the peak morning commute
hours. The City of Auburn contracts with Metro Transit to provide CTR support services for the
CTR affected local employers. Currently, there are 10 CTR employers in Auburn with a total of
5,500 employees. Metro Transit assists employers in complying with state law by providing
rideshare support and a host of other incentives aimed at reducing single occupant vehicle travel.
PIERCE TRANSIT
Route 497 is operated by Pierce Transit in partnership with the City of Auburn, and King County
Metro Transit. It operates peak hour weekday service between Lakeland Hills and the Auburn
Station. As a morning and evening service meeting Sounder trains the 497 is a commuter -
oriented route, but is open to all riders. In the future, the City hopes to expand the Route 497 to
serve all peak hour Sounder trips. Because Route 497 primarily serves Sounder passengers and
because it significantly reduces the demand for commuter parking at the Auburn Station parking
garage managed by Sound Transit the city is seeking financial participation from Sound Transit in
operating this route and making this a permanent route.
Vanpool Services are provided by Pierce Transit
similar to those offered by King County Metro
Transit.
SOUND TRANSIT
Sound Transit is the regional transit provider for
Puget Sound. It provides limited stop, transit
services linking Auburn to major regional
destinations in King and Pierce Counties. The
agency offers both Sounder commuter rail and
regional express bus services in Auburn.
Sounder Commuter Rail
Sound Transit operates the Sounder commuter rail
service on the Lakewood - Tacoma — Seattle route
via the BNSF Railway. Sound Transit provides
weekday peak hour trips northbound to Seattle in
the AM and southbound from Seattle to Tacoma -
Lakewood in the PM. Reverse direction trips are
also provided in each peak hour with mid -day
service being planned for future years. Some
Chapter 4. Transit
Sounder Train
Courtesy: Sound Transit
Sound Transit Regional Express Bus
Courtesy: Sound Transit
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
connections are available between south line Sounder trains which terminate in Seattle and north
line Sounder trains from Everett to Seattle. Additional special event service to and from Seattle
for Mariners, Seahawks and Sounders games and the Emerald Downs racetrack in Auburn is
offered on some weekends.
Currently, eight trains operate northbound to Seattle in the morning peak and return southbound
during the PM peak. Two trains operate southbound to Tacoma /Lakewood in the morning and
northbound to Seattle in the early evening.
Regional Express Bus Service
Route 566/567 offers daily weekday, limited stop service between the Auburn Station the Kent
Station, the Renton Transit Center, the Bellevue Transit Center, and the Overlake Transit Center.
Route 577/578 offers daily limited stop service between Puyallup, Sumner, Auburn, Federal Way
and Seattle. The 577 provides service between the Federal Way Transit Center and Seattle during
the peak periods when the Sounder trains are in operation. The 578 provides service between
Puyallup and Seattle during the off -peak hours when train service is not currently provided.
Transit Facilities
Sound Transit owns and operates the Auburn Station located in downtown Auburn. This full
service multi -modal facility provides parking for a total of 633 vehicles in a 6 -story parking garage
and a surface parking lot. The facility currently handles approximately 470 daily bus trips.
Approximately 3,000 passengers ride bus service to /from the station on a daily basis. Boardings
at Auburn on Sounder commuter rail are 1,300 per day. The facility draws numerous transit riders
from outside Auburn including many from outside the Sound Transit taxing District, the
geographic area where residents contribute tax revenue to fund Sound Transit.
Chapter 4. Transit Page 4- 4
AUBURICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
4.2 Transit User Needs
DEMOGRAPHICS
People use public transportation for two reasons: because they have to ride or because they
choose to ride. Carrying the choice rider, such as commuters, often has the greatest positive
impact on the transportation system by helping control peak hour traffic demand. But providing
a "safety net" of adequate transportation to those who absolutely depend on it is, arguably, public
transportation's most important role.
There are a number of ways to identify "transit dependency" but the most effective way is to
identify locations with high concentrations of residents who have no vehicle available in their
household. An examination of the most recent year 2000 Census data available from the Bureau
of the Census shows that some areas of Auburn have a surprisingly high number of households
with no vehicle available. This remains the most recent information available with the level of
detail necessary to identify needs on a block level. As a comparison baseline, 9 percent of Auburn
households have no vehicle available; this percentage is consistent with that of King County (9
percent) and slightly higher than that of Pierce County (8 percent). For the purpose of this
analysis, block groups with significant concentrations of residential development in which over 12
percent of households have no vehicle available are considered transit dependent areas. There are
eleven census block groups in Auburn in which over 12 percent of households have no vehicle
available, nine of which have significant concentrations of residential development and are
therefore identified as transit dependent areas. It is also notable that four of the nine block
groups with large concentrations of residential development have at least 20 percent of
households with no vehicle available. The nine block groups comprising the transit dependent
areas had a total of 3,698 households in 2000, 771 (21 percent) of which had no vehicle available.
Map 4 -2 shows the transit dependent areas and overlays the existing transit service in order to
identify if adequate transit service is available to these highly transit dependent neighborhoods.
Comparing the neighborhoods in question to the transit route structure, it is apparent that the
vast majority of Auburn's most transit dependent population lives within 1/4 miles of a fixed route
bus — the distance standard most often identified by the transit industry as a reasonable walking
distance to transit. An exception to that rule is the area near Dogwood Street SE north of
Auburn Way South where many of the transit dependent residents are located more than 1/4 mile
from fixed route bus service.
In the future, it will be critical to ensure these areas continue to be well covered by transit service,
both in terms of route and schedule coverage.
SERVICE COVERAGE
Generally speaking, local transit service coverage in Auburn is well planned and well operated.
Even so there are some areas of the community that do not have adequate local service coverage,
as well as some important regional bus links and commuter rail services that have yet to be fully
developed.
Local Bus Service
Chapter 4. Transit Page 4- 5
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Some of Auburn's most populated neighborhoods are deficient in local bus service, including the
West Hill, Lakeland Hills during the non -peak hours, and parts of east and north Auburn. The
least served residential area of Auburn is West Hill, an area with approximately 5,000 residents
with no transit service Lakeland Hills, a planned residential community with approximately 3,800
homes has peak hour service to downtown Auburn but lacks all day service. Lea Hill, a
predominantly residential community on Auburn's east hill, does have two transit routes, which
predominantly serve Green River College, leaving a large portion of the residents unable to walk
to a transit route. In 2014, a license plate survey of the Auburn Station garage indicated a
substantial number of Lea Hill residents utilize transit service at Auburn Station. This suggests
that a commuter oriented shuttle serving Lea Hill, similar to the Route 497 shuttle implemented
in Lakeland Hills, could be successful.
Additionally, residential areas of east Auburn, east of M Street NE and south of 8th Street NE,
and parts of northeast Auburn, east of I Street NE, are also located more than 1/4 mile from fixed
route bus service. It is difficult for these areas to access transit, both for local and regional trips.
The design of King County Metro's local bus routes in Auburn should be reviewed in relation to
future changes in Sound Transit's Sounder commuter rail and regional express bus services to
identify opportunities and priorities for productive improvements to transit coverage, frequency,
and hours of operation.
Regional Bus Service
The most important unmet regional transit need is for all day, express bus and commuter rail
service between Auburn, Tacoma /Lakewood and Seattle. While the original Sound Transit Regional
Express Bus Service Plan contained a direct link between Auburn and Tacoma /Lakewood, the
connection was discontinued in Sound Transit's later service plans.
Sounder Commuter Rail
Sounder Commuter Rail, a highly popular and
attractive service, operates bi- directionally in the
peak periods. Most of the trips are operated in the
peak direction; northbound during the weekday
AM peak and southbound during the weekday
PM peak. No midday, evening or weekend
regular service is currently provided. These
services are needed as is additional capacity on
some of the currently most popular runs.
Intercity Passenger Rail
Auburn is an ideal location for a future stop on
the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor, which runs
from Vancouver, BC to Eugene, OR. A former
intercity passenger rail stop and Amtrak city, Auburn is centrally located in South King County at
the intersection of SR -18 and SR -167 and is a 10 minute drive from I -5. The Auburn Station is
the only facility in King or Pierce County with direct freeway access and currently serves over
3,000 bus passengers and 1,300 commuter rail passengers and is centrally located within 10 miles
Auburn YMCA - Major trip generator
Chapter 4. Transit
Page 4- 6
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
of 500,000 people. Amtrak should implement more intercity rail stations in the high density and
traffic congested areas of Puget Sound such as at Auburn Station. A new Auburn stop would
have great ridership benefits since it is at a station with available overnight parking and is in close
proximity to hundreds of thousands of potential new customers. Furthermore the projected
schedule impacts of a stop in Auburn could be largely absorbed in the overall route schedule.
TRANSIT SCHEDULING
The scheduling of transit service is often as important as route alignment and coverage in
determining the success of the service.
Scheduling to Successfully Serve Employers
One of the most overlooked aspects of transit system design is scheduled transit arrival times
versus major employer shift times. While a transit system can physically serve the front door of a
business, its actual scheduled arrival times will often determine if anyone rides the system. It is
not the intention of this effort to conduct an exhaustive employer shift time analysis of the
community. However, an example of the challenge can be found in examining one of Auburn's
major employers, the Boeing Company with over 6,000 employees. The company's primary
morning shift time arrival occurs at 6 AM, the earliest southbound Sounder train from Seattle,
arrives in Auburn at 6:41 AM. The first run of the day for the Metro Route 181 from Federal Way
and Lea Hill arrive near Boeing at approximately 6 AM, making it difficult for employees to meet
the shift time. The first runs of the Route 917 which serve the nearby GSA and SSA offices arrive
after the Boeing shift time as well. None of the existing bus routes stop close enough to the
Boeing facility to allow employees to walk to the facility. This shows how it would be beneficial to
coordinate with major employers to offer alternate transit options that can meet various shift
times such as dedicated Vanpools or Vanshares.
The lack of transit schedule synchronization with key employers in a community can also
negatively impact other opportunities. The City of Auburn in partnership with Metro Transit was
the first agency in Puget Sound to create the concept of `Van Share', a specialized transit service
in which vanpools carry employees to their employer's front door from regional transit centers.
Where the schedules work, such as in providing a direct link between Boeing's Renton facilities
and the Tukwila Station, the concept has been highly successful. On the other end of the trip, the
Van Share concept can be successfully implemented to transport employees between their homes
and the Transit Station, saving capacity on the roadway and at the Auburn Station parking
facilities.
Due to the fact that Auburn's major employer shift times sometimes don't match Sounder and
regional bus transit arrival times, Van Share has not yet achieved its full potential in Auburn.
However as Sounder and bus service to the Auburn Station increase this option may become
more viable for major employers in Auburn.
To maximize the investment in public transit service in Auburn, it is recommended that both
Sound Transit and Metro Transit conduct an evaluation of their schedules with a focus on
improving service to major employers in the Auburn area.
Chapter 4. Transit Page 4- 7
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Transit Capacity
A second consideration in scheduling service is ensuring that enough service is available to meet
the demand.
Sounder Commuter Rail has also been immensely popular, indicating that increased service is
supported by the ridership demand. Daily Sounder boardings at south end stations total around
6,000 riders, the equivalent of a lane of traffic on SR 167 or I -5, emphasizing the importance of
expanding Sounder service.
The Auburn Station is a highly successful component of the Sounder service. Total rail boardings
at the Auburn Station today average over 1,300 riders per day making Auburn one of the busiest
stations on the Sounder route.
URBAN DESIGN
The design of the build environment has direct implications on the quality and availability of
transit service. Urban design can either encourage or inhibit the provision of local transit service.
Some inhibitors to providing neighborhood service include inadequate street geometry and
construction, lack of a satisfactory location for a terminal at the end of the route, absence of a
street grid that could be used to turn around a bus, and the absence of a connected sidewalk
network. Ideally, new residential developments should be laid out with future transit route
alignments in mind and supporting transit facilities Likewise, retrofits of the existing street
network should accommodate transit design considerations.
IMPROVING LOCAL SERVICE
Preserving the Route 910
Since 2010 Auburn and Metro Transit have partnered through the Transit Now initiative to
implement community shuttle circulator service. The Route 910 shuttle serves Northeast Auburn
commercial and activity areas. The service has become steadily more popular, doubling in
productivity since its inception. This partnership route between, Auburn and King County Metro
has now been extended until 2020.
Add Service to Replace the Terminated Route 919
Currently, a planned expansion of service to the Metro Route 915 is expected to begin in March
2016. This will increase service to hourly, midday on some of the alignment of the former Route
919. The city should continue to look for opportunities to improve service along the route of the
former 919.
Preserve and Expand Commuter Connection Bus Routes
Auburn should work with Pierce Transit, Metro Transit and Sound Transit to add service to the
Route 497 to meet all existing and future Sounder trains and to encourage Sound Transit to fund
a portion of the Route 497.
Auburn should explore the concept with Metro Transit and Sound Transit of adding a new
commuter bus service to Sounder from Lea Hill and the west hill of Auburn and encourage
Sound Transit to fund a portion of the routes Similar to the Route 497, these routes would be
Chapter 4. Transit Page 4- 8
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
timed to meet Sounder trains and operate on a direct route and express schedule after leaving the
Lea Hill or west hill areas.
TRANSIT FACILITIES
One type of transit facility improvement stands out as the most important ongoing need:
parking. Comparing the number of current Sounder daily boardings (1,300) to the available
number of parking stalls at the Auburn Station (633) and the number of passengers who transfer
daily from bus to Sounder (approximately 150) shows there is a lack of parking for Sounder at the
Auburn Station. Additional train trips are currently being planned, including three new round
trips, and these will attract more ridership (and result in more parking needs) in downtown
Auburn.
Although there is always a desire to have as many people as possible access commuter rail without
parking, the reality of the service is that it is usually used by customers who want to start and end
their day with a direct, fast trip to and from the station. Only the Route 497 is specifically
designed to link commuters to Sounder. It accounts for the majority of transfers between bus
service and rail service. Given the strength of the demand for Sounder and the location of many
of its users, other lifestyle choices (bike, pedestrian or TOD) will also not be sufficient to
ultimately negate the continued demand for more parking.
So, for the foreseeable future, parking will be a continuing challenge at the Auburn Station and
even more will be needed as three more Sounder roundtrips are added, as scheduled in 2016 and
2017.
Building the infrastructure to accommodate commuter parking demand is an essential component
of making transit an attractive option for commuters. In order to do so, action is essential to
clearly identify the future demand and acquire the land needed to build the parking. The plans
created in ST2 and ST3 (ST2 is the Sound Transit Plan approved by voters during 2008, ST3 is a
proposed ballot measure for voters to consider in 2016) to build parking should be followed. If
this is not done, neighborhoods within walking distance of Auburn Station, particularly those
bordering W Main Street, will experience an increase in on -street commuter parking, making it
difficult for residents to find parking during the day and early evening. To combat this issue, the
City has established a restricted parking zone for residents to the west of C Street NW, however
the problem may begin in other locations. Sound Transit should also examine the usage of the
Auburn Station garage by people who live outside the Sound Transit Taxing District. The agency
should consider requiring those users to pay to park in the Auburn Station garage. In a 2014
survey of the vehicles parked at the Auburn facility over 90 vehicles (15 percent of the parking
supply) were registered at addresses outside the Sound Transit Taxing District.
King County Metro Transit is responsible for installing new and maintaining existing bus shelters
in Auburn. Both the City and agency should continue to prioritize potential improvements to
shelters, benches, pads, bus zones, customer information and pedestrian access. Currently, about
20 Metro bus stops that meet warrants for the installation of shelters have not received them yet
and City staff is focused on working with Metro to accomplish that installation.
Pedestrian improvements around existing or planned transit stops, including enhanced crosswalks
and pedestrian refuges, should also be examined by the City. The placement of bus stops is driven
Chapter 4. Traruit Page 4- 9
C[TY OF
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
by a variety of criteria including transit system operating and design standards, professional engi-
neering field evaluation, and public input.
4.3 Transit System Recommendations
This section contains the recommendations derived from the transit needs assessment, as
discussed in the first part of this chapter. Recommendations are organized by lead agency, with
the understanding that implementation of any major system improvement will require the
collaboration of many agencies.
KING COUNTY METRO TRANSIT
Maintain the operation of the Route 910 in partnership with Metro Transit. Explore partnering
with Metro Transit and the Muckleshoot Indian tribe to create a new route combining the best
features of the former Route 919 and the MIT tribal shuttle to provide better transit service to the
city and the Reservation.
Work with Metro Transit to create new, limited stop AM and PM peak transit services designed
for commuters from Lea Hill and west hill to and from the downtown Auburn Station.
Conduct an evaluation of transit schedules; improve service to major employers.
Work with Metro Transit to add service to the Route 497 to meet more Sounder trains.
Explore, assist and encourage the implementation of commuter Vanpool and Van Share linking
Boeing to the Auburn Station. To meet Sounder and Regional bus routes.
Work with Sound Transit and Metro Transit to create additional parking at or near the Auburn
Station.
PIERCE TRANSIT
Work with Pierce Transit to add service to the Route 497 to meet more Sounder trains.
SOUND TRANSIT
Work with Sound Transit to add service to the Route 497 to meet more Sounder trains and fund
a portion of the Route.
Work with Sound Transit to add new commuter bus service to the Sounder from Lea Hill and
West Hill and fund a portion of the routes.
Institute midday Sounder service to and from Tacoma /Lakewood and Seattle and plan for
evening and weekend service in the near future.
Address the loss of existing parking at the Auburn Station due to the use of the overcrowded
Sounder parking facility by Sounder riders who live outside the Sound Transit taxing district and
pay nothing for the facility.
Begin working with the City of Auburn to create additional parking near the Auburn Station, as
specified in ST2 and included in ST3, which is scheduled to be on the November 2016 ballot.
CITY OF AUBURN
Continue the operation of the Route 910 in partnership with Metro Transit.
Chapter 4. Transit Page 4- 10
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Explore partnering with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe to create a new route combining the best
features of the former Route 919 and the MIT tribal shuttle to provide better transit service to the
City and the Reservation.
Work with Metro Transit and Sound Transit to create a new, limited stop AM and PM peak
transit service for commuters from Lea Hill and west hill to and from the Auburn Station.
Work with Pierce Transit and Metro Transit to add service to the Route 497 to meet more
Sounder trains and encourage Sound Transit to fund a portion of the Route 497 to continue the
route in service for multiple years beyond 2016.
Work with Sound Transit to address the loss of existing parking at the Auburn Station due to the
use of the overcrowded Sounder parking facility by Sounder riders who live outside the Sound
Transit taxing district and pay nothing for the facility.
Begin working with Sound Transit and Metro Transit in partnership to create additional
commuter parking at or near the Auburn Station.
Chapter 4. Transit Page 4- 11
S277TIIST-
37TH ST NW
17 i
67
18
d 1 ! _-
177 !ire Imola A
— -,-
:■
Milk r,L
11E1
p
910
r —
ru
4
80
•
26
efir
861915
r
■
tive
t r
Tja
S
i-
0 0 1
Miles
Auburn Transit Station "/ Metro Transit Routes
0 Park a Ride I \/
City of Auburn ^,
Pierce Transit Routes
Sound Transit Routes
,**%,%* Muckleshoot Shuttle Routes
Auburn Transportation Plan
Auburn Transit Routes
and MIT Shuttle Route
Map 4 -1
Printed On: 10,
277T11 T
SE
80
SE-2-S
ST
ST
ti
SE
SE 312TH S'
I al P
18
910
MIT
Shuttle
86/915
i
80
167
1 11
re
5E
"
64 N e
Ins L
izwi
•r 1
Miles
0
tJ
Auburn Transit Station
Park & Ride
City of Auburn
Transit Dependent Areas
Metro Transit Routes
Pierce Transit Routes
Sound Trans¢ Routes
,%%',4%* Muckleshoot Shuttle Routes
Source'. CiN of wbum 51S Department
Auburn Transportation Plan
Auburn Transit Routes
and Transit Dependent Areas
Map 4 -2
Printed On: 10 /8/2015 Map ID: 4684
*
AUBURN
WASH INGTON
CHAPTER 5.
POLICIES
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Transportation objectives and policies
establish the framework for realizing
the City's vision of its transportation
system. Policies provide guidance for
the City, other governmental entities and private developers, enabling the
City to achieve its goal in accordance with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
The policy framework presented below is a guideline, which the City will
use to evaluate individual projects and address its infrastructure needs.
The objectives and policies are organized according to five broad headings.
The first heading, Coordination, Planning and Implementation, addresses the
system comprehensively, detailing policies that pertain to the planning and
implementation of the system as a whole. The subsequent four headings
list policies specific to the following systems: Street system, Non - motorised
system, Transit system, and Air transportation. The analysis of the
transportation system, as well as any individual proposals, shall consider all
modes of transportation and all methods of efficiently managing the
network.
Public Art on West Main Street
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 1
AUBURN
WASH INCTON
GOAL
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
To plan, expand, and improve the transportation system in cooperation and
coordination with adjacent and regional jurisdictions to ensure concurrency
compliance with the growth management act, and to provide a safe and
efficent multimodal system that meets the community needs and facilitates
the land use plan.
5.1 Coordination, Planning and Implementation
OBJECTIVE: COORDINATION
To be consistent with regional plans and the plans of neighboring cities, to encourage
partnerships, and not to unreasonably preclude an adjacent jurisdiction from implementing its
planned improvements.
POLICIES:
Coord -01: Coordinate transportation operations, planning and
improvements with other transportation authorities and governmental
entities (cities, counties, tribes, state, federal) to address transportation
issues. These include:
• Improvement of the state highway network through strong advocacy with state officials, both
elected and staff, for improvements to state highways and interchanges;
• Improvements to roadways connecting Auburn to the surrounding region, including SR 167,
SR 18, SR 181 /West Valley Hwy, SR 164, and S 277th Street;
• Improved access to the Interstate 5 corridor and regional employment centers;
• Transit connections to the Regional Growth Centers;
• Establishing the Auburn Station as a center for multi -modal transportation connections to
proposed future intercity rail service;
• Strong advocacy with US congressional members to provide funding to mitigate
transportation problems connected to interstate commerce; and
• Proactively pursuing forums to coordinate transportation project priorities among other
governmental entities, including proposed future intercity rail service.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 2
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
OBJECTIVE: LONG -RANGE PLANNING & PROGRAMMING
To continue to plan for the future of the multi -modal transportation system through long -range
planning, programmatic planning, and financial planning, in compliance with the Growth
Management Act.
POLICIES:
Plan -01: The Comprehensive Transportation Plan shall be evaluated and amended
annually to ensure it is technically accurate, consistent with state, regional,
and other local plans, and in keeping with the City's vision of the future
transportation system.
Plan -02: The Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital
Facilities Plan (CFP) shall be updated annually to reevaluate project
priorities, develop a plan to fund capital improvement projects, and ensure
consistency between project priorities and financing plans. Project
evaluation criteria shall foster economic development, maximize utilization
of city financing to match transportation grants, promote safety, integrate
planning of other projects requiring disturbance of pavements, promote
mobility, and optimize the utilization of existing infrastructure.
OBJECTIVE: SAFETY
To provide a transportation system that is safe for all users.
POLICIES:
Safety -01: A safe and efficient transportation system shall be prioritized over
driving convenience.
Safety -02: Utilize education to increase awareness of existing traffic laws and
safety issues, especially as they relate to pedestrians and bicyclists.
Safety -03: Engage the community in transportation issues through public
involvement and partnerships with organizations such as the Auburn
School District.
Safety -04: Identify areas with persistent traffic violations and address these
violations, in part, through Police Department enforcement.
Safety -05: Emphasize enforcement of the "rules of the road" for pedestrians,
bicyclists and motorists whose actions endanger others. Conduct
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 3
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
enforcement in a manner that reinforces the messages found in non -
motorized education & safety programs.
Safety -06: Recognize the potential effects of hazards on transportation
facilities and incorporate such considerations into the planning and design
of transportation projects, where feasible.
OBJECTIVE: CONNECTIVITY
To provide a highly interconnected network of streets and trails for ease and variety of travel.
POLICIES:
Connect -01: An efficient transportation system seeks to spread vehicle
movements over a series of planned streets. The goal of the system is to
encourage connectivity while preventing unacceptably high traffic volumes
on any one street. Ample alternatives should exist to accommodate access
for emergency vehicles. For these reasons the City will continue to plan a
series of collectors and arterials designed to national standards to provide
efficient service to the community.
Connect -02: Encourage the use of trails and other connections that provide
ease of travel within and between neighborhoods, community activity
centers, and transit services. Development patterns that block direct
pedestrian access are discouraged. Ample alternatives should exist to
accommodate non - motorized transportation on arterials, collectors, and
local roads.
OBJECTIVE:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Minimize the environmental impacts of all new transportation projects and transportation related
improvements.
POLICIES:
Environ -01: Thoroughly evaluate the impacts of all transportation projects
and apply appropriate mitigation measures in conformance with SEPA,
the Critical Areas Ordinance, and other city, county, state, and federal
regulations.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 4
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Environ -02: Identify and consider the environmental impacts of
transportation projects at the earliest possible time to ensure planning and
decisions reflect environmental values, to avoid delays later in the process,
and to reduce or avoid potential problems that may adversely impact the
environment and project outcome.
Environ -03: Incorporate Low Impact Development (LID), green technology,
and sustainability practices into transportation improvements as primary
alternatives whenever feasible.
Environ -04: Support efforts to improve air quality throughout the Auburn
area and develop a transportation system compatible with the goals of the
Federal and State Clean Air Acts.
Environ -05: Require air quality studies of future major development to assess
impacts created by site generated traffic.
OBJECTIVE: LEVEL -OF- SERVICE (LOS) THRESHOLD
To ensure that new development does not degrade transportation facilities to below LOS
standards.
POLICIES:
LOS -01: New development shall not be allowed when the impacts of the
new development on the transportation system degrades the LOS to
below the adopted LOS standard, unless the impacts are mitigated
concurrent with the development as described in Chapter 2.
LOS -02: The term "below level -of- service" shall apply to situations where
traffic attributed to a development likely results in any of the following.
a. An unacceptable increase in hazard or an unacceptable decrease in safety
at an intersection or on a roadway segment.
b. An accelerated deterioration of the street pavement condition or the
proposed regular use of a street not designated as a truck route for truck
movements that can reasonably result in accelerated deterioration of the
street pavement.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 5
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
c. An unacceptable impact on geometric design conditions at an
intersection where two truck routes meet on the City arterial and collector
network.
d. An increase in congestion which constitutes an unacceptable adverse
environmental impact under the State Environmental Policy Act.
e. An increase in queuing that causes blocking of adjacent land uses or
intersections.
f. A reduction in any of the four (4) LOS standards below.
1. Arterial and Collector Corridor LOS: The level -of- service standard for
each arterial and collector corridor is "D ", unless otherwise specified in
Chapter 2 of this plan. The City may require a development or
redevelopment to examine a shorter or longer corridor segment than is
specified in Chapter 2, to ensure a project's total LOS impacts are
evaluated.
2. Signalized Intersection LOS: The level -of- service standard for signalized
intersections is "D ", with the following exceptions; for signalized
intersections of two Arterial roads the level -of- service standard during the
AM and PM peak periods is "E" for a maximum duration of 30 minutes
and for signalized intersections of two Principal Arterial roads the level -
of- service standard during the AM and PM peak periods is "E" for a
maximum duration of 60 minutes. The City may require a development or
redevelopment to examine individual signalized or roundabout
intersections for LOS impacts to ensure a project's total LOS impacts are
evaluated.
3. Two -Way and All-Way Stop Controlled Intersection LOS: The level -of-
service standard for two -way stop controlled and all -way stop controlled
intersections, is "D ". If LOS falls below the standard, analysis and
mitigation may be required in a manner commensurate with the associated
impacts. This may include, among other requirements, conducting a traffic
signal warrant analysis and installing or financing a signal or roundabout.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 6
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
4. Roundabout Intersection LOS: The level -of- service standard for
roundabout controlled intersections is "D ". The City may require a
development or redevelopment to examine to examine roundabout
intersections for LOS impacts to ensure a project's total LOS impacts are
evaluated.
LOS -03: Establish a multi -modal level -of- service system in the future.
LOS -04: PM level of service is the city standard. AM level of service may
need to be analyzed in situations where specialized conditions exist that
disproportionately impact AM traffic.
OBJECTIVE: CONCURRENCY
To ensure transportation facilities do not fall below the adopted level -of- service standard, as
required by the Growth Management Act.
POLICIES:
GMA -01: Require developments to construct or finance transportation
improvements and /or implement strategies that mitigate the impacts of
new development concurrent with (within 6 years of) development, as
required by the Growth Management Act.
GMA -02: New development that lowers a facility's level -of- service standard
below the locally adopted minimum standard shall be denied, as required
by the Growth Management Act. Strategies that may allow a development
to proceed include, but are not limited to:
• Reducing the scope of a project (e.g. platting fewer lots or building less square footage);
• Building or financing new transportation improvements concurrent with (within 6 years of)
development;
• Phasing /delaying a project;
• Requiring the development to incorporate Transportation Demand Management strategies; or
• Lowering level -of- service standards.
GMA -03: The denial of development in order to maintain concurrency may
be grounds for declaring an emergency for the purpose of amending the
Comprehensive Plan outside of the annual amendment cycle.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 7
AUBURN
WASH INCTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
GMA -04: Evaluate city transportation facilities annually to determine
compliance with the adopted level -of- service standards and, as necessary,
amend the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Capital
Facilities Plan (CFP) to remedy identified deficiencies.
GMA -05: Coordinate transportation improvements with the State, Counties,
and neighboring jurisdictions to encourage through trips to occur on state
facilities, reducing stress on the city street network.
OBJECTIVE: FINANCE
To finance the transportation systems necessary to serve new development, while ensuring the
City has the capability to finance general transportation needs.
POLICIES:
Funding -01: Require developments or redevelopments to construct
transportation infrastructure systems needed to serve new developments.
Funding -02: Actively pursue the formation of Local Improvement Districts
(LID) to upgrade existing streets and sidewalks and construct new streets
to the appropriate standard.
Funding -03: Improvements that serve new developments will be constructed
as a part of the development process. All costs will be borne by the
developer when the development is served by the proposed transportation
improvements. In some instances, the City may choose to participate in
this construction if improvements serve more than adjacent developments.
Funding -04: Revenues for street transportation improvements should
primarily provide for the orderly development of the City's transportation
system in compliance with the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The basic
criterion for such funding should be the degree to which that project
improves the overall transportation system and not the benefit that might
accrue to individual properties. Where it is possible to establish a direct
relationship between a needed improvement and a development, the
development should be expected to contribute to its construction.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 8
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Funding -05: Encourage public /private partnerships for financing
transportation projects that remedy existing and anticipated transportation
problems, or that foster economic growth.
Funding -06: Aggressively seek and take advantage of federal, state, local, and
private funding and lending sources that help implement the City's
Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
Funding -07: Maintain a traffic impact fee system based on the Institute of
Traffic Engineers (ITE) guidelines, as modified by the City Council, as a
means of enabling development to mitigate appropriately for associated
traffic impacts.
Funding -08: Reassess the land use element of the Comprehensive Plan if
funding for transportation facilities is insufficient to maintain adopted
level -of- service standards.
OBJECTIVE: QUALITY OF LIFE
To improve the quality of life for Auburn residents and businesses through design of the
transportation system.
POLICIES:
QOL -01: Enhance the livabili ty of Auburn through a variety of mechanisms,
including the innovative design and construction of roadways, non -
motorized facilities, and associated improvements. Apply design standards
that result in attractive and functional
transportation facilities.
OBJECTIVE: TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEM MANAGEMENT (TSM)
To efficiently operate the existing transportation
system through Transportation System
Management (TSM) strategies, thereby
maximizing resources and reducing the need for
costly system capacity expansion projects.
Chapter 5. Policies
Moving Traffic More Effectively with
Intelligent Transportation Systems
Pages -9
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
POLICIES:
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
TSM -01: Use TSM strategies to more efficiently utilize the existing
infrastructure to optimize traffic flow and relieve congestion. Examples
include:
• Re- channelization /restriping, adding turn lanes, adding /increasing number of through lanes
• Signal interconnect and optimization;
• Turn movement restrictions;
• Access Management; and
• Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS).
TSM -02: Support Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) implementation
in coordination with Map 2 -7. Future ITS corridors will be prioritized
using the following criteria.
• Grants, loans, or partner funding can be leveraged to expand the ITS system on a specific
corridor(s) .
• There is existing infrastructure that would make it easier and more cost efficient to implement
ITS elements.
• The corridor(s) completes a logical segment or missing link in the citywide ITS network.
• Significant travel -time savings can be achieved with ITS implementation.
• Corridor supports other City communication and technology needs.
• ITS implementation would have significant safety benefits, including reducing the need for
police flaggers in intersections during events.
TSM -03: ITS elements include but are not limited to:
• Operational improvements such as traffic signal coordination;
• Traveler information including traffic alerts and emergency notification;
• Incident management; and
• Traffic data collection.
TSM -04: Require development to contribute its share of ITS improvements
as mitigation.
TSM -05: Program signal timing to encourage specific movements and the
use of travel routes that are underutilized.
OBJECTIVE: TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM)
To utilize transportation demand management strategies to lessen demand for increased street
system capacity, help maintain the LOS standard, and enhance quality of life for those who use
and benefit from the transportation system.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 10
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
POLICIES:
TDM -01: Encourage the use of high- occupancy vehicles (buses, carpool, and
vanpool) through both private programs and under the direction of Metro
and Pierce Transit.
TDM -02: Promote reduced employee travel during the daily peak travel
periods through flexible work schedules and programs to allow employees
to work part -time or full-time or at alternate work sites closer to home.
TDM -03: Encourage employers to provide TDM measures in the workplace
through such programs as preferential parking for high- occupancy
vehicles, car sharing, improved access for transit vehicles, and employee
incentives for using high - occupancy vehicles.
TDM -04: In making funding decisions, consider transportation investments
that support transportation demand management approaches by providing
alternatives to single - occupant vehicles, such as transit, bikeways and
pedestrian paths.
TDM -05: Recognize emerging TDM strategies such as tolling, variable -
priced lanes, and car sharing may be effective in certain situations.
TDM -06: Coordinate with Metro and other jurisdictions to enhance
Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) programs for CTR employers in Auburn.
TDM -07: Lead by example through implementation of a thorough and
successful Commute -Trip Reduction (CTR) Program for City employees.
OBJECTIVE: PARKING
To ensure adequate coordination of parking needs with traffic and development needs and
support development of a regional park -and ride lot system by Metro Transit, Pierce Transit,
Sound Transit, and the Washington State Department of Transportation.
POLICIES:
Parking -01: On- street parking should be allowed only when consistent with
the function of the street and with traffic volumes.
Parking -02: New developments should provide adequate off - street parking
to meet their needs.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 11
AUBURN
WASH INCTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Parking -03: Develop and maintain regulations, which foster a balance
between meeting the need for public parking and ensuring developers
provide adequate parking to meet the demand generated by new
development.
Parking -04: In certain cases, such as in the Regional Growth Center and in
areas with high pedestrian and transit use, it may be appropriate to reduce
the developer parking obligation to achieve other community benefits or
employ innovative parking strategies such as the use of "park & walk" lots,
where people could park their vehicles and walk to nearby destinations.
Parking -05: The City shall evaluate new residential subdivisions with
constrained space for driveways, utility services, street lights, street trees,
and fire hydrants and the resultant impact on the provision of adequate
on- street parking. Where appropriate, the City shall require the subdivision
to provide dispersed locations of on- street parking (or street accessible
parking) to meet their needs in addition to the zoning code required off -
street parking.
Parking -06: Encourage park & ride lots on sites adjacent to compatible land
uses with convenient access to the Auburn Station, SR 18, SR 167, and all
regional transportation corridors.
Parking -07: Work proactively with Sound Transit, WSDOT, Metro Transit,
and Pierce Transit to ensure the adequate supply of park & ride capacity in
Auburn.
OBJECTIVE: RIGHT -OF -WAY
To retain and preserve existing right -of -way, and identify and acquire new right -of -way as
needed to achieve the City's objectives.
POLICIES:
ROW -01: The acquisition and preservation of right -of -way is a key
component of maintaining a viable transportation system. Methods used
to acquire and preserve right -of -way include:
• Requiring dedication of right -of -way as a condition of development;
• Purchasing right -of -way at fair market value; and
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 12
*
AUBURN
WASH INGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
• Acquiring development rights and easements from property owners.
ROW -02: Preserve and protect existing right -of -way through the issuance of
permits such as ROW Use permits and franchise and public way
agreements, by monitoring and responding to right -of -way encroachments
and safety impacts, and by limiting vacations of public right -of -way.
ROW -03: Vacate right -of -way only when it clearly will not be a future need
or to support economic development.
OBJECTIVE: MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION
To maintain the City's transportation system at a level that is comparable with the design
standards applied to new facilities.
POLICIES:
Prsry -01: Establish programs and schedules for the level and frequency of
roadway and non- motorized system maintenance.
Prsry -02: In order to help ensure the long term preservation of the city street
system, the City shall prohibit non -local trip heavy vehicles from traveling
on city streets , unless the City permits such travel via the issuance of a
temporary haul permit that requires appropriate mitigation.
Prsry -03: Establish standards of street repair and seek to obtain sufficient
financing to attain and maintain a safe system in good condition.
Prsry -04: Continue to implement the "Save Our Streets" program for
maintenance and rehabilitation of local streets.
Prsry -05: Continue to implement the arterial /collector streets maintenance
and rehabilitation program.
Prsry -06: Develop and implement operations and maintenance procedures to
ensure ongoing effectiveness of LID infrastructure.
Prsry -07: In order to help ensure the long term preservation of the city street
system, the City may prohibit trenching or cutting into newly constructed
or newly overlaid pavements for a period of 5 years. Overlays of up to the
full roadway width of affected pavement surface should be required as
mitigation in the event cuts into new pavements cannot be avoided.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 13
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Prsry -08: City shall notify and coordinate with all private and public utilities
within the City limits when planning to complete pavement overlay's or
reconstruction.
Save Our Streets - Patching Treatment
Save Our Streets - Overlay
5.2 Street System
OBJECTIVE:
COMPLETE
STREETS
Ensure Auburn's
transportation
system is
designed to
enable
comprehensive,
integrated, safe
access for
users of all
ages and
abilities
including
pedestrians,
bicyclists, motorists, transit riders and
operators, and truck operators.
Helping those with Special Needs
POLICIES:
Street -01: Plan for and develop a
balanced transportation system,
which provides safe access and
connectivity to transportation
facilities for users of all ages and abilities including pedestrians, bicyclists,
motorists, transit users and operators, and truck operators.
Street -02: Plan for, design, and construct all transportation projects, whether
City led or development driven, to provide appropriate accommodation
for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users in a manner consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, except in situations where the establishment of such
facilities would be contrary to public health and safety or the cost would
be excessively disproportionate to the need.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 14
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Street -03: Ensure the transportation system meets the requirements outlined
in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Street -04: The Auburn Engineering Design Standards is the primary vehicle for
executing the Complete Streets Objective and should include standards for
each roadway classification to guide implementation.
Street -05: Context and flexibility in balancing user needs shall be considered
in the design of all projects and if necessary, a deviation from the Auburn
Engineering Design Standards may be granted to ensure the Complete Streets
Objective and supporting policies are achieved.
OBJECTIVE: STREET NETWORK
To provide an integrated street network of appropriate classes of streets designed to facilitate
different types of traffic flows and access needs.
POLICIES:
Street -06: The city street system shall be made up of three classes of streets:
a. Arterials - a system of city, county, and state streets designed to move
traffic to or from major traffic and activity generators. Arterials should be
adequate in number, appropriately situated, and designed to accommodate
moderate to high traffic volumes with a minimum of flow disruption.
b. Collectors - a system of city streets that collect traffic and move it from
the local street system to the arterial street system.
c. Local streets - a system of city streets, which collect traffic from
individual sites and conveys the traffic to the collector and arterial systems.
Street -07: The Functional Roadway Classifications Map shall serve as the
adopted standard for identifying classified streets in the City of Auburn
and the potential annexation areas.
Street -08: Ensure all eligible streets classified in the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan are federally classified.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 15
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Street -09: Street standards shall be developed, modified, and implemented
that reflect the street classification system and function. The design and
management of the street network shall seek to improve the appearance of
existing street corridors. Streets are recognized as an important
component of the public spaces within the City and should include, where
appropriate, landscaping to enhance
the appearance of city street corridors.
The standards should include
provisions for streetscaping.
Street -10: The classification standards
adopted in the Auburn Engineering
Design Standards are considered the
City's minimum standards for new
streets. In cases in which the City
attempts to rebuild an existing street
within an established right -of -way, the City Council reserves the authority
to determine if additional right -of -way should be obtained in order to
realize the improvement. Preservation of neighborhood continuity and
cohesiveness will be respected.
Street -11: The standards for residential streets may be modified in cross
section to provide better relationships between the different components
of the street including, but not limited to, on- street parking, the landscape
strip, and the sidewalk. Among other objectives, this may be done to
balance the need to provide adequate parking and buffer pedestrians from
traffic.
Principal Arterial: 15th Street NW
Street -12: These minimum standards do not limit or prevent developers from
providing facilities that exceed the City's standards.
Street -13: Encourage King and Pierce counties to develop and implement a
similar system of arterial designations within Auburn's potential
annexation area.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 16
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
Street -14: Designate new arterials to serve developing areas concurrent with
approval of such development. Arterials shall be spaced in compliance
with good transportation network planning principles, and support the
importance of overall system circulation.
Street -15: Encourage King and Pierce counties to develop and implement a
similar system of collector designations within Auburn's potential
annexation area.
Street -16: Designate new collectors to serve developing areas concurrent
with approval of such development. Collectors shall be spaced in
compliance with good transportation network planning principles, and
support the importance of overall system circulation.
Street -17: Access Tracts may be permitted, as long as emergency access can
be guaranteed at all times.
Street -18: The local street network shall be developed to maximize the
efficiency of the transportation network in residential areas and minimize
through traffic in neighborhoods.
• The internal local residential street network for a subdivision should be designed to
discourage regional through traffic and non - residential traffic from penetrating the
subdivision or adjacent subdivisions.
• Where possible, streets shall be planned, designed and constructed to connect to future
development.
• When applicable, non - motorized paths shall be provided at the end of dead end streets to
shorten walking distances to an adjacent arterial or public facilities including, but not limited
to, schools and parks.
• Residential developments should be planned in a manner that minimizes the number of local
street accesses to arterials and collectors.
• To promote efficient connectivity between areas of the community, existing stub end streets
shall be linked to other streets in new development whenever the opportunity arises and the
resulting traffic volumes are not likely to exceed acceptable volumes as identified in the
Auburn Engineering Design Standards.
OBJECTIVE: PRIVATE STREETS
To discourage the development of private streets and ensure, if they are permitted by the City,
they are constructed and maintained according to City standards.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 17
CITY OF
POLICIES:
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Street -19: Private streets are discouraged, but may be permitted on a
discretionary basis, as regulated by city code and the Auburn Engineering
Design Standards.
Street -20: If a private street is permitted, it must be built to public street
standards as identified in the Auburn Engineering Design Standards and
Construction Standards manuals.
Street -21: Private streets must provide for emergency vehicle access and be
privately maintained by an approved association or business. The City
does not maintain private streets.
OBJECTIVE: ACCESS MANAGEMENT
To limit and provide access to the street network in a manner which improves and maintains
public safety and roadway capacity.
POLICIES:
Street -22: Seek consolidation of access points to state highways, arterials, and
collectors. This will benefit the highway and city street system, reduce
interference with traffic flows on arterials, and discourage through traffic
on local streets. To achieve this level of access control, the City:
• Adopts and supports the State's controlled access policy on all state highway facilities;
• May acquire access rights along some arterials and collectors;
• Adopts design standards that identify access standards for each type of functional street
classification;
• Encourages consolidation of access in developing commercial and high density residential
areas through shared use of driveways and local access streets; and
• Will establish standards for access management, develop a planning process to work with the
community and implement access management solutions on arterial corridors.
Street -23: Strive to prevent negative impacts to existing businesses, without compromising safety,
when implementing access management.
OBJECTIVE: THROUGH TRAFFIC
To accommodate through traffic in the City as efficiently as possible, with a minimum of
disruption to neighborhoods.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 18
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
POLICIES:
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Street -24: Continue to coordinate with the Washington State Department of
Transportation to facilitate the movement of traffic through the City.
Street -25: Encourage the State and Counties to develop through routes,
which minimize the impact of through traffic on Auburn's residential
neighborhoods.
Street -26: Actively solicit action by the State and Counties to program and
construct those improvements needed to serve Auburn to the state and
county arterial and freeway systems.
OBJECTIVE: TRAFFIC CALMING
To employ traffic calming techniques to improve safety and neighborhood quality.
POLICIES:
Street -27: Implement the City's traffic calming program to improve
neighborhood safety and quality.
Street -28: The traffic calming program shall require a technical analysis of
existing conditions and appropriate treatments before actions are taken to
fund and implement traffic calming measures.
Street -29: The traffic calming program shall incorporate neighborhood
involvement and seek community support.
Street -30: New construction should incorporate traffic calming measures, as
appropriate.
OBJECTIVE: FREIGHT MOVEMENTS
To facilitate the movements of freight and goods through Auburn with minimal adverse traffic
and other environmental impacts.
POLICIES:
Freight -01: The movement of freight and goods is recognized as an
important component of Auburn's transportation system.
Freight -02: The movement of freight and goods which serve largely national,
state, or regional needs should take place in such a way so that the impacts
on the local transportation system are minimized. These movements
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 19
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
should take place primarily on state highways, Interstates, or on grade -
separated rail corridors in order to minimize the local impacts.
Freight -03: Seek public and private partners to leverage funds for freight
improvement projects and associated mitigation.
Freight -04: Continue to work with the Freight Mobility Roundtable, FAST,
FMSIB, and other local and regional groups to ensure regional needs are
met, and local impacts are mitigated.
Freight -05: All through truck trips and the majority of local trips shall take
place on designated truck routes, as identified on the truck route map,
Map 2 -3, of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan. This policy shall not apply
to developments and uses operating under existing right -of -way use
permits, traffic mitigation agreements or equivalent agreements directly
related to the regulation of permitted haul routes.
Freight -06: If the City is unable to acquire funding to maintain existing truck
routes to a Pavement Condition Index Standard of 70 on a segment of
roadway, that route may be restricted or closed to truck travel.
Freight -07: Work towards designing and constructing future truck routes, as
identified on the truck route map in Chapter 2 of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan, to sustain routine truck traffic.
Freight -08: Local truck trips that have origins and /or destinations in Auburn
may have to sometimes use routes not designated as truck routes. The City
may approve the use of alternate routes not currently designated as truck
routes for truck traffic, with appropriate mitigation. Approval may be
made through issuance of right -of -way use permits, traffic mitigation
agreements or equivalent agreements.
Freight -09: Development shall be required to mitigate the impacts of
construction generated truck traffic on the City's transportation system,
based on the City's LOS standard.
Freight -10: Temporary haul routes for overweight or oversized vehicles shall
be permitted under circumstances acceptable to the City and with
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 20
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
appropriate mitigation. A temporary haul permit must be obtained prior
to the hauling of oversized or overweight freight.
Freight -11: Truck traffic in residential neighborhoods shall be prohibited,
except for local deliveries within said neighborhood, unless no other
possible route is available, in which case mitigation may be required.
OBJECTIVE: LATECOMER POLICY
To enable private investors to recover a portion of improvement costs for transportation facility
improvements that benefit other developments.
POLICIES:
LC -01: The City may enter into latecomer agreements where substantial
transportation investments are made by one party that legitimately should
be reimbursed by others, such as, when the infrastructure improvement
will benefit a future development. Such agreements will be at the
discretion of the City Council. Latecomer agreements do not apply to
situations in which a property owner is required to construct
improvements per an existing city code provision, such as in the case of
half - street and other frontage improvements.
OBJECTIVE: ROUNDABOUTS
To seek air quality, safety, and capacity benefits by promoting the use of roundabouts over
traffic signals.
POLICIES:
RB -01: Intersections controlled with roundabouts are preferred over
signalized intersections whenever feasible and appropriate due to the
benefits achieved with roundabouts including reduced collision rate for
vehicles and pedestrians, less severe collisions, smoother traffic flow,
reduced vehicle emissions and fuel consumption, lower long -term
maintenance costs, and improved aesthetics.
RB -02: Developments required to signalize an intersection as mitigation for
a project may be required to install a roundabout instead of a traffic signal.
The feasibility of acquiring the land needed for a roundabout will be
considered as a factor in this requirement.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 21
AUBURN
WASH INCTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
5.3 Non - motorized System
OBJECTIVE: PLANNING THE NON - MOTORIZED SYSTEM
To plan a coordinated, interconnected network of non - motorized transportation facilities that
effectively provide access to local and regional destinations, improve overall quality of life, and
support healthy community and environmental principles.
POLICIES:
NM -01: Implement land use regulations and encourage site design that
promotes non- motorized forms of transportation.
NM -02: Include the role of non- motorized transportation in all
transportation planning, programming, and if suitable, capital
improvement projects.
Interurban Trail at W Main Street
NM -03: Plan for continuous non- motorized circulation routes within and
between existing, new or redeveloping commercial, residential, and
industrial developments. Transportation planning shall seek to allow
pedestrians and bicyclists the ability to cross or avoid barriers in a manner
that is safe and convenient.
NM -04: Actively seek to acquire land along corridors identified for future
trail development in the Comprehensive Transportation Plan and Auburn Parks,
Recreation, & Open Space Plan 2005 and subsequent Park plans.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 22
CITY OF * *
AUBURN Comprehensive Transportation Plan
WASHINGTON
NM -05: Schedule, plan and co- sponsor events that support recreational
walking and bicycling. These events should emphasize their recreational
and health values and introduce people to the transportation capabilities of
bicycling and walking
NM -06: Improve and protect the non- motorized transportation system
through the establishment of level -of- service goals for non- motorized
facilities.
OBJECTIVE: DEVELOPING THE NON - MOTORIZED SYSTEM
To build a safe, attractive, and inter - connected non - motorized transportation system.
POLICIES:
NM -06: Develop and maintain the non- motorized system, including bike
routes, walkways and equestrian paths, to encourage significant
recreational use.
NM -07: Develop and maintain the non- motorized system, including bike
routes, sidewalks, and multi -use paths in a manner that promotes non -
motorized travel as a viable mode of transportation.
NM -08: Develop the non- motorized system to accommodate appropriate
alternative forms of non - motorized transport, as well as medically
necessary motorized transport.
NM -09: Appropriate street furniture, lighting, signage, and landscaping
should be installed along non- motorized routes to increase safety and to
ensure that facilities are inviting to users.
NM -10: Clearly sign and mark major non- motorized routes to guide
travelers and improve safety.
NM -11: Non- motorized routes shall be constructed to accommodate
emergency vehicle access and be amenable to law enforcement.
NM -12: Locate and design non- motorized transportation systems so that
they contribute to the safety, efficiency, enjoyment and convenience of
residential neighborhoods.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 23
AUBURN
WASH INCTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
NM -13: The development of facilities supporting non- motorized
transportation should be provided as a regular element of new
construction projects. Improvements shall be secured through the
development review process.
NM -14: Minimize hazards and obstructions on the non- motorized
transportation system by properly designing, constructing, managing, and
maintaining designated routes in the system.
OBJECTIVE:
PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL
To enhance and encourage pedestrian travel in Auburn.
POLICIES:
Ped -01: Promote pedestrian travel within the city and connections to
adjacent communities with emphasis placed on safety and on connectivity
to priority destinations such as schools, parks, the downtown, and other
pedestrian- oriented areas. Pedestrian - oriented areas are those areas with
high pedestrian traffic or potential and are identified in this plan. These
areas and streets shall encourage pedestrian travel by providing enhanced
pedestrian improvements or controls on motorized traffic.
Ped -02: Focus investments on and aggressively seek funding for the high
priority pedestrian corridors, identified in Map 3 -2.
Ped -03: Require developers to incorporate pedestrian facilities into new
development and redevelopment in conformance with the Auburn City
Code.
Ped -04: Continue to construct new and rehabilitate existing sidewalks
through a sidewalk improvement program.
Ped -05: Seek ways to provide pedestrian amenities such as streetlights, trees,
seating areas, signage, and public art along all major pedestrian travel
routes.
Ped -06: Work towards buffering pedestrian walkways from moving traffic,
particularly in areas with high levels of pedestrian movements, such as near
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 24
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
*
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
schools and commercial areas, and along corridors with heavy vehicular
traffic.
Ped -07: Pedestrian crossings shall be developed at locations with significant
pedestrian traffic and designed to match pedestrian desire lines.
Ped -08: Encourage the formation of LIDs to develop pedestrian pathways
and other non- motorized amenities throughout the City. Partner with the
local school districts to improve Safe Walking Routes to School.
OBJECTIVE: BICYCLE TRAVEL
To improve Auburn's bicycling network.
POLICIES:
Bike -01: Develop programs and publications, and work with local employers
to encourage citywide bicycle commuting.
Bike -02: Designate, develop, and maintain high priority bicycle routes, in
conformance with Map 3 -4, that create an interconnected system of bike
facilities for local and regional travel, including on- street bike routes, and
multi - purpose trails.
Bike -03: During the development review process, ensure projects are
consistent with the Non- motorized chapter of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan by requiring right -of -way dedications and other
improvements as needed to develop the bicycle network.
Bike -04: Focus investments on and aggressively seek funding for the high
priority future bicycle corridors, identified in Map 3 -4 and corridors and
connectors, as applicable, specified in Map 3 -5.
Bike -05: Encourage the inclusion of convenient and secure bicycle storage
facilities in all large public and private developments.
Bike -06: Continue to develop and implement Sharrows and associated Share
the Road signage in residential and some non- residential areas of City.
Bike -07: Continue installation of bike lanes in parts of City where there is
existing /adequate right -of -way.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 25
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Bike -08: Develop an Auburn specific bicycle signage program to highlight
corridors, connectors and in -city /out of city destinations.
Bike -09: Make improvements to existing Interurban Trail — signage,
pavement conditions, vegetation maintenance, grade crossings, and
upgrades to user facilities at Main Street crossing.
Bike -10: Develop a capital improvement program project with cost estimate
for the design and construction of bicycle /pedestrian bridge at southern
terminus of M St. west of existing Stuck River Vehicle Bridge.
Bike -11: Develop a capital improvement program project with cost estimate
for the design and construction of innovative and safe pedestrian /bicycle
crossing at M St. /Auburn Way South intersection.
Bike -12: Install one or more bike boxes through a pilot program approach
to test effectiveness and public response. Focus pilot program efforts at
key intersections such as the West Main Street and C Street intersection,
the M Street and Auburn Way South intersection and the Ellingson Road
and A Street intersection.
Bike -13: Continue to install bicycle /pedestrian crossing warning systems
along Interurban Trail at all crossing locations consisting of S 277th Street,
37th Street NW, and W Main Street.
Bike -14: Develop and maintain an official Auburn Bicycling Guide Map.
Bike -15: In coordination with the City Council, Mayor's Office, Auburn
Area Chamber of Commerce, Auburn Tourism Board and appropriate
City departments develop strategies and actions for the implementation of
the bicycle oriented economic development recommendations of the
Auburn Bicycle Task Force.
OBJECTIVE: EQUESTRIAN TRAVEL
To improve Auburn's equestrian environment.
POLICIES:
Eq -01: Strive to incorporate equestrian facilities into the design of trail and
transportation facilities, where possible and appropriate. These efforts
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 26
CITY OF Comprehensive Transportation Plan
AUBURN
f WASHINGTON
should be concentrated south of the White River in Auburn's southeast
corner and in Lea Hill, but considered for other areas of the City.
Eq -02: Transportation projects, and other public and private projects, in
lower - density neighborhoods should be evaluated, and where possible,
planned, designed and constructed to be compatible with equestrian use.
Eq -03: Create an interconnected system of safe equestrian trails and provide
adequate equestrian amenities adjacent to those trails.
5.4 Transit System
OBJECTIVE: TRANSIT SERVICES
To encourage the continued development of public transit systems and other alternatives to
single occupant vehicle travel, to relieve traffic congestion, to reduce reliance on the automobile
for personal transportation needs, to improve route coverage and scheduling, and to ensure
transit is a convenient and reliable mode option for both local and regional trips.
Transit -01: Partner with WSDOT, Metro Transit, Pierce Transit, Sound
Transit, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and private businesses to achieve
Auburn's transit and passenger rail objectives.
Transit -02: Work with local and regional transit agencies to serve new and
existing trip generators in Auburn, such as colleges, commercial areas, and
community facilities.
Transit -03: Encourage Sound Transit, Metro Transit, and Pierce Transit to
expand transit to underserved areas of Auburn.
Transit -04: Partner with WSDOT, Amtrak, and Sound Transit to establish
an intercity passenger rail stop at the Auburn Station.
Transit -05: Consider both the transit impacts and the opportunities
presented by major development proposals when reviewing development
under the State Environmental Policy Act.
Transit -06: Encourage the inclusion of transit facilities in new development
when appropriate.
Transit -07: Encourage bus stops to be located at well -lit and accessible areas.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 27
CITY OF
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Transit -08: Work with transit providers and regional agencies to develop a
transit system that is fully accessible to pedestrians and the physically
challenged, and which integrates the access, safety, and parking
requirements of bicyclists.
Transit -09: Identify areas of concentrated transit traffic and impose design
and construction standards that accommodate the unique considerations
associated with bus travel, such as street geometry and pedestrian linkages.
Transit -10: Work with transit providers to create new commuter — oriented
transit routes and maintain existing commuter routes linked with Sounder
commuter rail.
Transit -11: Develop rider information packages that inform users of
commuter, transit, rail, trail, and air transportation opportunities.
5.5 Air Transportation
OBJECTIVE:
AIR TRANSPORTATION
To provide an efficient municipal airport, serving light general aviation aircraft, as an integral
part of the City's transportation system.
POLICIES:
Air -01: Continue to develop the Auburn Municipal Airport in accordance
with the Airport Master Plan.
Air -02: The airport shall be managed as a general aviation facili ty; the use of
jet aircrafts and helicopters that create noise and land use conflicts shall be
evaluated, in conformance with FAA regulations.
Air -03: The siting of new airport facilities shall consider neighborhood
impacts such as increased noise generated from the use of those facilities.
Air -04: Use of the airport by non- conventional aircraft such as ultra lights
shall be discouraged, in conformance with FAA regulations.
Air -05: The City's zoning ordinance and other appropriate regulatory
measures shall enforce the airport clear zones as regulated by the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA). The impact of development on air safety
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 28
AUBURN
WASH INGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
shall be assessed through SEPA review, and appropriate mitigation
measures shall be required by the City.
Air -06: Minimize or eliminate the potentially adverse effects of light and
glare on the operation of the Auburn Airport.
Chapter 5. Policies Page 5- 29
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
CHAPTER 6.
FUNDING
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The ability to finance the maintenance and enhancement of the transportation system is critical to
the implementation of this plan and the success of the future transportation system. This chapter
details the financial planning tools and funding mechanisms available to accomplish these goals.
6.1 Financial Planning and Programming
The City updates its financial plan annually in order to ensure programmed transportation
improvements are financially feasible and prioritized in accordance with available funds. The
Transportation Improvement Program and Capital Facilities Plan are the two financial planning
documents the City uses to identify its financial strategy for implementing transportation
improvements.
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The Transportation Improvement Program (11P) is a six year plan which lists programmed
transportation improvements in the following categories: roadway improvement projects,
intersection improvement projects, non - motorized and transit projects, preliminary engineering
and miscellaneous projects, and preservation projects. Transportation needs are identified by
examining the latest information concerning
safety and accident history, growth trends, the
traffic model, traffic studies, and the
omprehensive Transportation Plan. The City
dopts a six -year Transportation Improvement Program
(11P) annually, including a revenue forecast and
nalysis of available funding. Projects are then
rioritized according to a number of factors
ncluding safety, capacity needs, access needs, and
e likelihood of securing funding. The first three
ears of the TIP must be financially constrained,
o project programming is often limited due to
nding limitations.
The TIP is an important tool for identifying
funding needs and developing a financial plan for
project implementation. It also feeds into the Capital Facilities Plan.
Auburn City Hall
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
The Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) is the Comprehensive Plan element which identifies the financial plan
for implementing all capital improvements in Auburn. Transportation improvements are included
Chapter 6. Funding Page 6- 1
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
in the Capital Facilities Plan, which is amended annually. The Capital Facilities Plan enables the City
to fulfill the GMA requirement of having a multiyear financing plan based on identified
transportation needs. It also enables the City to make informed decisions about its investment of
public dollars and make timely decisions about maintaining levels -of- service in accordance with
the Comprehensive Plan standards.
6.2 Funding Sources
The City uses a combination of public and private funding sources to implement transportation
improvements in Auburn, both for maintenance activities and capital improvements.
GENERAL TAX REVENUES
The City receives tax revenues from a variety of state, regional, and local sources including the real
estate excise tax, sales tax, and the motor vehicle fuel tax. Despite these revenues, the City has
numerous maintenance and capital improvement needs that cannot be met by existing tax
revenues alone.
Recognizing the need to raise additional revenues for the local street system, Auburn residents
approved the `Save Our Streets' (SOS) program in 2004 for specific funding from property taxes,
and in doing so, created a funding program to help rehabilitate Auburn's residential streets. In
2013, the City Council modified the funding source for the program to be from Construction
Sales Tax instead of property taxes.
With the success of the `Save Our Streets' program, the City intends to pursue a program that will
help fund arterial and collector street maintenance. The City does have an Arterial Street Fund;
however, these funds have proven inadequate in addressing all the maintenance and capital needs
of the arterial system.
In addition, the City has also created an Arterial Street Preservation Program to preserve and
rehabilitate the pavement on these classes of streets. The program is funded through a one
percent utility tax which was adopted by City Council during 2008.
GRANTS
The City has an active grant program and continually seeks grants, both private and public, to
improve Auburn's transportation system. The following is a list of some of the grants the City has
historically applied for and will likely apply for again in the future.
FEDERALLY FUNDED PROGRAMS
The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP -21) replaced the Transportation
Enhancement (TE) Activities with the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). The original
TE activities remain eligible for '1'E funds that were previously apportioned until the TE funds are
obligated, rescinded, or lapse. MAP -21 funds projects designed to strengthen the cultural,
aesthetic, and environmental aspects of the inter -modal transportation system. The program
provides for the implementation of a variety of non - traditional projects, including the restoration
of historic transportation facilities, the construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities,
landscaping and scenic beautification, and the mitigation of water pollution from highway runoff.
Chapter 6. Funding Page 6- 2
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The Surface Transportation Program (STP) provides flexible funding that may be used by
states and localities for projects on any public road, non - motorized improvements, bridge
projects, and transit capital projects.
The Safety Program is a federal program targeted at reducing accident rates at intersections and
along corridors, particularly at those locations with higher than average fatality and injury rates.
Funds come from the Highway Safety Improvement (HSIP) Program included in MAP -21. HSIP
requires that states program and spend safety funds according to their Strategic Highway Safety
Plan. Washington State's plan is called Target Zero.
The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program is a federally funded program
administered through PSRC. CMAQ funds projects and programs in air quality non - attainment
and maintenance areas, which reduce transportation related emissions.
In addition to the aforementioned programs, the federal government has an annual appropriations
bill. Auburn may apply through the offices of Washington senators and congressional members
for funding for specific projects. This funding source has historically been a successful means of
financing some of the City's more expensive capital improvement projects.
FEDERAL LEGISLATION
President Obama signed MAP -21 (P.L. 112 -141) into law on July 6, 2012. This major
transportation law provided $105 billion for the nation's surface transportation programs over a
two -year period. MAP -21 replaced the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation
Equity Act — A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA -LU), which was enacted in 2005 with an expiration
date of 2009. Congress had passed nine short -term extensions to SAFETEA -LU before finally
agreeing the two -year MAP -21 almost three years later. After a series of extensions, MAP21 is
now set to expire October 29, 2015. Efforts are currently underway in Congress to reauthorize the
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP- 21).The 2009 American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act also dedicates funding to numerous programs, many of which can be used to help
finance the City's programmed transportation improvement projects.
STATE FUNDED PROGRAMS
The Safe Routes to Schools Program is a state and federally funded program that aims to
protect children from traffic related deaths and injuries and promotes a healthy lifestyle by
encouraging bicycling and walking to school.
The Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Grant is a state funded program that funds non - motorized
safety improvements.
The Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) administers annual grant programs that fund
roadway and non - motorized projects that improve safety, mobility, capacity, and promote
economic development. The TIB offers several programs, each of which emphasizes different
funding criteria.
The Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB) is a state funded program that
provides low -cost financing for public facility improvements. Public entities are eligible to apply
for and receive loans and grants for public facilities linked to economic development outcomes
Chapter 6. Funding Page 6- 3
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
such as private business investment and job creation. CERB also finances site - specific studies and
plans.
LOANS
Low - interest loans are also available to municipalities. For example the Washington State
Department of Commerce Public Works Board offers low- interest loans for local governments to
finance public infrastructure construction and rehabilitation. Eligible projects must improve public
health and safety, respond to environmental issues, promote economic development, or upgrade
system performance. Roads, streets and bridges are eligible for these loans. The loans can be
strategically employed to leverage grant funding by providing a local match, enabling the City to
compete for funding for public infrastructure projects. In addition, the City has the option of
issuing bonds for public infrastructure projects.
PRIVATE SECTOR CONTRIBUTIONS
The City has an established traffic impact fee system based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers
(ITE) guidelines, as amended by the City Council. The fee system estimates the amount of traffic
each development is anticipated to create, based on the land use type and size. Traffic impact fees
compensate the City for the capacity improvements needed to accommodate the new trips
generated by new development. In turn, the City uses the revenues to expand the street network
through the capacity projects included in the TIP. The fees are based on the costs of the capacity
project included in the TIP and forecast growth throughout the City. The fees are updated
annually following the adoption of the TIP by City Council. Payment of the impact fee does not
relieve developers of their codified obligation to construct half -street improvements, nor the need
to mitigate project impacts identified through the SEPA process, which may include the
construction of an identified TIP project (and a credit for the impact fee contribution towards
that project).
The City also charges a truck impact fee for certain land -use types which are associated with
significant truck traffic generation, such as commercial and industrial uses. These fees are used to
address impacts on the City's truck routes and other truck- related infrastructure.
FUNDING PARTNERSHIPS
The City has successfully formed several funding partnerships, which have enabled it to leverage
its resources in implementing transportation improvements.
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS
Local Improvement Districts (LID) enable city investment in a specified area by leveraging city
funds, when available, with contributions from property owners in the district. In essence, LID's
are a means of using limited city resources to improve neighborhood quality through
improvement of streets, sidewalks, and other features of the roadway.
FAST FREIGHT ACTION STRATEGY TEAM)
FAST is an innovative partnership composed of transportation agencies, ports, cities, economic
development organizations, trucking, rail, and business interests. One of FAST's primary
objectives is to obtain funding for projects that improve freight mobility. FAST helped fund the S
Chapter 6. Funding Page 6- 4
AUBU*
RICT
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
277th Street Grade Separation, the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation, and the M Street Underpass
proj ect.
FMSIB FREIGHT MOBILITY STRATEGIC INVESTMENT BOARD)
The mission of the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board ( FMSIB) is to create a
comprehensive and coordinated state program to facilitate freight movement to local, national,
and international markets. FMSIB is also charged with lessening the impact of freight movements
on local communities. FMSIB obtains funding directly from legislative appropriations and has
contributed funds to the 3rd Street SW Grade Separation, the S 277th Street Grade Separation
and the M Street Underpass projects.
FUTURE FINANCING POSSIBILITIES
As the transportation system evolves, so will the range of financing options available to the City.
In general, the financing options currently available under state law fall short of meeting current
and anticipated transportation improvement needs. Hence, the City will continue to seek fair and
sustainable strategies for funding the maintenance activities and capital improvements needed to
preserve the City's transportation network. Among other strategies, the implementation of a street
utility may be employed to fund many of the City's transportation needs.
TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT
In 1987, the State Legislature created Transportation Benefit Districts (TBDs) as an option for
local governments to fund transportation improvements. Chapter 36.73 of the Revised Code of
Washington provides for the establishment of 'IBD by cities and counties to levy and impose
various taxes and fees to generate revenues to support transportation improvements within the
district. A 'IBD is a quasi - municipal corporation and independent taxing district created for the
sole purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation
improvements within the district. In 2005 and 2007, the Legislature amended the "IBD statute to
expand its uses and revenue authority, including the ability to authorize a $20 annual vehicle
license fee (VLF), and up to an additional $80 of VLF, if approved by voters within the district.
The state legislature provided local governments with these tools because inflation has eroded the
local share of gas tax and a series of statewide ballot initiatives passed over the last 12 years have
eliminated other traditional sources of funding for local transportation needs.
The City of Auburn created a "IBD in 2011. The "I 'BD is currently considering the implementation
of the $20 annual vehicle fee, possible local sales tax increase and how the revenue raised could be
best used to achieve the goals of the "IBD.
STREET UTILITY
A street utility would be used similarly to how sewer and water utility fees are now collected. A
monthly or annual fee would be charged to residents and businesses in Auburn, for example via a
flat fee or through a pro -rated fee based on anticipated usage.
The implementation of a street utility would require a change in state law. The street utility system
is one in which all residents and businesses would pay their fair share of funding street
maintenance and repair. If implemented, a street utility would undoubtedly be combined with the
suite of other financing strategies the City currently employs.
Chapter 6. Funding Page 6- 5
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
6.3 Funding Strategies and Project Prioritization
The City uses a variety of criteria to prioritize transportation projects, including safety, mobility,
and overall community benefit. In addition, the City also considers the availability of funding and
the ability to leverage City dollars to raise addition funds. For example, grants are often available
for specific types of capital investments, whereas they are more limited for
maintenance /preservation. Hence, the City often needs to budget for maintenance /preservation
through tax revenues. Capital improvements may be financially secured through a combination of
public and private investment. Hence, project prioritization for capital improvements is often
partially dependent on the ability to secure outside funding Likewise, maintenance and
preservation is highly dependent on the limited tax revenues available to the City. In the future,
the City will need to continue lobbying for its share of federal, state, and county tax revenues, seek
creative avenues for securing private investment dollars and grant funds, and potentially
implement new funding strategies such as tolling and street utility fees.
Chapter 6. Funding Page 6- 6
OF �F
C[TY
AUBURN
WASHINGTON
CHAPTER 7.
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
MONITORING AND
EVALUATION
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan, a long -
range plan with the horizon year 2035, predicts
the needs and conditions of the future
transportation system, enabling the City to
anticipate its future needs. Nonetheless, the
transportation network is dynamic, constantly evolving due to circumstances beyond the scope
and influence of this plan. Hence, regular updates are necessary to ensure the Plan remains current
and relevant.
Auburn Time
Auburn Station Clock
7.1 Annual Updates
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan can be amended annually as part of the City's regular
Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle, which ensures proposed changes go through a public
review process before the amended plan is adopted by the City Council at the end of the calendar
year. In preparation for the annual amendment cycle, the City will review the plan and propose
updates as needed. These proposed updates may be due to changes to City priorities, the
availability of new information, or the relevance of certain plan components.
RE- EVALUATION
The annual re- evaluation process provides an opportunity for the City to identify progress made
in implementing the Plan, as well as identify new needs that have arisen since the previous update.
The update will consider the street, non - motorized and transit systems, and assess whether the
Plan adequately addresses the implementation strategies necessary to ensure the transportation
infrastructure continues to grow in line with the City's objectives.
As part of this process, the City will review its future projects list and update the Transportation
Improvement Program and the Capital Facilities Plan as appropriate. It will also review and update the
Policies and Funding chapters, in order to remain consistent with the City's vision and current
with potential funding strategies.
TECHNICAL INFORMATION
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan contains a range of technical data, much of which
informs other elements of the Plan. As part of the annual amendment cycle, technical
information, such as traffic volumes, existing levels -of- service, roadway classifications, and transit
route and ridership information will be updated as appropriate. Updated information will inform
Chapter 7. Monitoring and Evaluation Page 7- 1
CITY OF
AUBU
WASHINGTON
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
much of the evaluation process, enabling the City to quantify system changes over time and make
appropriate decisions in planning the future system.
MODEL UPDATES
The City's traffic model shall be updated on a regular basis, every few years, as new land use,
employment, and housing data becomes available. Model updates are important as they ensure the
City has an accurate understanding of how land use patterns, employment, and other factors
impact future transportation conditions, enabling the City Council to make informed policy
decisions. The model also provides an understanding of the impacts associated with different
projects, allowing the City to devise a revised list of future projects to improve capacity and safety,
as well as achieve other priorities.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY
The annual evaluation process is an opportunity to ensure the Comprehensive Transportation
Plan is consistent with other elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan, including the land -use
element, economic development element, Auburn Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan,
Transportation Improvement Program, and Capital Facilities Plan. Hence, as part of the annual
amendment cycle, the City will ensure these plan components are consistent with and supportive
of each other.
7.2 Multi -Year Updates
The City has the opportunity to preform annual updates to the Comprehensive Transportation
Plan on an as needed basis to account for significant changes which have occurred during the
previous year. A more exhaustive process is periodically necessary, hence, a thorough rewrite of
the Plan shall be conducted every five to eight years. This endeavor will include a broad public
outreach effort with input from neighboring jurisdictions, state and regional agencies, and Auburn
residents and businesses. Much like the process for the 2009 update, it will present an opportunity
to holistically examine the current transportation system and lay the framework for development
of the future system.
Chapter 7. Monitoring and Evaluation Page 7- 2
CITY OF -
AUBURN
�---� WASHINGTON
Memorandum
To: Planning Commission Members
From: Jeff Tate, Assistant Director of Community Development Services
Date: October 13, 2015
Re: City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan Transmittal
Community Development Services is pleased to transmit the Draft Core Comprehensive Plan for your
review and consideration. During the October 20, 2015 staff will provide an overview of the Core
Comprehensive Plan and how it fits into the overall context of the City's full comprehensive plan. As a
precursor to staff's presentation, Attachment A of this memo provides a one page summary of the core
plan and its related policy elements.
The Core Plan serves as the foundational piece for all of the GMA mandatory Policy Elements. The Core
is the centerpiece of the entire Comprehensive Plan. It tells the story of what Auburn strives to be by
establishing values around which we will make future decisions, develop policies and regulations, and
make investments. As you read through this document you will see that 7 values are identified and
described. The Planning Commission reviewed these values earlier this year. We then provide a short
overview of each of the GMA mandated Policy Elements that includes a goal related to each value. It is
a way for Auburn to ensure that values carry forward into each of the detailed Policy Elements.
Attachment B of this memo provides an overview of the Planning Commission and City Council schedule
for reviewing the various remaining portions of the Comprehensive Plan.
There are a number of supporting documents that serve as "inputs" into the Core Comprehensive Plan.
These documents are listed as appendices in the Plan and are available to view on the City's webpage at
http: / /www.auburnwa.gov /doing business /community development /planning /comprehensive plan /d
raft comp plan.htm.
The following is a list of the appendices that are available online:
• Appendix A —The Auburn Community Vision Report
• Appendix B —The Auburn Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment
• Appendix C —The Auburn Housing Element Checklist
• Appendix D —The Auburn Health Impact Assessment
• Appendix E —The Comprehensive Plan Public Participation Program
• Appendix F — The Buildable Lands Analysis
• Appendix G —The Auburn Airport Master Plan
• Appendix H — Auburn Community Profile
ATTACHMENT A - CORE PLAN OVERVIEW
Purpose: Comply with Chapter 36.70a RCW - the Growth Management Act. RCW 36.70a.070
identifies mandatory elements of a comprehensive plan:
Land Use Element
Housing Element
Capital Facilities
Element (public
facilities)
Utilities Element
(electrical, natural gas,
telecommunication)
Transportation
Element
Economic
Development Element
Parks and Rec
Element
Audience: City Council for Core Plan. Specific individual plans, while adopted by council, are
primarily used by staff.
Core Plan Concept: Create a single, condensed, high level comprehensive plan. This document
functions as an "Executive Summary" for all comprehensive plan documents.
Structure: The Executive Summary is called the core plan. All other plans are outputs.
Examples of Contributing
Reports (Inputs)
Health Impact
Assessment
Core Plan
-Policy
Elements (Outputs
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Tuesday, December 8, 2015
ATTACHMENT B - SCHEDULE
Date
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Monday, October 26, 2015
Monday, November 2, 2015
Wednesday, November 4, 2015
Monday, November 23, 2015
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Monday, November 9, 2015
Monday, December 14, 2015
Monday, December 21, 2015
Planning Commission
Meeting
1 Subject(s)
Council Study Session
Core Plan Introduction
Transportation Introduction
Water Introduction
Sewer Introduction
Council Study Session
Core Plan Introduction
Transportation Introduction
Storm Introduction
Planning Commission
Land Use Introduction
Housing Introduction
Core Plan Hearing
Transportation Hearing
Council Study Session
Land Use Introduction
Housing Introduction
Planning Commission
Ec. Dev. Introduction
Parks Introduction
Utilities Introduction
Land Use Hearing
Housing Hearing
Council Study Session
Core Plan, Transportation,
Housing, Land Use Wrap Up
Council Study Session
Ec. Dev. Introduction
Parks Introduction
Utilities Introduction
Planning Commission
Ec. Dev. Hearing
Parks Hearing
Utilities Hearing
Comp Plan Deliberations
Council Study Session
Council Meeting
TBD if needed
Comp Plan
Land Use
Storm
Water
Planning Commission Hearing
Planning Commission Hearing
Sewer
Planning Commission Hearing
Planning Commission Hearing
Planning Commission Hearing
Economic Development
Planning Commission Hearing
Planning Commission Hearing
Parks and Recreation
Core
Planning Commission Hearing
Utilities
Housing
Transportation
Planning Commission Hearing
Planning Commission Hearing
Planning Commission Intro
Planning Commission Intro
City Council Intro
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - SUBJECT SCHEDULE
Subject
Planning Commission Intro
Planning Commission Intro
Planning Commission Intro
Planning Commission Intro
City Council Intro
City Council Intro
City Council Intro
Planning Commission Intro
City Council Intro
City Council Intro
Planning Commission Intro
City Council Intro
City Council Intro
Planning Commission Intro
Planning Commission Intro
City Council Intro
City Council Intro
March 17, 2015
April 14, 2015
October 26, 2015
April 14, 2015
April 21, 2015
October 26, 2015
May 5, 2015
June 2, 2015
November 2, 2015
October 20, 2015
November 4, 2015
November 2, 2015
October 20, 2015
November 4, 2015
November 2, 2015
November 4, 2015
November 17, 2015
November 9, 2015
November 4, 2015
November 17, 2015
MIM November 9, 2015
November 17, 2015
December 8, 2015
- November 23, 2015
I November 17, 2015
December 8, 2015
November 23, 2015
November 17, 2015
December 8, 2015
November 23, 2015
CITY OF AUBURN
CORE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
COVER PAGE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
TO BE FILLED WITH TITLE AND GRAPHIC
Acknowledgments
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
TO BE FILLED WITH NAMES AND ORGANIZATION
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 2
Table of Contents
Introduction and Background
Executive Summary
User's Guide
Community Profile and Characteristics
Community Vision and Values
Character
Wellness
Service
Economy
Celebration
Environment
Sustainability
Policy Elements
Volume 1- Land Use Policy Element
Volume 2 - Housing Policy Element
Volume 3 - Capital Facilities Policy Element
Volume 4 - Utilities Policy Element
Volume 5 - Transportation Policy Element
Volume 6 - Economic Development Policy Element
Volume 7 - Parks and Open Space Policy Element
Future Land Use Map
Appendices
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 3
Introduction and Background
Auburn is in the midst of an exciting stage of its evolution. From the 1850's until the mid 1990's,
Auburn has transitioned from a railroad and farming community to a small town. Since then, the
dynamism brought upon by opportunities and challenges that come with growth and progress
have drastically changed the City. With the annexations that occurred in the late 1990's and 2000's,
the overall growth since the 2000's, and its anticipated growth over the next 20 years, Auburn is
maturing into a City of local and regional significance with an operating budget in excess of a
quarter billion dollars annually. This ongoing maturation has changed Auburn from a relatively
insulated small town, nestled in the midst of many other similar communities that surround Seattle
and Tacoma, to a City with its own complex identity and a myriad of dreams and dilemmas. At the
time of settlement and for the next 100 years, the Auburn of 2035, with its 100,000 projected
residents, would be hard to imagine.
Auburn's transition from a small town to a City of regional significance is far from complete. There
is much work ahead of us. While we are fortunate to have many strengths and opportunities to
build upon, we also know that we have work to do in many areas. We must prepare for the future
challenges we know we will face, as well as those that will be presented to us along the way. This
Comprehensive Plan establishes a commitment to a future Auburn and lays the foundation for how
we will navigate the next 20 years. It accomplishes this by expressing the following:
• Describing a vision for Auburn.
• Declaring our commitment to core values.
• Setting policies to achieve the vision.
• Outlining actions that adhere to core values.
There were a variety of sources that shaped this Plan, but the single greatest influence is the
people who live, work, and visit Auburn. The process for developing this Plan included input from
more than 1,000 citizens and business owners who shared their opinions, criticisms, ideas and
concerns regarding where we are today and where we need to be in the future. The following is
an overview of the key inputs that shaped this Plan:
• In 2014 the City conducted the "Imagine Auburn" visioning exercise, which yielded about
1,000 responses from citizens, visitors and business owners. This effort alone provides a
major source of influence for the Plan.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 4
• A substantial amount of demographic data was analyzed in order to understand the profile
of our community and to identify trends in our community. These data provided a
significant amount of information toward formulating ideas and concepts.
• The Auburn Health Impact Assessment and Housing Inventory were focused studies
conducted to provide enhanced information in important areas. These studies provide
direct input on how to promote a healthy lifestyle in Auburn and how to manage the diverse
housing stock that exists in a City that is 124 years old.
• The Washington State Growth Management Act, King and Pierce Countywide Planning
Policies, and the Puget Sound Regional Council VISION 2040 are laws and policies under
which the City must plan. While these do not define our vision, they do establish the
framework within which we must operate.
The Comprehensive Plan is a guidance document. At its nucleus are the City's collective vision
and values which provide a foundation for future direction. The policies and actions will help the
Mayor, City Council, and staff follow the path to our vision, but we must remember that this path is
wide and it will meander a bit. The world around us is constantly changing, so being flexible and
open- minded allows us to better face the challenges that confront us.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 5
Executive Summary
The Auburn of 2035 will be an exciting, vibrant city where businesses want to locate and people
want to live or visit. This document constitutes the plan that City leadership will utilize to achieve
positive outcomes.
Reading through the plan may lead to questions about the City's aspirations and goals. In many
ways, Auburn is a "diamond in the rough ". The City's elected officials, staff members, and citizens
overwhelmingly believe that strong leadership and considered planning can lead to Auburn
realizing its potential. With two major rivers, access to many parks and trails, a solid business core,
a committed government, and a long list of other assets and traits, Auburn has all the right building
blocks to achieve great things. We just need to put those building blocks together and commit to
carrying out all the things we need to do to get there. We are eager to continue the good work that
has already been done, but are even more excited to ascend to a much higher level.
You might also wonder how we got to a point of defining a vision or laying out the plan to get there.
While there are many inputs that helped guide this process, the vision and resultant plan starts with
the people who either live here or spend their time working here or visiting. That feedback
provided great insight into our strengths and weaknesses, perceptions and concerns, as well as
ideas for what Auburn should be in the future. The following is a list that captures many of the
thoughts that were shared:
1. Citizens of Auburn share a tremendous pride in community - this is perhaps the most important
building block for successful implementation of a Comprehensive Plan.
2. We are a community that delights in our history, which makes it hard to know the way forward
in a way that embraces the new and unknown, while honoring the past - we need to overcome
this paradox that slows our progress.
3. Auburn has an extensive inventory of parks, natural areas, and open spaces, as well as arts and
recreation opportunities - these are essential components for a healthy community where
people want to live, play and work.
4. Most residents commute to jobs that are outside Auburn, while most people who work in
Auburn arrive from other locations - we need to explore ways to change this pattern.
5. Auburn has a robust collection of environmental resources. Through a combination of
protection, preservation and education both people and wildlife deserve a healthy natural
environment.
6. We are proud of, and find strength in, our social, cultural and ethnic diversity - continuing to
further celebrate and leverage our diversity is a necessity.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 6
7. Auburn lacks complete non - motorized connections that join residential areas with commercial
centers, recreational opportunities, or other residential neighborhoods - addressing this
concern will create more opportunity to live a healthy lifestyle, use other modes of transport
aside from cars, and build our sense of a connected community.
8. The presence of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe offers great opportunity for partnership and to
mutually enhance our economic, social and cultural presence within the community and
region - we need to continue to build our relationship with MIT to capitalize on these
opportunities.
9. Historic downtown Auburn has maintained a Main Street that many communities have long
since lost and are seeking ways to recreate - we need to continue our work to make downtown
Auburn a destination to visit and a pedestrian - friendly, transit oriented location to live.
10. Our physical location between Seattle and Tacoma, along the Sound Transit commuter line,
and at the intersection of SR -18 and SR -167 are ideal conditions for ensuring efficient
movement of goods and people - we need to better exploit our location advantage when trying
to attract businesses and residents.
11. There is a sentiment that Auburn could be safer - we need to overcome this perception so that
Auburn is a more desirable place to live, work and play.
12. There is a high level of dedication, commitment and excellence at our local school districts and
Green River College - we need to strengthen our partnerships with these institutions that are
equally passionate about elevating Auburn to a premier community.
13. Auburn has a diverse mix of housing types, however that does not mean it is appropriately
distributed throughout the City - while we have achieved or exceeded our goals for providing a
mix of housing, there is a need to better disperse different types of housing throughout the City,
while preserving existing housing stock.
14. Auburn already has a robust and diverse base of businesses, but there is a need to further
diversify - we need more businesses that generate revenue and jobs that will lead to local
spending.
15. Many of Auburn's streets are deteriorating due to their age, increased traffic volumes, especially
heavy trucks, or from design and construction standards based on previous jurisdictional
requirements prior to their annexation into the City - we need to sustain revenue streams and
to allocate resources in a manner that keeps our streets in good condition.
16. Access to healthy food and activities varies greatly throughout the City - this disparity should be
equalized in order to ensure that our entire community has the ability to choose to live a
healthy lifestyle.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 7
17. We are passionate about the extensive level of social and human services that exists in Auburn
but believe that other communities need to follow our example rather than lean on us to take
care of those in need - we struggle with how to provide local support within an overall
balanced regional approach.
18. As a 124 year old City there are buildings and areas in Auburn that are tired in their appearance
and function - we need to find ways to help energize the way those areas look and feel.
The Core Plan establishes a vision and series of values that are used to address the above themes.
By outlining the goals, policies and actions necessary to build upon our strengths and overcome
our weaknesses.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 8
User's Guide
The Comprehensive Plan is comprised of the Core Plan, a number of Contributing Reports (inputs),
and a number of Policy Elements (outputs). The following is an overview of the types of
documents that are included in the plan, how they are used, and their intended audience.
Examples of Contributing
Reports (Inputs)
Health Impact
Assessment
Core Plan
Examples of Policy
Elements (Outputs)
Land Use
Element
Core Plan: The Core Plan serves as the principal planning and guidance document used by City
leadership in their efforts to implement the Community's vision. It is a document that is intended to
be used and consulted by City Council and staff when evaluating city decisions, allocating city
resources, reviewing Policy Elements, committing to new City endeavors, and making fiscal
decisions. Every discussion and action by City Council should start and end with the following: "Is
this action true to our long term City vision; does it align with our City values; and is it consistent
with our adopted policies ?"
Contributing Reports: Contributing Reports are "inputs" into the Core Plan. Contributing Reports
provide statutory rules or background analysis and data that are used to help develop vision,
values, policies, and priorities. Examples of Contributing Reports include the Buildable Lands
Analysis, the Imagine Auburn community visioning report, the Growth Management Act, and the
Health Impact Assessment. These Reports are either prepared by City staff to better understand
conditions within Auburn or are provided by other government agencies that provide statewide or
regional planning parameters.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 9
Policy Elements: Policy Elements are "outputs" of the Core Plan. Policy Elements provide guidance
in specific areas such as land use, housing, transportation, and parks. These elements establish
how the city should manage systems and resources today and into the future. With support from
City staff, Policy Elements are developed and adopted by City Council. Once adopted, Policy
Elements become a manual for City staff in their implementation efforts to design and construct
capital projects, develop and maintain city programs, draft development regulations, pursue grant
money, and to carry out other types of typical tasks. Policy Elements are the principal planning and
guidance documents for City staff.
Where conflict or ambiguity exists between a Policy Element and a City regulation, the specific
Policy Element will prevail. Where there is conflict or ambiguity between Policy Elements or if a
Policy Element does not provide enough guidance to resolve the conflict or ambiguity, the vision,
values, and overarching policies of the Core Plan will be used to arrive at a final decision.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 10
Community Profile and Characteristics
Population Growth
As of 2014, Auburn ranks as the 14th most populated city within the State of Washington with a
population of approximately 76,347. It is located within the two most populous counties in the state
(King and Pierce counties) and is nearly equidistant from its two largest cities, Seattle and Tacoma.
Proximity to both of these cities, and being in a central location within Puget Sound Region, has
helped Auburn grow at a steady rate. Auburn's growth can be characterized in three eras. The 67
year settlement era of 1893 to 1950 saw the City grow to a size of 6,500 residents. The 40 year
absorption era of 1950 to 1990 saw a substantial amount of infill development and the City increase
at a rate of about 6,500 residents per decade to 33,000. Since 1990, the City has been going
through an expansion era that has seen three significant annexations of areas that have substantial
development potential.
Racial and Ethnic Characteristics
Auburn has seen significant demographic changes over the last decade. According to the 2010
U.S. Census, approximately 70.5% of Auburn's population is White /Non- Hispanic; data from the
2000 Census reported the white population in Auburn at 79 %. In 1990, the white population was
roughly 90 %. What this means is that Auburn has grown significantly more diverse in a 25 -year
period. As of 2014 estimates, the overall white population is just under 50,000 at 49,238. This means
that approximately 68.5% of Auburn's population is white. If this trend continues, Auburn will
become increasingly racially diverse.
Household and Income Characteristics
The year 2000 Census indicated that Auburn had 16,108 households; this number has catapulted.
The current household number estimates (based on 2013 figures) have increased to 27,427. This
significant increase is due to substantial development activity over the past 15 or so years and
significant annexations. Homeownership in Auburn is just under 60 percent, which is 3.5 points
lower than the State average. The lower percentage of homeownership corresponds to Auburn's
other below - Washington averages in per capita income, median household income, graduation
rate, as well as a higher- than - average percentage of persons under the poverty level. Auburn's
median household income is $55,483 compared to the Washington average of $59,478, which is a
nearly $4,000 difference, thus reducing earning power.
Age Characteristics
Auburn is a statistically a younger community than the state of Washington. The median age in
Washington is 37 years; the median age in Auburn is 35.5. This is up from 34.1 years of age in 2000.
While the median age has increased, the youth population remains significant. 7.4% of Auburn
residents are under 5 years of age and 25.9% are under the age of 18 both of which are
significantly higher than the state average. The percentage of people over the age of 65 is 10.2 %,
which compares similarly to the state of Washington figure of 12.3 %. Demographic data suggests a
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 11
need for services and programming that address the needs of children and families, while
continuing to focus on the needs of more mature adults and single people of all ages.
Resident Labor Force and Employment Characteristics
Since its population boom during the construction of the railroad freight terminals at the start of the
20th Century, Auburn has in many respects remained a "blue collar" community. This trend,
however, is declining as local economies in Washington diversify. In 1990, one out of four of
Auburn's residents worked in the manufacturing industry. Between 1990 and 2000, Auburn's
resident labor force lost 1,000, or approximately one - fourth, of these manufacturing jobs. This trend
of manufacturing job loss has been a nationwide trend, as companies relocate to other cities and
states based on tax savings, and many other companies are increasingly outsourcing jobs
overseas. In this ever - changing landscape, jobs continue to migrate into different sectors. This slow
shift is evidenced by the lessened impact of major employers in Auburn. They no longer dominate
the job market as small and medium -sized companies create more jobs. As recently as 2002, the
top ten employers accounted for nearly 85% of the total city employment. In 2011, these same
employers, which remained in the top ten, accounted for 55% of the total employment base. This
illustrates that the number of total jobs has significantly increased and that the number of job
providers or employers has also increased.
Generally, workers are tasked with finding jobs where compensation is most lucrative. Education
and specialized skills typically play a large role in finding high - paying, available jobs. An educated
population encourages companies to relocate to Auburn based on the available local workforce.
While Auburn's high school graduation rate of 87.5% is fairly close to the state average of 90 %, the
college graduation rate is more than 9 points lower than the state average. As mentioned
previously, the median and per capita income is significantly lower than the state average. These
data suggest that there may be a skills under match between regional employer expectations and
available workers in Auburn.
According to the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and the US Department of Labor,
approximately 41,000 jobs are located in Auburn. This number has grown steadily since 2010; it is
important to note that the number of jobs must be considered with an understanding of the
massive loss of manufacturing jobs and the very slow national economic recovery since the
economic downturn in 2008. Comparing the market sector distribution and number of jobs
between 1995, 2000, 2010, and 2013 illustrates some changes that have taken place in Auburn's job
market over the last 20 years. It also reflects nationwide trends based on the overall health of the
economy, decline of manufacturing, and an increasing reliance on service. Important categories to
note are:
a. Government and education, which have grown based on the increasing population of
Auburn and the need to provide increased and better service to residents, as well as the
success of Green River College
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 12
b. Trade, transportation, and utilities jobs (WTU) have more than doubled since 1995, also due
to the relative growth of Auburn
c. Construction has nearly doubled since 1995; this is due in large part to the significant
development that has been constructed in Auburn, such as Lakeland Hills; the dip in 2010 is
due to the economic downturn that began in 2008
d. Retail and services are significantly more important to Auburn's current job outlook than in
1995; service is largely increased due to the overall nationwide trend of less manufacturing
and more service -based jobs
e. Finance, insurance, and real estate have held steady over the last 20 years
Table 1 - Job Distribution by Market Area - 1995 - 2013
Daily Inflow and Outflow: The Auburn Commute
In 2013 the average daily commute from Auburn is 29 minutes, as of 2013 which is an increase
since 2000. A more interesting issue than the length of people's commute is the number of people
commuting out of and into Auburn. Both of these numbers far outstrip the number of people who
live and work within Auburn. This number has been virtually unchanged over the last decade. The
number of residents of Auburn, who also work in Auburn, has stayed at just over 4,000. The most
promising data from the inflow and outflow is that there is a significant increase in the number of
people commuting to Auburn for work. The influx of non - residents provides another pool of people
that engage with the services, features, and resources in the City.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 13
1995
2000
2010
2013
Const /Res
1,693
3,051
2,148
2,636
FIRE
760
567
757
784
Manufacturing
11,530
12,241
7,521
8,680
Retail
3,275
5,152
4,705
5,392
Services
6,241
11,437
10,496
10,700
WTU
2,716
3,619
5,475
6,626
Government
1,166
1,332
3,457
3,166
Education
1,282
1,344
2,810
2,981
Total
28,663
38,742
37,370
40,964
Daily Inflow and Outflow: The Auburn Commute
In 2013 the average daily commute from Auburn is 29 minutes, as of 2013 which is an increase
since 2000. A more interesting issue than the length of people's commute is the number of people
commuting out of and into Auburn. Both of these numbers far outstrip the number of people who
live and work within Auburn. This number has been virtually unchanged over the last decade. The
number of residents of Auburn, who also work in Auburn, has stayed at just over 4,000. The most
promising data from the inflow and outflow is that there is a significant increase in the number of
people commuting to Auburn for work. The influx of non - residents provides another pool of people
that engage with the services, features, and resources in the City.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 13
• • • i�
• INFLOW
N I N E •.E.
31,121
NON- RESIDENE"i
Wf112KW(3 IN
/VOVRN
Auburn in the Future - Projections of Growth
The Puget Sound Regional Council, King County, Pierce County and the City of Auburn need to
understand growth projections, patterns and implications for the 20 -30 year planning horizon.
Based on various models and analyses, available developable land, population data, and expected
economic trends, jurisdictions can better understand industrial, commercial, and residential land
supply and capacity. This understanding can be used to extrapolate future available housing units
and employment growth.
The primary data tool for planning for future growth are County prepared buildable lands analysis.
These reports establish the parameters around which cities and counties jointly plan for both
residential and job growth. As a two county city, the City of Auburn coordinates with both King
County and Pierce County in determining growth projections, land supply, and the adequacy of
urban services to serve future growth. The following description and data are taken from the King
County and Pierce County Buildable Lands Analyses.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 14
2014 King County Buildable Lands Analysis
After deducting for constraints, future right -of -way and public purpose needs, and after applying a
market factor, the King County Buildable Lands Analysis shows that Auburn has approximately
2,150.5 adjusted net acres of vacant and redevelopable residentially zoned land available during
the planning period through 2031. As seen in Table 2, the majority of available land for
development is zoned for single - family residential purposes.
Based on the residential land supply analysis and historical densities, an estimate of housing unit
capacity was developed. Table 2 identifies the estimated capacity (in housing units) in King
County by the aggregated zoning type. This estimate shows a capacity of approximately 14,597
housing units in the King County portion of the City exists out to the year 2031.
Table 2 - Gross and Adjusted Net Acres of Vacant and Redevelopable Land and Capacity by
Aggregated Residential Zoning Type
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land available for development after critical areas, anticipated right -of -way and public
purposes needs and a market factor have been taken into account.
Estimates of how much commercial and industrial square footage are available were also
calculated. The last column in Table 3 identifies the gross and adjusted net vacant and
redevelopable land by commercial and industrial land use from the King County Buildable Lands
analysis. Employment capacity was developed by applying a floor area per employee ratio.
Table 3 - Gross and Adjusted Net Acres and Capacity of Commercial and Industrial
Land Supply (King County - 2012)
Gross
Acres
Adjusted
Net Acres (1)
Net Capacity
(Housing units)
Single Family - Vacant
2,018.0
1,050.1
3,477
Single Family - Redevelopable
1,507.0
871.1
3,108
Multi - Family - Vacant
120
85.4
1,156
Multi - Family - Redevelopable
50.0
36.3
460
Multi - Family/ Mixed Use - Vacant
16
12.9
1,822
Multi - Family/ Mixed Use - Redevelopable
117.2
94.7
4,574
TOTAL
3,828.2
2,150.5
14,597
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land available for development after critical areas, anticipated right -of -way and public
purposes needs and a market factor have been taken into account.
Estimates of how much commercial and industrial square footage are available were also
calculated. The last column in Table 3 identifies the gross and adjusted net vacant and
redevelopable land by commercial and industrial land use from the King County Buildable Lands
analysis. Employment capacity was developed by applying a floor area per employee ratio.
Table 3 - Gross and Adjusted Net Acres and Capacity of Commercial and Industrial
Land Supply (King County - 2012)
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land after critical areas, future anticipated streets, land for public purposes and market
factor have been considered.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 15
Gross Acres
Adjusted
Net Acres (1)
Net Capacity
(Employment)
Commercial Vacant /Redevelopable
501.5
412.4
7,094
Mixed Use Vacant /Redevelopable
133.2
107.6
2,525
Industrial Vacant /Redevelopable
533.0
354.9
9,417
TOTAL
1,167.7
874.9
19,036
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land after critical areas, future anticipated streets, land for public purposes and market
factor have been considered.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 15
Pierce County Buildable Lands Analysis
Table 4 identifies the estimated capacity (in housing units) in Pierce County by the zoning type.
This estimate shows a capacity of approximately 922 housing units in the Pierce County portion of
the City exists to the year 2030.
Table 4 - Gross and Adjusted Net Acres of Vacant and Redevelopable Land by Residential
Zoning Type (Pierce County - 2012)
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land available for development after critical areas, anticipated right -of -way, lands
public purpose needs, and a market factor have been taken into account.
The Pierce County Buildable Lands analysis includes a 2030 employment target of 843 and an
employment capacity of 595. This estimate was based on the likely employment generated by the
commercial parcels located within Lakeland Hills South PUD and other vacant commercial lands
along A St. SE.
Table 5 - Gross and Adjusted Net Acres and Capacity of Commercial and Industrial Land
Supply (Pierce County - 2012)
Gross Acres
Adjusted
Net Acres (1)
Net Capacity
(Housing units)
R5, Residential
39.24
30.38
323
TV, Terrace View
3.17
1.34
86
Lakeland Hills South PUD
52.94
N/A
513
TOTAL
95.35
31.72
922
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land available for development after critical areas, anticipated right -of -way, lands
public purpose needs, and a market factor have been taken into account.
The Pierce County Buildable Lands analysis includes a 2030 employment target of 843 and an
employment capacity of 595. This estimate was based on the likely employment generated by the
commercial parcels located within Lakeland Hills South PUD and other vacant commercial lands
along A St. SE.
Table 5 - Gross and Adjusted Net Acres and Capacity of Commercial and Industrial Land
Supply (Pierce County - 2012)
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land after critical areas, future anticipated streets, land for public purposes and market
factor have been considered.
Combined King County and Pierce County Projections and Allocations
Table 6 provides a city -wide summary of housing unit and employment allocations.
Table 6 - City of Auburn 2006 - 2030/31 Housing Unit and Employment Allocations (King and
Pierce Counties)
Gross Acres
Adjusted
Net Acres (1)
Net Capacity
(Employment)
Commercial Vacant /Redevelopable
501.5
412.4
7,094
Mixed Use Vacant /Redevelopable
133.2
107.6
2,525
Industrial Vacant /Redevelopable
533.0
354.9
9,417
TOTAL
1,167.7
874.9
19,036
(1) "Adjusted Net Acres" represents land after critical areas, future anticipated streets, land for public purposes and market
factor have been considered.
Combined King County and Pierce County Projections and Allocations
Table 6 provides a city -wide summary of housing unit and employment allocations.
Table 6 - City of Auburn 2006 - 2030/31 Housing Unit and Employment Allocations (King and
Pierce Counties)
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 16
Housing Units
Employment
King County
9,004
19,200
Pierce County
3,634
843
TOTAL
12,638 Units
20,043 Jobs
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 16
While the calculations and categories used previously to identify market sectors and job counts
differ, Table 7 illustrates the tremendous job growth expected over the next 25 years. The total
number of jobs in Auburn is projected to increase 55% by 2040. The largest total gain will be in the
Construction sector. Other significant gains are in the FIRE /Services, Education and Retail /Food
Services sectors.
Table 7 - Job Distribution by Market Area - 2010 - 2040
Table 8 illustrates that around 37,000 units will be available by 2030 -31. This is nearly 10,000 more
units than in 2010; the addition of 20,000 more people would require this level of increase based on
the buildable lands population target, current zoning, and expected densities. Auburn is more than
prepared to accommodate this large influx of housing. Auburn is also prepared to consider
pathways to meet the housing demand on less land, through higher density and by reconsidering
zoning implementation and rules.
Table 8 - Population and Housing Forecasts - 2010 - 2035
2010
2020
2030
2040
2010 to 2040 Change
Const /Res
2,488
4,747
4,704
5,822
134%
FIRE /Services
12,398
15,935
18,734
22,213
79.2%
Manufacturing /WTU
13,366
13,661
14,512
15,731
17.7%
Retail /Food Services
7,218
9,084
10,396
12,323
70.7%
Government
2,243
1,812
1,841
1,883
-16.1%
Education
2,137
3,143
3,466
3,815
78.5%
Total
39,883
48,023
53,847
62,003
55.5%
Table 8 illustrates that around 37,000 units will be available by 2030 -31. This is nearly 10,000 more
units than in 2010; the addition of 20,000 more people would require this level of increase based on
the buildable lands population target, current zoning, and expected densities. Auburn is more than
prepared to accommodate this large influx of housing. Auburn is also prepared to consider
pathways to meet the housing demand on less land, through higher density and by reconsidering
zoning implementation and rules.
Table 8 - Population and Housing Forecasts - 2010 - 2035
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 17
Estimate
Forecasts
2010
2025
2030
2031
2035
Housing Units
27,827
34,582
36,827
37,276
39,072
Total Households
26,051
33,031
35,351
35,815
37,671
Household Population
69,491
84,126
88,996
89,970
93,866
Total Population
70,159
84,948
89,868
90,852
94,788
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 17
Community Vision and Values
In 2035 Auburn is a city of connected and cherished places, from a vibrant downtown to quiet open
spaces and everything in between, where a community of healthy, diverse, and engaged people
live and thrive.
In 2014, a substantial amount of time and energy was dedicated to developing a vision for Auburn
in 2035. Discussions occurred in the community through the Imagine Auburn visioning process
and amongst city council members. Many themes and messages surfaced about who we are and
what we aspire to become. In the words of City Council, a 2035 Auburn will be a "premier
community with vibrant opportunities ". Participants of Imagine Auburn added ideas for what they
thought this meant. The vision that emerged is encapsulated in the following seven value
statements:
1. Character: Developing and preserving attractive and interesting places where people want to
be.
2. Wellness: Promoting community -wide health and safety wellness.
3. Service: Providing transparent government service.
4. Economy: Encouraging a diverse and thriving marketplace for consumers and businesses.
5. Celebration: Celebrating our diverse cultures, heritage, and community.
6. Environment: Stewarding our environment.
7. Sustainability: Creating a sustainable future for our community.
The Comprehensive Plan is rooted in these values and they form a collective vision. But these
values do not end with the adoption of this Plan. They form the context around which we discuss,
debate, act, prioritize and lead our community to the vision we have created in this Plan.
Identifying values and creating a description of what each of these values look like, what they
mean, and how they will happen establishes a basis for evaluating future City policies, regulations,
actions, investments, budget priorities, grant- seeking priorities, and other community decisions. In
addition, the seven values underscore the entirety of the Comprehensive Plan and its
implementation, which includes the development of capital improvement, transportation, parks
and open space plans, and implementing regulations and standards. These values are the core of
how we make choices.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 18
Character
We will create and maintain high quality neighborhoods, places, and spaces.
What it will look like:
• Active gathering spaces, such as parks, plazas, cafes, concert venues, festivals and markets,
will be distributed throughout the City; these spaces will be engaging and filled with people
interacting, irrespective of culture, age, or income level.
• Buildings, landscaping, and outdoor spaces will be attractive, interesting, well designed, and
maintained.
• Buildings will be well- maintained and rehabilitated and new buildings will complement existing
historic resources.
• Neighborhoods will be socially and physically connected and include features and
development patterns that encourage us to interact.
• The community will have embraced the concept of "One Auburn" while capitalizing on the
unique local needs and identities of individual neighborhoods and districts.
What it means:
• Auburn has a reputation for high quality and engaging spaces, an array of performing arts
programs, wonderful public arts, extensive retail and restaurant options, and a variety of
community-led activities; a destination locale where citizens enjoy spending time, visitors look
forward to returning to, and merchants want to stay.
• Community programs and physical connections bring the City together.
• Residents and visitors have a wide range of options for getting to and from Auburn, as well as
travel alternatives within the City.
How it will happen:
• By implementing investments and branding strategies that recognize and reinforce an
individual identity for the City and its neighborhoods.
• By looking for opportunities to keep Auburn attractive, safe, interesting and fun.
• By ensuring that new construction and redevelopment of all projects incorporate amenities that
promote human interaction, further connect the community, and create people- centric land
uses; at the same time, property rights will be protected through due process, reasonable
implementation of regulations, and careful consideration of impacts to existing development.
The City is committed to diversity and togetherness through innovative public space. Public space
will support dynamic businesses and events by being walkable and connected. We believe that if
we are forward - thinking, embracing of technology, supportive of arts, and advocates for safety, that
we will have places that are cohesive, accessible, and interesting.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 19
Wellness
We will build and maintain an environment that promotes public safety and healthy lifestyle
options.
What it will look like:
• Multiple recreation options, and nearby trails, parks, activities, and events that will be readily
accessible to the entire community.
• A safe and inviting atmosphere for all will be provided throughout Auburn.
• A variety of healthy food options will be physically and economically accessible to all members
of the Auburn community.
• Housing stock will be maintained and monitored to limit the presence of declining, unsafe
neighborhoods.
• Risk to life and property from hazards will be minimized.
• Public infrastructure will be well- maintained.
What it means:
• More outdoor private and public amenities that offer people recreation options and safe
passage throughout the community
• Fresh, local and healthy food options should be available to all members of the community.
• Housing, neighborhoods, and spaces are held to a high standard.
• More community health resources in more places, for more people.
• The public perception and reality will be that Auburn is a safe place.
How it will happen:
• By applying sound environmental design, implementing housing and neighborhood
maintenance standards, building and /or financing infrastructure that connect the community,
and investing in recreation amenities and safety features.
• By promoting and supporting programs in businesses, non - profits, and public agencies that
provide healthy food and lifestyle options
• By proactively planning and preparing the City for unanticipated natural events and by
implementing regulatory requirements that mitigate exposure to natural hazards.
• By proactively planning and preparing the City to mitigate for and adapt to climate change and
its associated effects.
• By developing programs that provide technical and /or financial assistance to ensure quality
development and improve substandard housing, neighborhoods, and spaces.
• By budgeting appropriately to maintain City services that provide direct benefits to public
safety, housing, neighborhoods, and community health and wellness.
• By connecting healthcare and health resource providers with all populations of the City.
Enhanced quality of life through safe, walkable neighborhood design, lighting, and access to parks,
grocery stores, schools, medical services, and community centers should be available to all Auburn
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 20
residents. Implementation of strategic partnerships with the medical community and regional
recreation entities should ensure opportunities for a healthy lifestyle for all people, whether youth or
senior, rich or poor. As the City evolves and the community changes, police, fire, maintenance, and
volunteer services will continue to be essential in making sure Auburn grows together.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 21
Service
We will be an efficient, approachable, and responsive City government.
What it will look like:
• In the long -term interest of the City's tax payers and rate payers, the City will construct and
operate high quality infrastructure.
• A transparent, responsive, and competent government and staff that will be proactive,
accessible, and approachable.
• Residents and businesses will have equal access to and be highly engaged with City officials
and staff.
• Residents and businesses will be highly engaged through volunteer service.
What it means:
• Infrastructure assets that have a long life, require fiscally sound and environmentally
appropriate upkeep, conform to uniform standards, and are in the best interest of tax and rate
payers.
• Multiple avenues of communication.
• Government processes and services that are available to all segments of the population,
through multiple mediums and convenient means.
How it will happen
• By continuing to refine and enforce standards that ensure infrastructure assets added to the
City system are of the highest quality.
• By utilizing existing and emerging technologies to better communicate, interact and make
available the full range of programs and services to all populations.
• By developing and implementing new and different citizen engagement methods including a
citizen civics academy, community and business roundtables, and enhanced social media
communications.
• By capitalizing on partnerships with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, businesses, developers, non-
profits, faith -based organizations, transit agencies, school districts, Green River College, and
other governmental agencies.
The City will be judicious with the resources given by its residents and businesses, and efficient in
managing the budget and resulting services. In order to streamline our business practices, the City
will be forward - thinking, resourceful, innovative, responsive, informed, aware, and considerate of
long -term goals and results. The City, along with our engaged volunteer, philanthropic, and
business communities, will strive to advance social, fiscal, technological, and infrastructural health.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 22
Economy
We will provide a diverse and vibrant local economy with employment, retail and entertainment
opportunities for citizens and a growing marketplace for local and regional -scale businesses.
What it will look like:
• There will be a range of retail, industrial, manufacturing, and service businesses that start, grow,
and expand in an environment that is conducive to success and corporate community
participation.
• A wide compliment of retail, service and dining options will cater to local needs, attracts visitors
and encourage consistent patronage of local businesses.
• There will be a robust marketplace where people can and want to live, work and play in
Auburn.
What it means:
• Businesses that stay and grow in Auburn, while businesses from other cities, regions, and
states are attracted to locate and invest here.
• Investments in physical amenities and an environment that attracts people to live here, which
includes having attractive, resident - serving- businesses.
• People and goods that move safely and efficiently throughout the City.
• Increases in sales tax and property tax revenues for the City through targeted economic
development and recruitment efforts.
• Targeted employment recruitment to enhance the diversity and ability of employees to shop in
the City.
How it will happen:
• By implementing economic development strategies that focus on investments in our
community.
• By developing and implementing an economic development strategic plan to guide
policymaking and financial investment decisions.
• By facilitating development and attracting businesses that capitalize on the City's regional
economic amenities, including, but not limited to, those of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe.
• By making purposeful and strategic investments in public infrastructure and amenities that
further promote the City as an attractive place to invest and do business.
• By maintaining a City quality of service that provides the business community with certainty,
support and proactive decision making.
The City will promote sustainable and diverse industries through multiple means of moving people
and goods and infrastructure supporting that movement. The City will also develop policies that
encourage siting of businesses that share mutual benefits, a healthy local and regional
marketplace, innovative industries, and environmentally responsible development patterns that
foster a balanced, flexible, and resilient economy.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 23
Celebration
We will celebrate diversity and come together to teach, learn, and have fun.
What it will look like:
• Auburn will have a thriving and expanding arts and culture community.
• There will be events, amenities, and attractions that draw people to congregate and socialize.
• The community is inclusive and proud of its history, social, ethnic, economic, and cultural
diversity in the people who live, work and play in Auburn.
What it means:
• People from all parts of Auburn are engaging in both city -wide and neighborhood initiatives.
• Auburn's future is shaped by a broader demographic cross section of its citizenry.
• Event programming ensures that there are opportunities for neighborhoods and cultures to
celebrate their identity.
How it will happen:
• By developing physical and social infrastructure that encourages and enables more people to
practice and showcase their art.
• By finding ways to entice new and expanded participation through strategic event planning.
• By utilizing technology to find new audiences and increase the amount and quality of
information distributed.
• By having a diverse cross - section of property owners, business owners, non - profits,
governments (including tribal), faith -based organizations, and others who discuss Auburn's
future and take actions to make it their premier community.
One of the things that makes Auburn special is our diversity; different people have pride in their
culture, while respecting the differences in others. This variety adds strength and style to our places
and spaces. These distinctive places, while often reverential of a specific culture, feel open and
inviting because there is room for everyone.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 24
Environment
We will protect the natural environment, preserve open space, and create safe and appropriate
access.
What it will look like:
• Residents and visitors will enjoy open spaces and environmentally sensitive areas, while
encouraging the appreciation of their importance and beauty.
• The built environment will respect the natural landscape in a way that protects ecosystem
function.
• Natural resource protection will be supported and celebrated by City leadership and the
community.
What it means:
• Open spaces that are accessible to allow people to connect with the natural environment.
• Management of impacts to natural resources from new development are considerate of their
sensitivity and importance.
• The City proactively implements fiscally prudent policies and procedures that are based on
best practices and available science to mitigate and adapt to present and projected future
effects of climate change.
• Sensitive environmental sites are designated and managed as community environmental
services.
How it will happen:
• By continuing the application of regulatory tools as an important part of environmental
protection - in order to ensure that new development, redevelopment, land management, and
property use do not degrade the environment.
• By identifying particularly sensitive properties for protection through purchase, easement
acquisition, or other means.
• By seeking out opportunities on public and private property for restoration or enhancement of
existing sensitive areas.
• By City leaders and staff placing significant emphasis on policies and financial investments that
protect our natural resources.
• By continued coordination with the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe for the identification and
protection of sensitive areas and natural resources important to both the Tribe and the City.
The City will protect and preserve our environmental resources and heritage through responsible
and balanced policies and partnerships. Auburn residents will benefit from environmental
amenities such as parks and urban trails that enable walking and biking throughout our City. The
City's policies will incorporate best practices and creative means to balance current challenges of
environmentally sensitive areas with property rights.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 25
Sustainability
We will balance natural resource protections, economic prosperity, and cultural vibrancy in order to
build a thriving and long- lasting community.
What it will look like:
• Natural resource protections, economic prosperity and cultural vibrancy will be continuously
and conscientiously balanced in City policy and financial decisions.
• The community will be educated, equitable and prosperous.
• The City and community's collective actions will consider future citizens and the healthy
development of Auburn.
• Auburn is a resilient community. Its neighborhoods, infrastructure, and economy thrive and
remain healthy in the face of global climate change and its associated effects.
• Cultural diversity will be supported and strengthened through the City's policies, financial
practices, and policy implementation actions.
What it means:
• Citizens, business owners, government, non - profits, and a development community that
promote and implement practices that contribute to an environmentally - responsible Auburn.
• City leaders and staff that are committed to implementation of policies that consider both short -
term and long -term economic, social, and environmental conditions and effects.
• The City will have developed and implemented action plans that identify and achieve
sustainability goals and objectives.
How it will happen:
• By City leaders adopting sustainability in its broadest meaning as a core value and function of
Auburn's delivery of local government services.
• By City leaders continually and consciously creating policies, actions and strategies that reflect
the community's values.
• By inviting citizens and businesses to participate in the development and implementation of
Auburn's sustainability strategies, and challenging them to embrace sustainability in their
individual and collective actions.
To ensure healthy Auburn for future generations, we must consider long- lasting effects of our
actions on community health, economic viability, the environment, and issues of equity. This
means embracing change through inclusivity and balancing current and future needs.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 26
Policy Elements
Policy Elements in the Comprehensive Plan provide a finer level of detail for different subject areas.
Policy Elements are an extension of the Core Plan and are designed to implement the broad goals,
policies and actions contained herein. Furthermore, the Policy Elements reflect the vision and
values enumerated in the Core Plan. Specific Policy Elements are listed as follows:
Land Use Policy Element
Housing Policy Element
Capital Facilities Policy Element
Utilities Policy Element
Transportation Policy Element
Economic Development Policy Element
Parks and Open Space Policy Element
In this section each Policy Element is identified and described. The Core Plan provides the
foundation upon which each Policy Element is built by including. Broad goals that relate to each
value, as well as general policies and actions that will guide us to our vision of Auburn in 2035 are
also included in the following descriptions.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 27
Land Use Policy Element
Goals:
1. Character: Buildings and developments are planned and constructed using innovative
architectural and site layout techniques that emphasize social interaction and safety.
2. Wellness: Residential, commercial, and recreational areas of the City are joined by a
system of trails and paths so that there is less reliance upon the use of vehicles.
3. Service: Citizens are aware of the City's vision, have access to policies and information,
and feel that they have a voice in the outcome of future land use proposals.
4. Economy: There is a robust mix of uses and options that make living, working and
shopping in Auburn desirable.
5. Celebration: Neighborhoods and districts have been identified and are distinguishable
through the use of signs, marketing materials, and sub area plans.
6. Environment: Our rivers, streams, wetlands, habitats and other natural resources are
identified, preserved and protected for future generations.
7. Sustainability: Land use activities and developments incorporate low impact
development, crime prevention through environmental design, and other sustainable
development practices.
Land Use Description:
The Land Use Policy Element is the focal element of this Plan that is then supported by all
other elements of the Plan. It illustrates where the community should or should not
develop, the anticipated scale and intensity of development, and how various land uses
relate to each other. The Land Use Element lays the foundation for what the community
will look like, how it will change and grow, and where different types of land activities will be
established.
Auburn's overall existing land use pattern is checkered, somewhat random and
disconnected. Much of this is due to the manner in which Auburn has expanded in the last
20 years. The annexation of Lakeland Hills absorbed what became a community with wide
landscaped thoroughfares, contemporary architecture, and a more affluent demographic.
The West Hill and Lea Hill annexations brought relatively rural lands with a wide mix of
residential densities and rural levels of infrastructure, where residents feel a stronger
attachment to commercial centers located outside of Auburn. To the southeast, Auburn
transitions into a community with an entirely different character. The area along Auburn
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 28
Way South passes back and forth between the City of Auburn and the Muckleshoot
Reservation. To the southwest and north, Auburn is a mix of auto centric commercial
corridors, light industrial /warehousing, and aging single family homes. Historic downtown
Auburn has a more urban appearance with a traditional main street, regional transit center,
and vast opportunity to become a vibrant and walkable city center.
The existing land use pattern is also greatly influenced by the presence of major highways,
rail lines, physical land forms and natural features. The Green River, White River, Highway
18, Highway 167, bluffs of West Hill, slopes of Lea Hill, and Burlington Northern and Union
Pacific rail lines provide both opportunities and barriers. They serve as landmarks when
identifying neighborhoods, obstacles for connecting the community, preservation corridors,
and marketing features.
Lea Hill: Lea Hill is bound by the Green River, Highway 18, S. 277th St., and Kent. Much of
this area was annexed into Auburn in 2008. It includes Green River College, a relatively
small commercial center, a golf course, several schools, and a mix of low density rural uses
intermixed with traditional suburban residential developments. During the Imagine Auburn
visioning exercise Lea Hill residents indicated that they desire more parks and trails, access
to more neighborhood scale businesses, and safer neighborhoods. Lea Hill residents have
a stronger connection to Kent and Covington due to both perception and reality that
commercial services are more expansive and convenient at these locations. The Bridges
subdivision is an island in the middle of Lea Hill that is within the incorporated city limits of
Kent.
(Insert Map)
West Hill: West Hill is bound by West Valley Highway, 51st Ave S, and permanently
protected agricultural lands. It is comprised of different scales of residential development
and lacks commercial services. West Hill residents have a stronger connection to Federal
Way due to the perception that commercial services are more expansive and convenient at
these locations.
(Insert Map)
Lakeland Hills: Lakeland Hills is partially within King County and partially within Pierce
County. It is bound by West Valley Highway, Kersey Way, the White River, Lake Tapps, and
Sumner. The majority of Lakeland Hills is comprised of a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
that has a commercial center and a mix of single family homes, townhomes, and some
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 29
apartments. Additionally, there are undeveloped areas of Lakeland Hills that are outside of
the PUD that consist of a mix of traditional residential subdivisions and rural lands.
Lakeland Hills residents have a strong association with their own community, as well as
Bonney Lake and Sumner to the south. Internally, it is a well- connected community where
residents have good access to trails and several parks. However, it is not well- connected to
areas outside of Lakeland Hills. Lakeland Hills has a very limited amount of affordable
housing, senior housing, and multi - family housing.
(Insert Map)
Downtown Auburn: Downtown Auburn is characterized by a traditional Main Street that is
bisected by major corridors such as M Street, Auburn Way, Auburn Avenue, Division Street,
C Street, and the Interurban Trail. It is comprised of a mix of new and old commercial
buildings and uses, several civic buildings and uses, a regional transit center, a regional
medical center, and Auburn High School. Downtown Auburn offers immense opportunity
for a walkable, mixed -use center with easy access to Sound Transit. There are several
public spaces that are interspersed throughout downtown that can be used for
celebrations, events, and displays.
(Insert Map)
North Auburn: North Auburn is bound by S. 277th St., West Valley Highway, the Green
River, and the Downtown Urban Center. The primary corridors of Auburn Way North,
Harvey Road, and 15th Street NW /NE are primarily auto centric commercial thoroughfares.
West Valley Highway, A Street NE /B Street NW, and 37th Street NW /NE are the City's
principal warehousing and light industrial corridors. I Street NE serves as an alternative
north south route for a number of residential communities. Significant features in this
community include the Auburn Way North auto mall and the Auburn Environmental Park.
Interspersed throughout North Auburn are a number of residential communities, most of
which are between 40 and 100 years of age, with a few recently developed subdivisions.
(Insert Map)
South Auburn: South Auburn is bound by the Downtown Urban Center, West Valley
Highway, Algona, the White River, Auburn Way South and M Street SE. The primary
corridors of Auburn Way South, 15th Street SW, and A Street SE are primarily auto centric
retail and service commercial thoroughfares. West Valley Highway and C Street SW are
primarily light industrial and warehousing corridors. Significant features in this community
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 30
are the Les Gove Community Park campus, the Outlet Collection, Game Farm Park, Boeing,
Region 10 headquarters for the Federal Governments General Services Administration and
Social Security Administration, BNSF's Rail Yard, as well as the interchange of Highway 18
and Highway 167. During Imagine Auburn, feedback focused primarily on the need to
address crime and safety.
(Insert Map)
Southeast Auburn: Southeast Auburn begins at the base of the hill where Auburn Way
South climbs to the Muckleshoot Casino and extends out to the Auburn Adventist Academy.
This area is bound by the White River to the south and the Green River and bluffs to the
north. Auburn Way South is the primary corridor through this area, which weaves in and
out of the Muckleshoot Indian Reservation. While the properties along Auburn Way South
are primarily auto - centric commercial uses, the corridor is flanked by a number of
residential communities that are located immediately behind the businesses. During
Imagine Auburn, residents expressed concern over the high volume of traffic through this
corridor as visitors travel to the White River Amphitheater just outside of the City. There
were additional traffic concerns during commute hours as people travel south towards
Enumclaw. Citizens also expressed unease over the appearance of Auburn Way South.
Land Use Categories
(Insert Map)
Residential: The Residential land use category will include several types of residential
zoning designations ranging from low density areas with significant environmental
constraints or that lack urban infrastructure to high density multi - family designations where
the goal is to intensify and densify population. Residential land use designations will be
comprised of a diverse arrangement of multiple densities where a pattern of mixed
densities are preferred over a single density throughout the zone or neighborhood. This will
be accomplished by allowing greater density in exchange for the incorporation of high
quality and innovative architectural design, greater neighborhood connectivity,
compatibility with the natural environment, installation of community amenities, crime
prevention through environmental design, and techniques that ensure compatibility
between other uses and communities.
Commercial: The Commercial land use category will include zoning designations that
provide a wide range of retail, entertainment, and service uses and activities. Zoning
designations within this category will range from auto - centric corridors to pedestrian and
transit oriented mixed use districts. When defining zoning boundaries and developing
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 31
strategies, attention will be given to the appropriateness of the types of uses and activities,
the bulk and scale of developments, compatibility with surrounding activities and the
environment, accessibility and connectivity, and consistency with the City's economic
development objectives.
Industrial: The Industrial land use category will include zoning designations that provide
an opportunity for warehousing, distribution, transportation, light industrial, storage and
manufacturing uses. Despite the traditional perception of how these types of uses look and
function, zoning designations and development standards will reinforce that it is equally
important that these areas remain attractive in their appearance and that they be
connected by adequate motorized, non - motorized and multi -modal transportation
infrastructure.
Public /Institutional: The Public and Institutional land use category will include zoning
designations for open space, public space, and preserved lands. Properties such as parks,
environmentally protected areas, significant utility properties and corridors, and institutional
uses will be located within the zoning designations of this land use category. Zoning
designations will distinguish between active public parks where people are encouraged to
congregate; passive areas intended to be left undisturbed, and uses such as schools and
fire stations. Due to the nature of the types of uses and activities allowed within this
category, zoning boundaries tend to be drawn around individual properties or a small
collection of properties.
Special Planning Areas: Special Planning Areas are districts within the City where a Plan
has been developed, adopted, and incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. A Special
Planning Area may function as an overlay that is supplemental to the underlying zoning
designation or as a replacement of the underlying land use category and zoning
designation. Special Planning Areas serve a purpose that seeks to enhance economic
development opportunities, environmental protection, or master planned developments.
Overlays: Overlays are supplemental to the underlying land use category and zoning
designation. Overlays provide supplemental policy language for urban separators,
impression corridors, gateways, and potential annexation areas. Overlays are delineated
and assigned because there are extraordinary circumstances that warrant additional and
specialized planning emphasis in a particular area of the City.
Land Use Policies:
1. Require building design standards for multi - family, mixed use, and non - residential
structures to ensure unique and high quality architectural forms, shapes and materials.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 32
2. Require site design standards for multi - family, mixed use, commercial and residential
development proposals that provide connectivity between and through sites, adequate
public gathering spaces, sustainable development practices, and efficient provision of
utilities and streets.
3. Engage in strategic planning of identified corridors and gateways which include an
emphasized level of planning, designing, improving, regulating, and maintaining those
areas that provide the most visible impression of Auburn.
4. Delineate neighborhoods and districts and develop strategies for creating greater
neighborhood identity that reinforces the concept of "One Auburn ".
5. Identify commercial, residential and recreational destinations that should be joined by
paths and trails with the overall goal of creating a citywide infrastructure that is fully
connected.
6. Develop downtown Auburn into a safe, walkable community, that has attractive public
plazas and buildings, and an engaging streetscape through planning, regulation, and
capital improvements.
7. Identify, protect, preserve and restore Auburn's environment and natural resources.
8. Implement measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
9. Develop vehicular gateways into Auburn into well signed, attractive and prominent
entry points.
10. Establish sign controls that reduce sign clutter and strive for a long term outcome
where attractive buildings, thoughtful sign design, and vegetation dominate the
landscape instead of poorly placed and designed signs.
11. Establish parking standards that limit the overall number of spaces and where
landscaping and site layout softens the visual impact of large parking lots.
12. Incentivize good community design by allowing increased height, density, intensity and
other standards.
13. Ensure harmonious transition between land uses and zoning designations through the
use of setbacks, vegetation, building orientation, or architectural design.
14. Employ Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) when designing
communities and development proposals.
15. Support efforts and programs such as neighborhood watch, national night out, and
other activities that bring residents together.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 33
PLAN LEAD PARTNERS
Short Term (2016 thru 2018)
1. Update city zoning and development regulations to be
consistent with the Core Plan and Land Use Policy
Element.
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council,
Planning
Commission,
Mayor's Office, City
Attorney
2. Update the city zoning and development regulations to
be consistent with National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System requirements.
CDPW -
Community
Development,
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council,
Planning
Commission,
Mayor's Office, City
Attorney
3. Implement the recommendations of the Main Street
Urban Design Plan.
CDPW -
Community
Development
Mayor's Office,
CDPW - Public
Works, Downtown
Association,
Chamber of
Commerce,
Business and
Property Owners
4. Prepare an Auburn Way South Corridor Improvement
Plan.
CDPW -
Community
Development,
CDPW - Public
Works
Mayor's Office, State
Department of
Transportation,
Business, MIT, and
Property Owners
5. Develop a connectivity strategy that lays the foundation
for joining commercial, residential and recreational
areas.
CDPW -
Community
Development,
CDPW - Public
Works
Mayor's Office,
Parks, Utility
Providers
6. Update the City's Greenhouse Gas Inventory and
Climate Action Plan
CDPW -
Environmental
Services
All City Departments
7. Develop a Sustainability Element of the Comprehensive
Plan.
CDPW -
Environmental
Services
All City Departments
8. Continue ongoing support to the City's Neighborhoods
program and utilize the program to strengthen
relationships between neighborhoods and the City.
Mayor's Office
All City Departments
Moderate Term (2019 thru 2025)
9. Identify neighborhoods and develop strategies for
promoting awareness.
CDPW -
Community
Development
Mayor's Office
10. Develop and implement a citywide greenhouse gas
CDPW -
All City Departments
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 34
reduction plan.
Environmental
Services
11. In 2021, update Land Use Policy Element.
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council,
Planning
Commission,
Mayor's Office, City
Attorney
12. In 2022, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Land Use Policy Element
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council,
Planning
Commission,
Mayor's Office, City
Attorney
Long Term (2026 thru 2035)
13. In 2028, update Land Use Policy Element.
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council,
Planning
Commission,
Mayor's Office, City
Attorney
14. In 2029, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Land Use Policy Element
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council,
Planning
Commission,
Mayor's Office, City
Attorney
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 35
Housing Policy Element
Goals:
1. Character: Trails, public spaces and outdoor amenities are available which promote
social interaction, safety, and healthy lifestyles.
2. Wellness: Buildings and properties are managed to provide a healthy environment and
the surrounding landscape is maintained and feels safe.
3. Service: Social and human services that aid in the provision of housing for those in
need are supported by the community.
4. Economy: Residential communities are well designed and connected to non - motorized
paths and transit service so that residents can afford to shop and work close to home.
5. Celebration: Residents feel a sense of pride and neighborhood identity while promoting
the idea of "One Auburn ".
6. Environment: Housing is integrated into the natural environment.
7. Sustainable: Adequate and dispersed housing is provided to seniors, the disabled, low
income, and all other individuals and families.
Housing Description:
A sustainable community offers a range of housing types by providing opportunities for
people to choose and to afford to live near jobs, shopping, and services. This type of
outcome enables shorter trips, the use of alternative transportation, reductions in traffic
congestion, improved quality of life, and the economic benefit of residents choosing to
spend their income in Auburn. Because we believe that there is strength in diversity, it is a
priority to support and enable a robust mix of housing types. Dispersed and extensive
housing options enable all segments of society to make choices about where they want to
live in Auburn rather than feeling forced to reside in other communities.
Creating the opportunity to establish or retain housing stock for seniors and populations
who have social, health, and human service needs is particularly important. Housing data
demonstrates that Auburn already has a wide range of housing types and housing costs.
But as a significant portion of the population ages, there will be an increasing demand for
senior housing. While Auburn already has a wide range of this housing type, it is not
dispersed throughout the City. Specifically, there are very few senior, affordable, or lower
income housing options in Lakeland Hills or West Hill, very few senior options on Lea Hill,
and a concentration of senior and low income options in the Valley.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 36
The preservation and renewal of older neighborhoods is an important consideration for
retaining a mix of housing types, as well as community character and history. Auburn's
housing stock is older and much of the rental housing stock is in fair to poor condition.
While Auburn is not proactively seeking to eliminate affordable housing, there is a reality
that some of the housing stock is at the end of its life. There must be a conscious effort to
understand and identify which properties are at the end of useful life and which properties
have renovation potential. Perhaps most importantly, the City must ensure that
redevelopment and renovation does not result in a wholesale loss of affordable housing
stock.
Auburn's average and median household size suggests that there is a need to provide
housing for both small and large households. Auburn's average household size is 2.67
compared to 2.40 in King County and 2.59 in Pierce County, while our average family size is
3.22 as compared to 3.05 and 3.09 in King and Pierce Counties, respectively. While these
average figures are higher than our neighbors, we also have a higher percentage of single
parents with children. These data strengthen the conclusion that there is a need for less
traditional housing, which include accessory dwelling units, cottage housing, townhouses,
apartments, and condominiums. Housing data, national trends, and City experience also
conclude that we will likely see increasing demands for larger houses that accommodate
multi - generational families living together.
Housing Policies:
1. Residential neighborhoods and buildings will be designed and maintained to support
safe and active living that is connected to multimodal transportation options.
2. Support efforts to retain and create more types of housing with a broader mix of
affordability in all of Auburn's residential and mixed use neighborhoods.
3. Implement and promote measures that enhance public safety such as neighborhood
watch, crime prevention through environmental design, and expanded access to law
enforcement resources.
4. Organize actions that influence and incentivize the retention and maintenance of the
existing housing stock and their surrounding environs.
5. Implement strategies that lead to the adequate provision of dispersed affordable
housing for moderate, low, and very -low income households and residents in need.
6. Support efforts that are intended to connect human, health, and social services to
residents in need.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 37
7. Develop and support programs that help inform residents of their options, available
services, and rights to healthy and affordable housing.
8. Strengthen our partnerships with other agencies and communities to help bolster and
steady the supply of housing options and supportive services so that there is greater
equity in the region.
9. Monitor spatial and quantitative trends in housing supply, affordability, and diversity for
Auburn and other King and Pierce County municipalities and make appropriate policy,
regulatory and programmatic adjustments in response to data findings.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 38
PLAN LEAD PARTNERS
Short Term (2016 thru 2018)
1. Develop a monitoring program that defines the tools
and metrics that describe housing condition, supply,
availability, location, crime rates, and housing type.
CDPW -
Community
Development
Police, King County,
Pierce County
2. Evaluate city zoning regulations to ensure that
accessory dwelling units, clustered housing, cottage
housing, townhouses, etc. are allowed within
appropriate residential and mixed use zones.
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney
3. Utilize the existing city rental housing business license
program and requirements to educate multi - family
property owners about Auburn's goals, policies and
standards and that holds property owners and tenants
accountable for adherence to its objectives.
CDPW -
Community
Development
CDPW - Business and
Budget, Police, Multi -
Family Property
Owners
4. Continue the City's housing home repair program and
seek ways to expand its use.
Administration -
Neighborhood
Services
CDPW - Community
Development
Moderate Term (2019 thru 2025)
5. By neighborhood, inventory housing opportunities for
seniors, moderate income, low income, very low
income, and persons with disabilities. Develop
conclusions that can be used to identify areas that are
in need of specific housing types.
CDPW -
Community
Development
King County, Pierce
County
6. Work with transit agencies to determine multi modal
transportation needs, routes, funding and capital
improvements necessary to serve priority areas.
CDPW - Public
Works, CDPW -
Community
Development
Sound Transit, MIT,
Metro, Pierce Transit
7. Develop a joint Muckleshoot/Auburn housing
inventory and needs assessment that is used to
establish goals and strategies that combine our
resources for mutual benefit.
CDPW -
Community
Development, MIT
City Council, Tribal
Council, King County,
Pierce County
8. In 2021, update Housing Policy Element based upon
findings and data collected in the monitoring program.
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney
9. In 2022, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Housing Policy Element
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney
Long Term (2026 thru 2035)
10. In 2028, update Housing Policy Element based upon
findings and data collected in the monitoring program.
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney
11. In 2029, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Housing Policy Element
CDPW -
Community
Development
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 39
Capital Facilities Policy Element
Goals:
1. Character: Our capital investments have been strategically deployed and have resulted
in a targeted mix of streets, parks, amenities and trails that serve the majority of
communities.
2. Wellness: Capital facility planning, budgeting, design and construction incorporate
principles and concepts that promote a healthy lifestyle.
3. Service: Revenue sources and budget allocations have been identified that support
both the construction, provision, and on -going high quality maintenance of capital
facilities and public services.
4. Economy: Our capital facilities are a marketing asset that causes businesses and
residents to seek opportunities to locate here.
5. Celebration: We design, construct, and utilize our parks and streets so that we can
gather on holidays, listen to music, attend parades, watch movies, view art, observe
nature, and enjoy other community events.
6. Environment: Capital improvements are designed and constructed in a manner that
employs a higher standard than the minimum required under the law.
7. Sustainable: We have fully implemented a capital investment philosophy that values the
long term outcome over the short term expense.
Capital Facilities Description:
Capital facilities are those facilities that are owned and operated by the City. The Capital
Facilities Policy Element is made up of a collection of documents that include the City's 6-
Year Capital Facilities Plan, the Comprehensive Water Plan, the Comprehensive Sewer
Plan, the Comprehensive Stormwater Drainage Plan, and the Capital Facilities Plans for
each school district and the Valley Regional Fire Authority. Additionally, although the Parks
and Recreation Policy Element and the Transportation Policy Element are standalone
documents, they too are a component of the Capital Facilities Plan because they include
both short and long term investments in developing and maintaining City-owned facilities.
The provision and sizing of facilities, such as utilities and streets, can influence the rate,
timing, and ability for growth and development that occurs within the City. Timed provision
of facilities also ensures that new development can be assimilated into the existing
community without serious disruptions or adverse impacts. This plan establishes policies
to allow development only when and where all public facilities are adequate or can be
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 40
made adequate, and only when and where such development can be adequately served
by public facilities and services consistent with adopted level of service standards.
Public facilities include public utilities, streets, parks, municipal buildings, fire and police
services, technology and communication systems, K -12 school systems, and waste and
recycling services.
Capital Facilities Policies:
1. Development will only be permitted where there is a positive determination that
concurrency and level of service standards have been met. Levels of service shall be
established within, or by way of, each capital facilities document and /or Policy Element.
2. Lands designated for urban growth shall have urban levels of public facilities prior to, or
concurrent with, development. If adequate public facilities do not exist and public funds
are not committed, proposed development activities must provide such facilities at their
own expense.
3. New connections to the City's sanitary sewer, water, and /or storm drainage systems,
shall contribute their fair share toward the construction and /or financing of future or on-
going projects to increase the capacity of those systems.
4. The City will coordinate with other utility purveyors within the City of Auburn to ensure
that adequate facilities exist or are planned in underserved areas. Other utility
comprehensive plans are not incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan unless there is
a specific City Council action to accept and adopt.
5. The City will coordinate with solid waste providers and King County to ensure that there
is adequate and mandatory waste and recycling service provided throughout Auburn.
The City will continue to create, support, and implement efforts that expand recycling
and re -use.
6. The City will coordinate with each school district and their capital facility planning
efforts. A school district capital facility plan is not incorporated into the Comprehensive
Plan unless there is a specific City Council action to accept and adopt.
7. The City will coordinate with Valley Regional Fire Authority and their capital facility
planning efforts. A fire capital facility plan is not incorporated into the Comprehensive
Plan unless there is a specific City Council action to accept and adopt.
8. The City will implement the adopted Auburn Airport Master Plan.
9. The City will seek opportunities to incorporate trails and public spaces as general
funding for these allow in its capital facility projects.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 41
10. Sustainable development practices will be incorporated into capital facility project
design and construction.
11. The siting, design, construction, and improvement of all public facilities shall be done in
full compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
CTION PLAN RS
Short Term (2016 thru 2018)
1. Implement 6 -year Capital Improvement Plans for
water, sewer, and storm drainage.
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
2. Implement 6 -year Capital Improvement Plans for
Transportation.
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
3. Incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) into City
Codes and Standards by January 1, 2017.
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
Moderate Term (2019 thru 2025)
4. Implement 7 to 10 year Capital Improvement Plans for
water, sewer, and storm drainage.
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
5. Implement longer term Capital Improvement Plans for
Transportation
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
6. In 2021, update Capital Facilities Policy Element.
CDPW - Public
Works, Parks
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
7. In 2022, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Capital Facilities Policy Element
CDPW - Public
Works, Parks
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 42
Long Term (2026 thru 2035) ' 1
8. Implement 10 to 20 year Capital Improvement Plans
for water, sewer, and storm drainage.
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
9. In 2028, update Capital Facilities Policy Element.
CDPW - Public
Works, Parks
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
10. In 2029, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Capital Facilities Policy Element
CDPW - Public
Works, Parks
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 43
Utilities Policy Element
Goals
1. Character: Utility corridors serve multi - purpose functions such as non - motorized
connectivity and recreational amenities.
2. Wellness: The extension and provision of utility service extends throughout the entire
community who has access to safe and reliable utility service.
3. Service: Residents and businesses have access to all forms of reliable utility service
including communication, water, sewer, and storm systems.
4. Economy: Through planning, franchise agreements and partnerships, capital
improvements are occurring in conjunction with development and redevelopment.
5. Celebration: Technology and amenities are in place that support community events and
enhance awareness and accessibility that results in broader participation.
6. Environment: Utility users are leaders in the region and have embraced and deployed
alternative energy solutions and conservation measures.
7. Sustainable: New development fully pays for utility extensions and upgrades that are of
a quality that is in the best long term interest of the City and avoids ratepayer subsidies.
Utilities Description:
The primary responsibility of planning for private utilities rests with the utility providers. Clearly,
this planning cannot take place without open lines of communication between the City and the
utility providers.
Puget Sound Energy (PSE) provides electrical and natural gas service to most of the City of
Auburn. PSE is an investor -owned private utility, which provides service to approximately 1.2
million customers in a service area that covers 6,000 square miles. With respect to electrical
service, PSE builds, operates, and maintains an electrical system consisting of generation,
transmission, and distribution facilities.
The Northwest Pipeline Corporation and Enumclaw Gas also have gas lines in the
southeastern portion of the City. While the Northwest Pipeline Corporation does not serve any
customers within the City, Enumclaw Gas has some residential customers in the area of the
Adventist Academy.
Conventional local telephone service to the City is provided by Century Link. CenturyLink offers
service to 25 million customers in 14 western states. The facilities in which calls are switched
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 44
are call central offices. Typically there are four main lines heading out from each central office
- one in each direction. Auburn's central office is located in downtown Auburn. Long distance
service is provided in the area by several providers. These providers have underground fiber
optic cables passing through the City of Auburn.
Cellular telecommunications provide mobile telephone. Cellular communication companies
offer digital voice, messaging and high speed wireless data services to customers. There are
several cellular service providers with customers and facilities in the City of Auburn. Regulation
of cellular providers is provided by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Cable television service is provided by Comcast through a combination of aerial and
underground cables. Several satellite dish companies also provide service within the City but
facilities are limited to the satellite dishes affixed to homes. The City is currently negotiating
with Century Link on a potential cable franchise.
Investor -owned utilities in the State of Washington are regulated by the Washington Utilities
and Transportation Commission (WUTC). State law regulates charges, services, facilities, and
practices of utilities. Any changes in policies regarding these aspects of utility provision require
WUTC approval.
Private utilities include electricity, telecommunications, natural gas, and non -city owned sewer,
and water.
Utilities Policies:
1. Private utility companies should strive to provide utility services to all segments of the
Auburn population and areas of the community.
2. All new utility and telecommunication lines shall be located underground within all new
developments. The City will also work with utility companies to relocate existing
distribution, service and telecommunication lines underground as a part of system
upgrades, urban revitalization, and city capital projects whenever it is economically and
technologically feasible.
3. The visual impact of private utilities shall be mitigated through undergrounding,
colocation, screening, or other mitigation techniques. Views from private property,
rights of way, and the surrounding community shall be considered when mitigating
visual impact.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 45
4. When granting franchise agreements, right of way permits, and other city approvals to
utility providers, evidence shall be provided that documents sustainable development
practices that will be incorporated into construction activities.
ON PLAN D ; PARTNERS
Short Term (2016 thru 2018)
1. Explore opportunities to enhance the use of franchise
fees and taxes.
CDPW - Public
Works, Finance
Mayor's Office, City
Attorney, IT
2. Review and update the City's Municipal Code for
consistency with any regulatory changes as it relates
to franchises.
CDPW - Public
Works, City
Attorney,
Innovation and
Technology
Mayor's Office, City
Council, CDPW -
Community
Development
Moderate Term (2019 thru 2025)
■
3. In 2021, update Utilities Policy Element.
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
4. In 2022, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Utilities Policy Element
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
Long Term (2026 thru 2035)
5. In 2028, update Utilities Policy Element.
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
6. In 2029, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Utilities Policy Element
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 46
Transportation Policy Element
Goals
1. Character: Investments in developing and maintaining our pedestrian, non - motorized
and street infrastructure have resulted in the creation of a community that is physically
connected.
2. Wellness: Residents, visitors and workers increase utilization of non - motorized forms of
transportation.
3. Service: Through partnership with other agencies, public transportation is an available
option for navigating the City and connecting to other forms of transportation.
4. Economy: Street surfaces are in a state of good repair allowing people and goods to
navigate into, through and out of Auburn.
5. Celebration: As a result of improvements to the transportation infrastructure, combined
with modern design techniques, we experience a decreasing frequency and severity of
collisions.
6. Environment: Through development of additional non - motorized infrastructure there are
fewer vehicular trips per capita.
7. Sustainable: There is an adequate sustained source of financing for long term
investment in our streets, sidewalks, public landscaping, and non - motorized corridors.
Transportation Description: The transportation system is a vital component of Auburn's social,
economic, and physical structure. The primary purpose of the transportation system is to
support the movement of people and goods within the City and connect the City to the broader
region. Secondarily, it influences patterns of growth, development and economic activity by
providing access to adjacent land uses. Planning for the development and maintenance of the
transportation system is a critical activity promoting the efficient movement of people and
goods, ensuring emergency access, and optimizing the role transportation plays in attaining
other community objectives.
The Transportation Policy Element, also known as the Transportation Comprehensive Plan,
provides policy and technical direction for development of the City's transportation system
through the year 2035. It updates and expands the 2009 Comprehensive Transportation Plan by
recognizing network changes since the last plan, evaluating current needs, and identifying
standards for future development and infrastructure improvements. The Plan underwent a
major update in 2005 and a midterm update in 2009 to incorporate the Lea Hill and West Hill
annexation areas into the Plan.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 47
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan is the framework for transportation planning in
Auburn. It functions as the overarching guide for changes to the transportation system. The
Plan evaluates the existing system by identifying key assets and improvement needs. These
findings are then incorporated into a needs assessment, which guides the future of the
transportation system.
This Plan is multi - modal, addressing multiple forms of transportation in Auburn including the
street network, non - motorized travel, and transit. Evaluating all modes enables the City to
address its future transportation needs in a comprehensive and balanced manner.
Transportation Policies:
1. Level of Service (LOS) and concurrency standards will be adopted and utilized when
evaluating the transportation impacts and mitigation measures associated with
development proposals. New development will pay for all system enhancements
necessary to support the development.
2. Engage in coordinated regional transportation planning efforts with King County, Pierce
County, Washington State Department of Transportation, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe,
Sound Transit, and adjacent jurisdictions.
3. Pursue funding and actions that establish public transportation options to all areas of
the City.
4. Incorporate Low Impact Development (LID) concepts and strategies into City initiated
transportation projects and privately initiated subdivision proposals.
5. Create a pedestrian and bicycle network linking neighborhoods, activity centers, and
popular destinations, and promote walkable, bike -able connections to transit service.
6. Increase coordination and integration of land -use and transportation planning to
reduce traffic congestion and protect the natural environment.
7. Provide transportation alternatives that meet the needs of seniors and those who are
unable to drive.
8. Inform the community of transportation improvements, capital projects, traffic
disruptions and alternative methods for avoiding delays.
9. Develop information about alternate modes of travel to encourage visitors and
residents to walk and bike.
CTION PLAN
LEAD PARTNERS
Short Term (2016 thru 2018)
. Develop financial and capital programming standards
that establish minimum budget targets for non-
CDPW - Public
Works
CDPW - Community
Development, Finance,
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 48
motorized connection improvements.
Mayors' Office
2. Develop a Neighborhood Connectivity Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
CDPW - Public
Works
CDPW - Community
Development
3. Develop a citywide wayfinding plan with strategies
and actions directed at both non - motorized and
vehicle modes.
CDPW -
Community
Development
CDPW - Public Works,
CDPW - M &O
4. Implement the short -term actions outlined in the
adopted Parking Management Plan
CDPW -
Community
Development
5. Identify and prioritize vehicular gateways into the City.
Design and construct gateway entry points.
CDPW -
Community
Development
Moderate Term (2019 thru 2025)
1 ■
6. Implement the long -term actions outlined in the
adopted Parking Management Plan.
CDPW -
Community
Development
7. In 2021, update the Transportation Policy Element.
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
8. In 2022, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Transportation Policy Element
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
Long Term (2026 thru 2035)
9. In 2028, update Transportation Policy Element.
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
10. In 2029, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Transportation Policy Element
CDPW - Public
Works
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 49
Economic Development Policy Element
Goals
1. Character: Our cultural diversity has been leveraged to bind our community, expand our
market, and celebrate cultural traditions.
2. Wellness: We are a safe community with walkable commercial districts where there the
perception and reality is that crime activity is low and public safety staffing meets or
exceeds the community's expectations.
3. Service: Our economic development strategies focus on supporting the existing
business community; as a result, recruitment is minimal because businesses desire to
locate here.
4. Economy: We are able to measure and achieve defined targets for manufacturing,
service, and retail jobs and revenues.
5. Celebration: We actively promote our local businesses and have been successful at
making our citizens more aware of what is available locally as well as attracting visitors
from beyond our City.
6. Environment: Our economy is growing and diversifying because of our efforts to protect
our rivers, streams, wetlands, and other environmental resources.
7. Sustainable: Residents are staying in Auburn to work and shop and we are widely
considered to be a regional dining, shopping and entertainment destination.
Economic Development Description:
Auburn's economic base drives and shapes the community and region. Auburn's residents
and the surrounding region benefit from the jobs and services Auburn's economic base
offers. Through the payment of sales, property and other taxes, the City of Auburn can fund
and provide services and public facilities which Auburn residents require.
It is in the City's best interest to maintain and expand our economic base in unison with
implementing all of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. This section of the plan will help
to define the City's goals and policies in this vital area.
Economic Development Policies:
1. Attract high wage employment opportunities and sales tax generating businesses to
diversify the City's economic base and generate positive secondary benefits for the
community.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 50
2. Assist business organizations in developing and implementing new or improved
product development opportunities to increase sales tax revenue collections.
3. Dedicate resources to pursue an expanded economic development program for the
City.
4. Develop a clear and elaborate City branding strategy.
5. Create an economic development toolbox comprised of programs and incentives to
reduce financial, regulatory, and operational constraints for existing or new business
growth and expansion.
6. Prioritize the installation of key infrastructure at identified employment areas to facilitate
development of these economic centers.
- 9 EVELOPME ' LAN EAD PARTNERS
i
Short Term (2016 thru 2018)
1. Adopt and implement a City 10 year Economic
Development Strategic Plan
Moderate Term (2019 thru 2025)
2. In 2021, update Economic Development Policy
Element.
Mayor's Office
City Council, Planning
Commission, City
Attorney, CDPW -
Community
Development
3. In 2022, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Economic Development Policy Element
Mayor's Office
City Council, Planning
Commission, City
Attorney, CDPW -
Community
Development
Long Term (2026 thru 2035) _
4. In 2028, update Economic Development Policy
Element.
Mayor's Office
City Council, Planning
Commission, City
Attorney, CDPW -
Community
Development
5. In 2029, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Economic Development Policy Element
Mayor's Office
City Council, Planning
Commission, City
Attorney, CDPW -
Community
Development
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 51
Parks and Open Space Policy Element
Goals
1. Character: There are a mix of small urban parks, natural areas, sports complexes, and
community buildings that offer a full range of recreation service.
2. Wellness: Parks are well advertised, maintained, and are safe locations during all hours.
3. Service: Parks and park programming are accessible to all segments of the population.
4. Economy: Our parks and natural spaces are one of the major reasons that businesses
and residents site why they chose to locate here and why they choose to stay.
5. Celebration: There are a mix of large and small parks that are being used for local,
neighborhood, city-wide, and regional events.
6. Environment: Parks, open spaces, and natural areas are designated, designed and
maintained in a manner that respects the environment and natural setting.
7. Sustainable: Park development and maintenance has an identified long term funding
source that ensures that the system grows and improves.
Parks and Open Space Description:
Parks, arts, open space, and recreation facilities are an essential amenity to maintain a high
quality of life in the community. As the population of Auburn grows, the demand for parks,
recreational programs, arts and culture, and open space will continue to increase. To
maintain Auburn's quality of life, the supply of parks and programs must keep pace with the
demand associated with a growing population.
Parks and Open Space Policies:
1. Provide and maintain a comprehensive system of parks and recreation programs that
serves the needs and desires of the City's residents.
2. Protect and preserve open space and natural areas that incorporate appropriate
opportunities for residents and citizens to view and learn about natural systems and
habitats.
3. Provide activities and amenities that allow for community interactions and encourage
active and healthy lifestyles.
4. Provide a broad variety of recreational and cultural opportunities to all residents.
5. New development will contribute to the development of new parks at a level
commensurate with their share of new facility needs.
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 52
6. Provide and support community events, festivals, and programs that offer a variety of
opportunities for social interaction and contribute to a sense of community.
7. Diversify the funding sources that support the City Parks, Arts and Recreation
Department to include public funding, earned revenues, development impact fees, and
outside funding sources.
8. Establish regulations and incentives to incorporate parks and trails into subdivisions
and other development projects.
9. Support collaboration between agencies, organizations, and businesses on trails
marketing, management, and maintenance in recognition of the value of trails to the
community and the economy.
• ► • ` CE ACTION PLAN
D PARTNERS
Short Term (2016 thru 2018)
1. Establish Level of Service (LOS) standards for parks,
open space, arts and service programs.
Parks
CDPW - Community
Development
2. Establish a formal fee in lieu of program
Parks
CDPW - Community
Development, City
Attorney, Mayor's
Office
3. Acquire additional properties for inclusion in the
Auburn Environmental Park and develop a
comprehensive management plan.
CDPW -
Environmental
Services
Parks
4. Complete and activate the Auburn Youth and
Community Center
CDPW - Public
Works, Parks
CDPW - Community
Development, Police
5. Complete the Les Gove Community Campus Plan
Parks
City Council, Mayor's
Office, Police, CDPW
Moderate Term (2019 thru 2025)
6. Begin identification of acquisition needs based on
Level of Service.
Parks
7. Develop criteria and strategies for identifying land that
should be preserved as open space and funding
mechanisms for acquiring priority lands.
Parks, CDPW -
Environmental
Services
CDPW - Community
Development
8. In 2021, update Parks and Open Space Policy
Element.
Parks
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
9. In 2022, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Parks and Open Space Policy Element
Parks
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan
Page 53
Long Term (2026 thru 2035) ' 1
10. In 2028, update Parks and Open Space Policy
Element.
Parks
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
11. In 2029, update city zoning regulations to be consistent
with update to Parks and Open Space Policy Element
Parks
City Council, Planning
Commission, Mayor's
Office, City Attorney,
CDPW - Community
Development
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 54
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
TO BE FILLED WITH MAP
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 55
Appendices
Appendix A - The Auburn Community Vision Report
Appendix B - The Auburn Housing Needs and Characteristics Assessment
Appendix C - The Auburn Housing Element Checklist
Appendix D - The Auburn Health Impact Assessment
Appendix E - The Comprehensive Public Participation Plan
Appendix F - The Buildable Lands Analysis
Appendix G - Auburn Airport Master Plan
Appendix H - Auburn Community Profile
City of Auburn 1 Core Comprehensive Plan Page 56