Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Element topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant outlines eight transportation goals for Richland comprehensive plan update
Summary
Nicole Stickney of AHPL presented the Transportation Element goals and proposed policies—covering multimodal networks, Vision Zero safety targets, multimodal level-of-service metrics, environmental stewardship and funding/prioritization—saying the full element and TSP descriptions will return in the next month or two for further review.
Nicole Stickney, the consultant leading the comprehensive-plan update, told the Richland Planning Commission the Transportation Element will set the city's direction for the next 20 years and align the plan with Washington's Growth Management Act.
"We are fully planning under the Growth Management Act," Stickney said, explaining that the update includes a transportation system plan and an overview of major projects and policies to guide future development and capital investments.
The presentation organized the element around eight goals. Stickney said Goal 1 emphasizes a comprehensive multimodal network and connector streets that link local streets with collectors and arterials while supporting freight mobility. Goal 2 centers on safety and adopts a vision-zero approach, prioritizing measures to reduce fatal and serious-injury collisions through engineering, education, enforcement and evaluation. "The city's adoption of a vision 0 principle signals the local commitment to eliminating traffic related deaths and severe injuries," she said.
Goal 3 proposes new multimodal performance standards for operations, including nonmotorized "level of traffic stress" measures to better reflect walking and bicycling comfort. Goal 4 encourages active, sustainable transportation and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) by large employers. Goal 5 seeks to balance mobility with environmental stewardship through streetscape treatments, stormwater best practices and designs that limit wildlife impacts. Goal 6 focuses on community well-being, outreach and connectivity (sidewalks, trails, lighting). Goal 7 addresses fiscal responsibility and project prioritization, noting tools such as impact fees and SEPA-based mitigation. Goal 8 emphasizes regional coordination with BFCOG, state agencies and infrastructure providers.
Commissioners asked for clarifications. One asked whether policy T3f (minimizing driveways along major streets) would change existing conditions or only apply to new development; staff and consultants responded the policy is aimed at new projects and access management, with cross-easements to be added to the language. Commissioners also pressed how the plan would address underserved and vulnerable populations; Stickney said equity and exposure analysis (by census tract) and outreach would inform prioritization so projects serving vulnerable populations score higher for funding and scheduling.
Stickney said the team would bring the remainder of the element (detailed descriptions and standards) to the commission within the next month or two and asked commissioners to flag any wording or policy concerns now so staff can refine the draft.
The presentation did not include a formal vote; commissioners provided feedback and asked staff to refine language on prioritization for underserved communities and to clarify implementation measures.
