The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03-30-2009 ~ J"w.. ~ CITYOFt.-....~ - CITY COUNCIL 3 , COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WAS H I N GTON March 30, 2009 5:00 PM Council Chambers COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION 1. Puget Sound Regional Council Transportation 2040 Alternatives II. Washington State Department of Transportation HOT Lanes Report OTHER ITEMS MAY BE DISCUSSED BY THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY THE COUNCIL ON ANY ITEM DURING A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING. Page 1 , �..� � „�'�--.--. . . �._ , . � I�;� � � . � � � '� � . . .. - 'I� :_ .a � �R�f �n'.�.' :... .., .... . .� ' � I 4�� .� , FM_!:. Background and �� ,, � . Status Report � . -- --- - -- � r - _; Auburn City Council '' , ,. , �� _ ,i� �►� � ' i� � _ �IL--=�:---- - . a . t � VISION 2040 is the Region's long-range "��- growth management, economic, and = transportation strategy ;� '�° ' VISION 2040 (adopted 2008) � • People, prosperity, planet: environmental framework ' � • Regional growth strategy (population and jobs) • Multi-county planning policies ' � • Implementation i;�' � , Regional Economic Strategy (adopted 2005) • Prosperity partnership • Industry clusters TranspoRation 2040 (underway—adoption: 2010) • Long-range multi-modal transportation plan - • Update of 2001 plan (Destination 2030) �. � . . • . . . . . Region expects to add 1.7 million people and 1.2 million jobs by 2040 (from base year 2000) • Smaller household sizes • Older population • Fewer households with children • Different trevel needs 8 preferences • More recially 8 ethnically diverse • Different housing needs 8 preferences . .,... Pooulation 5 mil�ion wnumx rweun :ro�� .. . .. . _ . . EmPlovment I �w��„q 3 milliOn i50CNM .. i .. —_--i . _.• �. ' iWtOYMiMt 10WM1KK1 IOAlCAfi LOL.:ut fMR0YME1n il �: c, . ... .u. J.� . .. . . � • � • � � � Populatlon Population and �oox � Employment have ,so%--�'—�9�� ' both grown faster i than the national ,ao� average. 50% I ' ox Employment 1960 7985 1970 1975 1980 19B5 1990 1995 2000 E005 zoa% tsosc i _�,eb� —,� iaow I wx ow �., 1970 1975 1980 7985 1980 1995 2000 2005 sourcc. oF�u.eso 2 - . . - . . . . . . _ . - . . Share of Regional Job Change Share oI Reglonal Popula2ion Change 1970-2000 1970.2000 Regional Growth 1970-2000 Kina Countv: � 70%of new jobs 43%of new people Pierce Counri: ``��• 2ooa2o4o 11%of new jobs saoo•zaao 23%of new people Result: More workers � commuting into ' King County . : - �. ' - • . . . . . . • • � i�� More of the region's workforce is commuting to King County �� SNOHOMISH COUNTY: _. .�� — ��t One worker in three commutes into King _ ._._::.�,.;� ,�, � �., County 32%35% l PIERCE COUNTY: � One worker in four ��,�, commutes into King 1970 Pct _�y ta°, Counry xa0a acc - KITSAP COUNTY: � I— � � One worker in seven � commutes into King �� _ _. - County �� I ��- �% zs� f �� < Source: f9)0.I000 Centus Journay N WaA �' 3 • • - � 111 • 1 � 1 - • � • � ' � - - •- - Smaller increases in key travel variables forecast underthe RegionalGrowth Strategy. p ' �Rep GroxM Sbatpy 18 I I ,PSfiC Faracnb 18 ', i it IMraese In '� Average �Z -� - �I Seco�Me of Deuy,per to +gg� — Vanic�a.per Mlle D � +�SO%� e +145% a � � I � 0 Fraewsys 8 Ezpreeewayn Merials Snurce: PSRL,Regiona!Forewsts antl Vision 2040 E/S �� . • • ' • � .Pa;r::.in;: � _�� - ��e . .� ' g ' __ �! San ITe9c v��' - 3 ',` -. _ r _- T _ {5� --�i�` - ' +� �w`� I _ ''^► � - Xr _ � _ 'tr _ .;. ,: -._ _ -- -:. �� ` - - _ . H -_ _ - ` �-,... "+. ^, i�'�Frano: i _ . � �s- �:_— - _ . _ __ � _ . ' ' ' .._ -. _ -_ _ *� ... .._ . _ , � �, ', Z_� ._ __� Phoenia i I _' . . . - "-' . _ - .. Y -- " . � - _...... . .�_. ..-_ . . . _. _ .r + - _ .. . '.�, . � �- . _ . - -"� _ f, � -:i'.�e � . - �.__'_rg., �. .' - ' - M nncaPoti9"�.. '�� _ ��i.,i,n.r � r ... . . .__—. .- � � '_ VlRCGO".o��= �.i 4 ' � � • � ' 1 •�• _ _ I 8,000,000 14.8% 7,000,000 - phoenix: doubled since 7990 6.000.000 � S,OOO,D00 I■ 002 6 390.1% ■ ::2000 4.000,000 80.7X � t990 1 7a39% �s.tx ■1980 3,000,000 . —. . ��9�� S..i 89.6% ss.sx � �- ias.e^s 2,o0a,000 � — 1,000,000 � 0 d�e � �� y��y c�� C�s � p�3 O�`S C4\y � C 0av C�' pJm '�0\ Q g�FP yx� � �\�c Q ,qc�� oam sa�«o.ca��.a:ooa ncs ena cmws ca�em �i � ' • � 8 Phcenix: Many artarials, >� very few freeways(only 18°/oftoWl) m 6 I� m 9 � I N g + tArtefial I I ■Fr _ f � m C m J ]- 1 PerceM Freeway % % % % 0 �o J �o o e� + y � 90 ��eC `� O.ye9 �o dC� °� P``sC �' Qo �io� g1C � Q� `cC° �i:�. Source:]W5 Hlgh«eY Par�armann ysC � Mommnry Deb 5 ' • • • � - � • I ■Density ❑Deiay I ANanta: Lowest denslty,highest delay moo- , San Diego: Highest density, high delay �v L uao - aa -m L y �� -- - - — �wi m �� - ' a ao � s �000 e . ,o � = :s� — A z �o S '� i000 � — — - ° o a soo.. _ __ _ .��o w o" 0 0 y�P �P GP pP �O �1 �p VP da �Q: D• �o• ,�. �y Q��. �Y � ¢�sca Q>+8 g�, pF � \C e� p`� Q�C � 9S Source:2005 Highway Perfortnance Moni[oring$yslem(HPMS),TTI �.� ' • � ' 30 Atlanta: highest , ' * ,. VMT,but ZS approaohingthe reat x � Z� A +Seattle A s portland V �� a_�.-_� � 15 ` -�San Francisco � -+-San Diego � > �p �Denver -�--Phoenlx �Minneapolis 5 � A[lanfa 0 00ry �q� �A� 0� �0$ �0ry q� �0� 0� ry0g �J�ry �i$ Source:2005 Highway Pertormance Monitoring Sys�em(HPMS),TTI �i� 6 • • • • sa� asw 90% d0%r % .. x ❑Carpool �I ' �% 79% ❑Tnnsk �0% r — — , x. ' 25% 2a% �M' ■Walk . I�t . �% yd% � ❑Blks YO% ,. � - e � � - 'x^° # x. -. ❑WorM il Homa m � � � ■OMer 70%i- � x '� � a e � H g x � 0% P P P P 0 �,? P P a�`a� oP� �°pc �o� �ac °ea, J\ �G °`�d w O o� � Qa ��n � r.p oCO�D• Oa �c y0``P �c`+ �g`. p. ,9c�oo Q gcc.p' O°� Q'�` C0� F� �c Sources: 2006 Amencan Commurrly Sw.ey y�° � &2041 Canatlian Census � � • � � • � Obiectives of the Transportation Plan Update • Develop transportation strategies to address the results of the VISION 2040 update, the Regional Economic Strategy, and the latest 2040 growth forecasts for person and freight travel demand. • Make progress on the major transportation system issues facing the region and inform near term project decisions. �� 7 . . . . Develop alternatives that address key issues and include a range of strategies to meet the region's transportation needs: • Land Use-Better integrate transportation and land use decisions through implementation of Vision 2040. • Economy-Support the Regional Economic Stretegy. • Congestion and Mobility-Reduce congestion on facilities for all types of freight and person travel. • Equity and Special Needs Transportation-Equitably make transportation investments across the region and improve access to jobs and services for people with special needs. • Safety 8 Health-Improve the safety of the transportation system and assist the state in meeting the objectives of"Target Zero"'and encouraging healthy lifes[yles. • Security-Support the region's ability to deal with emergencies. • Energy and the Environment-Reduce the causes of climate change and wa[er quality impacts on Puge[Sound • Preservation of the System-Make improvements to an aging infrastructure. • Transportation Funding-Support the development of sustainable transportation funding. • Project Prioritization•Make the most of scarce trensportation dollars. �'. • f • � • Federal revenues in 2009 will not meet SAFETEA-LU spending guarantees oeu��euuo�� w aa w m m 4"' ' "' - �...... .. ' -,_ . ......... � • ... ' .y' ��..............�_... 0 ' . � ........�..... ........•...... '' '••., ,.....� .� ~� +ttighwevProgrmnM"n'1 �4ensitPmg'emlti'[Y*4Y1 �'�� -. -►Hi�,�hwayA��Ifeixnie �hansilAar�Palarcr `�'"-1 -1� �IIH 2W5 2UU6 2U�] 1AIU8 3MIY 3111I 11t1 211L' 2013 �J11�4 21Y15 � 8 . . . . . Growth Rates Compared Gas Tax Revenue,8 Gas Tax Rate in 1991 dollars ' t.z .— _ _ —_ , -_ 1.1 c..1e.ri.r.nu. ryea�aone�l I ss�ni �� 1.0 xx ss+:n� 09 �e.ee +sszn R sSv r,� 0.8 �.aia.wm J ��ae�ami.a� 0] �e.�r 15:]6 0.6 n.oa Estimates 05 inclutle[he new � CAFE s[anGartls � I 04 �uui �cao tws iew ieae aoo� zom xoas som zooe van zau mu zov ao�a xoz�l . _ � • ' • • • • � � � Why is climate change important to consider in the Transportation 2040 Update? 2002 Greenhouse Gas Errdssions- Puget Sound Region � Industry �. Electricity. 17%-� �(process),3°k i Industry(energy), ' � 7% � Transport qq.,For.8 �� 51% Waste,it% ��Commercial,5% `Residentlal,6% Sau¢e: Puget Sountl Clean Air Agency ��.e 9 - . . ' - • • : - Forecasted VMT trends, compared to VMT reduction benchmarks , y. �� I Buaines!as usual Vel�tl line oo.00a.000J . ..." �v.•� _ ___ , - _�..••� I ��.-...�• "� � tex�ie��ey m-_��.-.��aa....._�,��_'�-�«�,�. i$ �� /�-/,.r�"' —� DO%reautuonnyxo]5 � } �j/ ' I SOxMLcibnhy2oso9 a w�� _ HB 2815 ,o�� _ _ ,:�� .�a ,o,o . zooa o I. _ .. _ uniVMioe GpIW�ESSHBwet9Neeuce�� I':r $ff3tB91C ; -� Expansion —� expansion: P� ' � Improve \ vansit � \ EffiGianc , ' .. , exPansi°°' ', Y i expansion: 12nsit transit �_�� I � axpansion: 1 ezpension: transi� � ezpansion: 12ns11 � ' I, roads i Iexpansion: I expansion: i expansion: � rpatls roaes ezpansion: II �� expension: mads roatls I � transit 1 � I PManq oric�ng enpanslon: , �� roads . ' O�cin9 . �v^cm ptlCing i s tem s pricing monagemeni pdGng � � management system + i a � nern i JYs�e1� Imana ement� ��management '�c� demand �^ana ement� 9 demand tlemantl strategies demantl aemand demand s[rategies sUate9ies strategies strategies st2tegies easeline 1 2 3 4 � 10 � . Finance "Current Law"Revenue Forecast to 2040 (with higher regional rate of retum on state funds) Preservation All current capacity will be maintained (including I-5 repave, US-2 Trestle) Roadway System Current plus funded future investments �NickelfTPA projects,41ane 520 bridge, current AWV) Regional Trensit Current plus funded future investments(ST2) Local Transit Current plus KC"Rapid Ride," CT"Swift",and very minor service expansion in some areas Ferries Existing WSF service plus existing King County Ferry District 8 Kitsap Transit passenger-only ferries HOV practice(2+, 3+) Existing Practice; after 2020: 3+only(peak hour) �; � . • Baseline is included in all action alternatives • Baseline is the "No Action" alternative under SEPA • Highways: Nickel and TPA programs - Parts of SR 9, SR 522, SR 532 (to Stanwood) - I-405 improvements Baseiine - Complete I-5 and SR 16 HOV lanes - BAT ianes on SR 99 north core Strategies - Existing 4-lane SR 520 Bridge - AWV is subject to current planning process • Transit: Funded programs - Sound Transit 2 (LINK to Lynnwood, Overlake, Fed. Way) - KC Metro—"Transit Now" — BRT (SR 99, Ballard, W. Seattlej - 2% annual increase in local transit service • Core strategies include safety, security, & special needs ��> 11 � - ^ ... f-<SELINE'. _ _= i-�..ii�GunOaEfhWatl��AmanAllemallwwEetSEPA) - _ +�ti re.�. _n. , �� Highway °,�i Improvements " " �!" ., A 1_ ry i _� � ry . } � _ � �� (� I JI` 1.� � 4�`�I��_I x�T� { � t�"'�y,�. ��~j',,.�,� s"' .,. 1,-�-?' a .:,,. y,; '� �� '�� ` �' yt r`_� — ,-.� , ,�<,� �. —_ cc B45ELINE-. B�ntl FyrqpE Prqeqg�ryp Acpq�qttxngryya wder SEPA .` r.w�, ax - Improvements ` � + ',� Transit 1� X� ,�_. �, i Improvemertts a-�"� ._a'i�° ` I �'�}�*� � ' �`, „'fi"?�-�- '' ;, i t . , i�� c _ H{IN'�� ` - �ti — V,�� C^ — t ` -... 12 BASELME' BuIIE FuMeE Ra eGs(No ANon Altemetivo uMer SEPA) Highway � Improvements �, + - , I T2nsot �� Lt ," � � Improvemenfs c�•"' _��` ' + �� i Non-motorized `� ;i R..: ' �wy: ; Improvemenis ��„' ,», � ' - I 1 - _� . _ ... --_ '.� � �� : 1'�-'t if_ � �',y _ - _ 1 — _- . . • Minimum investment in new capacity • Focused on system efficiency investments: - CTR, GTEC, vanpool, telework, ITS Improve - Freeway speed harmonization Efficiency - Corridor management 8� incident management - Hard shoulder running s,,,,,gi� - Traveler information EROanslon • Relies largely on treditional funding • Adds 1-tane High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes on selected highways: 1-5, I-90, I-405, SR 167, SR 16 • Toll revenues spent to operate the HOT lane system • New 6-lane SR 520 B�idge (with tolls - all alternatives) � Sig�ificant expansion in bus service hours • Signal prioritization for transit �; 13 ALTERNATIVE 1: Make me Most of Me Fxletln Tr�s onatlon 5 stam Highway Improvements " `' z �jJ +; .,,, a a7 � '��c � . �}r„ � „.j�1,� ,� . > ;y�`�' ��` . �.�,s� ' =. � � � �: .�;`' -__ wl',.. ._Y.c...:_. ,� o `.� i � ARERNATVE 1' Make�he Most of tlfa ExisYln T2ns ortatlon 5 slem Improvements " + Transit ��.�� _ , Improvemenfs ,� '� '�' _ ` h - 7 � „,�7. �� , � �� , , �`� l� ^ l� r�� --- 4� `f y — 1, �_. �`r� , c " 14 ALTERNATIVE 1' Make Ne Mo9 of tlie EasM Trans ortallan 5 rtem Highway � Improvements ` " + Transit �-'� - � I I Improvements - - _ ` + � � Non-motorized r��,y,i� � ��- Improvements M� " : _ 1 . , 4� -1 i,� -�� _ �,� IS �� _- ,J � S . •. \ i 1 - • • Focused on adding capacity (roads and transit) ,mP,o�a • Most closely resembles Desfination 2030 E"�=�a^=Y • Expands revenues by adding more HOT lanes: - Converts HOV lanes /adds new HOT lanes Strateglc Ezpansion: - HOT lanes network on major highways: I-5, I-405, Transit8 I-90, SR 520, SR 167, SR 16, SR 512 Roaaway • Highway investments: - SR 9, SR 527, US 2 (I-5 to Sultan, including trestle), SR 522, SR 509 extension, SR 167, SR 18 widening, SR 704 Cross-base, I-5 (HOT lanes US 2-SR 531), I-405 • Transit investments: - Expanded ST2: LINK to Everett, Tacoma, downtown Redmond - BRT on I-405 � ,. 15 ALTERNATIVE 2: InvBSY in Cdqlil IM1IpNvplqn�y Ip V�y NafwoAS Highway improvements `�, ` c. , �� "i �d �., ;,.}�,�: :. ...;k_�:. ��-:,} ,.. ;d; *\.� ��z , '1 '�� `��4 � -�,c\ ' __ � J,�,` ,,�� __ � _-- I ALTERNATIVE�: �Invest in Ca Ilal Im vemenls ro ihe NeNro�ks —_—_-.n.�.� i..� . Improvements "�`' + r.. Transit ��' t,;�� Improvements �� f.� ' ". � �� .� ,i ;:X"' a.:. ° ° : } i',.l:� N a� �vy�� .. � . �'l •� �� .� •� l r (�� .. /�__._.i� • � I a. ��`�-�'�� 16 •. .' . - ALTERNATIVE2�. �_�. . - Irnesl in Capital ImIXovema�rte to Me NeMroiks _ ' - _:.._ . ._._-.__ .) �.i......v.. � �.��. Highway � Improvements �,, " '' � r Transet �� Improvements �� " " + �,� ` .. Non-molorized � I ��,l� 4 � ) �' Improverrients - , �'- ." 'I Q �`f'f , I ;'� �� :'� - _ � � F � -- � --" -- -- I . . . . . . . - - . • Blends efficiency and expansion investments • Uses traditional funding to enhance transit • Relies on tolls to fund highway improvements Improve • Tolls on core freeways (not HOT lanes) E""'•"`Y • Major highway projects: sva<e9+� - I-5 north to SR 531 e:pansion • SR 9, US 2 trestle - I-405, SR 167, SR 16, SR 18, SR 509, SR 522, SR 704 • Transit investments: - ST2 - Increased service in tolled corridors • HOV system improvements �;. 17 aLiERW1TIVE S �- F�.ind EzOanflon enE Ellloency Por the Core NeMroM1s ,_. .... ra..., m� . Highway ` Improvements �;:� �.� , i - t �.r ��r X' '� h� , „ ,��„�t'.� ,;,��"�" - ' "�' , , 4 �1 ��., �•��', _ . ( / �� y ''� \. \✓ C S �- AITERNATIVE 7: FUM Fx anvon an0 El�aen br iM1a Core NeNroMs y' f�../�x . � ImprovemenYs � + = .t� � � i Transit ) �a �^a %: a , , - w Improvemenis , R � � , �` � • „ ,�ir, ; � Ii .-- .��" , ` ..r. � 4 'L,.��'� . $._ c I ".Lf�� ..-! "�' ' -� a �', _. i� �_c �r ,» �j-,5�� `�� _ :ti:" �:i,�iJ n"ti __ — ' — + - 18 AITERNATVE 3: :. 111 . Funtl Ez anyon anE ElRoenc tor t�e Core Netwarks ,_ ._ . . �s.�,i�.c.. �.......n.. . Highway Improvements i I + ,�;� . Transit � I � ^ , Improvements „ _� ' -� `r7._ + - = � , \ . r Non-motordzed �,,��"' � � �� Improvements ^ 4�',.' �= .- �� ., 1". . �. � �`i . r : - • a • Focused on managing the system • Uses tolling as congestion management tool • Tolls entire freeway system; revenues spent on highway efficiency and transit expansion Improve • Highway improvements: eificier,cy - Bottlenecks and chokepoints region-wide - SR 509 extension, SR 167, I-405, SR 18 - HOV lanes on I-5 and SR 16 g��•s�� - I-5 widening in Pierce County E"ve""°" • Transit investmenks: - ST2 plus LINK to Everett,Tacoma, downtown Redmond - More service on tolled corridors - Trensit priority on parallel arterials � � 19 � -� ALTERNATIVE4' - -- � - Im rove an0 Mana e the Entlre hans otlalion 5 s�am Highway �� .�� tlmp�ovements `' �,� �JJ I+ .- � µV i� i� . \ I }� 1 f��i i'� '-��q �-,� C t,�rW`� �,�'M' � �,,:�.�� , ,� h ' ' � I -k� .'-_ i o-£;E�, � -- � ' HLTERNATIVE 4' . y-�- . Im rove and Mana e ihe Entire Trans ortallon S stem ._'_," _' �-. v.�...i...:m.�l� �'? Highw ' '`: Improvements " " �':�� + ��,� , Transit � �� _^z F4 � � Imgrovements � ' ' , _ ,:; �!�1 �ti :� � .�'"��li„ti ;;``+ '� �" � '� - �� .,, � ';� ,� � � � � :�/l �� i� � � l �.. �- y ' a� � i i ._ a ... � -� �' _.Vtf�I ., ..�__ � t �. � . ..,.,. , _ _ 2� .�..� �... ��":�� ..','v '� qLTERNATNE4-. � . � =.,. .� Impmve and Mana e Ma Entira Trans ortation S stem Highway improvements " " ,1 I; �I + r 'l Trensit � ,_� _ '=- � ImprovemenEs y '� 4�_ � " li + �� NoEz-motorfze�' �'� ��" � � \ Improvemertis � �"", � �, tk, 7 r � / � _ _�_ I � ,rL I ._ ;}: �.� ~ r '� � _� .i ._5�.._..: ,' a ..�... t • - • ' � . ' 0 1 • • • Major shift in priorities: - Address emerging statewide issues: ' Reduce greenhouse gas emissions (state goals) ' Reduce vehicle miles traveled (state benchmarks) - Reduce use of fossil fuel (technology, incentives) - Move from fuel-based to user-based financing (tolls) - Offer significantly more travel choices - Rethink how we use public right•of-way • Tolls entire system (highways and arterials) Improve • Highway improvements: EffC1eOLY - I-405 improvements - I-$ HOV serategic - SR 16 HOV(Olympic Drive to Purdy) Expansion - I-90 two-way transit and HOV �:, 21 Alternative 5 (part 2} � • Pedestrian & bike improvements: - Pedes4rian network in all regional growth centers - Separated bike network in all regional growth centers • Increase transit service by double population growth • Transit investments: - LINK extends to Everett, Tacoma, downtown Redmond - Light rail on I-405 corridor(Lynnwood to Tukwila) - BRT or light rail from Seattle to Ballard and West Seattle - Trensit (commuter rail) along BNSF cor�idor - BRT on SR 99, SR 522, SR 167, SR 305, SR 3 - CT transit emphasis corridors Improve Efflciency Strategic Expansion � i ALTERNATIVE 5�. � �_-..,. Pmviae Accesu0illt anG Retluce CarOon Emissions , . .. .-..- ,l vm�.....mo. . ��. '_e' .� Hi9 r_ , Improvements +" � , r�f'� - � � , .. _.. ,, ,-, � _ M' s ..I— ' � �nt ` .��,.� �Stil 1 �1��}`J n.� l U � l ��/ti ��ry.4� I } F r.-r1 `I r, f �� _� " __ t �"�, , f�., , _'' _-s G�� _ � t p� • _ l_ � ( — ___ 22 I � �� ALTEftNATIVES' �;44 � Pmvitle Acce5ti0i11t antl Retluce Callon Emigslons . _""�. . ,�_ _ r.n.....i..... �i Highway Improvements " + ,� TransiY �� _ � , Improvements 't ',i_ -�r' � , _ � f a�;" � � J � � �' , �>i ^� N — q � nLTERNATIVES: - amvitle Accesv0ilit antl ReGuce Ca�bon Emisslons .:: � rn.�....n...�, �_._�,� "'� Improvements � + Transit � `� � Improvements �� '� " � `– , + _ Non-motorizad r r � Improvements � "?; s, '; � �. _ ��'ti �� ,<� °�'�,��`� - � � _- � ,� ,�- - �r.. .�_::�''� _ e _e_— 23 �! 1 ° a _ �� aro . o A � 1 .a �.�1 . '�� '� r_ .i � ' • ��f�.�.��. • Policv Analvsis will assure ;- alternatives are consistent with VISION 2040 and meet regional goals - ,`� • Technical Analvsis will compare � '� a�, �'` `t, and evaluate alter�atives using �'� � �, .�.�•, quantitative methods (criteria) °"'�-f • Environmental Review (done �'1`� ' _ .. within the context of the EIS) will � assess the alternatives based on I P - F � Ya�i environmental impacts and /��: ".�, J4a'"a = VISION 2040 goals r„ � .:"4 -= , �,�.,. =- . Mobility (M) Economic Pro�r��r ;, ,c=; L Travel Trme Savings 1. Accessi6iliry fo High-Wage antlWing Wage Employment 2. RelieDility Benel/ts 2. Accessibility ro Cluster Employment(75 clusters) 3. Vehicle Operering Cost Savings 3. Accessibiliry ro Freight Generarors 4. OtherUserCosts Environmental Stewardship (ES) FindnCO (F) L VehicleEmissionCostSavings 1. Fecility Operafing Cosfs 2. Runotl From Impervious Sudeces 2. Capifa/Costs 3. Abiliry to Retain Open Space 3. Operafing Revenues Quality of Life (QL) 4. Inlluence ol Finance on the Economy �. qccident Cosf Savings Growth Management (GM) 2. Noo-MororizedTravel 1. Populefion in Regionel Geo9rephies 3. Reduntlancy 2. Employment in Regional Geographies Equlty(E� 3. Jobs and Housing Belence in Counties �, Geographic Equiry 4. Populafion antl Jobs in Regional Growth Z �ncome Equity Cenfers antl Jobs in MICs 3. Dism6ution ol Beneflts fo Passenger and Freight Users 4. Specia/Needs and EJ Populalions � „ 24 i • . - . � . � - . - „ ,,: ,,. . , �� 0 � 6.Analysis 7.Racommendation � I B.APProval_1 � Key Decision Points Draft EIS: May �� • • • TfansportetiOn 2040 www.psrc.oralaroiectsltrans2040lindex.htm Charlie Howard 1-206-464-7122 chowardna asrc.oru Mike Cummings 1-206-464-6172 mcummings(�a.psrc.or9 Stephen Kiehl 1-206-971-3290 skiehl(�a.psrc.ora m: 25 � � � ( ' 1 � 1' 1pn 1 'l l 1 1 , � ' � � / ' '/ � � � / / � ' / / �Jltv • � � Keeping the Region Moving Overview The region's elected leadership voced unanimously ro move forward with the update to the region's long range transportation plan by selecting plan altematives for analysis and public �^� review.Five altematives and a baseline that shows existing funded plans and projects were ,+, developed to frame the discussions regional leaders,communiry members,business,and '}�' environmental groups will be having[hrouyh 2009.A hybrid altemative is likely[o result as the preferred choice for Transportation 20a0. Transportation 2040 is taking a fresh approach to meeting the mobiliry needs of a growing � .� region while sustaining the environment and supporting the regional economy.The region has PSRCistheregional nansportation,em- made solid progress towards improving transportation in the last[en years.The new plan will nomirdevelopment,andgrow[hplanning move beyond past debates and employ 21st century technology ro deliver a s[rategy ro take us agenryforrherentralPugerSoundregian, into the fu ture. which indudes King,Kitsap,Pierre,and Snohomish rounties. Each alternative under considzranon indudes a strategy to identify sufficienc f�nding sources ro help keep pdce with rhe reyion's needs,but each [akes a di(feren[approach ro makiny transportation investments.The approaches range from making modest improvements �'owfh from 2007 d�2040 with limited funds to shifting regional priorities in a way that would result in a new type of Syy� transportation system In every case,to both pay for improvements and ro manage congestion, [olling plays a part Shori desaip[ions of[he al[emaiives are available on the back of this handout. Background 41% The update began with a scoping process in ��ovember 2007,whicn gatnered public commen[s on what to indude in Ihe draft alternatives.The Scoping �eport summarizez nearly 1,000 public comments and condudes that the al[ematives must consider three key concerns mngestion and mobiliry,Irnpact on the environrnen�(suecif c�lly dimate chanye),and I��ow fo mlleci and sust'ain � ,,, , , transporta[ion funding. During 2008,PSRC engayed multiple groups and technical experts,parmer agencies,high levei regional staff,and elected officials in the d�velopment of draft plan al[ern�tives. TohlTrips Employment Households What's Next? qre regmn is/nnng mnvdemGleg�avifn The vote to move forw�rd sgnaled PS?.l.stdff'ro b2gm tesOng the altema[ives using Che best by7040.PSRC/oremsrs showthotwe wil! innova[ions in [echnica'�. tools to determine wha[combinacion of programs,projects and add IAmillionpeopleand 1.1 million�obs, funding mechanisms will make the most of transportation investments.Tne altematives will androtalnips(Misisdemandforhavel, also be evalua[ed to assure consistency with VISION 2040,the Regional Economic Strategy, withnosperifiedmode—somrs,lenies, and federal and state requirements.The altematives will also be evaluated in an Environmenta�� 6ikes,andbusesafeallinduded)willlikely Impact Statement. rearh overl0millionperday,a47 pe�rent inaeaseaver1IN16. In late spring,PSRC plans to release the Transportation 2040 Draft Environmental impact Statement(DEIS)for public review and comment.The DEIS will report the results of the technical and policy analyses and the potential impacts on both the natural and built enviionments. How to Get Involved •Visit psrcoig ro review the altemafives " Q indepthandmakerommentsonline. Smping � •StheduleaTranspartafion1040 Crheria presentation foryournext rommuniry AhernativesDevebpment � grouporcounrilmeeting,mllMarina Analysis DEIS � Kingat106d89-1878roarmngeit. Develop Final Plao � •Attend any oIPSRCs board or mmmitree ppp�� meetings—earhopenswithapublir Public Involvement and Environmental Analysis rommentpenod. . � � � - � � �� •� � � � ! � - • i • . � i • � s � s s - � i PSRC � � � The P1an Alternatives...........................................................................................compiere descriptioru ond m,aps ore online ot psrc.org ' Baseline Alternative(SEPA No-actionJ:Build Funded Profeds The Baseline is funded with"current law"traditional revenue sources— �, 4 �� gas tax,sales tax,and limited tolling.The Baseline al[ernafive would build ��;�� . stare highway projec[s funded under the Nickel gas tax and Tranzportation + �� " �j� Partnership Account(TPA) programs,plus Sound Transit s Phase II plan, � 'l' �'' � , �� approved by voters in Vovember 2008. ' ,.;��, . Alternotive 7:Make the Most of the Existing System T ' �` i \ I ` . j....�;� Thls al[ernative emphasizes PlficiPncy by investing more in programs to � �:�- i '7 - manage demand and in rechnology ro moniror roadways.This means � :` doing a betterjob of moving people and goods on the exizting sysrem and creating more travel choices to reduce demand during peak hours. � � BaselineAlrernarive Altemative 2:Invest in Capitallmprovements Alrernarive i ! This alternative most resembles the current plan,Deztination 2030. � , , Altemative 2 adds significant highway and ttansit capaaty,and has the � highest need to geneiate addi[ional revenue to supplement traditional r��") ' " � funding sources.Tolling (HOT lanes)will play dual roles:as a source of � , •evenue and a tool to manage congestion. "' '`~ �-1 ,. ' Alternative 3:Fund Expansion and ffficiency of the Core Network ��' `� ; � }p This alternative proposes a signihcant shift in the way our region will collect �, { �:_ I �:J�' ` and distribute transportation funds.This strategy would generate sufficient ��. �� - revenue from highway tolls for both efhC�.ency proyrams and expansion � -��- . � , ' orojects.Toll revenues would be focused on highway improvements. , � Alternativel Alternative 4:Improve and Manage the Entire Transportation Alternatiuei System This alternative mmbines traditional and new rolling revenues to I'� emphasize overall system management and coordination to accomplish �� several objectives manage congestion,supplement traditional funding , I .; y resources,finance syttem and demand management pmqrams and { •� . ti R orojects,invest in transit,and make arterial improvements. � � . -�}}}�� . ' Altemative 5:Provide Accessibility and Reduce Carbon Emissions �'.` �' Y' _ \ �,�. � � This al[ernative proposes a dramatic shift from dependence on fossil fuels � �"„ �� I i ,, and fuel-based revenues to a sysrem with enhanced travel choices(more �J��,iy,, , � � � transit bike and pedestrian facilities)and greatly reduced carbon dioxide I ',�, ,�� ?missions.Alternative 5 would replace traditional funding sources with tolls(or other user fees)on the entire roadway system induding Freeways Alternative4 and arterials. Alternative5 '.'r:��,-ii_n,-.a Community Outreoch PSRCinvitesthepublittogefinvolvedandstayinformedthroughouttheupdateproress. r-mailyowcomments............._.........._,_transportatian1040@psrcorg PSRCsmlfinetwithgroupsaroundfheregionsuthastheEastsideTransportation ,,;p,,,o.mniIPSRCsralf.............................MikeCummingtProgramManager � Asmciation,Snohomish C�unry Tomorrow Sreerin9 Committee,ond Regionol Bike-PeA 106-464-6D7•mrummings;apsrcorg Advisory Committee.Please mnmrt us if you are interested in a piesemm�on(or yaur munril,rhnmberormmmunirygioup.lnaddirion,mmmunitymembersmeenmuraged ��Yournamefothemoilinglisf..............MarinaKing•106-389-1878•mking(�psrcorg tokeepupfodafeandproviderommentsviaanyofthemethodslistedhera w,nrhaPSRCwebsi�e......................_........psrcorg/prajerts/trans1040/index.htm r' � � ' � � =i I ' ' '� I � � im:;� � ��; � '� ��`�} f � �I � �I �' 11 � � � „t�•` ,_��:; � ' F�='� . r� ■ ■ � M �� 1 ��h � �� I � t au 4�; � t t ��tS��„�; � �i 4 � " �� ' � �� ( � �"�� ':i..�-3'`��.< x {-��Hi�,�+ i Shelley Coler�an , � inance Di�rector Marc�h 30 , 2009 � � , ___ _ . J` �., z. _'- ,� > �` �'E� 'C+ f�' v� � . Clty of A � � � rr� � a� � c� et Ar� e;nd � ent # 1 Sa� m � a �y � �even �e ❑ Sales Tax Reve�nue red�uced $ 1 .6M � �xpe�n�se � ❑ 10 . 75 Gen�era�l Fu�nd� positions froze�n � ❑ Depa�rtrn�ent red��uction��s ❑ 2 I nte��rna�l S�e��rvi�ce F�u�nd� posit�ions frozen � ❑ Reduced �Ge�neral Fu�nd transfers to I�nte�rnal Services _ . � , , �s .�� ? - � � ; . iv": - { k . ' ., �"� � C�� :? Y �.' € '.;� . .I. l . . -�.', � ..�._�:_u........ ... ..._ ..... _. . Sa � eS 8c l� Se ��X � Month� 2004 2005 � 2006 2007 2008 2009 Jan $1 ,062,20�7 $1 ;123,157 $1,25'1 ,049 $1 ;329,790 $1 ;296,019 $1 ,055,557 Feb 1 ,257,200 1 ,416,048 1 ,580,398 1 ,592,011 1 ,651 ,260 1 ,101 ,110 �.: r v {r -�" .;a rt '�� ,�`+k"' 3i�2 ��i'�j�.� March �1,,029,514 d;�,� 982,6�9�� 1 ,137 551 1 305 813 1 248 698 , �82�43�'�;� , , , , , � � _ �«��. ��.�,,, R�i�.� s p �"'��' �980;153��; 1 ,002,340 1 ,213,439 1 ,255,339 1 ,251 ,583 A ril s�v;�`Ti:.f $' �..-e., May 1 ,234.,711 1 ,400,121� 1,333,250 1 ,551 ,330 1 ;412,254 , ; June 1,156,560 1 ,188,486 1,248,569 1 ,397,992 1 ,305,479 July 1.,168,594 1 ,166,508 1 ,299,554 1 ,455,828 1 ,304,867 August 1 ,375,283 1 ;405,770 1,454,095' 1 ,566,318 1 ,484,797 Sept 1 ,227,648 1 ,287,325 1„326,487 1 ,489,028 1 ,173,024 Oct 1 ,291 ,481 1 ;344,133 1 ,380,997 1 ,503,270 1 ,209,439 Nov 1 ,361 ,483 1 ,437,123 1,626,477 1 ,499,944 1 ,200,513 Dec 1 ,149,214 1 ,240,083 1 ,33.7,047 1 ,627,540 1 ,009,879 SST 596,463 521 ,424 $14,294,048 $14;953;763 $16,188,9�13 , $17,574,203 $16,144,276 $3,560,525 ' Incl(.Dec) 4:6% 826% 8.56% -11 .5% -27.57% ! Inc/(Dec) w/ Mitigation -8.14% -1i5.14% I �aY i�V t.i 'r '3" _. ... ' �� # � 4{i K �.� {a � F: ]n 3m..avmx � - i .... e � J i�.�'`b : . . „ Fn v _ ... . ........ .....i..m....... . . �. I I I I S � Ie'S �c ' ' ' 'S�e T�x � 20�9 ��t Adopted Budge# $16,685,000 � � Budget Amendment #1� (1 ,588,275) Subtotal 15,096,725 Adjustment Recommended (1 ,000�,000) Tota�l $14,096,725 � _ L k.._� (. e : ...� 2. :_ . . .. ' w� t b i ` _ r" '�" Y � ': .. : . '� � y, e�. ❑ . . . � �� _ � � � s.�L � JtT Z........m.a.w,..a _ ..w.. . _ __ . 5��I�es Ta�x C �e�d�� o� for A� n�ex�� oo � ��■ l��sed $ 17��/I a�s b�ases �for estirnate of $2 . 16VI �■� Rece�ive � �/z of 1 % of s��ales tax as credit ■ Based on firs�t quarter anal'ysis of sal��e�s tax need to revise . � Sales tax credit recornrnend reducing �o $ 1 . 61VI or �educing by $500 , 000 �.��.� �h r 3.`{2` b 4 . . . . °;. � ,� � v �. , :. f i?;,� �", � �'�`"�i . �'� ;% .:` ' � , ' �- ' ��LNYt4.utLUA::+... .. .� ....:: Y : ... _ .. . � � � i � don Reven � e�s � 2009 Rev�ised Difference Bu;dget Budget Es�t. Building Permits $950,000 $695,648 ($254,352) Plan Check Fees 425,000 309,952 (115,048) 'FAG Linear Cha�rges 200,000 133,369 I (66,631 ) � _. - �, .�._. � �_ _ _..._- --- ; ' _ _ ,.�-, k t = _ . _ - � S � r� � � ry �f �eve�n � es Saies & Use Tax ($1 ,000,000) Sa�les Tax Credit (500,000) Card Games (129,079) Subtotal $�1, 629, 079 Building Permi�ts (254,352) Plan Check Fees (115,048) FAC Linear Charges (66,631 ) Sub#otal $436, 031 Total $2,065, 110 � _, � � -- � � xtiF , ��—.- . t�. � , ■� �� - � , � ��,�. ti7 � a ._ �__ _ _ .�. Considesration�s/A�c�io �s �o� f�u �her �eductoo �s � � Eli�m�inate 2%o C'ity ma�tch o�n VE;BA � Rea�llocate Red�fl�ex net revenue to General Fund instead of Traffic Calm�ing� projects � Uti�lize Cumulafive Reserve for revenue s�tabil�ization � Red�uction in Force � Union Concessions � Other itern�s n.ot significa�nt on own b�ut as group couild be sign�ificant � . _