Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTrans 2014-06-23 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila Transportation Committee • Allan Ekberg, Chair • Dennis Robertson • Kate Kruller AGENDA Distribution: A. Ekberg D. Robertson K. Kruller D. Quinn Mayor Haggerton D. Cline L. Humphrey B. Giberson F. I riarte R. Tischmak G. Labanara P. Brodin S. Kerslake M. Hart Clerk File Copy 2 Extra Place pkt pdf on Z: \TC -UC Agendas e -mail cover to: A. Le, C. O'Flaherty, D. Almberg, B. Saxton, S. Norris, M. Hart, L. Humphrey MONDAY, JUNE 23, 2014 — 5:15 PM FOSTER CONFERENCE Room — 6300 BUILDING (formerly known as Conference Room #1) Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, July 14, 2014 The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities. Please contact the Public Works Department at 206 - 433 -0179 for assistance. Item Recommended Action Page ., 1. PRESENTATION(S) 2. BUSINESS AGENDA a) Sound Transit's Long Range Plan Update a) Information Only Pg. 1 3. SCATBd b) • SCATBd May 20, 2014 Meeting Summary b) Information Only Pg. 55 • SCATBd June 17, 2014 Meeting Agenda 4. MISCELLANEOUS c) Apprenticeship Procedures Update c) For Discussion Only 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS Future Agendas: • Automated Traffic Enforcement Next Scheduled Meeting: Monday, July 14, 2014 The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate individuals with disabilities. Please contact the Public Works Department at 206 - 433 -0179 for assistance. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: ISSUE Briefing on Sound Transit's Long Range Plan Update Process. BACKGROUND Sound Transit is currently in the process of updating its Long Range Plan (Plan). The Plan outlines the agency's vision for a high capacity transit (HCT) system serving urban areas in Snohomish, King, and Pierce Counties. The Plan was last updated in 2005 and served as the foundation for voter approval of Sound Transit 2 in November 2008. Sound Transit has indicated that it hopes to go to the voters in November 2016 to seek authorization for Sound Transit 3, which would further expand HCT in the region. Prior to going to a vote, Sound Transit would need to obtain authority from the State Legislature to increase its taxing authority. On June 13, 2014, Sound Transit issued a draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) regarding proposed changes to the Plan. A copy of the Executive Summary to the draft SEIS is attached. The Executive Summary outlines various proposed corridors that Sound Transit may consider providing HCT in the future. Prior to the release of the draft SEIS, the City provided a letter dated November 25, 2013 as part of the required scoping process. Staff is currently reviewing the draft SEIS document and comments are due on July 28, 2014. The Sound Transit Board will be considering updates to the Plan in the Fall of 2014, with final action scheduled in December. City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee Bob Giberson, Public Works Director Brandon Miles, Economic Development Planner June 20, 2014 Sound Transit's Long Range Plan Update DISCUSSION Access to HCT is vital to the City's businesses, residents, and property owners. Additionally, in order for the City's Urban Center and Manufacturing Industrial Center to remain competitive, they must have an expansive linkage to HCT connecting the City to the region. Overall, the Plan assists in achieving that goal. Staff intends on having further discussions with the City Council as Sound Transit's Long Range Plan Update moves forward. RECOMMENDATION Information Only. Sound Transit has scheduled a presentation to the City Council on July 14, 2014. Attachments: Sound Transit Long Range Plan Draft SEIS Executive Summary, with Appendix A City Comment letter to Sound Transit dated November 25, 2013. W: \PW Eng \OTHER \Bob Giberson \Sound Trans it \Info Memo Sound Transit Long Range Plan Update 06- 120 -14 FINAL.docx 1 r,- Sound Transit is updating its Regional Transit Long -Range Plan, which outlines the agency's vision for a high- capacity transit (HCT) system serving the urban areas of Snohomish, King, and Pierce Counties. The plan includes corridors for light rail, commuter rail, and regional express bus /bus rapid transit. The plan focuses on the functional elements of the system —how HCT and supporting services will continue to help meet the transportation needs created by future population and em- ployment growth in the region. Sound Transit is in the process of com- pleting the second phase of its investments, known as Sound Transit 2 (ST2), consistent with the current 2005 Long -Range Plan. An updated Long -Range Plan will look further ahead by addressing regional transit needs that remain after the ST2 system plan is fully implemented. As required by the Washington State Environmental Policy Act, this Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) supports Sound Transit's current planning and decision- making efforts for an updated Long -Range Plan and future transit system plan. This Draft SEIS presents a plan -level environmental review of two Long -Range Plan Update alternatives, the Current Plan Alternative (the No Action Alternative) and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative (the Action Alternative). Each alternative considers broad actions throughout the region — transit modes, corridors, types of sup- porting facilities, programs, and policies. Upon completion of the environmental review process, the Sound Transit Board will decide whether to revise the Long -Range Plan. 5 -1 2 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update EMIZIASTOMATNMItenMaiMninnffittlfirulAVAIMICISAMMEIMINIWZMIU History and Background of the Regional Transit Long -Range Plan In 1996, Sound Transit developed and adopted its first Regional Transit Long Range Vision, which later evolved into the agency's Long -Range Plan. At the same time Sound Transit adopted The Ten -Year Regional Transit System Plan, which became known as Sound Move. Sound Move was the first phase of investments for im- plementing the Long -Range Vision. The current Long - Range Plan was adopted in 2005 as an update to the original Long -Range Vision. The second phase of invest- ments, the ST2 System Plan, was subsequently adopted in 2008 and is in the process of being implemented. Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan is a fiscally uncon- strained plan that includes services and facilities to connect the region's growth centers with high- capacity transit. The regional transit system currently includes light rail, commuter rail, bus rapid transit (BRT), and re- gional express bus services and facilities. It also includes programs and policies that support these services. Sound Transit's services are integrated with local transit service, providing a "coordinated system of services" to make it easy to move around the region. The envisioned network of transit services described in the Long -Range o q e e €iV and u t n er n s he cen an e ? Plan is at a corridor -wide level; specific routes or align- ments are not defined. The Long -Range Plan has been implemented in phases through voter - approved funding programs, first through Sound Move and then ST2, which were both fiscally constrained. That is, they were limited by the funds projected to be available. Environmental Review Process This Draft SEIS is part of a phased environmental re- view process. It supplements and builds on the Regional Transit System Plan Final EIS of 1993 (JRPC 1993) and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the Regional Transit Long -Range Plan of 2005 (Sound Transit 2005), which were prepared to S -2 support Sound Transit's previous long -range planning efforts. This SEIS process precedes any future proj- ect -level environmental review for individual projects. They may be implemented under future funding pro- grams once ST2 is completed. This Draft SEIS evaluates the potential transportation and environmental effects of implementing the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative using a 2040 planning horizon. Corridors in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative could be selected in whole, or in part, by the Board when updat- ing the plan. Along with other information developed through the update process (e.g., the high - capacity transit corridor studies —see page 12), this SEIS will support the deci- sions of the Sound Transit Board to: • Ensure that the Long -Range Plan continues to meet Sound Transit's goals ® Make revisions to update the Long -Range Plan Purpose and Need Purpose The purpose of the Long -Range Plan Update is to define a regional HCT system that could effective- ly and sustainably serve the mobility needs of the central Puget Sound region through 2040 and beyond, providing an alternative to travel by automobile and the congested freeway network. The Long -Range Plan Update will consider the projected regional popula- tion, employment, and transportation growth. This will be done in coordination with, and with the support of, the growth management strategies established in regional land use, transportation, and economic devel- opment plans. Need An update to Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan is need- ed to achieve the following: • Make it consistent with updated local and regional plans Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan is a part of the larger regional transportation picture and feeds into Transportation 2040, the Puget Sound Region's Transportation Plan. Since the 2005 Long -Range Plan was adopted, Transportation 2040, Vision 2040, and other local plans have been updated by the Puget Sound Regional Council, the region's federally June 2014 3 recognized metropolitan planning organization. County and city comprehensive plans throughout the region reinforce the need for HCT investments to support new and continued population and em- ployment growth, as well as to provide for vibrant urban communities that offer alternatives to travel via the automobile. Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan Update will help support these plans. • Incorporate current population and employment forecasts From a base of more than 2.8 million today, the region's population is expected to grow by over 30 percent to more than 3.7 million in 2040. During the same period, employment is expected to grow even faster, from approximately 1.5 million jobs to over 2.5 million, an increase of 62 percent. The projected increases in population and jobs in the Plan area will result in more congestion. The Long - Range Plan update will address appropriate HCT service to support the anticipated growth. • Identify potential modifications to the plan that could serve as a basis for the next phase of HCT improvements to continue to address long -term mobility needs It has been almost 10 years since the Long -Range Plan was last updated. During that time, several Sound Transit projects have been in varying stages of planning, design, and construction. Sound Tran- sit's system ridership has grown almost 155 percent and is expected to continue to increase. An update to the Long -Range Plan may identify potential new or modified HCT corridors and services. It may also clarify modal choices and services for HCT corridors in the current plan. Goals The goals of the current Long -Range Plan were re- fined for the Long -Range Plan Update and include the following: • Provide a public high- capacity transportation sys- tem that helps ensure long -term mobility, connec- tivity, and convenience for residents of the central Puget Sound region for generations to come • Strengthen communities' use of the regional tran- sit network • Create a financially feasible system • Improve the economic vitality of the region • Preserve and promote a healthy and sustainable environment Alternatives Considered in the SEIS Two alternatives have been developed for evalua- tion in this Draft SEIS: the Current Plan Alternative (the No Action Alternative) and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative (the Action Alternative). These alternatives include a wide range of high- capacity corridors and modes for purposes of updating the fis- cally unconstrained Long -Range Plan. S -3 4 Regional Transit Long-Range Plan Update WENHOEIMEMMMEAOMMEEMMBEEMEMMOMME wmpummummucuammommEmammummummeammEmmummomomummommm amm mmeammummmmwmcommmommonummomymmm mmmom MAP KEY Current Plan Alternative Light Rail Service 101111111H1 High-Capacity Transit 11 1 Future Light Rail Service 111111 Potential Rail Extensions Commuter Rail Service 000 Bus Rapid Transit (BR1) Regional Express Bus Service Local Bus Service Sound Transit District Boundary 11 Edmon Muki Ly Everett reek Snohomish County Woodinville iGng Shot' Bal Redmond Seatt Wes' Seaitie Ti,erleke evue ;Sammamish Burie Sea Des Moines ). Fedefal Way Taco 'a, Issaquah Renton Kent Uqiversity Place Lakewood DuPon Thurston County 14 Pierce County Frederickson Orting Auburn Sumner 1. 1.., Bonney La kir" ■tng couno, 6.erre 0 N ■=i Miles 0 4 8 Figure 5-1 Current Plan Alternative 5,4 Source: Sound Transit 2014 June 2014 5 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Development of alternatives Three primary HCT transit technologies and support- ing services were studied in this Draft SEIS —light rail, commuter rail, and regional express bus /BRT. In addi- tion, the Draft SEIS also looked at streetcar services. Each of these modes is further defined in Chapter 2 of the Draft SEIS. Sound Transit conducted a scoping process for the Long -Range Plan Update SEIS in fall 2013. The more than 5,000 comments received helped Sound Transit determine which alternatives and environmental issues would be studied in the Draft SEIS. The Scoping Summary Report for the 2014 Long -Range Plan Update presents more detailed information about the com- ments received. Many suggestions made during scoping were related to corridors and specific services or facilities within HCT corridors already in the Current Plan Alternative. These corridors and "representative projects" (see page S -8) were presumed to be developable under the Current Plan Alternative. Suggestions for new transit corri- dors were put through a screening process in order to develop the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. The screening criteria used during this process were based on the purpose and need for the Long -Range Plan Update and the goals and objectives described in Chapter 1 of the Draft SEIS. Current Plan Alternative (No Action Alternative) The No Action Alternative, referred to in the Draft SEIS as the Current Plan Alternative, consists of the current 2005 Long -Range Plan plus the Sound Transit Board actions taken as part of the development and imple- mentation of the ST2 program. Key Board decisions that affected corridors in the Long -Range Plan are listed in Chapter 2 of the Draft SEIS. Figure S -1 shows the general corridors that would be served as part of the Current Plan Alternative. For purposes of analyzing potential impacts on the trans- portation system and on transit ridership, all of the corridors shown in Figure S -1 were included as part of the Current Plan Alternative. When analyzing potential environmental impacts for this alternative, the Draft SEIS focuses primarily (but not exclusively) on those corridor sections that do not yet have service in opera- tion, are not yet under construction, or have otherwise not begun project -level environmental reviews. Those corridors are shown in Figure 2. oet On Figure S -2, the light rail, commuter rail, and bus corridors in operation, under construction, or in project -level environmental review are screened back because they have already been, or are currently, subject to project -level environmental review. Light rail Some corridors previously designated in the 1996 and 2005 Long -Range Plans as potential rail extensions were subsequently funded through Sound Move and ST2. Light rail elements of the Current Plan Alternative that were funded through Sound Move and ST2 and are in operation, under construction, or in project -level envi- ronmental review include the following: • Central Link from Sea -Tac Airport to Downtown Seattle • S. 200th Link Extension from Sea -Tac Airport south to S. 200th Street • University Link Extension from Downtown Seattle to the University of Washington • Northgate Link Extension from Husky Stadium to Northgate • Lynnwood Link Extension from Northgate to Lynnwood • East Link light rail from Seattle to Downtown Redmond • Federal Way Link Extension from South 200th Street to the Federal Way Transit Center • Tacoma Link light rail from Tacoma Station to Downtown Tacoma and an extension to the west • Operations and maintenance facilities in Seattle and Tacoma and a satellite facility in either Lynnwood or Bellevue Some of the remaining corridors in the Current Plan Alternative were identified as "Potential Rail Extensions" in the 2005 Long -Range Plan but have not yet been included in a system plan for project develop- ment or construction. Therefore, decisions on mode in those corridors have not yet been made but could be light rail. For purposes of analyzing potential impacts associated with the Current Plan Alternative, corridors A through H reflect potential rail extensions that were analyzed as light rail corridors (see the Current Plan Alternative list on page S -6 and Figure S -2). Some of these corridors were also evaluated for commuter rail and /or BRT (see the "Commuter Rail" and "Regional Express Bus/BRT" sections below). Light rail corridors would have similar service charac- teristics as the Link light rail system implemented as S -5 6 part of Sound Move and ST2 and would operate primar- ily on exclusive rights -of -way or on surface streets with protected rights -of -way. Commuter rail Sound Transit currently operates Sounder commuter rail service from Everett to Lakewood. Some of the corridors in the Current Plan Alternative identified as "Potential Rail Extensions" in the 2005 Long -Range Plan have not yet been included in a system plan for construction (or the project development phase). These corridors, I and J, are shown in Figure S -2 and the Current Plan Alternative list on this page. Since they could be implemented as commuter rail, they were evaluated as such for purposes of analyzing potential impacts associated with the Current Plan Alternative. Regional express bus /bus rapid transit Numerous corridors are identified for regional express bus, BRT, or —in most cases —both under the Current Plan Alternative. Sound Transit currently operates 26 regional express bus (ST Express) routes, many of which operate in high - occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. For purposes of analyzing potential environmental impacts for the Current Plan Alternative, this Draft SETS focuses on the regional express bus and BRT cor- ridors not yet implemented and includes corridors M through Y. For BRT corridors M through 5, ST Express bus service currently operates in all of these corridors except corri- dor P, which is the Eastside Rail Corridor east of Seattle. Each of these corridors is also shown as a BRT corridor in the 2005 Long -Range Plan and therefore could also be considered for higher performing BRT operating within exclusive rights -of -way where feasible. Corridors T through Y of the Current Plan Alternative are identified exclusively for regional express bus service (no BRT) in the 2005 Long -Range Plan but are not yet in service. High - capacity transit The Current Plan Alternative includes two corridors identified in the 2005 Long -Range Plan as "HCT" without specifying a particular mode. These corri- dors could be implemented as light rail or as BRT. For purposes of analyzing potential impacts associated with the Current Plan Alternative, this Draft SEIS evaluates Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update Cutr n MMan A en htie LIGHT RAIL Potential light rail corridors in the Current Plan Alternative. Potential rail extensions, assumed light rail. A Tacoma to Federal Way B Burien to Renton C Bellevue to Issaquah along;) -90' D Renton to Lynnwood along 1 -405 E Renton to Woodinville along Eastside Corridor Downtown Seattle to Ballard' Ballard to University of Washington H Lynnwood to Everett COMMUTER RAIL Potential commuter rail corridor in the Current Plan Alternative. Potential rail extension, assumed commuter rail. 1 DuPont to Lakewood Renton to Woodinville Corridor REGIONAL EXPRESS TRANSIT Bus rapid transit (BRT) M Federal Way to DuPont along 1 -5 N Renton to Puyallup along SR 167 O Bellevue to Issaquah along 1 -90 P Renton to Woodinville along Eastside Corridor Renton to Lynnwood along 1-405 Seattle to Everett along SR 99 Lynnwood to Everett along 1 -5 along Eastside Rail Regional express bus T Puyallup to DuPont via Cross U Puyallup to Lakewood ✓ Puyallup to Tacoma W SeaTac to West Seattle X Redmond to Kirkland Y North Bothell to Mill Creek Base Highway HCT (mode not specified) K University of Washington SR 520' Northgate to Bo o Mukilteo Po o Redmond via SR 52.2 dors could be nstructed in tunnel S -6 June 2014 7 Draft Supplemental Environmental impact Statement a mdid1,1. nu77M1l 7108M YANFU'kYdGNl4 nwlr » �Ypn rA;," Ilul YlmH OMIriZlFalmuIMIIIIM NYMIIdIYAPdWMI ;GB3,10iPllSblBgL',bIXNXIY. innmmmmm Mwiwuum1 wwwiwmmw MAP KEY Projects Approved in Sound Move/ ST2 System Plans (In operation/In Design or In Construction/In Project Development) Ught Rail Service Future Ught Rail Service Commuter Rail Service Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Regional Express Bus Service Local Bus Service Sound Transit District Boundary Corridors in 2005 LRP (Not Yet Included in a System Plan) 11111 Potential Rail Extensions III INU�iu Hi gh-Capadty Transit mom Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) assont Regional Express Bus (not in service) Edmonds Mukil �P Everett reek inw Sho Ball _ Snohomish County Woodinville King County - - -- Seattle` West Seattle Redmond lake =`f J JlilBe�Jvue Mercer • Sammamish slnd Issaquah Buriepi Des Moines yll F,ede a: Way I Tacdm. 1 University ;'Place Lakewood Kent yj Auburn 11� i Sumner Bonney Lake'`-• 0 \..•Z onry P'e ce X01 • ,� uoryi r• sintAss ' ;DuPont 'N1 Thurston County 1 Pierce County Frederickson Orting O N Miles 0 4 8 Source: Sound Transit 2014 Figure 5 -2 Current Plan Alternative -- corridors analyzed in this Draft SETS mmuwwwun 8 these two HCT corridors shown on the Current Plan Alternative list on page S -6 and Figure S -2, as both light rail and BRT. Similar to the current Sound Transit system operating today, regional express bus /BRT service could be im- plemented as an interim HCT mode for all or portions of potential light rail corridors until funding becomes available. Representative projects, programs, and policies Stations, park and rides, operations and maintenance facilities, access improvements, and other supporting transit facilities may be implemented along any of the Current Plan Alternative corridors, whether or not they have been implemented as part of Sound Move or ST2. This includes new track infill stations or other infrastructure that may be needed along routes already in service. The 2005 SEIS referred to these as "repre- sentative projects" since they represent the types of projects that could be built along any existing or future corridor. Building from the list in the 2005 Long -Range Plan SEIS, an updated list of representative projects for the Current Plan Alternative can be found in Appendix A of the Draft SEIS. These types of projects and their potential environmental impacts are broadly discussed in the Draft SEIS. The types of representative projects are as follows, listed below by mode: • Light rail— Service expansion, transit stations and park- and -and ride facilities, pedestrian and bicycle access and safety, and operations and maintenance facilities • Commuter rail— Service expansion, new track, transit stations and park- and -ride facilities, pedes- trian and bicycle access and safety, and operations and maintenance facilities • Regional express bus /bus rapid transit — Service expansion or revised bus routes, transit stations and park- and -and ride facilities, HOV direct access, transit priority improvements, rider amenities, grade or barrier separation, and operations and maintenance facilities The following programs and policies have been adopt- ed by the Sound Transit Board and would continue to remain in effect as part of the Current Plan Alternative: • Transit- Oriented Development Policy (December 2012) • Sustainability Initiative (June 2007) • System Access Policy (March 2013) • Updated Bicycle Policy (April 2009) • Environmental Policy (April 2004) Potential Plan Modifications Alternative (Action Alternative) The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative assumes implementation of all the elements of the Current Plan and adds HCT corridors and services that are potential modifications to the Current Plan. These corridors, shown in Figures S -3 and S -4, represent a menu of op- tions that the Sound Transit Board could choose from when updating the Long -Range Plan. S -8 June 2014 9 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Light rail New light rail corridors considered under the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would have the same characteristics as light rail corridors under the Current Plan Alternative. Commuter rail The additional commuter rail segments would have similar physical and operating characteristics to the existing Sounder line. There are existing rail lines along Corridors 16 and 18, while there are none along Corridor 17. tp n e LI ^.. is - ` 1 Downtown Seattle to Magnolia /Ballard to Shoreline Community College 2 Downtown Seattle to West Seattle /Burien 3 Ballard to Everett Station via Aurora Village, Lynnwood 4 Everett to North Everett 5 Lakewood to Spanaway to Frederickson to So Hill to Puyallup 6 DuPont to Downtown Tacoma via Lakewood, Steilacoom, and Ruston 7 Puyallup /Sumner to Renton via SR 167 8 Downtown Seattle along Madison Street or to Madrona 9 Tukwila to SODO via Duwamish industrial area 0 North Kirkland or University of Washington Bothell to Northgate via SR 522 1 Ballard to Bothell via Northgate 2 Mill Creek, connecting to Eastside Rail Corridor 3 Tacoma to Ruston Ferry Terminal 4 Tacoma to Parkland via SR 7 5 Lynnwood to Everett, serving Southwest Ever Industrial Center (Paine Field and Boeing) OMMUTER RAIL 6 Puyallup /Sumner to Orting 7 Lakewood to Parkland 8 Tacoma to Frederickson oee Regional express bus /bus rapid transit The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative includes many new regional express and /or BRT corridors. High - capacity transit corridors Some suggestions for new HCT corridors or service did not specify a mode and are numbered as corridors 19, 20, and 21 on Figure S -3. Similar to HCT corridors in the Current Plan Alternative, these new HCT corridors were evaluated as both BRT and light rail corridors. Regional express bus 24 Issaquah to Overlake via Sam and Redmond 25 Renton to Downtown Seattle 26 UW Bothell to Sammamish via Redmond 27 Titlow Beach to Downtown Tacoma 28 Renton (Fairwood) to Eastgate via Factori 29 145`h Street from 1 -5 to SR 522 30 North Kirkland to Downtown Seattle 31 Woodinville to Bellevue 32 Woodinville to Everett 33 Connection to Joint Base Lewis -McCh Regional express bus /BRT (mode not specifie 34 Tacoma to Bellevue 35 Kent to Sea -Tac Airport 36 Puyallup to Rainier Valley HCT (mode not specified) 19 Tukwila Sounder Station to Downtown eatt e via Sea-Tac Airport, Burien, and West Seattle 20 Downtown Seattle to Edmonds via Ballard, Shoreline Community College West Seattle to Ballard via Central District e REGIONAL EXPRESS BUS /BUS RAPID TRANSIT Bus rapid transit (BRT) 22 Puyallup vicinity, notably along Meridian Avenue 23 Madison Street in Seattle Streetcar corridors were identified in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, typically as options to connect areas to regional transit hubs. A potential new tunnel under Downtown Seattle could also or alternatively support a Ballard -to- Seattle light rail line, which is included in the Current Plan S -9 10 Regional Transit Long-Range Plan Update IIINEIWAMIMMIIIIMAMIYIMINIMMIVVIAIMIVIIM14184)1110,1MMIIIISIMIXIDIXIMNIVIMIMIXIMAIMIMMIXIIMMINIIIXIMMIMITOMMIX1)14,1=11,00ERIMISIMIRMIXIMIMIXIVMMIMMAAMMIlall,IrOMIXIIMMIUM111/IMIEIMMUMORMININIMMINIIMMIYHMOINIMINM/MINMEMIE MIIMPPYM MAP KEY Potential Plan Modifications Alternative Light Rail mom High-Capacity Transit mom Commuter Rail Current Plan Alternative Light Rail Service High-Capadty Transit Future Light Rail Service II Potential Rail Extensions Commuter Rail Service Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Regional Express Bus Service Local Bus Service Sound Transit District Boundary Mukilt Pi Everett /411 Edmond Snohomish County Woodinville King County Shor Ball. Sea w Seatt Redmond Agir 0)Mrlake,, elleVue I \Samman4sh? Burie aT Des Moines Way Rentori Kent , Autibm uPont Thurston Coun Pierce County Frederickson Orting Sumner • '47.9 Bonny Lake ouno, 'ore 0 N imosorom= Miles 0 4 8 Source: Sound Transit 2014 Figure 5-3 Potential Plan Modifications Alternative—light rail, commuter rail, and high capacity transit S-10 June 2014 11 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement V4,100011001116010,1147MSMIIIIMMIMIIMIUM kffAIIIMIIIMAIMINIIMEINNIIMINIII11132101171.1111MUNINXIMM VP N 0 MAP KEY Potential Plan Modifications • Alternative aAn'''Z'A Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) annall• Regional Express Bus M1E1111110 Regional Express Bus/BRT Current Plan Alternative MEM Light Rail Service 11.1r6 )N High-Capadty Transit M ri 11 Future Light Rail Service 11111f 1 Potential Rail Extensions Commuter Rail Service Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Regional Express Bus Service Local Bus Service Sound Transit District Boundary Edmond Sea "VAst Seattle Mukilt Everett ek Shor rd,'„ Snohomish County - King County oodinvilie Redmond amish Burie Des Moines 111 r 11 ,11.1 AID 1`"" VVay 1"1 Wiversity Place e'In'tood ,r1rOuPorit Thurston County Kent,„,, Auburn saquan Sumner \ Bonney Lake 8 .1:11Y °'o0, kr• Pierce County Frederickson Orting 0 N ■=1 Miles 0 4 8 Source: Sound Transit 2014 Figure S-4 Potential Man Modifications Alternative—regional express bus and bus rapid transit 12 W,„..005 0447fflA 10620 ;79.100.000 will4rotogjas �0 -; Streetcar Streetcar services were identified in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, typically as options to con- nect areas to regional transit hubs. Representative projects, programs, and policies The types of representative projects or support facilities described by mode for the Current Plan Alternative could similarly be implemented along any of the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative corridors. A list of representative projects for the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative can be found in Appendix A of the Draft SEIS. The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative could in- clude new programs and policies or it could build upon existing programs and policies. For example, it could include new initiatives related to: • System access • Demand management • Research and technology Key Transportation Impacts Impacts of plan alternatives on total transit ridership This section describes the impacts on total transit rid- ership of two scenarios: 1) the Current Plan Alternative as compared to the Sound Transit system implemented through completion of 5T2, and 2) the Potential Plan High- capacity transit corridor studies ST2 directed Sound Transit to conduct the follow- ing high- capacity transit corridor studies: • Ballard to Downtown Seattle HCT Corridor Study • Central to East HCT Corridor Study - Ballard to University District — Redmond to Kirkland to University District — Kirkland -to Bellevue to Issaquah — I -405 BRT — Eastside Rail Corridor • Federal Way to Tacoma HCT Corridor Study • Lynnwood to Everett HCT Corridor Study • South King County HCT Corridor Study — Downtown Seattle to West Seattle to Burien — Renton to Tukwila, SeaTac, and on to Burien All of the corridors listed above are also evaluat- ed in the Draft SEIS as part of the Current Plan Alternative (except Downtown Seattle to West Seattle, which is evaluated as part of the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative). However, the HCT corridor studies and the Long -Range Plan Update SEIS are evaluating potential transit improvements in these corridors at a different scale. The HCT corridor studies are evaluating options within a more localized area and in greater detail, while the Draft SEIS generally identifies plan -level alter- natives and evaluates their impacts at a broader regional level. To the extent possible, the Draft SETS incorporates information available from these HCT corridor studies. S-121 June 2014 13 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Modifications Alternative compared to the Current Plan Alternative. The description of impacts focuses on how corridors included in the alternatives affect transit ridership at selected screenlines shown on Figure S -5. Current Plan Alternative When compared to completion of ST2, the corridors included in the Current Plan Alternative would expand HCT service to communities throughout the Plan area (Sound Transit's service area). The changes in ridership resulting from the Current Plan Alternative when compared to completion of ST2 reflect the relative effectiveness of Plan corridors in attracting riders. One major change under the Current Plan Alternative is reduced transit travel times as compared to ST2. These changes in transit travel times result from exclusive right -of -way for transit as compared to mixed opera- tions in ST2. The reduced travel times could also result from more direct transit connections under the Current Plan Alternative as compared to connections in ST2. Examples of reduced transit travel times include: • Tukwila to Bellevue central business district (CBD) • SeaTac to Tacoma CBD • Ballard to Everett CBD • Kirkland to Kent CBD • Paine Field to Seattle CBD The reduced transit travel times would result in transit ridership increases. The extent of ridership changes in the year 2040 from new corridors would vary substan- tially, ranging from approximately 15,000 additional transit riders per day to less than 3,000 additional tran- sit riders per day at selected screenlines. The effectiveness of a corridor in terms of increasing ridership could be particularly high if it has one or more of the following characteristics: • It is resulting in a major increase in daily transit rid- ership (5,000 or greater) at one or more screenlines • It is resulting in transit ridership increases at more than one screenline • It is the only corridor affecting ridership changes at a screenline; at most screenlines, multiple corridors are affecting transit ridership changes The following information summarizes the relative effectiveness of the corridors in the Current Plan o Alternative in influencing transit ridership changes. The corridors, shown on Figure S -2, are in order of daily transit ridership increases. Corridor A —Light rail between Tacoma and Federal Way: Corridor A would contribute to a major increase in daily transit ridership (15,000) at King County/ Pierce County Line West (screenline 6). Corridor A also would increase ridership (5,000) at North of Spokane Street (screenline 2), as riders continue from Tacoma to Seattle. Corridor B —Light rail between Burien and Renton: On its own, this corridor would result in a major in- crease in daily transit ridership (10,000) at West of SR 167 /Rainier Avenue (screenline 14). creep ines represent a met o. to measure and show changes in ridershi for multiple routes within a corridor.Th screenlines discussed in this Executive Summary are intended to capture the potential effects on transit volumes of HCT elements included in the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. Corridor F —Light rail between Downtown Seattle and Ballard: Corridor F would contribute to the major increase in daily transit ridership of 10,000 at Ship Canal (screenline 1). Corridor G —Light rail between Ballard and University of Washington: Corridor G would result in a major increase (15,000) in daily transit ridership at Wallingford (screenline 20). Corridor H —Light rail transit extension from Lynnwood Transit Center to Everett: Corridor H would contribute to a major increase in transit rider- ship (10,000) at the Ship Canal (screenline 1). Corridor H would also contribute to a major transit ridership increase (10,000) at the King County /Snohomish County Line West (screenline 6), as well as a ridership increase (5,000) at North of SR 526 South of Everett (screenline 5). IS -13 14 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update SELECTED SCREENLINES 1. Ship Canal 2. North of Spokane St 3. West Seattle Bridge 4. King /Snohomish Line -East 5. North of SR 526 6. King /Snohomish Line -Wes 7. SR 522 8. Crosslake —SR 520 9. West of 148th 10. North of Totem Lake 11. East of Lake Sammamish 12. North of Renton 13. North ofSR518 14. West of SR 167 /Rainier Ave 15. South of Renton 16. King /Pierce Line —West 17. King /Pierce Line —East 18. North of S 72nd St 19. East of Canyon Rd E 20. Wallingford 21. North of Downtown Bellevue Mill Creek Edmonds - "Lynnwood Snohomish County King County Northgate IGrkland allard�. Redmond Overtake Mercer tutsland Burien Des Moines Federal Way Tacoma University Place Lakewood Sumner \ Bonney Cake ,7r" �i .P•; C oust, erce Orting sonommu=== Miles 4 8 Thurston. County 1 erce County Figure 5 -5 Selected Screenlines S -14 June 2014 15 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Corridor D —Light rail from Renton to Lynnwood along I -405: Corridor D would contribute to transit ridership increases (5,000) at King County/Snohomish County Line East (screenline 4). In addition, corridor D would contribute to transit ridership increases (5,000) at North of Totem Lake (screenline 10) and North of Renton (screenline 12). The remaining transit corridors in the Current Plan Alternative would result in relatively low transit rider- ship increases at the selected screenlines. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative When compared to the Current Plan Alternative, the elements included in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would result in further expansion of HCT service throughout the Plan area. It should be noted that the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative does not represent an integrated HCT system but is instead a menu of potential additions to the Current Plan Alternative. Accordingly, there are corridors that may duplicate other corridors in serving the same trav- el market. One major change under the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative is reduced transit travel times to many locations as compared to the Current Plan Alternative. In some cases, operating characteristics for the corridors would involve exclusive right -of -way for transit as compared to mixed operations in the Current Plan Alternative. In other cases, the reduced transit travel time would result from more direct connections under the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative as compared to transit service connections in the Current Plan Alternative. Examples of reduced transit travel times include: • West Seattle to Seattle CBD • Bellevue CBD to Kent CBD • Paine Field to Everett CBD • U- District to Kent CBD • Seattle CBD to Tacoma CBD These reduced transit travel times would result in transit ridership increases. The extent of ridership changes in the year 2040 from new corridors would vary substantially, ranging from approximately 20,000 addi- tional transit riders per day to less than 3,000 additional transit riders per day at selected screenlines. oee The following information summarizes the rela- tive effectiveness of corridors in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative in increasing transit rider- ship. These corridors are shown on Figures S -3 and S -4. As is the case with corridors in the Current Plan Alternative, the effectiveness of any corridor in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would be particularly high if it has one or more of the following characteristics: • It is resulting in a major increase in daily transit rid- ership (5,000 or greater) at one or more screenlines • It is resulting in transit ridership increases at more than one screenline • It is the only corridor affecting ridership changes at a screenline; at most screenlines, multiple corridors are affecting transit ridership changes Corridor 2 —Light rail between Downtown Seattle, West Seattle, and Burien: This corridor is affecting transit ridership at four locations, North of Spokane Street (screenline 2), West Seattle Bridge (screenline 3), North of SR 518 (screenline 13), and West of SR 167/ Rainier Avenue (screenline 14). The extent of rider- ship changes is major — between 10,000 and 20,000 per location. At three locations, other corridors contribute to the ridership increases. However, at West of SR 167/ Rainier Avenue (screenline 14), corridor 2 would be the only one contributing to the ridership increases. Corridor 19 —HCT line from Tukwila Sounder Station to Sea -Tac Airport to Burien to Downtown Seattle via West Seattle: This corridor is resulting in major transit ridership increases (20,000) at North of Spokane Street (screenline 2) and West Seattle Bridge (screenline 3). Corridor 19 is also contributing to rider- ship increases (10,000) North of SR 518 (screenline 13). Corridor 7 —Light rail from Puyallup /Sumner to Renton via SR 167: This corridor contributes to rid- ership increases at North of SR 518 (screenline 13). Corridor 7 is also resulting in transit ridership increases at two other locations: South of Renton (screenline 15) and King County/Pierce County Line East (screenline 17). At all locations, the added daily transit ridership is 10,000 at each screenline. Corridor 10 —Light rail from North Kirkland to UW Bothell to Northgate via SR 522: This corridor is increasing transit ridership at SR 522 (screenline 7) and at North of Totem Lake (screenline 10). Daily transit IS -15 16 ridership increases at each screenline would be approx- imately 5,000. Corridor 11 —Light rail from Ballard to Bothell via Northgate: This corridor is contributing to tran- sit ridership increases at two locations, Ship Canal (screenline 1) and SR 522 (screenline 7). Daily transit ridership increases at each screenline would be approx- imately 5,000. Corridor 20 —HCT line from Downtown Seattle to Edmonds via Ballard and Shoreline Community College. This corridor is contributing to transit rider- ship increases (5,000) at the Ship Canal (screenline 1). Several corridors would be affecting one location. These are corridors: • 1 —Light rail north /south – Downtown Seattle to Magnolia /Ballard to Shoreline Community College • 5 —Light rail from Lakewood to Spanaway to Frederickson to South Hill to Puyallup • 6 —Light rail from DuPont to Downtown Tacoma via Lakewood, Steilacoom, and Ruston • 9 —Light rail from Tukwila to SODO via Duwamish industrial area • 12 —Light rail to Mill Creek, connecting to Eastside Rail Corridor The remaining transit corridors in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would result in relatively low transit ridership increases at the selected screenlines. Impacts of plan alternatives on the regional transportation system Implementation of the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would impact physical components of the multimodal transportation system, including public transit, operations of free- ways and local streets, parking, non - motorized modes (pedestrian and bicycle facilities), safety, and freight. The items included in this section address impacts relat- ed to both operations and construction. This assessment of potential impacts is a high -level overview of what could occur. No specific alignments have been selected for any transit mode, and there is no determination as to corridor profile (whether any particular element would be underground, at grade, or elevated). ""' x„_ a ?xxx- ^xrgi:rY..Faw::ai.:'...v S -16I Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement ooe Local bus service New rail service and regional express bus /BRT could replace some transit services provided by local agencies, potentially freeing service hours for the local transit provider to use elsewhere. Demand could increase for local bus service connecting to new light rail and commuter rail stations and regional express /BRT services. Buses that use streets or freeways undergoing construction of new transit facilities could temporarily travel more slowly or be detoured to adjacent streets, which could increase walking or bicycling travel times to access the bus. Highways and roads Consistent with Transportation 2040, the assumption is that all limited access roadways will be tolled or man- aged by 2040. However, if lanes are not managed to allow 45 mile per hour speeds 90 percent of the time on limited- access roadways, then speeds for buses on these roadways could be much lower in some cases. Both alternatives include new rail and bus corridors that, depending on the alignment and design, could impact local streets and freeways. These impacts could include use of lane capacity for HCT guideways and stations, at -grade crossings for rail or BRT, and increased conges- tion around stations and park and rides. Construction of HCT could occur on or adjacent to the freeway system, arterials, or local streets. This construction could close road and freeway lanes for short or long durations, which could reduce lane capacity, lower speeds and increase congestion, and require detours diverting traffic from the freeway system, arterials, and local streets to alterna- tive routes. Parking With expanded rail or BRT service, demand for park- ing at stations could increase, which could spill over into surrounding neighborhoods. Decreased on- street parking in some corridors could occur to accommodate new guideways and stations. Loss of parking on- street and at park- and -ride facilities could be expected during guideway and station construction and where new or expanded park- and -ride facilities occur. Safety Rail and BRT facilities could create safety impacts for at -grade crossings or where operating in mixed traffic. Projects include safety features and often upgrades for unprotected pedestrian crossings on commuter rail lines. With new rail and bus service, there would be increased vehicular, walk, and bike activity in station areas potentially impacting the safety of roadway and non - motorized systems. Non - motorized systems — pedestrian and bicycle facilities Both the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative could include potential pedestrian and bicycle facilities that improve access to transit facilities. With expanded transit operations under each alternative, there could be potential impacts on pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Construction could temporarily close or restrict pedes- trian and bicycle facilities such as sidewalks, bike lanes, and trails. Construction also would temporarily result in other localized impacts, such as increased conges- tion, restricted access to facilities, and a lower quality pedestrian and bicycle environment. Freight movement A reduction in vehicle miles traveled from both alterna- tives would benefit freight movements on highways. In some cases, new guideways and stations could reduce access to driveways used to access businesses. In addi- tion, rail development could displace on- street loading capacity for trucks delivering goods. Construction of transit facilities could temporarily re- strict freight movement and access to businesses. New commuter rail service could require that some existing freight rail lines be upgraded or improved, which would result in construction activity in the railroad right -of- way or adjacent areas. Key Environmental Impacts The Draft SEIS describes the affected environment and potential impacts and mitigation for the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. The impact analysis is at a level of detail consistent with the broad, plan -level issues being ad- dressed in the Long -Range Plan Update. For the Current Plan Alternative, the environmental impact analysis focuses on corridors A through Y, as shown in Figure S -2. A qualitative summary of poten- tial environmental impacts and benefits is depicted in Table S -1 (light rail and commuter rail corridors) and Table S -2 (regional express bus /BRT corridors). For the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, corridors 1 through 36, as shown on Figures S -3 and S -4, refer to 5 -17 18 Table S -4 (light rail and commuter rail corridors) and Table S -5 (regional express bus /BRT corridors). The ratings used in these summary tables reflect a relative comparison between corridors based on the analysis in the Draft SEIS. Overall, increasing HCT under either the Current Plan Alternative or the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative is generally expected to decrease energy consumption and reduce greenhouse gas and other air emissions in the region as more people choose to use transit instead of travel in single- occupancy vehicles. In addition, an expansion of regional high - capacity transit is consistent with state and regional growth manage- ment goals and is consistent with the vast majority Overall increasing r ans o 5 generally a t decrease e erg consumption c greenhouse g i sions inter o fewer people ve 1 single-occupancy vehicles. k . _ of local plans in the region. Other key environmental effects include potential noise and /or vibration impacts to surrounding land uses, impacts to wetlands and streams, adverse effects to historic properties, and the use of parks and recreational facilities. The extent to which impacts could occur varies depend- ing on the concentration of resources within a corridor and the transit mode being evaluated. In general, imple- menting any of the transit modes within existing road- way or railroad rights -of -way would likely have the least amount of environmental impacts. If additional lanes were to be constructed for exclusive BRT lanes or Tight rail guideways, the potential for impacts to surrounding resources could increase. Light rail, BRT, or commuter rail on new alignments have the highest likelihood of impacts to surrounding land uses or resources; however, such impacts would be avoided and minimized to the extent possible during future project -level planning and environmental reviews. Earth • Risks are related to geologic hazards that already exist, including steep slopes that are more prone Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update to erosion or landslides, soft soils, and seismic and liquefaction hazards. • Depending on location, all modes would have com- parable susceptibility to geologic hazards. • Corridors in areas with the highest susceptibility to certain geologic hazards include N in the Kent Valley along SR 167 and V in the Puyallup River Basin, both in the Current Plan Alternative; and 7 (also in the Kent Valley along SR 167) and 16 between Puyallup and Orting, both in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. Air quality • The Current Plan Alternative would reduce green- house gas and other air emissions in the region as more people choose to use transit instead of travel in single - occupancy vehicles. • The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would provide an incremental reduction as transit corri- dors are added. Noise • Commuter rail has the highest maximum noise levels of all transit modes; however, it operates less frequently, with service occurring during peak commute hours. In terms of potential noise impacts, light rail and BRT are similar, although BRT generates more noise for a similar number of passengers served. • The highest potential for noise impacts occurs in corridors with dense residential development. This includes BRT or light rail corridors along SR 99 such as R (BRT from Seattle to Everett) and 3 (light rail from Ballard to Everett Station), and 20 (BRT from Downtown Seattle to Edmonds). • Light rail corridor 19 from Tukwila to Downtown Seattle via West Seattle is also very densely de- veloped, potentially resulting in a high number of residences impacted. Water quality and hydrology • Runoff from new impervious surfaces can cause bank erosion and increase stream bed depth; how- ever, commuter rail tracks on ballast and ties are not impervious. • Pollutants on new impervious surfaces can de- crease water quality; however, operation of light rail alone is not a pollutant - generating activity. • Light rail corridors D (Renton to Lynnwood along I -405 under Current Plan Alternative) and 7 S -18 June 2014 19 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement IIIIIMIIIr'lII1 llYk. 7!, YMryXYfiXI 'g19,NMIX'Mtl'JUEMMIM A X OIXrAtINID MITI XMMYly 1PY;=11 •II6X,tl XMIYNAIIM V7a XX 1,YdXMINVNI YdedNl9@1UNVil+drdY;riGiY xavtq it dflJd YUdiXiYYAItilI N raIX Vd MN4f AONEIIN Table S -1 Current Plan Alternative .summary of impacts ..light rag:, commuter rain„ high capacity translt 1 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 ill II 1!a4 ;o8 0; a ;e6g1Jo 11 111111111111 III 11111111111111111111111111111111111111 JJ1J111111111111111111 JJIJJJJJI�i!!!!!!!!!!!!!l 11111111111 10 (OZS aS em) puowpaa o; Mflr (D113) alI!nu!pooM o; uo ;uaa pooma)e3 o;;uodna fly uaian3 0; poomuukI Mfl o; pJelles fa 1 49 ila fa pJe!leg o; areas uMO ;unnoa (ba3) aII!nulpooM o; uo ;uaa (sov-i) poomuw(3 0; uo ;uaa (06 -1) yenbessi o; annal!a8 .. uo ;uaa o; uapne I `1 In GC �(eM IeJapa3 0; mom. POTENTIAL EFFECTS 1 CO N 0 CU j ° rn 0 0.� GJ u L t 10 W a Noise and Vibration N 0) TS t I 10 T C1 A d 1 0 0 N LY I W 0 O v E 0 0 C 0 0 0. E 2 C ° .N a, Y an co 3 CU • 0 C T 12 d O N N CU CO 11:1 N t • .vi ° o C "0 u a CU y E E w . ▪ i Regional Transit Long - .Range Plan Update !0.' 0.1Wm11dIG1YDEMEMEM @IY;d%IYI81llNUMINIPI1MlldYlflMIPIM !,Pdp.tit I1MIMO ar IIMI VMITEYAlAYU W IMYrMt/INIIlull / I O F MYlIMIN d PUTIIMIE IMIY l Atd IYAPlA t p I MI RltlaYZYMMS Spy XIINYIM4tdP;lY'ipNi4dMr M!NMONOMMIN IIMMOVIl1RMIINI EA4AVINMYENIRM'MI MIYIVPAIRMAIIYINIYdp141RRVEMIN Table 5 -2 Current POan AOternat:ive summary of impacts reglona0 express bus and bus 0-ap0d trans'ot oallpiniN ollaaJD II!W of IAIN L11-10N P ue ii I3. P i of puow as 0 5 alueaS lsaM of )el -ea5 • 111104 I • • I ,1 • • ewo)el of dnlleLnd 0 ® • • • • poonnale1 of dnlleind • • • • 000 S 20 ( MH asee JJ sso ey) luodna 01 dnpeAnd • e • • • .. l .o. .;;. (5-I) uaJan3 0l poonnuukl • d d • • j (66 HS) uaian3 of aluea5 e 0 ® • • • 8 81 (SOB -I) pa nnuukl of uoluaa (mg) alI!nu!pooM of uoluaa (06-1) yenbessl of annallae (L91 HS) dnlleu(nd of uoluaa (S-I) luodna of AeM leJapa j Ilayloe of ale6ylJON (HS aS e!n) puowpaa of Mfl POTENTIAL EFFECTS O 0001080 0 •I • }••• A • • • 1 • Lei u 2 • I O 0 E • I CU 0 TO CU c J a Z a_ W 5 Z V ▪ C V1 • C , v O a N W CC CO Q 2 j W 0 Potential for impacts to streams Regionally important ecosystem resources Benefit from reduction in energy use 01 0) W Environmental Health v fo ial for conflicts with major utilities V • a, a • N N f0 y 41 = C Z1 = vs 5 .� • a= im to a `(0 O a LP 2 0.''I O A d c c • @d fo V a N 41 E e V 1,i 0. 0. E E OP 0J TO - TO O O a a Parks and Recreation Historic Resources O c O et June 2014 21 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement u@ IIYmm�I�IHXIYAP111nAArv�ItAYM1111MAA�5mIPIUIIIXI111AIYUNIIY/ mPdI��IIIVIIINIIXIMXII1m1Y�wW@ AIIYPTYNXIIIIY�A\ YVlmmmmm, Itllllttdllllrt�l�YIAXIIYIIIIII�wI/ �RIl XGA11MNnIXIMIIYXXh�A11udWYINIIXUtYdll111411mpi INYdmNYtlllltttl dllN�Y" IYdIIG191d11R@ Ni1NIIV', MnYkIMPIIB4 'JI4GIIIINMII119+eAPSIId ullICdl i1UI,P SlI '1 melle10 0 IN Table S -3 IPoteintiall Nan Modificatonus Alternative summary of [m pacts- fight ra'iO, commuter rao0, Il liigh- capaclity transit auuv uaanp 'louls!a iei;uaD eln mpg o; ap eaS;saM auilaio4S 'pJelle8 . en% spuowP3 o; apeas umolumoo aluea5 3saM eln aluea5 umolumoo - uaung- uodJly oel -eaS of ellm�lnl uosppapaij o; ewooel puepied of poomar3 L17 • 1 f"! 6wuoolJauwnS /dnlleInd% /fir W ialuaj leleulsnpul uaian3 MS 6ulnJas uaian3 of poomuuR1 (L Hs) Puepped of ewooel leulwial AJJa3 uolsna o; ewooel 3y3 0; 6uluauuoo )1aa.0 ILIW 11111111111111111111111 I a ;e6yuoN e!n owe (3; pielleg ) (z s HS) a ;e LIVoN of Ilaylog Mn Jo puepp9i yuoN eaJy lep ;snpul yslwemna eln 000s o; ellm)lnl uoslpew 6uole ayueas umo ;umoo (L9 L HS) uoluaa of JauwnS /dnlleAnd eln ewooel umo ;umoo o ; ;uodno dnpeAnd o IUH y; nos- uos)ppapaJd- 6emeueds -pooma leI 1.1aJan3 yuoN 011.1a12/13 poomuw(l/a,ellin wanly eln uolle ;S uaian3 of P1elleg uaung., 'ap eas Isam o; alueas umo ;umoo ea )) augaJo4S o; pepes 'egou6eI- aluea5 umolumoo 1 POTENTIAL EFFECTS usceptibility to geologic hazards w an w , c w c O -00 w E 0 c To a Potential for noise impacts to residences Potential for impacts to streams Potential for impacts to wetlands eu 0 0 0 ro b -0 ro 0. 0 0 E m c an g �`o 3 .4.' w C V Ew al 9 0 T C d s `^ y C q e Q i A u A LAJ W S ',, 5 W �E n. cc Historic Resources eI 22 Regional Transit Long-Range Pan Update JNUx pG' AIW' NI raU9E4lMIliRtl lra nRdtitlN1mRUYIi111Y1YI MEIMIlYlY111GDD OWI WitAitl! AAI1ENIIIIIY,' YFi111MM111➢ IYRU1111YIYIII %VW,MIIION !%' tiNIM IfttllMlu 1I171. 10AI @UYRlINXMI!1MIbI121,10PMYF M111 &MRRMtl12dNtltllMNtiIflMMINVAVIp diMIUM mmrommindYlnuMmm➢ IXI AI+72.1iinvlm(MOitiYdlMER Table S -4 PoterrtuaV Pan Modificatvons ADternatiiWve summary of lrvopacts -0ught raullo commuter raft, Ngh.capacuty transiit Gallen Jalules 01 dnpebnd e uodily )ej-eas of wall el annallag of ewooel e uolloauu0) w18f uaian3 0l alllnwpooM annallag of aglnulpooM ?ZS BS 01 5-1 woJ }wails 41S6r 6uoly euoloej eln ale61se3 of (pooMnej) uoluaa , , e • •••••e • • • • • • • • s e • 8,6 • •r• • • • • • • eseeeee • • ewooel uMOluMoa 01 peas mom •seeeee • • puowpaa 11•0009 • • pue yslwewwe5 eln saws Mfl aluea5 0l uoluaa © e • • • puowpaa pue yslwewweS wit aslepano of yenhessl d 90000e 00,0 uosipelry 6uole aluea5 uMOluM0 I llorrr (any uelpuaj) 6uunln dnlle%nd sseeee e • • auuyuaanp'lo!Jlsla goo) eln piepee 01 aluea5 lsaM J3 ausaioy5 'p1elles eln spuowP3 0l aluea5 uMOluMO4 alueaS Ism eln aluea5 uMOluMOa - ualmg- vocluv oil -eaS welt/mini C J G a �' I- W 5 z v Jr" c cc n c >N r a N O W CO W .. Z . "" C 2 w N 3 3 co V C aJ TO E C E C H H N 63 V C1 N = w C - W w '.. w 2 i (Puyallup to Renton via SR 167 in the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative) could cross the greatest number of streams. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative corridor 12 (Mill Creek connecting to the Eastside Rail Corridor) could cross the greatest number of streams per mile of corridor. • Corridors in the Plan area near the Puget Sound shoreline and large rivers (such as the Puyallup, Snohomish, and Duwamish Rivers) are at risk for inundation from rising sea levels that may occur as the result of climate change. • Fill within floodplains could impede flows and increase the risk of flooding. Climate change could also result in localized flooding in floodplain areas due to increased precipitation from storm events. Corridors in the Current Plan Alternative that in- clude a higher concentration of floodplains include light rail corridors C and D along Lake Sammamish and the Snohomish River, respectively. In the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, light rail corridor 7 and BRT corridor 36 along SR 167 from Puyallup to Renton, as well as corridor 34 from Tacoma to Bellevue, also have a high concentration of floodplains. Ecosystems • The removal, degradation, or fragmentation of habitat could disturb fish and wildlife movement. Areas potentially affected include those with high concentrations of natural resources, high - quality native ecosystems, and major lakes or rivers. • Current Plan Alternative corridors C (Bellevue to Issaquah) and H (Lynnwood to Everett) and Potential Plan Modifications Alternative corridors 7 (Puyallup /Sumner to Renton) and 12 (Mill Creek connecting to Eastside Rail Corridor) have the greatest density of wetland areas. • Priority conservation areas within corridors near Cougar Mountain and Issaquah Creek (light rail corridor C, BRT corridor 0), Edmonds Point (HCT corridor 20), and a portion of the Joint Base Lewis - McChord between Lakewood and Parkland (commuter rail corridor 17) could be affected. Energy • Under either the Current Plan Alternative or the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, transportation- related energy consumption is gen- erally expected to decrease as more people choose to use transit instead of traveling in single- occupan- cy vehicles. Environmental health • During construction, the disturbance or release of hazardous materials could occur, particularly in areas with high concentrations of contaminants such as industrialized areas. The Current Plan Alternative includes industrialized areas around the Port of Tacoma (corridor A) and Ballard (corridor F). The Potential Plan Modifications Alternative includes industrialized areas around the Port of Tacoma (corridors 6, 13, and 14) and Ballard (corri- dors 1, 3, 11, and 20). • Electromagnetic fields (EMF) associated with light rail operations could require mitigation to avoid S -23 24 Regional Transi ong -Range Plan Update impacts to sensitive electronics located in medical and research facilities. Visual quality • Transit features, such as walls, stations, at -grade or elevated guideways, infill stations, operation and maintenance facilities, park- and -ride facilities, and other structures, could result in the alteration or removal of some visual resources (such as a view or structure). • In general, new transportation facilities constructed in existing transportation corridors would be less likely to negatively affect visual quality than those built in new corridors. Land use • In general, both alternatives would be consistent with state, regional, county, and municipal plans, policies, and legislation. However, Potential Plan Modifications Alterative corridor 16, commuter rail service from Puyallup /Sumner to Orting, may not be consistent with Orting's goal to preserve its small -town character. • The alternatives would improve transit service to regional growth centers and manufacturing and industrial centers, and would focus growth within the boundaries of Urban Growth Areas. • Under the Current Plan Alternative, connections generally would be added between regional cen- ters and /or manufacturing industrial centers. Connections to other smaller communities include Woodinville (corridors E, J, and P), DuPont (cor- ridors I, M, and T), West Seattle (corridor W), Mukilteo (corridor Y), and Issaquah (corridor 0). • Under the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, connections generally would be added between regional centers and /or manufacturing industrial centers. Connections to other smaller communities include Woodinville (corridors 31 and 32), DuPont (corridor 6), Mill Creek (corridor 12), Ruston (cor- ridor 13), Parkland (corridors 14 and 17), Orting (corridor 16), Sammamish (corridor 26), Titlow Beach (corridor 27), Eastgate (corridor 28), Rainier Valley (corridor 37), West Seattle (corridor 21), and Issaquah (corridor 24). • Commercial, industrial, and residential land uses could be affected by property acquisitions, displace- ments, and land use conversions. Public services and utilities • Depending on location, all modes would have comparable impacts to public services and utilities. Overall, long -term impacts on utility services and systems are expected to be minimal. • In the Current Plan Alternative, corridors B (Burien to Renton), D (Renton to Lynnwood), and H (Lynnwood to Everett) cross either natural gas in- ter/intra state pipelines or transmission lines. In the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, corridors 5 (Lakewood - Spanaway- Frederickson -South Hill - Puyallup), 7 (Puyallup /Sumner to Renton), 12 (Mill Creek connecting to the Eastside Rail Corridor), 16 (Puyallup /Sumner to Orting), 18 (Tacoma to Frederickson), 22 (Puyallup vicinity), and 36 (Puyallup to the Rainier Valley) cross either natural gas inter /intra state pipelines, petroleum product pipelines, or transmission lines. If necessary, these utilities would be relocated. Park and recreation facilities • Both alternatives could result in the acquisition of all or a portion of a park or recreation facility, particularly when other physical constraints limit avoidance or minimization options. King County parks and recreation facilities could be particularly affected given their high density. • In the Current Plan Alternative, light rail cor- ridors D (Renton to Lynnwood), E (Renton to Woodinville), F (Downtown Seattle to Ballard), and G (Ballard to UW) have the greatest potential to impact park and recreation facilities. • For the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, corridors 1 (Downtown Seattle to Shoreline Community College), 2 (Downtown Seattle to West Seattle /Burien), 19 (Tukwila Sounder Station to Downtown Seattle to Ballard), 8 (Downtown Seattle along Madison Street), and 21 (West Seattle to Ballard) have the greatest potential to impact park and recreational facilities. Historic resources • Property acquisitions could result in the alteration or demolition of architectural properties. • Portions of the corridors between downtown Seattle and Northgate and near downtown Tacoma could be particularly affected given the high concentrations of architectural historic properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. • In the Current Plan Alternative, light rail corri- dor F (Downtown Seattle to Ballard) would have the greatest potential to affect historic properties. For the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative, S -241 June 2014 25 corridors 1 (Downtown Seattle to Shoreline Community College), 2 (Downtown Seattle to West Seattle /Burien), 4 (Everett to North Everett), 8 (Downtown Seattle along Madison Street), 19 (Tukwila Sounder Station to Downtown Seattle via \Vest Seattle), and 20 (West Seattle to Edmonds) would have the greatest potential to affect historic properties. • Archaeological sites and traditional cultural properties could be affected by ground- disturbing activities, such as the installation of piers to support elevated rail lines or other activities associated with new stations, park- and -ride facilities, or other support facilities. Cumulative impacts • Differences in cumulative impacts between the two alternatives would be relatively minor when consid- ered on a regional scale. • Both alternatives would offer environmental bene- fits. These benefits, combined with other regional plans and projects to help manage growth in a more sustainable manner, could result in greater cumu- lative benefits because they would help to reduce vehicle trips and urban sprawl. Avoidance, Minimization, and Mitigation Measures Sound Transit has established programs, best practic- es, and policies that would guide the implementation of this Long -Range Plan Update and the projects that would follow. These include the agency's commitment to satisfying all applicable laws and regulations and to mitigate significant adverse impacts responsibly and reasonably, consistent with Sound Transit's policies. In addition to meeting environmental commitments, Sound Transit will continue to avoid and minimize impacts where possible. Several environmental ele- ments analyzed in this Draft SETS are not likely to have significant adverse long -term impacts requiring mitiga- tion after standard project measures are applied, such as earth, air quality, energy, public services, utilities, and water resources. The following text summarizes key areas where mitigation measures are expected to be required. More specific measures would be identified during future project -level environmental reviews. Transportation Mitigation would be required to address impacts to lo- cal transit service, local roadway and freeway facilities, parking, safety, non - motorized facilities in station areas, and freight movement resulting from plan implementa- tion and project development. For construction activities affecting freeways, Sound Transit would work with the Washington State Department of Transportation to develop a plan to coordinate construction with incident management, construction staging, and traffic control where the con- struction could affect freeway traffic, as well as provide construction closure information to the public. Truck access points from the freeway would be identified to minimize impacts on general purpose traffic and inter- change operations. jS -25 26 Mitigation for impacts on local roadway facilities, park- ing, safety, non - motorized facilities, and freight move- ment would comply with local regulations governing construction mitigation, including traffic control and truck routing. For local transit service and facilities, potential route service changes would be coordinated with affected transit systems. For freight- related items, mitigation would be coordinated with local jurisdictions and affected businesses and operators. Noise and vibration Potential measures to control noise and vibration could include acquisition of land for buffer zones, project realignment, bus and roadway design and maintenance, track and wheel design and maintenance for rail systems, minimization of audible warning systems to only the levels necessary, construction of noise walls and other barriers, and sound insulation for buildings. Track sub -base and support structures could be designed to reduce vibration and ground - borne noise levels. Ecosystems Sound Transit would mitigate impacts in accordance with applicable federal and state regulations and local critical area ordinances and their permit requirements. Sound Transit is committed to no net loss of wetland functions and wetland areas. Potential measures to minimize impacts could include minimizing land clear- ing, avoiding sensitive habitat and wetlands, designing fish - passable structures, establishing time -of -year construction restrictions in sensitive areas, enhancing remaining habitat, and compensating or replacing lost wetland areas. Environmental health The Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative would adhere to all applicable regulations regarding hazardous materials handling and spill response during construction and long -term oper- ation. Any hazardous materials sites in the construction area would be identified and addressed to avoid the potential for exposure or spread of hazardous mate- rials during construction. Should EMF impacts from light rail be identified, modified power delivery designs would be expected to mitigate such impacts. Visual quality and aesthetics Measures to reduce or minimize adverse long -term impacts on visual quality could include avoidance of visually sensitive areas; design or aesthetic treatments to reduce the impacts of transit facilities by integrating them with existing plans, minimizing their size, making them compatible with their surroundings, and shielding light from reaching surrounding properties; and the provision of landscaping and other screening features. Land use Sound Transit would provide relocation assistance and advisory services where property acquisitions and displacements would be unavoidable. The relocation program would be in accordance with state and federal laws and Sound Transit policy. S -26 June 2014 27 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Parks and recreation Sound transit would coordinate with the agencies with jurisdiction over parklands to minimize impacts. Mitigation could include restoration of disturbed parks and open space to pre- project conditions, park enhancement, or replacement of acquired parkland. Construction - period mitigation measures could include maintaining access during road and trail closures and providing coordinated information on access options. Historic resources Sound Transit would determine appropriate mitigation measures in consultation with the lead federal agencies, the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Native American tribes, affect- ed local governments, and other interested parties. Potential mitigation measures could include design- ing facilities to be compatible with historic resources, employing construction methods to minimize impacts, conducting rehabilitation or relocation to appropriate standards, preparing interpretive information for the public, and fully documenting properties if no alterna- tive to relocation or demolition exists. Mitigation mea- sures for archaeological sites could include performing archaeological testing and monitoring in high- proba- bility areas prior to and during construction and data recovery of significant sites. Significant Avoidable Adverse Impacts that Cannot be Mitigated No significant unavoidable adverse impacts to earth, air quality, energy, and public services and utilities are expected with either the Current Plan Alternative or the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. With implementation of the avoidance, minimiza- tion, and mitigation measures listed above, significant unavoidable adverse impacts to noise and vibration, water quality and hydrology, ecosystems, environmental health, visual quality, parks and recreation facilities, and historic and cultural resources could be minimized for most plan elements under the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. However, significant unavoidable adverse impacts to noise and vibration, environmental health, visual quali- ty, land use, parks and recreation facilities, and historic and cultural resources could occur in some corridors and with some modes. Temporary unavoidable adverse oee impacts could occur to water quality and hydrology and ecosystems during construction. Even with the mitigation measures described above, there could be unavoidable adverse transportation impacts, primarily during construction of the corridors and facilities included in the Current Plan Alternative or the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative. Construction impacts could include temporary lane or roadway closures, loss of parking, increased truck traffic and congestion, and reduced access to businesses. Areas of Controversy and Uncertainty and the Issues to be Resolved The Sound Transit Board will evaluate many issues as it considers updates to the Long -Range Plan. Those issues include understanding the need for projects, achieving balance among the various service areas of the region, and obtaining funding to make the plans a reality. Unresolved regional issues that may affect the updated Long -Range Plan are discussed below. Several corridors were analyzed as part of the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative for possible inclusion in the updated Long -Range Plan. Using the transportation and environmental analysis, as well as other studies, the Sound Transit Board may consider adding some of the Potential Plan Modification Alternative corridors to the updated Long -Range Plan. Sound Transit will consider the specific modes for the HCT corridors included in the Plan. Corridors evalu- ated in this Draft SEIS include light rail, commuter rail, BRT, regional express bus, and streetcar. Each of the mode technologies has distinct advantages. In some corridors, the mode decision could include two or more possibilities. For example, a corridor may be identified as an HCT corridor and /or designated as a potential future light rail extension in the Long -Range Plan. Sound Transit can also consider annexing areas into the Sound Transit district or extending services beyond the current district boundary. Annexation and ser- vice extensions can occur under the Long -Range Plan Update alternatives as long as the legislatively mandated requirements are met. Extensions of service can occur without changing or annexing the district boundary. During the scoping process, Sound Transit received suggestions both to expand the district boundary and 1S -27 28 to extend service outside the current boundary. Sound Transit would work with interested jurisdictions to annex or extend service beyond the current boundary if a proposal is made. Next Steps: Plan Adoption and Implementation With publication of this Draft SEIS, Sound Transit is presenting the results of the plan -level environmental impact analysis on updating the Long -Range Plan and starting a public comment period, which will close on July 28, 2014. 2014 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update After the close of the public comment period, Sound Transit will use the comments received, along with any updated information, to prepare a Final SEIS. As part of the Final SEIS, comments received on this Draft SEIS will be responded to. Following the issuance of the Final SEIS, the Sound Transit Board will make final decisions on updating the Regional Transit Long -Range Plan. The updated Long -Range Plan will then provide the basis for future transit investments. Future system plans would be submitted to voters for approval. If funding is approved, project -level planning and environmental re- view would be performed, followed by implementation of the projects as appropriate. Public Comment Period June 13 to July 28 Figure S -6 Environmental review process Complete FEIS and respond to comments on the Draft SEIS August to November Board Updates LRP December S -281 June2014 29 Current Plan and Potential Plan Modifications Alternatives: Corridors and Representative Projects/ Programs /Policies June 2014 S0uNDTMN5IT Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Contents 1 Current Plan Alternative 1 2 Potential Plan Modifications Alternative 11 Tables Table A -1. Current Plan Alternative —Link Light Rail and Tacoma Link corridors and service 2 Table A -2. Current Plan Alternative— Sounder corridors and service 2 Table A -3. Current Plan Alternative—HLI corridors and service 3 Table A -4. Current Plan Alternative —bus corridors and service 3 Table A -5. Current Plan Alternative — policies and programs 4 Table A -6. Current Plan Alternative — representative projects and programs 5 Table A -7. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative —Link Light Rail corridors and service 11 Table A -8. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative— Sounder corridors and service 11 Table A -9. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative —HCT corridors and service 12 Table A -10. Potential Plan Modifications Alternatives —bus corridors and service 12 Table A -11. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative — representative projects, policies, and programs 12 Appendix A Corridors and Representative Projects /Programs /Policies 1 A -i 31 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement This Appendix includes a list of the HCT corridors that make up the Current Plan Alternative and the Potential Plan Modifications Alternative described in Chapter 2 of the Draft SEIS. For both alternatives, it also includes a list of representative projects associated with these corridors for purposes of modeling and impact analysis. Specific projects, locations, operating characteristics, and levels of service would be determined and evaluated at the project -level in the future as appropriate. Accordingly, new or different projects not listed below, but that are similar to the types of representative projects listed, could be implemented at the project - level. The order of listing below does not imply rank or preference. 1 Current Plan Alternative The 1993 long -range vision and 2005 long -range regional transit plan identified broadly defined corridors for commuter rail, light rail, BRT and regional express bus service, thus creating a vision for transit in the central Puget Sound Region. Sound Move in 1996 and Sound Transit 2 (ST2) in 2008 created a more refined blueprint for specific projects and services for which voters approved funding. These projects and services were a subset of the 1993 and 2005 long -range plans. Sound Transit has been in the process of building these projects in a phased manner. The following list for the Current Plan Alternative includes corridor segments with projects (including service, stations, and other infrastructure projects) that as part of Sound Move or ST2 have either (1) been built, (2) are in construction or in final design, or (3) in project development (project - level preliminary design and environmental review is either underway or complete). Since these projects have already been evaluated (or are being evaluated) through a more detailed environmental review process, they are generally not evaluated in this Draft SEIS with regard to potential environmental impacts. This list also includes commuter rail, light rail, BRT and regional express bus corridors included in the 2005 Long -Range Plan that are not yet (1) approved in a system plan, (2) approved by voters for funding, and (3) entered into the project development phase (preliminary design and environmental review). Since project - level environmental review of these corridors sections has not previously been completed or initiated, the impact analysis for the Current Plan Alternative in this Draft SEIS (see Chapter 4) largely focuses on environmental effects within these corridors. Also included below is a list of representative projects that could be implemented within any of the HCT corridors that comprise the Current Plan Alternative regardless of whether service is already in operation along those corridors. For example, this Draft SEIS also broadly considers the potential impacts of additional projects that might occur along existing Link light rail or Sounder commuter rail lines, such as infill stations or sections of new railroad track for storage. In fact, many of the suggestions for specific projects that came out of the 2013 scoping process for this Draft SEIS were within corridors already in operation, in final design or construction, or currently undergoing project -level environmental reviews. Those suggestions are included in this list of representative projects for the Current Plan Alternative. Appendix A Corridors and Representative Projects /Programs /Policies 1 A -1 32 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update Table A -1. Current Plan Alternative —Link Light Rail and Tacoma Link corridors and service Chapter 4 map letter Name SeaTac Airport to Westlake Sound Move /ST2 Note /operational status In Operation Counties served Tacoma Link Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King Pierce King Westlake to University of Washington (University Link Extension) Sound Move /5 i2 Under Construction University of Washington to Northgate (Northgate Link Extension Sound Move /ST2 Under Construction Northgate to Lynnwood (Lynnwood Link Extension) Seattle to Overlake (East Link Extension) Overlake to Redmond (East Link) Sound Move /ST2 Under Environmental Review and In Preliminary Design King Snohomish, King King King King King King Pierce Sound Move /ST2 In Final Design Sound Move /ST2 Project development completed or in process; construction not funded. SeaTac Airport to South 200th Street (South 200th Link Extension) Sound Move /ST2 Under Construction SeaTac Airport to Kent /Des Moines (Federal Way Link Extension) Sound Move /ST2 Under Environmental Review and In Preliminary Design Kent/Des Moines to Federal Way (Federal Way Link Extension) Sound Move /ST2 Project development completed or in process; construction not funded. Tacoma Link Expansion Sound Move/S12 Under environmental review; construction not yet fully funded. H D C1 E G1 F1 B Lynnwood to Everett Lynnwood to Renton along I -405 Corridor Renton to Burien Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Snohomish Snohomish, King King King King King King, Pierce Long -Range Plan Corridor Bellevue to Issaquah Ballard to University District Downtown Seattle to Ballard Federal Way to Tacoma Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor 1 Portions of these corridors could be constructed in tunnels Table A -2. Current Plan Alternative— Sounder corridors and service Chapter 4 map letter Name Status Note/operational North Line (Seattle to Everett) Sound Move/ST2 In Operation Snohomish, King P South Line (Seattle to Lakewood) Sound Move /ST2 In Operation Renton to Woodinville Long -Range Plan Corridor A' Lakewood to DuPont Long -Range Plan Corridor King, Pierce King Pierce 1 Indicated as "Potential Rail" in Long -Range Plan; assumed as Sounder extension A -2 1 June 2014 33 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Table A -3. Current Plan Alternative —HCT corridors and service Chapter 4 map letter Name Status Note /operational status Counties served Table A -4. Current Plan Alternative —bus corridors and service Chapter 4 map letter HCT Corridor Studies Sound Move /ST2 Note /operational status In Operation Systemwide I U.W. to Redmond via SR 520 Long -Range Plan Corridor In Operation King 3 Northgate to Bothell via SR 522 Long -Range Plan Corridor In Operation King Table A -4. Current Plan Alternative —bus corridors and service Chapter 4 map letter Name ST Express Route 510 Everett– Seattle Status Sound Move /ST2 Note /operational status In Operation Counties served Snohomish, King ST Express Route 511 Ash Way – Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation Snohomish, King ST Express Route 512 Everett– Seattle Sound Move/S12 In Operation Snohomish, King ST Express Route 513 Everett– Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation Snohomish, King ST Express Route 522 Woodinville – Seattle Sound Move/S12 In Operation King ST Express Route 532 Everett– Bellevue Sound Move /ST2 In Operation Snohomish, King ST Express Route 535 Lynnwood – Bellevue Sound Move /ST2 In Operation Snohomish, King ST Express Route 540 Kirkland– University District Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 542 Redmond – University District Sound Move/ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 545 Redmond – Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 550 Bellevue– Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 554 Issaquah – Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 555 Issaquah – Northgate Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 556 Issaquah – Northgate Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 560 Bellevue– Sea -Tac– W. Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 566 Auburn – Overlake Sound Move/S12 In Operation King ST Express Route 567 Kent – Overlake Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King ST Express Route 574 Lakewood – SeaTac Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King, Pierce ST Express Route 577 Federal Way – Seattle Sound Move/S12 In Operation King ST Express Route 578 Puyallup – Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King, Pierce ST Express Route 586 Tacoma –U. District Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King, Pierce ST Express Route 590 Tacoma – Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King, Pierce ST Express Route 592 Olympia /DuPont– Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King, Pierce ST Express Route 594 Lakewood – Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King, Pierce ST Express Route 595 Gig Harbor – Seattle Sound Move /ST2 In Operation King, Pierce ST Express Route 596 Bonney Lake– Sumner Sound Move /ST2 In Operation Pierce First Hill Streetcar Sound Move/S12 Under Constr King K1 BRT or ST Express along SR -167 corridor from Renton to Puyallup Long -Range Plan Corridor King, Pierce L BRT or ST Express along I -5 corridor from DuPont to Federal Way Long -Range Plan Corridor King, Pierce M BRT or ST Express along I -90 corridor from Bellevue to Issaquah Long -Range Plan Corridor King N BRT or ST Express along SR 99– Seattle to Everett Long -Range Plan Corridor Snohomish, King Appendix A Corridors and Representative Projects /Programs /Policies ( A -3 34 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update Table A -4. Current Plan Alternative —bus corridors and service (continued) Chapter 4 map letter" Name 0 Q R 5 T U v W BRT or ST Express along I -5 corridor from Lynnwood to Everett BRT or ST Express — eastside in vicinity of I -405 from Lynnwood I -5 /I -405 junction to Burien Regional Express Redmond to Kirkland Regional Express Puyallup to Lakewood in vicinity of SR 512 Regional Express Puyallup to DuPont via Cross Base Highway Regional Express Puyallup to Tacoma Regional Express SeaTac to West Seattle Junction Regional Express North Bothell to Millcreek to Mukilteo atus Note /operationa status Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Long -Range Plan Corridor Counties served Snohomish Snohomish, King King Pierce Pierce Pierce King Snohomish 1 A portion of this corridor could be constructed in tunnels Table A -5. Curren Plan Alternative — policies and programs Program Element Name Access (Non- Motorized; Connec- Sound Transit System Access tions with Other Transit; Parking) Policy Current Policies Note/ operational status In Operation Sustainability Sound Transit Sustainability Initiative Current Policies In Operation Transit Oriented Development Sound Transit Transit - Oriented Development Policy Current Policies In Operation Research and Technology Off -board payments Current Policies In Operation Connections with Other Services Support high- capacity feeder and Facilities services Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Connections with Other Services Better integrate transit transfer and Facilities areas and operations Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Transit Oriented Development Support transit - oriented development Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Connections with Other Services and Facilities Improve passenger facilities Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Transit Oriented Development Support transit - oriented development through station design and placement Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Connections with Other Services and Facilities Support multi -modal connections Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Connections with Other Services and Facilities Provide improved system access Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Planning, TSM, TDM, Other Help fund TDM /market development programs Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Research and Technology Provide real -time information displays Long -Range Plan Policy /Program Research and Technology Technology advancements and upgrades Long -Range Plan Policy /Program The first four policies in this table have been adopted by the ST Board as separate policies, while the others are policy statements included in the current Long -Range Plan. A -4 1 June 2014 35 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Table A -6. Current Plan Alternative— representative projects and programs Program Element Name Counties served Link Light Rail Station Everett Waterfront Snohomish Station Hewitt Ave. Snohomish Station Everett Snohomish Station Broadway Snohomish Station Everett Mall Snohomish Station 128th Street Snohomish Station 164th Street SW/ Ash Way Snohomish Station Lynnwood CBD (Alderwood Mall) Snohomish Station 220th Street Southwest Snohomish Station Damson /SR 524 Snohomish Station Canyon Park Snohomish Station NE 155th St. King Station NE 130th St. King Station Convention Place King Station S Graham Street King Station Boeing Access Rd. King Station NW Market and 15th NW King Station NW Market and 8th NW King Station N 46th and Fremont N King Station N 45th and Wallingford Way N King Station NE 45th and Thackeray NE King Station Memorial Stadium at Seattle Center King Station Thomas Street King Station Mercer and Westlake King Station S 133rd Street King Station S. 216th Street King Station S. 260th Street King Station Tukwila King Station Southcenter King Station S Renton King Station Bothell King Station Brickyard King Station Totem Lake King Station Kirkland King Station Houghton King Station I -90 /I -405 Transfer King Station Newport/112th King Station N 44th St. King Station N Renton King Station Wilburton King Station Eastgate King Station Lakemont King Station Issaquah (Downtown) King Station North Issaquah King Station Issaquah Highlands King Station 70th Avenue Pierce Appendix A Corridors and Representative Projects /Programs /Policies A -5 36 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update Table A -6. Current Plan Alternative— representative projects and programs (continued) Program Element Name Station 54th Ave. E Counties served Pierce Station Tacoma Dome Pierce Other Infrastructure Park & Ride in southeast Seattle /Rainier Beach King Other Infrastructure Provide improved transfers and pedestrian connections at Mount King Baker Station Other Infrastructure Improve pedestrian access to Tukwila /International Blvd Station King from International Blvd Other Infrastructure Non - motorized bridge between North Seattle Community College King and Northgate Link Station Other Infrastructure Non - motorized bridge between 156th Ave. NE and Inbound on- King ramp to SR 520 via Overlake Transit Center Other Infrastructure Renovate International District /Chinatown Station to add center platforms King Other Infrastructure Increase parking capacity at Tukwila /International Blvd Station King Other Infrastructure Operation and Maintenance facilities Systemwide Tacoma Link Station Tacoma Link Extension Station(s) Pierce Sounder Service Add Express Service Snohomish, King, Pierce Service Increase service frequency Snohomish, King, Pierce Service All -day, two -way service Snohomish, King, Pierce Station Shoreline /Richmond Beach King Station Ballard King Station Interbay King Station Broad St. King Station Georgetown King Station Boeing Access Road King Station Woodinville King Station Bothell King Station Kirkland/Totem Lake King Station Bellevue King Station Newcastle King Station Renton King Station N. Sumner /Pacific King, Pierce Station Station Between Puyallup and Sumner Pierce Station Joint Base Lewis - McChord (JBLM) Pierce Station DuPont Pierce Infrastructure Improvement Extend all station platforms to 10 -cars Systemwide Infrastructure Improvement Additional parking at stations Systemwide Infrastructure Improvement Construct rail line between Argo Yard and Tacoma to increase operations during off -peak periods King, Pierce Infrastructure Improvement Track and Signal Improvements Systemwide Infrastructure Improvement Maintenance Facilities Systemwide Infrastructure Improvement Eastside Rail Corridor Yard & Shops Facilities King Infrastructure Improvement Pierce County Yard & Shops Pierce Infrastructure Improvement Improve non - motorized access to Tukwila Sounder Station King Infrastructure Improvement Improve Puyallup Sounder Station access Pierce Infrastructure Improvement Tacoma Dome Station improvements Pierce A -6 1 June 2014 37 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Table A -6. Current Plan Alternative— representative projects and programs (continued) Program Element Infrastructure Improvement South Tacoma Station pedestrian bridge Infrastructure Improvement Layover facility at DuPont Counties served Pierce Pierce Bus HOV Direct Access' I- 5/128th Street SE /SW Direct Access (Mariner Park- and -Ride) Snohomish HOV Direct Access' I -5 /I -405 HOV Direct Access near Lynnwood Snohomish HOV Direct Access' Completion of north half of HOV ramps at Ash Way Snohomish HOV Direct Access' SR 525 at 164th (Swamp Creek) HOV Access Ramps Snohomish HOV Direct Access' SR 527 HOV, 208th -228th SW Snohomish HOV Direct Access' I -5 to SODO Busway Direct Access at S Industrial Way King HOV Direct Access' Direct HOV Access Ramps on SR 167 in Kent (e.g., at Smith St.) King HOV Direct Access' I- 405/I -90 Interchange HOV Direct Access King HOV Direct Access' I -90 HOV Ramps to SR 900 King HOV Direct Access' Issaquah HOV crossing with 1 -90 Direct Access King HOV Direct Access' SR 520 Direct Access to Downtown Redmond King HOV Direct Access' SR 520 at NE 31st St. HOV Access King HOV Direct Access' SR 520 at 108th Ave. NE direct HOV access (to /from East) King HOV Direct Access' I- 405 /SR 520 Interchange HOV Direct Access (West leg to North leg) King HOV Direct Access' Newcastle (ll2th SE) I-405 Center HOV Direct Access King HOV Direct Access' Flyer station on I -405 at N. 30th Street in Renton King HOV Direct Access' Renton Rainier Ave. at I -405 Center HOV Direct Access King HOV Direct Access' Kirkland at 85th HOV Center Direct Access King HOV Direct Access' Houghton Freeway Station King HOV Direct Access' Houghton (Kirkland) I -405 Center HOV Direct Access King HOV Direct Access' Brickyard (NE 160th) I-405 Center HOV Direct Access King HOV Direct Access' Direct Access at UW- Bothell (195th) King HOV Direct Access' Direct HOV access ramps on I-405 in the vicinity of the Tukwila Sounder station (e.g., at SR 181 /Interurban Ave. S.) King HOV Direct Access' I -5 Direct access to Tacoma Dome Station Pierce HOV Direct Access' 1 -5 Direct access to Lakewood Park - and -Ride Pierce HOV Direct Access' I -5 /North Pierce HOV Access Ramp near 54th Ave. E Pierce Transit Center North Everett Transit Center Snohomish Transit Center Everett Station Transit Center and parking expansion Snohomish Transit Center Mill Creek Town Center Transit Center Snohomish Transit Center King Street Multimodal Hub Improvements King Transit Center Westlake Multimodal Hub Improvements King Transit Center Northgate Multimodal Hub Improvements King Transit Center West Seattle Transit Hub King Transit Center Husky Stadium /SR 520 Multimodal Hub Improvements King Transit Center Aurora Village Hub Improvements King Transit Center Federal Way Hub Improvements King Transit Center Newcastle Transit Center (on- street transit center) King Transit Center Brickyard (NE 160th) I-405 in -line freeway station King Transit Center Totem Lake /128th Transit Center King Transit Center Totem Lake /128th Freeway Station King Transit Center Kirkland Transit Center King Transit Center Redmond Transit Center King Transit Center Bothell Transit Center King Appendix A Corridors and Representative Projects /Programs /Policies 1 A -7 38 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update Table A -6. Current Plan Alternative— representative projects and programs (continued) Program Element Transit Center Name Woodinville CBD Transit Center Counties served King Transit Center Renton Transit Center King Transit Center Enhance S. Kirkland Park - and -Ride to major regional transit hub King Infrastructure Improvement Everett Station Bus Layover Snohomish Infrastructure Improvement Widen SR 99 at SR 104 to provide bus lanes Snohomish Infrastructure Improvement SR 99 Signal /Queue Bypass, Airport Road to Everett Snohomish Infrastructure Improvement Northgate Way /5th Ave. NE Signal /Queue Bypass King Infrastructure Improvement 15th Avenue NE /NE 45th St LT Signal /Queue Bypass King Infrastructure Improvement I -90 D2 Transitway ramps King Infrastructure Improvement SR 522 BAT Lanes: NE 145th to Bothell /I -405 King Infrastructure Improvement SR 99 BAT Lanes: Aurora Village to Seattle CBD King Infrastructure Improvement Improve I- 5/145th Street interchange King Infrastructure Improvement Add connection from SODO busway to Downtown Seattle surface streets King Infrastructure Improvement SR 516/W Meeker Signal Priority King Infrastructure Improvement S 272nd /S 277th Signal Priority/Queue Bypass, SR 99 to E. Valley Highway King Infrastructure Improvement SR 522 BAT lanes: re- design lanes from 130th to 145th King Infrastructure Improvement 156th Avenue HOV, Overlake Transit Center to NE 24th King Infrastructure Improvement Woodinville Arterial HOV enhancements King Infrastructure Improvement NE 8th Signal Priority at 112th King Infrastructure Improvement NE 6th Signal Priority, 108th to 114th King Infrastructure Improvement NE 85th Street Signal /Queue Bypass, Willows Rd to I -405 King Infrastructure Improvement Bus Ramp over Redmond Way King Infrastructure Improvement Improve 98th Avenue NE & NE 185th Street in Bothell, including bus priority treatments King Infrastructure Improvement SR 522 HOV Woodinville - Bothell King Infrastructure Improvement Leary Way HOV from Redmond Way King Infrastructure Improvement SR 900 HOV Lane, I -5 to 5 129th King Infrastructure Improvement Avondale Rd. HOV, Avondale Way to SR 202 King Infrastructure Improvement SW 27th Street /Strander Blvd. Extension King Infrastructure Improvement SR 161 Arterial HOV and /or signal priority/queue bypass— 176th E to SR 512 Pierce Infrastructure Improvement Bus Maintenance Facilities Systemwide Infrastructure Improvement Bus Midday Storage Facilities Systemwide Infrastructure Improvement Surveillance, Control & Driver Information (systemwide) Systemwide Regional Express Service ST Express South Everett to Overlake via SR 527 Snohomish Service Improve connections to east of Everett Snohomish Service Midday shadow bus service for Sounder South Stations (Tukwila, S. Tacoma) Pierce Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Improve bus service to Sea -Tac Airport King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Revise /enhance ST Express Route 522 (e.g., to full BRT, to serve NE 185th in Bothell, to serve Roosevelt Link) King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Restructure or improve routes (e.g., 540, 554) King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Enhance to full BRT service levels routes 545, 532 Snohomish, King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Modify ST Express routes between Everett and Bellevue (532) to serve Lynnwood Transit Center, UW Bothell, and NE 128th Street Snohomish, King A -8 1 June 2014 39 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Table A -6. Current Plan Alternative— representative projects and programs (continued) Program Element Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus ST Express Route 550 — delete or enhance to full BRT service levels Counties served King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Add stop to ST Express Route 560 at Tukwila /International Blvd Station King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus ST Express Route 560 — restructure or improve route, or enhance to full BRT service levels King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Restructure or enhance ST Express Routes 555/566/567 King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Increase ST Express route 574 frequency King, Pierce Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Extend ST Express Route 590 further, into South Lake Union King, Pierce Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Reroute ST Express route 594 to serve Federal Way Transit Center, skip SODO King, Pierce Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Expand service between UW Tacoma and UW Seattle campus King, Pierce Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Restructure transit service in Southeast Seattle possibly towards Renton King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Add bus stop to the northbound Olive Way onramp King Restructured or Enhanced Regional Express Bus Consider revision of bus operations at Montlake Triangle King Multiple Modes Parking Swamp Creek Park - and -Ride Lot Expansion Snohomish Parking Mariner Park - and -Ride Lot Expansion Snohomish Parking SR 525, Mukilteo Park - and -Ride lot Snohomish Parking McCollum Park - and -Ride expansion Snohomish Parking Expansion of Ash Way Park - and -Ride (garage) Snohomish Parking Park - and -Ride between Mill Creek and Canyon Park Snohomish Parking Canyon Park Park - and -Ride expansion Snohomish Parking NE 145th /SR 522 Park - and -Ride Lot King Parking I -5 /NE 145th King Parking Shoreline Park - and -Ride Lot Expansion King Parking I -5 /NE 185th St, Shoreline King Parking Lake Forest Park Park - and -Ride Lot King Parking Husky Stadium /SR 520 Multimodal Hub King Parking Burien Park & Ride expansion King Parking Issaquah Highland Park & Ride King Parking Bothell Park - and -Ride Expansion King Parking Kenmore Park - and -Ride Lot Expansion King Parking Brickyard Park - and -Ride Lot Expansion King Parking Newport Hills Park - and -Ride Lot Expansion, I -405 at 112th SE King Parking Renton Boeing /Park/8th Expansion King Parking S. Renton Park - and -Ride Lot, Strander Blvd at E Valley Hwy King Parking Newcastle Park - and -Ride Lot King Parking N. 44th Park - and -Ride Lot King Parking Bothell Park - and -Ride at Kaysner Way Expansion King Parking SR 522 at 68th NE Park - and -Ride Lot King Parking Wilburton Park - and -Ride Lot Expansion King Parking Kingsgate Park - and -Ride Lot Expansion King Appendix A Corridors and Representative Projects /Programs /Policies I A -9 40 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update Table A -6. Current Plan Alternative— representative projects and programs (continued) Program Element Parking Parking Policies, Programs, and Services Name N. Sumner Station Parking Counties served Pierce SR 99 at 54th Ave. E. Station Parking Pierce Parking Increase costs for Park & Ride use Systemwide Parking Provide increased Park & Ride capacity Systemwide Parking Stop building new Park & Ride capacity Systemwide Parking Evaluate Eastside Park & Ride capacities and locations King Parking Provide parking mitigation to cities with stations Systemwide Connections with Other Services and Facilities Improve feeder services (e.g., to Federal Way Transit Center from Auburn, Puyallup and nearby park- and - rides) Systemwide Connections with Other Services and Facilities Complete a transit access study on SR 522 (improve access to transit) King Connections with Other Services and Facilities Support transit speed and reliability projects Systemwide Connections with Other Services and Facilities Pedestrian access and circulation information /wayfinding Systemwide Connections with Other Services and Facilities Provide increased bus layover capacity at stations and hubs Systemwide Connections with Other Services and Facilities Consider revision of bus operations at Montlake Triangle King Connections with Other Services and Facilities Improve connections between HCT and regional centers Systemwide Connections with Other Services and Facilities Provide improved bicycle storage, including bike share Systemwide Connections with Other Services and Facilities Improve non - motorized access to stations Systemwide Planning, TSM, TDM, Other Transit Flow & Safety Systemwide Planning, TSM, TDM, Other Computer Systems /Enhancements Systemwide Planning, TSM, TDM, Other System Access Study Systemwide Planning, TSM, TDM, Other Evaluate and implement effective technologies Systemwide Planning, TSM, TDM, Other Partner with WSDOT on demand management Systemwide Planning, TSM, TDM, Other Support transit - oriented development through density incentives Systemwide Sustainability Emphasize sustainability for buildings and operations Systemwide Sustainability Renewable energy in buildings/ stations Systemwide 1 HOV direct access in this table includes ramps, freeway stations, or overpasses A -10 I June 2014 41 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 2 Potential Plan Modifications Alternative Following is a list of new HCT corridors and modes for consideration to potentially modify the current plan. These corridors and modes were suggestions provided primarily by the local jurisdictions, agencies, tribes, stakeholder organization, and the public during the Draft SEIS scoping process. This section also includes a list of representative projects, policies, programs, and services identified in this Draft SEIS for purposes of modeling and impact analysis. Specific projects, locations, operating characteristics, and levels of service would be determined and evaluated at the project level. Accordingly, new or different projects not listed below, but that are similar to the types of representative projects listed, could be implemented at the project - level. Projects or programs that Sound Transit could advance in future system planning under the current Long -Range Plan are not included below as potential plan modifications. The order of listing below does not imply rank or preference. Table A -7. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative —Link Light Rail corridors and service Chapter 4 Map # Name Link line north /south – downtown Seattle to Magnolia /Ballard to Shoreline New Corridor Community College Counties served King 2� Link line between downtown Seattle, West Seattle, and Burien New Corridor King 3 Link line from Ballard to Everett Station via Aurora Village, Lynnwood New Corridor Snohomish, King 4 Link line extension from Everett to North Everett New Corridor Snohomish 5 Link line from Lakewood to Spanaway to Frederickson to South Hill to Puyallup New Corridor Pierce 6 Link line from DuPont to downtown Tacoma via Lakewood, Steilacoom, and Ruston New Corridor Pierce 7 Link line from Puyallup /Sumner to Renton via SR 167 New Corridor King, Pierce 8 Link line east /west —from downtown Seattle along Madison Street or to Madrona New Corridor King 9 Link line from Tukwila to SODO via Duwamish industrial area New Corridor King 10 Link line from North Kirkland or UW Bothell to Northgate via SR 522 New Corridor King 11 Link line from Ballard to Bothell via Northgate New Corridor King 12 Link line to Mill Creek, connecting to Eastside Rail Corridor New Corridor Snohomish, King 13 Extend Tacoma Link to Ruston Ferry Terminal New Corridor Pierce 14 Link line on SR 7 from Tacoma to Parkland New Corridor Pierce 15 Link line between Lynnwood and Everett that serves Southwest Everett Industrial Center (Paine Field, Boeing) New Corridor Snohomish IA portion of this corridor could be constructed in a tunnel. Table A -8. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative— Sounder corridors and service Chapter 4 Map # Name atus Counties served 16 Sounder line from Puyallup /Sumner to Orting New Corridor Pierce 17 Sounder line between Lakewood and Parkland New Corridor Pierce 18 Sounder line Tacoma to Frederickson New Corridor Pierce Appendix A Corridors and Representative Projects /Programs /Policies A -11 42 Regional Transit Long -Range Plan Update Table A -9. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative —HCT corridors and service Chapter 4 Map # Name 19 HCT line from Tukwila Sounder station to Sea -Tac Airport to Burien to Downtown Seattle via West Seattle 20 HCT line from downtown Seattle to Edmonds via Ballard, Shoreline Community College 21 HCT line from West Seattle to Ballard via Central District, Queen Anne atus Counties served New Corridor King New Corridor Snohomish, King New Corridor King Table A -10. Potential Plan Modifications Alternatives —bus corridors and service Chapter 4' Map # Name 22 23 24 Counties served BRT routes in Puyallup vicinity, notably along Meridian Avenue New Corridor BRT route along Madison Street in Seattle from Colman Dock to 23rd New Corridor Street. ST Regional Express route between Issaquah and Overlake via Sammamish, Redmond New Corridor Pierce King King 25 ST Regional Express route between Renton and downtown Seattle New Corridor 26 ST Regional Express route connecting UW Bothell to Sammamish via New Corridor Redmond King King 27 ST Regional Express route from Titlow Beach to downtown Tacoma New Corridor 28 ST Regional Express route from Renton (Fairwood) to Eastgate via New Corridor Factoria Pierce King 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ST Regional Express on 145th Street from I -5 serving SR 522 New Corridor ST Regional Express route from North Kirkland to downtown Seattle New Corridor ST Regional Express route Woodinville to Bellevue service New Corridor ST Regional Express route Woodinville to Everett service New Corridor Connection to Joint Base Lewis - McChord (JBLM) New Corridor Regional Express Bus /BRT service between Tacoma and Bellevue New Corridor Regional Express Bus /BRT service between Kent and Sea -Tac Airport New Corridor Regional Express /BRT between Puyallup and Rainier Valley New Corridor King King King Snohomish, King Pierce King, Pierce King King, Pierce Table A -11. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative— representative projects, policies, and programs Name Counties served Bus Improved east -west service in Shoreline, connecting SR 99 BRT, I -5 LRT, and SR 522 HCT King Totem Lake to Redmond service King Provide frequent, direct bus service to Overlake Transit Center King Improve NE 145th Street, including multimodal /bus priority treatments (e.g. BAT Lanes) King Add bus priority treatments to east -west bus corridors in Snohomish County (e.g., 128th, 164th, 196th) Snohomish Arterial HOV/Transit Signal Priority (TSP) bus lane improvements on 128th Snohomish SR 99 Signal /Queue Bypass, Airport Road to Everett Snohomish NE 124th HOV, I- 405 –SR 202 King Priority treatment -156th St. Left Turn Queue Bypass, eastbound 8th to NB 156th King Priority treatment —SR 202 HOV, SR 520 – Sahalee Way King Priority treatment -148th NE, Bel -Red Rd. –SR 520 King Priority treatment -148th NE, Bel -Red Rd. to Bellevue Community College Perimeter Rd. King SR 7 Arterial HOV, Roy Wye–SR 512 Pierce A -12 June 2014 43 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Table A -11. Potential Plan Modifications Alternative— representative projects, policies, and programs (continued) Name Counties served Bus Ramp over Union Hill Road King HOV /Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Tunnel from SR 520 to Pacific St. King HOV Access Ramp at 1st Ave. S Bridge King Bellevue College Connection Improvements (e.g., improvements to non - motorized facilities and bus stops) King Additional Regional Express bus maintenance facilities & storage yards for Plan Modifications Systemwide Streetcar Rapid streetcar from Roosevelt to downtown Seattle via University District King Rapid streetcar from North Ballard to downtown Seattle via Fremont King Extend streetcar from Westlake Center to King Street Station via 1st Avenue King Streetcar along Phinney Ridge King Streetcar from Lake City to Roosevelt King Streetcar from Golden Gardens to Magnuson Park King Streetcar from Ballard to University Village King Streetcar from Alki to SW Trenton Street in Seattle King Streetcar on Seattle Waterfront King Streetcar from SODO to E Marginal Way King Streetcar from W Dravus Street to W Mercer Street King Streetcar from Alderwood Mall to Edmonds Community College via Lynnwood Transit Center Snohomish Streetcar from Everett Waterfront to Lowell via Everett Station Snohomish Streetcar from Paine Field to SR 527 via Airport Road /SR 96 Snohomish Link Light Rail Additional Link maintenance facilities & storage yards for Plan Modifications Multiple Modes Systemwide Vehicles, commuter rail cabs, coaches and locomotives. Systemwide Stations and supporting facilities and services for corridor level Plan Modifications. Snohomish, King, Pierce Additional Sounder maintenance facilities & storage yards for Plan Modifications Systemwide Colman Dock Multimodal Hub Passenger Facilities King SR 99 and 118th St. Station Parking Snohomish Beverly Rd. Station Parking Snohomish Boeing Paine Field Station Parking Snohomish 175th St. E at Canyon Rd. Station Parking Pierce Portland Ave. E at SR 512 Station Parking Pierce P I" 011.$1$, 3 II ...."W LIMO, Lil1u .,GI VI..W Study integration of Swift with Link LRT to maximize the transportation benefit of both modes Snohomish Support BRT programs of other agencies, with goal of ITDP Bronze BRT standard Systemwide Support implementation of the Growing Transit Communities partnership Systemwide Financially support construction of transit - oriented development Systemwide Appendix A Corridors and Representative Projects /Programs /Policies A -13 44 November 25, 2013 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor Department of Community Development Jack Pace, Director Mr. James Irish Deputy Director Environmental Affairs and Sustainability Sound Transit 401 S. Jackson St., Seattle WA 98104 Re: Comments regarding Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan Update /SEIS Dear Mr. Irish: We would like to thank you for providing us the opportunity to comment on the scoping of Sound Transit's Long -Range Plan Update/SEIS. We continue to appreciate the work that Sound Transit and King County Metro are doing to serve the people of Tukwila and the region with better bus service, commuter rail and light rail. We fully support Sound Transit's efforts to improve and expand service in our area. We look forward to working with Sound Transit in this process and to participate in the upcoming interagency coordination process as well. This letter is an overview of the various system improvements the City of Tukwila has identified that would increase local and regional mobility; would support the residential and employment growth projected to occur in Tukwila in a manner consistent with Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan and PSRC's Vision 2040; and would leverage existing City and Sound Transit investments to help meet the needs of our residents and those from the entire region who work in and visit Tukwila. Our comments are grouped in to five main categories: (1) capital improvements (in -fill stations, Link system expansion, station access improvements); (2) service enhancements (Sounder, bus); (3) operations and maintenance; (4) planning considerations/areas of impact (TOD, parking management strategies, partnerships); (5) comments on Sound Transit Long -Range Plan Update, Issue Paper S.5: Rail between Burien and Renton (March 2005). 1. Capital Improvements A. Link Light Rail Infill Stations at Boeing Access Road and S. 133`' Street: These stations were in the original design of the Central Link system but were deferred to a later date (see Attachment 1). The City of Tukwila would like to ensure that building these infill stations remain a part of the Long Range Plan and are a high priority for completion, as they are important links to connect the region to jobs and education opportunities in Tukwila and to connect Tukwila neighborhoods to the regional transit network. The Boeing Access Road station is an especially high priority, providing a transit connection to the 15,000 current jobs (with an additional 10,000 zoned and planned for by 2040) within the City's regionally- designated Manufacturing and Industrial Center and the newly opened Aviation High School. This station would also provide the only Link Light Rail/Sounder Commuter Rail interface outside of downtown Seattle, and serve as a means of connecting Sounder and Amtrak riders with SeaTac Airport. Additionally, the Boeing Access Road station would link nearby residential neighborhoods in Renton, Seattle and Unincorporated King County (Skyway) to Light Rail. Page 1 of 7 45 Construction of the Boeing Access Road station is supported by multipie policies in Tulcwila's Comprehensive Plan and Multi-County Planning Policies (MPP)—Vision 2040 MPP-DP-10: Give funding priority priority both for transportation infrastructure and for economic de — to support designated regional oaou strial center consistent with the regional vision. Regional funds are prioritized to regional manufacturing/industrial centers. County-level and local funding are also appropriate to prioritize to these regional centers. ii. The S.l33m Street station would connec many Tukwila neighborhoods such as Riverton, Foster and Allentown to transit. This station would also be a vital link to Tukwila Community Center. At this time all these neighborhoods see the train go by, but there is no easy access for them to get on the train. This station would draw on much larger shed given the ridership numbers at the existing park and ride lot along Interurban Ave. The park and ride lot has far exceeded its capacity; therefore the S 133m Street Station could provide a viable transit option and increase daily ndership, particularly if the travel times from S 133 rd Station to Seattle would be shorter than bus travel times B. Link System Expansion: Link Light Rail Line from West Seattle – Burien – Tukwila/International Boulevard Station – Tukwila Urban Center – Tukwila Sounder Station – Renton: Tukwila strongly supports a better East-West Connection, particuiarly connection to Tukwila Urban Center includi a station at Southcenter. The area in the vicinity of Westfield Southcenter Mall iou regionally-designated urb000entcr(batn/aouutcooneotedtoSuoodTruood`xreginou\ network as part of Sound Move or Sound Transit 2. The City is working hard to transition the Southcenter area from a suburban to a more urban pattern of development supported by high capacity transit. There are currently 2O'8OO jobs and more than l25,0O0 daily visitors to this area. Substantial public investments are being made in this area, including a new bus Transit Center at Andover Park West and Baker Blvd.; frontage improvements along Baker Blvd.; arid a new pedestrian and bicycle bridge over the Green River connecting to the new Sounder Commuter Rail Station. These p joctouznp\aooedtocata\yzoiofi|ltbutix a more walkable and compact form of development, including a new transit-oriented development (TOD) neighborhood (see Figure 1) that will extend eastward from the new bus Transit Center towards the Sounder Commuter Rail Station. The emerging new TOD neighborhood district will eventually be characterized by a compact, vibrant, and transit-supportive mix of housing, office, lodging and supportive retail and service uses. Local workers, commuters, shoppers, and residents wili benefit from the easy access and convenience and to an increasingly wide variety of transit offerings accessible in the urban center. Page 46 „ 1111111111111111111111111111 ""allauluo :111 1:01111111111111111111111111 111111 1111111111111111111111111111111 f, falido,11,11,11,11,1111111 I” 11,5, [1.1,1.111111111:111111h 1IIiII Ill Figure 1. Urban Center Districts C. Station Access Improvements: The following improvements could help encourage greater ridership of the Sound Transit network through improved rider usability and access: L Real time arrival information at both the platforms and bus areas (information on all modes serving stop, similar to the OneBusAway displays along 3'I Avenue in Seattle) both at Tukwila International Boulevard and Tukwila Sounder /Amtrak Stations. u. A direct pedestrian connection between Tukwila International Boulevard and the Tukwila International Boulevard Station mezzanine in order to reduce travel times and increase safety. Page3of7 47 Compliance with contractual agreements between the City of Tukwila and Sound Transit on Parking at Tukwila International Boulevard Station. Sound Transit is obligated under its existing contractual obligations to provide additional parking at Tukwila International Station and to accommodate additional demand anticipated due to U -Link extension. Under the settlement agreement with Tukwila, Sound Transit has agreed to provide additional parking if demand cannot be met after additional parking is provided at S. 200th St. station. Additionally, Sound Transit needs to submit studies to document how parking demand will be impacted once light rail is extended to the University District. In order to comply with its existing contractual obligations Sound Transit should be prepared to provide additional capacity when demand warrants. iv. Improve non - motorized access to the west from the Tukwila Sounder Station (see Figure 2). As part of its own work to connect the Urban Center with the Sounder /Amtrak Station, the City of Tukwila is building a Pedestrian- Bicycle Bridge over the Green River. This new bridge will complete a connecting "pedestrian spine" between the Tukwila Sounder Station and the new bus Transit Center in the increasingly intensifying Urban Center, providing workers, commuters, shoppers and residents a more direct connection to transit options. This phase of the project is fully funded and will be completed by 2016. See Attachments 2 and 3 for the location and design of the bridge. To SeaTae Airport lb Seattle To Seattle To Renton 1�W tom_ WII!` f ns a44W 241 Sounder 'frank Station f Figure 2. Connection the Urban Center with Transit Page 4 of 7 48 Phase 2 of this project will include a signalized pedestrian crossing of West Valley Highway, a paved pathway to complete the connection to the Interurban Trail, and completion of widening of West Valley Highway for an additional northbound lane and infill of missing sidewalks over the Seattle Public Utility Bow Lake right of way. It also includes an underpass connection under the Union Pacific Railroad line, which has already been partially funded by Sound Transit. Sound Transit should build the following four transit access improvement projects: a) Strander Boulevard Extension/BNSF underpass. b) Southcenter Non - Motorized Transit Link (improvements to Baker Blvd). c) Union Pacific Railroad underpass. d) Signalized crossing at West Valley Hwy (WVH) and path from WVH to Tukwila Sounder Station 2. Service Enhancements: A. Route 560 Stop at Tukwila International Blvd Station: This route currently travels along Tukwila International Boulevard, but does not have a stop in Tukwila. The addition of a stop at Tukwila International Boulevard Station would improve ridership on the current route, build connections between currently underserved urban centers, and build demand for the future High Capacity Transit route. B. Express Routes from downtown Seattle to Tukwila (Link and/or ST Express Bus): Express service would help improve the convenience of taking transit for the large number of people who travel to Tukwila for work. C. Increased Sounder service: i. In the short term, increased peak and reverse peak service with eventual increase to all -day bi- directional service. Many of the jobs located on or near the Sounder South corridor are in the manufacturing, retail and medical sectors and thus not on a typical peak commute schedule. Expanded Sounder service would allow these jobs to be better served. ii. The Federal Railroad Authority is in the process of reforming its regulations on Diesel Multiple Units (DMUs) operating on shared track. Sound Transit should study the usage of DMU technology on Sounder Commuter Rail both as a complement to existing service and a possible replacement. DMU has the potential for significant operating savings which could be used to make the service more frequent and useful for the region as whole. 3. Operations and Maintenance A. Continue to proactively monitor noise impacts B. Increased security at stations C. Public - accessible restrooms at stations 4. Planning Considerations: Sound Transit should consider the link between land use and transit in their planning process and partner with Tukwila to encourage transit oriented development. A. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) i. Partner with Tukwila to encourage code changes in support of a transition to TOD in station planning areas. Sound Transit should plan for their properties within station areas to be catalyst projects, providing station parking with housing or other uses above parking levels. Partnerships with housing agencies and developers could be explored by Sound Transit to accomplish this. ii. Partner with housing agencies and/or developers to develop Sound Transit properties in combination with transit station parking. Page 5 of 7 49 B. Growing Transit Communities Recommendations Sound Transit pl i efforts should be consistent with the regional GrowinQTraood Communities effort, including the foliowing South Corridor stra cgicm: i. Take proactive regional and local actions to catalyze weaker and transitional markets for TOD. Identify development objectives (uses and densities) that are feasible given existing and anticipated market conditions, existing and ongoing transit investments, and the range of tools available to cities and other agencies. ii. Capitalize on the potential for TOD along Tukwila International Boulevard, particularly key transit nodes, whether served by BRT or light rail. iii. Improve transit connections, particularly better east-west connections, between the light rail corridor and nearby re ioouUydeui8natcdueotorx. iv. Ensure effective community engagement with existing and emerging culturally and racially diverse communities along the corridor. v. Identify and promote comniunity assets as a basis for attracting private and pubiic investment. vi. Encourage the development and preservation of healthy affordable housing that meets the needs offamilies. 5. Comments on Sound Transit Long-Range Plan Update, Issue Paper S.5: Rail between Burien and Renton (March 2005). Since the purpose of this paper is to provide information on the corridor to help inform a Long-Range Plan decision we would like to clarify some of the findings on the niajor study elements. A. Potential rail alignments. i. The City of Tukwila agrees strorigly with the need to make transfers between the east-west and north-south lines at the Tukwila International Boulevard Station efficient and comfortable for riders. Sound Transit must consider a design that does not require having to leave the platfoiiii area, descend to street level, and then ascend to a different track to access uconnecting train. ii. Were the previously prepared studies by ST on alternative LRT routes reviewed? Some of these alternatives included routes to the Urban Center and Tukwila Sounder/Amtrak Station. Future studies should build on these analyses. B. Estimated Ridership for the Extension. L Tukwila International Boulevard Station. The City is currently updating plans for the area surrounding the light rail station, with the anticipation of pianning for more transit- oriented development. Less than a mile away is qoIcwi}u\/U)oge`. with 400 new dweliing units and 30,000 square feet of new uouzmerciuDoffioespace. The City of SeaTac is also zoning it's area around Tukwila International Boulevard Station to promote TOD. ii. "Access to the regional retail center in Tukwila at and adjacent to the Mall. The Southcenter Station would serve primarily retail/office/light industrial activity." As described earlier, the Tukwila's Urban Center should not just be thought of as an area of significant employment in a retail/light industrial setting. The City is working to transition the area between the Mall and the Sounder Station into a more urban mix of uses, with plans to accommodate over 2,700 households by 2031. In the future, light industrial, warehouse, or auto-oriented uses will not be permitted in the TOD district. Page sovr 50 "Since the Tukwila Sounder Station could also serve as an origin for trips, additional park and ride capacity may be needed." Since the Sounder /Amtrak Station is within the TOD District, the City will encourage any future parking to be provided in a parking structure, preferably as part of a TOD project on the Sound Transit site or in close proximity. iv. Cost Estimates. "It is important to note that these cost estimates are at a conceptual level only and do not involve any level of engineering or detailed analysis." The City of Tukwila hopes that ST will also include the City in any future discussions on route selection early in the process so that Tukwila, as a partner with Sound Transit, can help shape the alternatives and add local knowledge to the decision - making process. The City of Tukwila is willing to work with Sound Transit and other jurisdictions to reduce costs. Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Long -Range Plan updates. We would like to set up a meeting with you to go over our comments in greater depth. Please call Minnie Dhaliwal at 206 -431 -3685 to schedule the meeting or if you have questions on our comments. We look forward to working with you to make transit the mode of choice in Tukwila. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Bob Giberson . ck Pace Director, Public Works Director, Community Development Page 7 of 7 51 VOSOMM 8130TH Sr Future Potential S. 133rd Station°°y (See Appendix A) 8,133RD ST South 144th Station S 154Th ST South 154th Station 8150TH ST SOUNDTRANSR ■ Ttmnel mum Elevated semsossesson At Grade • • • • • • Retained Cut -Fill Tukwila Freeway Route Limits Preferred Alternative • Station Park - and -Ride Q Future Potential Station Attachment 1 52 Inter ,k ! ° Si me t - \t EAST APPROACH- OPTION 2 Attachment 3 SOUTH COUNTY AREA TRANSPORTATION BOARD (SCATBd) May 20, 2014 MEETING SUMMARY Members Councilmember Marcie Palmer (Chair) Councilmember Bill Peloza (Vice - Chair) Councilmember Carol Benson Councilmember Dana Ralph Councilmember Wayne Snoey Councilmember Mike Sando Deputy Mayor Jeannie Burbidge Chris Arkills Councilmember Jeanette Burrage Councilmember Linda Johnson Councilmember Stacia Jenkins Mayor Dave Hill Councilmember Barry Ladenburg Chelsea Levy Dezerae Hayes Charles Prestrud Maiya Andrews City of Renton City of Auburn City of Black Diamond City of Kent City of Covington City of Enumclaw City of Federal Way King County (Alternate) City of Des Moines City of Maple Valley City of Normandy Park City of Algona City of SeaTac Sound Transit Muckleshoot Tribe of Indians WSDOT (Alternate) City of Burien (Alternate) I. Open Meeting After opening comments and introductions the Board adopted the meeting summary of their April 15, 2014 meeting. II. BNSF Briefing on Oil Train Traffic — Johan Hellman, Executive Director, State Government Affairs, BNSF Railway Company Mr. Hellman presentation included a brief history of the railroad's Northwest operations; a discussion of supply chain in Washington State's trade economy; new private infrastructure investments to the region and BNSF's safety program. Mr. Hellman said that a common question asked of him is where are the trains going and what volumes do they carry? He said that BNSF is reluctant to answer those because of the proprietary and confidentiality nature of the cargo and because of homeland security concerns. He said the May 08, 2014 U.S. Department of Transportation order, railroads will have to tell emergency responders when and where shipments of crude oil are traveling on the rails. Mr. Hellman said that BNSF is currently sharing this information with local responders along with a disclosure agreement not to publicly disclose this information. Because of an increase in domestic multimodal and oil train traffic on its system, BNSF is making a $225 million investment in its Washington State system in 2014. Nationwide, BNSF will invest $5 billion across its rail network, including a $2.3 billion investment in its core network and a $1.6 billion investment in locomotive and freight cars. 55 Mr. Hellman said that BNSF does not own its own oil tank cars; but they recently put out a request for proposal to build 5000 state of the art oil tank cars. He said BNSF wanted the safest tank cars available and noted that other rail companies are following their lead to build stronger oil tank cars. BNSF also has a network of over 200 first responders at 60 locations and are trained in hazmat response. In Washington State they are located in Seattle, Tacoma, Vancouver, Pasco and Spokane. BNSF also provides free training for first responders, and trains 3,500 local first responders each year. Mr. Hellman said that one of the major issues for cities along it rail tracks is the traffic impacts at rail crossings. Rail roads are federally required to provide 5% of the cost for rail crossing improvement projects. He said if the region takes a coordinated and comprehensive analysis on grade crossing improvements, similar to the FAST Corridor Partnership approach, it will get the attention of the rail roads. III. Public Comment Councilmember Peloza reported on his attendance to Regional Access Mobility Partnership (RAMP) meeting on May 7. He said he presented the SCATBd priorities brochure, and discussed the possibility of a joint SCATBd /RAlVIP meeting in near future. Will Knedlik representing Eastside Transit Riders United commented on the need to resolve the subarea equity issue and for Metro to get its costs under control. Todd Woosley representing the Eastside Transportation Association said Prop 1 failed because voters understood that Metro needs to get its costs under control. He also said there needs to be subarea equity in transit service and fair box recovery needs to be addressed. Vic Bishop representing ETA also commented on transit service subarea equity, and said south King County area was paying more in transit supporting taxes and not getting back its fair share in transit service. IV. Post - Election King County Transportation Impacts, King County Metro /Roads Division Chris Wiezerbiki, King County Roads Services Deputy Director and Marty Minkoff, Metro Service Planning Supervisor, reported on the service impacts resulting from voters not approving Proposition One in King County. King County's Road Services Division (RSD) maintains over 1,500 road miles and 181 bridges in unincorporated King County. Forty percent of the funding in Proposition 1 would have provided $51 million in local transportation funding for all cities in King County, including more than $6.4 million for unincorporated King County. The majority of RSD's funding pays for regulatory required and safety programs, with little left for maintenance and preservation. With declining revenue in the unincorporated area, RSD has less capacity to preserve roadways, reducing road overlays annually from 44 miles in 2009, to 2.5 miles expected in 2016. In 2014, serious storm events caused more unplanned failures than RSD budgeted for, totaling $7.1 million when RSD budgeted for $2.5 million. 56 King County Metro Transit's proposed service reductions are guided by Metro's Service Guidelines, which measure productivity and performance, connections to regional growth centers, manufacturing - industrial centers and transit activity centers, and consider impacts to historically disadvantaged. Target ridership levels are set by considering ridership, locations served, and the number of low- income or minority riders. Service reductions will total approximately 550,000 hours over four service changes starting in September 2014. The first reduction will be all Priority 1 service, consisting of routes in the bottom 25 percent of performances that duplicate other routes. The next reductions in February 2015 and June 2015 will be Priority 2 service reductions, which require changing multiple routes, including highest used routes in an area to use fewer service hours by providing buses in fewer route patterns. The last service change in September 2015 will be a mix of Priority 3 service reductions, which consists of routes in the lowest 25 percent performance and already are below target service levels, and some additional Priority 2 service reductions SCATBd Action: Board members approved the drafting of two letters, on to the King County Executive regarding the regarding the proposed transit service reductions unfairly impacting the South King County area, and a letter to the Governor asking his office to coordinate an oil train accident response plan and local hazmat training in order to address the safety of our residents. Other Attendees: Johan Hellman, BNSF Marty Minkoff, King County Chris Wierzbicki, King County Doug Johnson, King County Monica Whitman, Kent Tom Gut, SeaTac Will Knedlik Todd Woosley, ETA Vic Bishop, ETA Paul Takamine, King County Rick Perez, Federal Way Evette Mason, Port of Tacoma Jason Brown, Councilmember Reagan Dunn's Office Andrew Merges, Des Moines Tamie Deady, Black Diamond 57 SOUTH COUNTY AREA TRANSPORTATION BOARD (SCATBd) MEETING Tuesday, June 17, 2014 9:00 — 11:00 a.m. SeaTac City Hall 4800 South 188th Street SeaTac Agenda 1. Open Meeting • Introductions • Approve summary of May 20, 2014 SCATBd Meeting (Attachment A) Action 9:00 a.m. 2 Reports, Communications and Citizen Requests to Comment • Chair or Vice Chair • Participant Updates from RTC and Other Regional Committees • Public Comment Reports and Discussion 9:05 a.m. 3. SR 167 HOT Lane Briefing — Craig Stone, WSDOT Report and Discussion 9:20 a.m. 4. Transportation Futures — Charlie Howard, PSRC Report and Discussion 9:40 a.m. 5. PSRC Regional Centers Monitoring Report - Liz Underwood - Bultmann, PSRC Report and Discussion 10:00 a.m. 6. Sound Transit Long Range Plan Update — Chelsea Levy and Karen Waterman, Sound Transit Report and Discussion 10:30 a.m. 7. • July 15, 2014 Treats — Enumclaw • For the Good of the Order • Adjourn 58