Let's Improve Transportation DRAFT Report

Executive Summary

This report describes the results of the Let's Improve Transportation Challenge, an online experiment in participatory democracy facilitated by researchers at the University of Washington. 135 residents of King, Pierce, and Shohomish and neighboring counties contributed their ideas and concerns in the LIT Challenge.

The recommended package contains 27 road and transit projects. The total cost of the package is $11.8 Billion. The package was endorsed by 61% of the 57 voting participants.

The LIT Challenge was conducted between October 16 and November 13, 2007. To view the website where the experiment took place, visit www.LetsImproveTransportation.org. See Appendix A for more details about the LIT research study. Contact information for the researchers who developed LIT can be found at www.pgist.org.

All participants in the LIT Challenge had the opportunity to review this report and suggest revisions to this report. 50 participants voted to endorse this final version of the report, while 12 participants voted to reject it.

For contact information, please visit www.pgist.org.

1. The participants and their concerns about transportation

135 residents of King, Pierce, and Shohomish and neighboring counties contributed their ideas and concerns in the LIT Challenge.. Here is some information about these contributors.

Area of residence: 52.6% : Seattle and North King
15.6% : Pierce
14.1% : East King
7.4% : South King
6.7% : Snohomish
3.7% : Other
Primary mode of transportation (daily commute): 28.1% : Undeclared
23.7% : Drive Alone
23.0% : Bus or Transit
18.5% : Walk or Bike
6.7% : Carpool or Vanpool
0.0% : Ferry
0.0% : Other
Yearly household income 27.4% : Undeclared
27.4% : $0-$39,999
20.7% : $40,000-$69,999
14.8% : $70,000-$99,999
7.4% : $100,000-$159,999
2.2% : $160,000 or more

The experiment was open and available to any member of the public, and participants were self-selected. The experiment designers set participant recruitment targets for five different geographic areas within the three-county region and used a small payment as an incentive to promote geographic diversity. However, no willing participants were turned away. Despite targeted recruitment efforts outside of Seattle city limits and the use of payment incentives, the final population of active participants was heavily biased towards Seattle and North King County. The outcomes of the experiment appear to reflect this geographic bias.

It should also be noted that participants were not specifically asked to disclose their multi-modal transportation activities. So the "Primary Mode" statistics above do not accurately reflect the behavior of participants who, for example, regularly commute using multiple modes of transportation in a single trip.

Concerns expressed by participants

The first step of the LIT Challenge involved brainstorming concerns about the regional transportation system. Displayed below are summaries of themes which emerged from this brainstorm. These summaries were drafted by the LIT moderator using a computer-assisted concern synthesis process. The summaries were then reviewed by participants and revised based on their input.

Transit Convenience and Comfort

Many participants expressed the need to improve the convenience of our current transit system to make it more attractive to new users. Ideas ranged from digital readouts of the next bus arrivals at all bus stops, to more frequent and timely bus service, to making bus schedules available on mobile Internet devices. The comfort of our transit system was also a concern, including overcrowding, a lack of public toilets, and the safefy of buses and park-n-rides (see the "Safety and Security" theme). Others suggested simplifying the transit fare system, making transit fare collection more efficient, and/or studying the removal of transit fares altogether as an incentive for people to take transit. Eastside participants are concerned about the lack of convenient transit options for traveling around the Eastside.  Additionally participants pointed to the need for better schedule coordination. For many participants, these details should not be overlooked as we push for larger infrastructure improvements.

[Updated 09 November 2007]

37 out of 39 agree that this summary reflects the concerns of all participants.

Governance and Funding

Funding and governance are two related but distinct themes. "Governance" refers to concerns about how regional transportation planning and decisions are made and implemented. Several participants commented on the many separate agencies responsible for transportation planning and the lack of coordination between them. Others pointed out that we shouldn't plan our transportation system improvements without also considering the interrelated land use issues, such as housing and retail development. For example, a specific suggestion was the significant need for more affordable housing along the new light rail corridor in South King County. Also related to this theme were frustrations with excess government bureaucracy and regulation. A few agreed that there are problems with leadership and management structure at our agencies, and specifically described the need for a more corporate-style organization and decision making capabilities at Metro.
An even stronger theme was the issue of funding transportation system improvements. As one participant put it: funding has "stymied our politicians for decades". Participants agreed on the need for increased funding and generally agreed that funding mechanisms should be used strategically to provide residents with incentives to shift their transportation habits away from a dependence on SOVs (single occupancy vehicles). Accordingly, many argued for increased use of tolls, express toll lanes, and congestion pricing as both a way to fund maintenance and improvements as well as a disincentive to SOV travel.  Increased parking fees were another suggested funding mechanism which doubles as a disincentive to driving.  Another idea was the use of targeted property taxes that tax those who directly benefit from road improvements. Also supported was the use of gas tax and excise or value taxes on car registration. Finally there appeared to be an overwhelming consensus against the use of general sales taxes, due to both their disproportionate impact on the poor and the fact that they inappropriately tax activities unrelated to transportation.

[Revised Oct. 22, 2007 in response to participant comments] 

11 out of 13 agree that this summary reflects the concerns of all participants.

Safety and Security

Safety and security concerns included the safety of cyclists, pedestrians, park and ride users, and bus users. Cyclists recognize the dangerousness of potholes on streets, careless drivers, lack of appropriate lighting and debris buildup on bicycle trails.  Some call for more bike-only bike routes and for recognition by roads departments that bicycles are among the vehicles using the roads (for example, adjusting existing traffic light sensors to detect bicycles). Participants also call for a greater consideration of how surface street intersections are used by pedestrians and cyclists, citing the South Lake Union trolley rails as an example. Some participants propose that more pleasant street designs, such as more intersections with diagonal crossings, would contribute to a general sense of security in pedestrian travel. Park and ride users are concerned by the theft at these places, which may disuade users from public transit.  Participants also see the need to further invest in the safety of bus riders, particularly on high-incident bus routes and at major transfer locations.  Participants point to the "complete streets" ordinance, as one move to take into consideration the multiple, safe uses of our transportation system.

[Updated 09 November 2007] 

29 out of 31 agree that this summary reflects the concerns of all participants.

Urban Design improvements for Bikes and Pedestrians

Participants were concerned about the quality and extent of our transportation infrastructure dedicated to cyclists and pedestrians. Cyclists described the need for more clearly indentifiable bike routes, general street maintenance to reduce potholes, adequate trail lighting, more bike capacity on buses, more bike lockers at transit hubs and workplaces, and adjusting existing traffic light sensors to detect bicycles.  Also of concern is the safety of riders (see "Safety and Security" and the general need for education about cyclists' rights and responsibilities. 

The need for better sidewalks topped the list of concerns of pedestrian advocates. Examples included more sidewalks crossing between Capitol Hill and Downtown Seattle over I-5, walkable sidewalks with adequate lighting, and safe crossings at transit stops. The health benefits of walking was also emphasized.

A popular way to frame this problem was the need to focus on better urban design standards. This includes "complete streets" laws which mandate providing for non-automotive transport in all road improvements, better zoning, bike/ped friendly neighborhood street design, and closing down some streets to automobile traffic.

[Revised on Oct. 22, 2007 in response to participant feedback] 

38 out of 39 agree that this summary reflects the concerns of all participants.

Traffic congestion and the need to reduce driving

While "traffic congestion" was a significant theme among participants, there were different opinions regarding how to deal with the problem or whether we should consider congestion to be a problem at all. Some participants expressed concerned about traffic congestion and bottlenecks on highways as well as the resulting delays for automobile and transit commuters. A minority described the need address this problem with targeted highway expansions. Others argued that congestion is not a problem you can fix with more road capacity, as car traffic will simply continue to grow. Therefore several participants instead called for providing incentives for people to choose alternatives to driving through a combination of "carrots" and "sticks". Specific suggestions included using congestion pricing on highways to provide disincentives against driving during peak commute periods (see Governance and Funding), improving rapid transit alternatives (see  Expanding Rapid Transit Options), and providing more parking at park-n-rides so that folks can use these rapid transit alternatives. Additionally, a few participants promoted telecommuting as a way to reduce the need for people to commute to an office or workplace each day.

[Revised Oct. 22, 2007 in response to participant feedback] 

19 out of 20 agree that this summary reflects the concerns of all participants.

Expanding Rapid transit options

A particularly popular topic was the need to expand rapid transit options, including expanding rail, bus rapid transit, and even personal rapid transit options. Participants described the benefits such as decreasing our regional energy consumption and greenhouse emissions, managing urban growth, containing urban sprawl, and getting people out of their cars. Solutions varied, from allocating more dedicated road right-of-ways for buses and streetcars to the need to build more tunnels and light rail infrastructure. 

31 out of 34 agree that this summary reflects the concerns of all participants.

Environmental Impacts

Many participants are concerned about the environmental impacts of our transportation system, and more broadly that transportation is implicated in global changes in climate. These concerns include excessive energy use, the pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from cars, and the sprawl facilitated by highway and road expansion projects. Several participants expressed a desire for reducing these impacts and our region's "carbon footprint" more generally. Some participants point to the need for affordable housing in high density areas, and the persistance of affordable housing in areas served by public transportation.  Many of the other concern themes summarize strategies participants offered for making these kinds of changes.

[Updated 21 Oct. 2007]

35 out of 37 agree that this summary reflects the concerns of all participants.

2. Improvement factors used in project evaluation

The second step included a review, discussion, and weighting of "improvement factors" used to evaluate the proposed transportation projects. They were used by a panel of transportation specialists to qualitatively "score" proposed projects. (Appendix B includes a detailed discussion of the factors and scoring process). After a period of discussion about the relevance of the improvement factors to the concerns discussed in Step 1, participants weighted the relative importance of each factor based on their individual preferences. A total weight of 100 was distributed by each participant across the factors. The following table displays information about the improvement factors and average participant weight preferences.

A few participants suggested ways to improve upon these factors. Popular suggestions included adding "Impact on incident response and emergency evacuation" to the Safety factor, adding "impact on global climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, and carbon footprint" to the Environment factor, and adding "impact on public health", presumably to the Quality of Life factor. Other popular suggestions spoke to the desire of many participants to consider transportation projects as part of a broader plan for urban development, rather than improvements that can be evaluated in isolation. For example, participants called for attention to the impacts of projects on density and affordable housing, urban/suburban design, sustainable development, and land use and zoning. In other words, many participants were concerned about the interrelationship between transportation and urban development, an issue that calls for an entirely different methodology for specialist evaluation.

Improvement factor

1. Economic Vitality - 11.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on access to terminal (sea, air, multimodal)
  • Impact on general economic development
  • Impact on the value of residential and nonresidential properties
  • Impact on worker movement and accessibility to jobs for a variety of income levels
2. Security - 7.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on monitoring and tracking within the system (e.g. visual surveillance technology)
  • Impact on the handling of hazardous materials movement
  • Impact on the patrolling of the system
  • Impact on unauthorized access to the system
3. Access, Mobility, Connectivity - 21.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on accessibility for people
  • Impact on intermodal connectivity
  • Impact on mobility of people
  • Impact on overall system connectivity and integration
4. Efficient System Management - 8.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on administrative productivity/efficiency
  • Impact on transportation system cost
  • Impact on travel demand (e.g. decreasing VMT using transportation demand management (TDM) strategies)
  • Impact on travel supply (e.g. increasing throughput using Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technologies)
5. System Preservation - 6.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on maintenance capabilities
  • Impact on system condition monitoring capabilities
  • Impact on system degradation
  • Impact on system size (i.e. expansion or rehabilitation)
6. Environment - 14.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on fuel consumption
  • Impact on vehicle emissions and air pollution
  • Impact on water pollution
  • Impact on wetlands or other natural habitats
7. Quality of Life - 12.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on ambient noise
  • Impact on community cohesion and aesthetic design including the preservation of cultural or historic areas
  • Impact on equity
  • Impact on physical activity (e.g. promotes nonmotorized travel, provides access to parks etc.)
8. Safety - 8.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on bicyclists and pedestrians
  • Impact on incident response
  • Impact on traffic calming
  • Impact on vehicular accidents and traffic volume
9. Freight Movement - 4.0
    Objectives
  • Impact on export/import efficiency
  • Impact on information/telecommunications networks
  • Impact on intermodal connectivity
  • Impact on overall system accessibility, mobility, and connectivity

3. Project selection, funding selection, and personal package creation

In the third step participants first reviewed and discussed a list of proposed transportation improvement projects in the 3 county region. This was followed by a review and discussion of available options for funding these transportation improvements. Finally, participants were each given the opportunity to create their own personal transportation package including both a set of projects and a set of funding sources which provide enough money to pay for the projects. The results of participant project and funding source selection are described below. Note: only 115 of the total 135 participants completed this step.

The list of proposed transportation projects was derived from three sources: The RTID Blueprint for Progress, Sound Transit 2, and the Washington Department of Transportation. The commonality in the list of projects is either that they have all been recently considered for regional funding. During their review and discussion of packages, a number of participants commented on the lack of projects which address short-comings in our existing transit system. For example, one popular suggestion (21 participants in agreement) was building improved and well-lit bus shelters at every transit stop which includes route maps and electronic bus destination and arrival time displays. Such improvements, they argue, would be far cheaper than the major infrastructure projects on the project list, and possibly quite effective at increasing ridership. Another suggestion (with 7 of 8 participants in agreement) was that future lists of proposed projects should have more general, qualitative improvements to the transportation system (including more WiFi access on buses, public lavatories at transit stations, new information technologies for transit times, etc). The discussions about funding also produced some popular suggestions for options not on the list. Examples include a progressive income tax for funding projects, congestion pricing on all freeways, and a London-style congestion charge for downtown Seattle.

Project Money needed County Number of participants who selected % of participants who selected
Alaska Way Viaduct
Alternative 1, Elevated Structure $416.5 million King 24 of 115 21%
Alternative 2, 6-Lane Tunnel $2.2 billion King 6 of 115 5%
Alternative 3, Surface/Tunnel Hybrid $574 million King 29 of 115 25%
Alternative 4, Streets + Transit $996.5 million King 30 of 115 26%
Enhanced Express Bus Service
N. 8th Street Parking Garage in Renton $41.4 million King 42 of 115 37%
Transit Center & Parking Garage at Bothell $44.9 million Snohomish 53 of 115 46%
Enhanced Transit: Downtown to Capital Hill via First Hill
Alternative 1, Street Car $149.2 million King 28 of 115 24%
Alternative 2, Bus $15.4 million King 45 of 115 39%
I-405 Improvements
Bellevue to Renton $904 million King 30 of 115 26%
I-90 Improvements
HOV lane between Bellevue and Seattle $25 million King 68 of 115 59%
Light Rail Extension Studies
Preliminary Engineering for Overlake to Redmond $100.6 million King 46 of 115 40%
Study of Port of Tacoma to Tacoma Dome $33.4 million Pierce 45 of 115 39%
Light Rail Extension to the Eastside
Alternative 1: Seattle to Bellevue (partial aerial alignment) $1.7 billion King 25 of 115 22%
Alternative 2: Seattle to Bellevue (partial tunnel alignment) $2.2 billion King 6 of 115 5%
Alternative 3: Seattle to Overlake (partial aerial alignment) $2.4 billion King 17 of 115 15%
Alternative 4: Seattle to Overlake (partial tunnel alignment) $2.9 billion King 14 of 115 12%
Light Rail Extension to the North
University of Washington to Lynnwood $2.5 billion King/Snohomish 33 of 115 29%
University of Washington to Mountlake Terrace $2.2 billion King 10 of 115 9%
University of Washington to Northgate $1.3 billion King 28 of 115 24%
Light Rail Extension to the South
Sea-Tac Airport to Federal Way Transit Center $1.5 billion King 25 of 115 22%
Sea-Tac Airport to Kent/Des Moines Road $684.1 million King 11 of 115 10%
Sea-Tac Airport to Port of Tacoma $2.4 billion King/Pierce 35 of 115 30%
New Highway Segments
Cross Base Highway (SR 704) $276 million Pierce 21 of 115 18%
Extend SR 167 from Puyallup to SR 509 $2 billion Pierce 19 of 115 17%
Extend SR 509 to I-5 $798 million King 27 of 115 23%
Monroe Bypass/US 2 (Phase 1) $44 million Snohomish 35 of 115 30%
Other Pierce Road Improvements
SR 410/SR 162 Congestion Relief Project $58 million Pierce 37 of 115 32%
Tacoma Mall Access Project $12 million Pierce 31 of 115 27%
Other Seattle Area Improvements
Adds direct transit access from I-5 to S. Industrial Way $83 million King 45 of 115 39%
Replace the South Park Bridge $99 million King 47 of 115 41%
South Lander St. Grade Separation $55 million King 37 of 115 32%
Upgrade King County Metro Bus Rapid Transit on SR 99 $37 million King 62 of 115 54%
Widen Mercer St. from I-5 to Dexter Ave. N. $100 million King 46 of 115 40%
Widen Spokane St. Viaduct $146 million King 31 of 115 27%
Other Snohomish Road Improvements
Add capacity & safety features on 84th Ave. W from 212 St. SW to 238th St. SW $8.7 million Snohomish 34 of 115 30%
Add capacity on 238th St SW from 84th Ave. W to SR 104 $2.2 million Snohomish 30 of 115 26%
Build a new SR 522 and Paradise Lake Road Interchange $127 million Snohomish 26 of 115 23%
Grade seperate BNSF railway at 36th St., Lowell River Rd., and Everett Ave. $17.6 million Snohomish 36 of 115 31%
Reconstruct SR 99 and SR 104 Interchange $40 million Snohomish 30 of 115 26%
Widen & Connect 39th and 35th Ave. SE from 240 St. SE to Seattle Hill Rd. $79 million Snohomish 21 of 115 18%
Widen 20th St. SE from US 2 to SR 9 $34.9 million Snohomish 23 of 115 20%
Widen 36/35 Ave. W. from Maple Rd. to 148th St. SW $11 million Snohomish 23 of 115 20%
Widen SR 524 from 48th Ave W to I-5, and 24th Ave. W. to SR 527 $122.5 million Snohomish 18 of 115 16%
Widen SR 531 from 43rd Ave. NE to 67 Ave. NE $55 million Snohomish 19 of 115 17%
Snohomish County Transit Improvements
Bus/Van Fleet Expansion $12 million Snohomish 59 of 115 51%
Edmonds (SR 104) Multimodal Terminal $122 million Snohomish 40 of 115 35%
I-5 Mountlake Terrace Commuter Parking Lot Expansion $2 million Snohomish 49 of 115 43%
North County (I-5, SR 2, SR 9) Park & Ride Facilities $20 million Snohomish 44 of 115 38%
SR 525 Mukilteo Park & Ride Lot $6.7 million Snohomish 48 of 115 42%
Snohomish I-5 Access Improvements
Add capacity on 116 St. NE from I-5 to State St. $2.1 million Snohomish 30 of 115 26%
Upgrade arterials and intersection at I-5/US 2 in Everett $306 million Snohomish 37 of 115 32%
Upgrade State Ave. from 136 St. NE to 152 St. NE $3.6 million Snohomish 32 of 115 28%
Widen 112th St. SW from I-5 to SR 527 $3 million Snohomish 30 of 115 26%
Widen 44th Ave. W. from 200th St. SW to SR 524 $1 million Snohomish 31 of 115 27%
Snohomish SR 9 Improvements
Widen Airport Way from SR 9 to Bridge #1 in Snohomish $304 million Snohomish 18 of 115 16%
Widen SR 9 from SR 92 to 176th St. SE $486.3 million Snohomish 17 of 115 15%
Sounder Improvements
New Sounder Station at Edmonds Crossing $30.6 million Snohomish 59 of 115 51%
Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Puyallup Station $53.3 million Pierce 48 of 115 42%
Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Sumner Station $37.7 million Pierce 51 of 115 44%
Parking Garage at Mukilteo Sounder Station $9.8 million Snohomish 47 of 115 41%
SR 167 Improvements
Congestion Relief Green River Valley Corridor $391 million King 27 of 115 23%
SR 167/I-405 HOV-to-HOV Interchange $316 million King 46 of 115 40%
Upgrade Interchange at I-5 and SR 18 $89 million King 38 of 115 33%
SR 520 Bridge
Alternative 1, 4-Lane, No Transit $1.6 billion King 11 of 115 10%
Alternative 2, 6-Lane, HOV/Transit $2.4 billion King 44 of 115 38%
Alternative 3, 6-Lane, Pacific Interchange $2.7 billion King 19 of 115 17%
Funding source Money raised Annual cost to average resident Number of participants who selected % of participants who selected
Vehicle license fee
$150 per vehicle $3.4 Billion $150 7 of 115 6%
$15 per vehicle $438.8 Million $15 24 of 115 21%
$100 per vehicle $2.5 Billion $100 14 of 115 12%
$50 per vehicle $1.4 Billion $50 21 of 115 18%
Employer excise tax
$1 per month paid by employer for each full-time worker $342 Million $12 21 of 115 18%
$3 per month paid by employer for each full-time worker $978 Million $36 17 of 115 15%
$5 per month paid by employer for each full-time worker $1.6 Billion $60 20 of 115 17%
Toll on I-405, south of I-90
Variable rate: $2.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak $611 Million $30 16 of 115 14%
Fixed rate: $1.25 $458.2 Million $28 6 of 115 5%
Variable rate: $1.25 peak period, $0.25 off-peak $372 Million $15 25 of 115 22%
Fixed rate, $0.50 $279 Million $13 12 of 115 10%
Toll on I-5, south of I-90
Variable rate: $3.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak $584 Million $40 21 of 115 18%
Variable rate: $5.25 peak period, $0.75 off-peak $948 Million $63 7 of 115 6%
Fixed rate: $3.00 $711 Million $68 6 of 115 5%
Fixed rate: $0.75 $438 Million $18 7 of 115 6%
Sales tax on gas (currently there is no sales tax on gas)
8.8% sales tax on gas $3.8 Billion $170 17 of 115 15%
6.5% sales tax on gas $2.5 Billion $124 20 of 115 17%
Gas tax increase (rate now 37.5 cents per gallon)
16 cents per gallon $4.2 Billion $87 5 of 115 4%
2 cents per gallon $598.8 Million $11 17 of 115 15%
20 cents per gallon $4.8 Billion $109 18 of 115 16%
12 cents per gallon $3.3 Billion $65 13 of 115 11%
6 cents per gallon $1.8 Billion $33 29 of 115 25%
Toll on I-5, north of I-90
Fixed rate: $0.75 $438 Million $18 13 of 115 11%
Variable rate: $3.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak $584 Million $40 16 of 115 14%
Variable rate: $5.25 peak period, $0.75 off-peak $948 Million $63 8 of 115 7%
Fixed rate: $3.00 $711 Million $68 5 of 115 4%
Toll on I-90
Fixed rate: $0.50 $198 Million $13 8 of 115 7%
Fixed rate: $1.50 $315 Million $35 6 of 115 5%
Variable rate:$2.50 peak period, $0.40 off-peak $420 Million $30 24 of 115 21%
Variable rate: $1.75 peak period, $0.25 off-peak $264 Million $20 14 of 115 12%
Commercial parking tax
$0.50 per parking visit $276 Million $12 24 of 115 21%
$2.00 per parking visit $960 Million $48 17 of 115 15%
$1.00 per parking visit $528 Million $24 35 of 115 30%
Toll on SR 520 bridge
Fixed rate $0.50 one way $199.5 Million $10 16 of 115 14%
Variable rate: $2.75 peak period, free off-peak $266 Million $20 23 of 115 20%
Fixed rate: $2.50 $312 Million $45 10 of 115 9%
Variable rate: $4.00 peak period, $0.75 off-peak $416 Million $38 24 of 115 21%
General sales tax increase (rate now 8.9%)
0.3% $4.5 Billion $73 12 of 115 10%
0.5% $7.5 Billion $125 8 of 115 7%
0.1% $1.5 Billion $21 24 of 115 21%
0.9% $10.1 Billion $229 1 of 115 1%
0.7% $9 Billion $177 1 of 115 1%
Toll on I-405, north of I-90
Variable rate: $2.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak $611 Million $30 22 of 115 19%
Fixed rate: $0.50 $279 Million $13 7 of 115 6%
Variable rate: $1.25 peak period, $0.25 off-peak $372 Million $15 17 of 115 15%
Fixed rate: $1.25 $458.2 Million $28 8 of 115 7%
Toll on Alaska Way Viaduct
Fixed rate: $0.20 $68.2 Million $10 8 of 115 7%
Fixed rate: $0.75 $105.8 Million $35 13 of 115 11%
Variable rate:$1 peak period, $0.20 off-peak $141 Million $20 31 of 115 27%
Variable rate: $0.40 peak period, free off-peak $91 Million $5 14 of 115 12%
Motor vehicle excise tax increase (rate now 0.3%)
0.3% $1.3 Billion $43 24 of 115 21%
0.7% $2.9 Billion $100 11 of 115 10%
0.1% $445 Million $14 17 of 115 15%
0.5% $2.1 Billion $72 15 of 115 13%
0.9% $3.6 Billion $129 14 of 115 12%
Toll on SR 167
Fixed rate: $0.40 $144.8 Million $10 9 of 115 8%
Variable rate: $2.00 peak period, $0.40 off-peak $312 Million $25 21 of 115 18%
Variable rate: $1.50 peak period, free off-peak $193 Million $15 25 of 115 22%
Fixed rate: $1.25 $234 Million $28 7 of 115 6%

4. Evaluation of candidate packages and package selection

Participants created 111 unique packages. In order to narrow the field of packages under consideration for recommendation, a small set of new packages were computationally generated. These new candidate packages collectively represent the diversity of packages created by participants in Step 3. Details about each of these packages, as well as the methodology used to create them is available in Appendix C.

In the fourth step, participants reviewed and evaluated these candidate packages. A preliminary poll regarding participants' degree of support for each of the packages was used to inform the discussion. This was followed by a final package recommendation vote. Note: only 57 of the total 135 participants cast their vote.

Many of the participants pointed out faults with each of the five candidate packages. Most significant (and popular) among these critiques was the fact that none of the packages covered all three counties particularly well, and that two of the packages included a contradictory funding source--tolling the Alaskan Way Viaduct while also replacing it with a surface level boulevard.

In the final package election, 61% of voting participants expressed their willingness to recommend Package #3, which is described in detail below. However only 11% of voting participants expressed an enthusiastic support for this package. To address these wide-spread reservations participants suggested several popular revisions to Package #3 to improve upon its flaws. These suggestions included:

The following statistical information characterizes only the participants who cast their vote on package recommendation.

About the 57 participants in the final package recommendation vote

Area of residence: 54.4% : Seattle and North King
17.5% : East King
14.0% : Pierce
7.0% : South King
5.3% : Snohomish
1.8% : Other
Primary mode of transportation (daily commute): 28.1% : Drive Alone
26.3% : Bus or Transit
24.6% : Undeclared
15.8% : Walk or Bike
5.3% : Carpool or Vanpool
0.0% : Ferry
0.0% : Other
Yearly household income 28.1% : Undeclared
28.1% : $40,000-$69,999
17.5% : $0-$39,999
14.0% : $70,000-$99,999
8.8% : $100,000-$159,999
3.5% : $160,000 or more

Package Endorsement Vote Results

 
I would enthusiastically endorse this package
I am willing to endorse this package if it receives greatest participant support
I would not endorse this package, regardless of its support among other participants
Package #3
11%
51%
38%
Package #1
11%
40%
49%
Package #2
12%
23%
64%
Package #5
14%
20%
66%
Package #4
3%
17%
80%

Package #3 (The Preferred Package) Total cost: $11.8 billion Estimated cost per household: $432.00/year

Projects included in this package

Money Needed

Enhanced Transit: Downtown to Capital Hill via First Hill

Alternative 2, Bus
$15.4 Million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Sumner Station
$37.7 Million

Light Rail Extension Studies

Preliminary Engineering for Overlake to Redmond
$100.6 Million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

Bus/Van Fleet Expansion
$12 Million

Sounder Improvements

New Sounder Station at Edmonds Crossing
$30.6 Million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Replace the South Park Bridge
$99 Million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

North County (I-5, SR 2, SR 9) Park & Ride Facilities
$20 Million

Light Rail Extension to the Eastside

Alternative 3: Seattle to Overlake (partial aerial alignment)
$2.4 Billion

Light Rail Extension to the North

University of Washington to Northgate
$1.3 Billion

SR 167 Improvements

SR 167/I-405 HOV-to-HOV Interchange
$316 Million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Upgrade King County Metro Bus Rapid Transit on SR 99
$37 Million

Light Rail Extension to the South

Sea-Tac Airport to Port of Tacoma
$2.4 Billion

Snohomish I-5 Access Improvements

Upgrade arterials and intersection at I-5/US 2 in Everett
$306 Million

I-90 Improvements

HOV lane between Bellevue and Seattle
$25 Million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

I-5 Mountlake Terrace Commuter Parking Lot Expansion
$2 Million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Adds direct transit access from I-5 to S. Industrial Way
$83 Million

New Highway Segments

Monroe Bypass/US 2 (Phase 1)
$44 Million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Widen Mercer St. from I-5 to Dexter Ave. N.
$100 Million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

SR 525 Mukilteo Park & Ride Lot
$6.7 Million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Puyallup Station
$53.3 Million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

South Lander St. Grade Separation
$55 Million

Enhanced Express Bus Service

Transit Center & Parking Garage at Bothell
$44.9 Million

I-405 Improvements

Bellevue to Renton
$904 Million

SR 520 Bridge

Alternative 2, 6-Lane, HOV/Transit
$2.4 Billion

Enhanced Express Bus Service

N. 8th Street Parking Garage in Renton
$41.4 Million

Alaska Way Viaduct

Alternative 4, Streets + Transit
$996.5 Million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage at Mukilteo Sounder Station
$9.8 Million

Funding sources included in this package

Money raised

Employer excise tax

$1 per month paid by employer for each full-time worker
$342 Million

Toll on I-5, south of I-90

Variable rate: $3.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak
$584 Million

Toll on I-5, north of I-90

Variable rate: $3.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak
$584 Million

Toll on SR 520 bridge

Variable rate: $2.75 peak period, free off-peak
$266 Million

Gas tax increase (rate now 37.5 cents per gallon)

20 cents per gallon
$4.8 Billion

Vehicle license fee

$50 per vehicle
$1.4 Billion

Motor vehicle excise tax increase (rate now 0.3%)

0.5%
$2.1 Billion

Commercial parking tax

$1.00 per parking visit
$528 Million

Toll on I-405, south of I-90

Variable rate: $1.25 peak period, $0.25 off-peak
$372 Million

Toll on SR 167

Variable rate: $1.50 peak period, free off-peak
$193 Million

Toll on I-90

Variable rate: $1.75 peak period, $0.25 off-peak
$264 Million

Toll on I-405, north of I-90

Variable rate: $1.25 peak period, $0.25 off-peak
$372 Million

Appendix A: About Let's Improve Transportation

Residents of King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties were invited to participate in the Let's Improve Transportation Challenge, an experiment in online participatory democracy. The purpose of this experiment was to evaluate a new and potentially more meaningful way to involve citizens in the process of regional transportation improvement decision making.

Participants were asked to imagine they are a member of a large citizen advisory committee, charged with providing policy makers their recommendations regarding a regional transportation ballot measure. The measure would ask voters in the region if they wish to raise taxes to pay for a package of road and transit improvement projects. The participants' task was to determine which projects to build and which funding mechanisms (such as taxes or tolls) should be used to pay for them. The challenge for participants was to identify which package of projects and funding options they could collectively recommend. An innovative new website called Let's Improve Transportation was developed to support this collaborative process, which included five steps:

  1. Brainstorm concerns
  2. Review improvement factors
  3. Create personal transportation package
  4. Select a recommended transportation package
  5. Create a final report

No prior experience with transportation issues was necessary for participation. Qualified participants who completed the LIT Challenge received a small stipend for their efforts.

About the research effort behind Let's Improve Transportation

The Participatory GIS for Transportation (PGIST) research study at the University of Washington(1) was founded to develop web and mapping technologies for supporting public participation in transportation improvement programming decisions. A demonstration website, www.LetsImproveTransportation.org employs state-of-the-art Web 2.0 technology which provides a simple web interface to support facilitators or agency planners in several stages of a transportation improvement programming process.

Project solicitation and evaluation

  • Define "improvement factors", or criteria for project evaluation.
  • Enter information about proposed transportation improvement projects into an online database.
  • Input scores for individual proposed projects based on the defined improvement factors.
  • Define available funding mechanisms (in the case of a ballot measure financing plan such as RTID).

Public review and participation

  • Display project information, project scores, project location (footprints), and funding options on a website for public review.
  • Support a structured public consultation process (see description above)
  • Support the automated clustering of individual transportation packages created by participants into a short list of representative "candidate" packages for public review and evaluation.

There were three main goals for the LIT Challenge experiment:

  1. To serve as a public demonstration of one way to enhance the involvement of citizens in transportation improvement programming decision processes.
  2. To allow PGIST researchers to evaluate the effectiveness of this experimental model of public involvement.
  3. Allow agency collaborators to evaluate the capabilities of the web technology and provide feedback regarding its appropriateness to their transportation improvement programming and public involvement needs.

Researchers hope that web technology developed by PGIST can be refined, improved, and eventually put to use by transportation agencies around U.S. and the world.

Notes

1 Research institutions associated with this study include University of Washington departments of Geography, Civil Engineering, and Information Science, San Diego State University department of Geography, and University of Wyoming department of Civil Engineering.

Appendix B: Project scoring methodology

All proposed transportation projects appearing on the LIT website have a letter grade for each improvement factor. The factors were not scored directly. Rather, a panel of six researcher team members with a diversity of perspectives in transportation planning assigned a numeric score to each objective associated with the improvement factors. The scores, ranging from negative three to positive three, correspond to a subjective judgment regarding the predicted impacts of the completed project on the region. Positive scores mean the project is predicted to have a positive impact on the region for the objective under consideration, while negative scores mean the predicted impact is negative.

For example, a score of two for the objective "impact on vehicle emissions and air pollution" means that the panel judged the project would have a moderate amount of beneficial impact on the region's vehicle emissions and air pollution. Conversely, a score of negative one for the objective "impact on travel demand" means the judges felt the project would have a minor negative impact on travel demand (or, in other words, a minor increase in regional travel demand).

A project's improvement factor grade is based on a numeric average of the scores assigned to each of the four objectives associated with that factor. Each objective score is the average of two individual judges' scores, one with expertise in transportation engineering and another with expertise in urban planning or urban geography. The judges assigned scores to each project over a three-week period. To evaluate the projects they used the same project information currently available to users of the LIT website.

It is important to note that the scores represent the qualitative judgments of research staff based on limited information. The transportation projects under consideration are at widely varying levels of completion. Some are nearly ready for construction, others have barely begun the planning and design process. In some cases a great deal of information is known about the projects, in others it is too early in their development to have many details. Therefore, the project grades are intended simply to begin a broader conversation among LIT participants regarding the potential merits and impacts of proposed projects.

Appendix C: The candidate packages

After every participant submitted their package in step 3c, a statistical procedure was used to identify a small set of "candidate" packages that best represented the diversity of packages created by all participants. The statistical procedure is called "cluster analysis". In this procedure, all of the participant packages were separated into clusters (subgroups of packages) based on the package's project and funding selections. Then, for each cluster, one representative package was identified as a candidate package. (Kaufman and Rousseeuw, 1990).

Package #1 Total cost: $12.4 billion Estimated cost per household: $569.00 per year

Projects included in this package

Money Needed

Light Rail Extension to the North

University of Washington to Lynnwood
$2.5 billion

Enhanced Transit: Downtown to Capital Hill via First Hill

Alternative 1, Street Car
$149.2 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Sumner Station
$37.7 million

Light Rail Extension Studies

Preliminary Engineering for Overlake to Redmond
$100.6 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

Bus/Van Fleet Expansion
$12 million

Sounder Improvements

New Sounder Station at Edmonds Crossing
$30.6 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Replace the South Park Bridge
$99 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

North County (I-5, SR 2, SR 9) Park & Ride Facilities
$20 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Upgrade King County Metro Bus Rapid Transit on SR 99
$37 million

Light Rail Extension to the South

Sea-Tac Airport to Port of Tacoma
$2.4 billion

Light Rail Extension Studies

Study of Port of Tacoma to Tacoma Dome
$33.4 million

Light Rail Extension to the Eastside

Alternative 4: Seattle to Overlake (partial tunnel alignment)
$2.9 billion

I-90 Improvements

HOV lane between Bellevue and Seattle
$25 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

I-5 Mountlake Terrace Commuter Parking Lot Expansion
$2 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Widen Spokane St. Viaduct
$146 million

Adds direct transit access from I-5 to S. Industrial Way
$83 million

Widen Mercer St. from I-5 to Dexter Ave. N.
$100 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

SR 525 Mukilteo Park & Ride Lot
$6.7 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Puyallup Station
$53.3 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

South Lander St. Grade Separation
$55 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

Edmonds (SR 104) Multimodal Terminal
$122 million

Other Pierce Road Improvements

Tacoma Mall Access Project
$12 million

Enhanced Express Bus Service

Transit Center & Parking Garage at Bothell
$44.9 million

SR 520 Bridge

Alternative 2, 6-Lane, HOV/Transit
$2.4 billion

Alaska Way Viaduct

Alternative 4, Streets + Transit
$996.5 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage at Mukilteo Sounder Station
$9.8 million

Funding sources included in this package

Money raised

Toll on I-5, south of I-90

Variable rate: $3.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak
$584 Million

Toll on Alaska Way Viaduct

Variable rate:$1 peak period, $0.20 off-peak
$141 Million

Toll on SR 520 bridge

Variable rate: $4.00 peak period, $0.75 off-peak
$416 Million

Toll on I-405, north of I-90

Variable rate: $2.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak
$611 Million

Commercial parking tax

$1.00 per parking visit
$528 Million

Gas tax increase (rate now 37.5 cents per gallon)

6 cents per gallon
$1.8 Billion

Motor vehicle excise tax increase (rate now 0.3%)

0.7%
$2.9 Billion

Toll on I-90

Variable rate:$2.50 peak period, $0.40 off-peak
$420 Million

Employer excise tax

$3 per month paid by employer for each full-time worker
$978 Million

Toll on I-405, south of I-90

Variable rate: $2.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak
$611 Million

Toll on SR 167

Variable rate: $2.00 peak period, $0.40 off-peak
$312 Million

Vehicle license fee

$100 per vehicle
$2.5 Billion

Toll on I-5, north of I-90

Variable rate: $5.25 peak period, $0.75 off-peak
$948 Million



Package #2 Total cost: $5.4 billion Estimated cost per household: $196.00 per year

Projects included in this package

Money Needed

Alaska Way Viaduct

Alternative 1, Elevated Structure
$416.5 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Widen Mercer St. from I-5 to Dexter Ave. N.
$100 million

Enhanced Transit: Downtown to Capital Hill via First Hill

Alternative 2, Bus
$15.4 million

Other Pierce Road Improvements

SR 410/SR 162 Congestion Relief Project
$58 million

I-90 Improvements

HOV lane between Bellevue and Seattle
$25 million

Light Rail Extension to the South

Sea-Tac Airport to Port of Tacoma
$2.4 billion

SR 520 Bridge

Alternative 2, 6-Lane, HOV/Transit
$2.4 billion

Light Rail Extension Studies

Study of Port of Tacoma to Tacoma Dome
$33.4 million

Funding sources included in this package

Money raised

Employer excise tax

$1 per month paid by employer for each full-time worker
$342 Million

Motor vehicle excise tax increase (rate now 0.3%)

0.3%
$1.3 Billion

Toll on SR 520 bridge

Fixed rate $0.50 one way
$199.5 Million

Toll on Alaska Way Viaduct

Variable rate:$1 peak period, $0.20 off-peak
$141 Million

Commercial parking tax

$2.00 per parking visit
$960 Million

Toll on I-405, south of I-90

Variable rate: $1.25 peak period, $0.25 off-peak
$372 Million

Toll on I-405, north of I-90

Variable rate: $1.25 peak period, $0.25 off-peak
$372 Million

Gas tax increase (rate now 37.5 cents per gallon)

6 cents per gallon
$1.8 Billion



Package #3 Total cost: $11.8 billion Estimated cost per household: $432.00 per year

Projects included in this package

Money Needed

Enhanced Transit: Downtown to Capital Hill via First Hill

Alternative 2, Bus
$15.4 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Sumner Station
$37.7 million

Light Rail Extension Studies

Preliminary Engineering for Overlake to Redmond
$100.6 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

Bus/Van Fleet Expansion
$12 million

Sounder Improvements

New Sounder Station at Edmonds Crossing
$30.6 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Replace the South Park Bridge
$99 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

North County (I-5, SR 2, SR 9) Park & Ride Facilities
$20 million

Light Rail Extension to the Eastside

Alternative 3: Seattle to Overlake (partial aerial alignment)
$2.4 billion

Light Rail Extension to the North

University of Washington to Northgate
$1.3 billion

SR 167 Improvements

SR 167/I-405 HOV-to-HOV Interchange
$316 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Upgrade King County Metro Bus Rapid Transit on SR 99
$37 million

Light Rail Extension to the South

Sea-Tac Airport to Port of Tacoma
$2.4 billion

Snohomish I-5 Access Improvements

Upgrade arterials and intersection at I-5/US 2 in Everett
$306 million

I-90 Improvements

HOV lane between Bellevue and Seattle
$25 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

I-5 Mountlake Terrace Commuter Parking Lot Expansion
$2 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Adds direct transit access from I-5 to S. Industrial Way
$83 million

New Highway Segments

Monroe Bypass/US 2 (Phase 1)
$44 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Widen Mercer St. from I-5 to Dexter Ave. N.
$100 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

SR 525 Mukilteo Park & Ride Lot
$6.7 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Puyallup Station
$53.3 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

South Lander St. Grade Separation
$55 million

Enhanced Express Bus Service

Transit Center & Parking Garage at Bothell
$44.9 million

I-405 Improvements

Bellevue to Renton
$904 million

SR 520 Bridge

Alternative 2, 6-Lane, HOV/Transit
$2.4 billion

Enhanced Express Bus Service

N. 8th Street Parking Garage in Renton
$41.4 million

Alaska Way Viaduct

Alternative 4, Streets + Transit
$996.5 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage at Mukilteo Sounder Station
$9.8 million

Funding sources included in this package

Money raised

Employer excise tax

$1 per month paid by employer for each full-time worker
$342 Million

Toll on I-5, south of I-90

Variable rate: $3.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak
$584 Million

Toll on I-5, north of I-90

Variable rate: $3.25 peak period, $0.50 off-peak
$584 Million

Toll on SR 520 bridge

Variable rate: $2.75 peak period, free off-peak
$266 Million

Gas tax increase (rate now 37.5 cents per gallon)

20 cents per gallon
$4.8 Billion

Vehicle license fee

$50 per vehicle
$1.4 Billion

Motor vehicle excise tax increase (rate now 0.3%)

0.5%
$2.1 Billion

Commercial parking tax

$1.00 per parking visit
$528 Million

Toll on I-405, south of I-90

Variable rate: $1.25 peak period, $0.25 off-peak
$372 Million

Toll on SR 167

Variable rate: $1.50 peak period, free off-peak
$193 Million

Toll on I-90

Variable rate: $1.75 peak period, $0.25 off-peak
$264 Million

Toll on I-405, north of I-90

Variable rate: $1.25 peak period, $0.25 off-peak
$372 Million



Package #4 Total cost: $2.4 billion Estimated cost per household: $115.00 per year

Projects included in this package

Money Needed

Light Rail Extension to the South

Sea-Tac Airport to Port of Tacoma
$2.4 billion

Funding sources included in this package

Money raised

Toll on SR 520 bridge

Fixed rate $0.50 one way
$199.5 Million

Toll on Alaska Way Viaduct

Variable rate:$1 peak period, $0.20 off-peak
$141 Million

Gas tax increase (rate now 37.5 cents per gallon)

2 cents per gallon
$598.8 Million

Vehicle license fee

$50 per vehicle
$1.4 Billion

Commercial parking tax

$1.00 per parking visit
$528 Million



Package #5 Total cost: $4 billion Estimated cost per household: $160.00 per year

Projects included in this package

Money Needed

Enhanced Transit: Downtown to Capital Hill via First Hill

Alternative 2, Bus
$15.4 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Sumner Station
$37.7 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

Bus/Van Fleet Expansion
$12 million

Sounder Improvements

New Sounder Station at Edmonds Crossing
$30.6 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Replace the South Park Bridge
$99 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

North County (I-5, SR 2, SR 9) Park & Ride Facilities
$20 million

SR 167 Improvements

Upgrade Interchange at I-5 and SR 18
$89 million

Congestion Relief Green River Valley Corridor
$391 million

Snohomish I-5 Access Improvements

Widen 44th Ave. W. from 200th St. SW to SR 524
$1 million

Other Snohomish Road Improvements

Reconstruct SR 99 and SR 104 Interchange
$40 million

Widen SR 531 from 43rd Ave. NE to 67 Ave. NE
$55 million

SR 167 Improvements

SR 167/I-405 HOV-to-HOV Interchange
$316 million

Other Snohomish Road Improvements

Widen SR 524 from 48th Ave W to I-5, and 24th Ave. W. to SR 527
$122.5 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Upgrade King County Metro Bus Rapid Transit on SR 99
$37 million

Other Snohomish Road Improvements

Build a new SR 522 and Paradise Lake Road Interchange
$127 million

Snohomish I-5 Access Improvements

Upgrade arterials and intersection at I-5/US 2 in Everett
$306 million

Widen 112th St. SW from I-5 to SR 527
$3 million

Alaska Way Viaduct

Alternative 3, Surface/Tunnel Hybrid
$574 million

Snohomish I-5 Access Improvements

Add capacity on 116 St. NE from I-5 to State St.
$2.1 million

Other Snohomish Road Improvements

Widen & Connect 39th and 35th Ave. SE from 240 St. SE to Seattle Hill Rd.
$79 million

Widen 36/35 Ave. W. from Maple Rd. to 148th St. SW
$11 million

Other Pierce Road Improvements

SR 410/SR 162 Congestion Relief Project
$58 million

Snohomish I-5 Access Improvements

Upgrade State Ave. from 136 St. NE to 152 St. NE
$3.6 million

I-90 Improvements

HOV lane between Bellevue and Seattle
$25 million

Snohomish SR 9 Improvements

Widen SR 9 from SR 92 to 176th St. SE
$486.3 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

I-5 Mountlake Terrace Commuter Parking Lot Expansion
$2 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Widen Spokane St. Viaduct
$146 million

Other Snohomish Road Improvements

Add capacity & safety features on 84th Ave. W from 212 St. SW to 238th St. SW
$8.7 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Adds direct transit access from I-5 to S. Industrial Way
$83 million

New Highway Segments

Monroe Bypass/US 2 (Phase 1)
$44 million

Other Snohomish Road Improvements

Widen 20th St. SE from US 2 to SR 9
$34.9 million

Snohomish SR 9 Improvements

Widen Airport Way from SR 9 to Bridge #1 in Snohomish
$304 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

SR 525 Mukilteo Park & Ride Lot
$6.7 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

Widen Mercer St. from I-5 to Dexter Ave. N.
$100 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge at Puyallup Station
$53.3 million

Other Seattle Area Improvements

South Lander St. Grade Separation
$55 million

Other Snohomish Road Improvements

Grade seperate BNSF railway at 36th St., Lowell River Rd., and Everett Ave.
$17.6 million

Snohomish County Transit Improvements

Edmonds (SR 104) Multimodal Terminal
$122 million

Other Pierce Road Improvements

Tacoma Mall Access Project
$12 million

Enhanced Express Bus Service

Transit Center & Parking Garage at Bothell
$44.9 million

Other Snohomish Road Improvements

Add capacity on 238th St SW from 84th Ave. W to SR 104
$2.2 million

Enhanced Express Bus Service

N. 8th Street Parking Garage in Renton
$41.4 million

Sounder Improvements

Parking Garage at Mukilteo Sounder Station
$9.8 million

Funding sources included in this package

Money raised

Vehicle license fee

$100 per vehicle
$2.5 Billion

Employer excise tax

$5 per month paid by employer for each full-time worker
$1.6 Billion