Inventory of Existing Facilities and Services A30

Land Use Assumptions Used in Estimating Travel A49

Traffic Forecasts A51

Intergovernmental Coordination Efforts A58

State Highways in Seattle: Inventory, Projects and Impacts

There are approximately 54,000 acres of land in the city, nearly 14,000 of which (about 26 percent) are used for street rights-of-way. Seattle's street network in 2000 consists of 479475 miles of arterials, including some that are designated state routes, and 1,2121223 miles of non-arterials (see Transportation Figure A-1). In the arterial system there are 180162 miles of principal arterials, 157176 miles of minor arterials, and 142137 miles of collector arterials. There are 829979 signalized intersections, 4,596 non-signalized arterial intersections and 7,029 non-arterial intersections. Transportation Figures A-1a 2a-c shows the locations of traffic and pedestrian crossing signals in Seattle. The "state signals" are managed by the Washington State Department of Transportation and are located mostly at freeway on- and off-ramps. Fire station signals and railroad crossing signals are not included. Transportation Figure A-1b 3 shows the distribution of the more than 6077,000 street lights along rights-of-way in, and along the borders of, Seattle. The numbers in the Figure indicate the number of city-operated street lights in each one-quarter-square-mile area.

The Seattle Comprehensive Transportation Program (SCTP) identifies street classifications for the city's arterial and street system for six different transportation uses: Traffic, Transit, Truck, Bicycle, Pedestrian and Boulevard. The traffic classifications follow the Washington State street classification system (principal arterials, minor arterials, collector arterials). High-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes exists on some arterials and limited access facilities as shown in Transportation Figure A-24. (Section amended 7/95)

Transportation Figure A-35 shows the 19939 average weekday traffic volumes on Seattle's arterials and freeways. To analyze trends, traffic counts are taken annually on arterials and freeways along screenlines at or near the city limits, and are added together to estimate the traffic volume entering and exiting the city daily. Transportation Figure A-46 shows the trend in average weekday traffic at the city limit screenlines; the volume has increased from 758,000 in 1980 to 1,004,0001,137,000 in 19908 -- a 3250 percent increase over ten18 years. During the same period, Seattle's population increased by 4.59.3 percent and employment increased by 26 percent However, between 1995 and 1998 approximately 50,000 new jobs were added within the city, a 12% increase.

Transportation Figure A-57 similarly shows the trend in average weekday traffic crossing an imaginary cordon around downtown Seattle, bounded by Lenora Street, I-5, Royal Brougham Way, and Alaskan Way. The volumes include traffic getting on and off the ferries. From 1980 to 19908, downtown cordon traffic grew 1424 percent, from 371,000 to 423,000462,000.

In addition, the number of registered vehicles in Seattle has increased from 474,535 in 1980 to 536,335 in 1990, representing a 13 percent increase. Vehicle ownership has increased from 0.7 per resident in 1968, to 0.96 per resident in 1980, and to 1.04 per resident in 1990, representing an eight percent increase from 1980 to 1990.

Public transit in Seattle is provided by three agencies. Metro provides bus, trolley and streetcar services that serves cover mostall of King County., while Community Transit and PierceSound Transit operate express bus services to Seattle from King, Snohomish and Pierce Counties., respectively. In 1990 As of 2000, Metro serveds a population of about 1.4 nearly 2 million over a 2,128-square-mile service area. It operateds approximately 1300 vehicles on about 188 routes representing 7,050 route miles with annual ridership of 73over 75 million. Transportation Figure A-68 shows Metro's 19928 transit routes in Seattle.

In September 1990, Metro began bus operations in a 1.3-mile-long tunnel under Third Avenue and Pine Street from the International District to 9th Avenue and Pine Street. The tunnel has five stations, and connects to Interstate 90 at the south end and to the Interstate 5 express lanes at the north end. Dual-powered buses operate through the tunnel; diesel power is used on streets and highways, while electric power is used in the tunnel. Rails were installed in the tunnel so trains can use it in the future.Use of dual-powered buses in the tunnel will eventually cease and be replaced by Sound Transit's Link light rail system, scheduled for completion by 2007.

Metro has about 56 miles of two-way overhead electric trolley wire in Seattle used by approximately 100 trolley buses. Trolleys produce no tailpipe emissions and are considerably quieter than diesel buses.

All buses operating in downtown Seattle are free to riders from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. The ride-free zone boundaries are Battery Street, Sixth Avenue, I-5, Jackson Street, and the waterfront. The ride-free zone significantly reduces the need to use cars for short trips around downtown.

The Waterfront Streetcar system includes three streetcars, nine stations, and more than two miles of rail. The tracks and overhead wire run along Alaskan Way and South Main Street from Myrtle Edwards Park to the International District.

Metro and WSDOT operates 174 park-and-ride lots in Seattle with approximately 2,4500 parking spaces, and the City owns and operates a park-and-ride lot at the Fauntleroy ferry dock, as shown in Transportation Figures A-79 and A-10. There is also a Metro transit center just south of the Northgate Mall. The park-and-ride lots may be used by commuters, free of charge, to meet a carpool, vanpool or bus. The Fauntleroy ferry park-and-ride lot is open to anyone during the day; ferry foot-passengers in registered carpools and vanpools who leave their cars or vans in Seattle at night pay a fee and park in the park-and-ride lot

The City of Seattle operates a monorail on a mile of elevated guideway between Westlake Mall in downtown Seattle and the Seattle Center. The monorail carried about 2.15 million riders in 19939.

Metro provides wheelchair-accessible buses and other special transportation services for persons unable to use regular bus service. For example, low-income King County residents 65 years or older and people with disabilities are eligible for reduced-cost taxi trips. Other Metro programs and services include custom buses, special event service, the U-Pass program with the University of Washington, bikes on buses, vanpools, and a ridematch service.

Bicycles are classified as "vehicles" in the Seattle Traffic Code and have the right to use all streets in the city except where explicitly prohibited. Transportation Figure A-911 shows the three categories of bike facilities, and the miles of each. Bicycle racks are provided in neighborhood commercial areas and downtown, and some work places provide secure, weather-protected bike parking, showers, and lockers. As of 2000, the City has installed over 1900 bike racks across the city. Seattle's Land Use Code requires that many new developments include bike parking where parking is built for cars.

Metro first installed bike racks on buses in 1979 to carry bicyclists across the SR-520 bridge. The 45 racks presently in use allow buses routed across the bridge to carry a maximum of two bikes per bus. Metro has since installed bike racks on their entire fleet of buses.recently budgeted to install bike racks on its entire fleet of buses. Metro also has bike racks and lockers at some of its Seattle park-and-ride lots and at the Northgate Transit Center. The Washington State Ferry Colman Dock in downtown Seattle has bicycle racks for 10 to 15 bikes, while the Fauntleroy dock has none. All ferries provide simple tie-downs for bicycle transport, although the passenger-only ferries can carry only five bikes.

Of the City's 479 miles of arterials (in 1995), about 306 miles have had sidewalks or asphalt walkways on both sides of the street, and 140 miles have had a sidewalk or walkway on one side of the street; about 33 miles of arterials do not have sidewalks or asphalt walkways on either side of the street. "School walk boundaries" define areas where school bus service is not provided and students generally walk to school. In 1995, Tthere awere 20 miles of arterials in elementary school walk boundaries without sidewalks on either side of the street.; and Tthere awere 362 miles of Seattle residential streets (non-arterials) lacking sidewalks within the school walk boundaries.

On-street parking occurs in the public right-of-way, and is therefore regulated by the City through the creation of no-parking and special-use parking zones, time-of-day restrictions, parking duration limits, meter rates, and Residential Parking Zones. Parking meter rates in 1994 2000 are $1.00 per hour in downtown Seattle, First Hill, Broadway, and the University District, and $.60 per hour elsewhere. Residential Parking Zones (RPZs) are designed to protect Seattle's residential neighborhoods from parking impacts and congestion from major employment and/or retail centers. In an RPZ, on-street parking is generally restricted to two or three hours, except for residents and guests who display special RPZ decals.

Existing RPZs are in Montlake, Fauntleroy, Wallingford, University Park, First Hill/Capitol Hill, and Eastlake, and near Providence Hospital and Group Health Hospitalaround Husky Stadium and Providence Hospital, and in the following communities: Montlake, Fauntleroy, Capitol Hill (Group Health), Wallingford, University District area, First Hill, Eastlake, Magnolia, N Queen Anne, North Capitol Hill, Lower Queen Anne, South Seattle (Franklin HS), Belmont/Harvard, Mount Baker, North Beacon Hill, Licton Springs, and Roosevelt/Cowen Park.

Off-street parking facilities are usually privately-owned and operated. The City regulates the location and size of garages and lots through the Land Use Code. Transportation Figure A-102 shows inventory data for off-street parking in three Seattle areas: the Central Business District, lower Queen Anne, and First Hill.

Carpools receive preferential parking treatment through City programs, allocation of on-street parking spaces, and Land Use Code requirements for carpool parking in new developments.

Passenger Rail: Amtrak operates trains over 900 miles of Burlington Northern tracks in the state and provides service to 146 cities. The Empire Builder provides daily service from Seattle to Spokane and on to Chicago,; the Cascades operates twice a day to/from Portland, and daily to/from Vancouver, B.C. tThe Coast Starlight runs daily toconnecting Seattle to Portland, Oakland and on to Los Angeles

Freight: Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) owns and operates a mainline dual-track from Portland to Seattle. Union Pacific owns and operates a single mainline track with two-way train operations between Tacoma and Seattle. Burlington NorthernSF owns and operates tracks that extend north from downtown Seattle to Snohomish County and then east to Spokane. A Cconnecting spurs, operated by the Ballard Terminal Rail Company, serves the Ballard and the western ship canal area. Burlington Northern SF trains consist of 20 double-stack cars and range up to 5,500 feet in length; Union Pacific has 28 double-stack cars in trains up to 7,700 feet long.

Rail-line capacity depends on train length, operating speeds, the number of switch crossover points, and whether the line has one- or two-way traffic. Current train speed limits in the City are 10, 20, or 40 mph depending on the segment.

There are three truck-to-train intermodal terminals serving the South Harbor area: Burlington Northern Santa Fe operates the Seattle International Gateway yard north of S. Hanford Street, Union Pacific operates the Seattle Yard north of the Georgetown neighborhood, and the Port of Seattle operates an intermodal facility at Terminal 18. North of downtown Seattle is Burlington NorthernSF's Interbay rail yard.

There are three commercial aircraft landing facilities in the greater Seattle metropolitan area: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Sea-Tac), operated by the Port of Seattle and located in the City of SeaTac; the Lake Union seaplane base in Seattle; and the Lake Washington seaplane base near Kenmore. Sea-Tac's facilities, which can accommodate 380,000 flight operations annually, include two instrument runways, 69 loading gates, one main and two satellite terminals, and 4.5 miles of intra-airport roads. Future plans include construction of a third parallel runway and expansion of the terminal and parking facilities. Sea-Tac accommodates 30over 55 airlines, including 104 international passenger carriers and 135 all-cargo carriers. In 19908 there were 355,000407,576 flight aircraft operations at Sea-Tac, and itthis is expected that air travel will exceed the airport's existing capacity by the year 2000 to increase to 474,000 operations by 2010.

The majority of general aviation flights take off and land either at King County International Airport (Boeing Field) or at one of the 11 active privately-operated helistops and heliports around the city. Boeing Field has one 10,000-foot runway with an instrument landing system and one 3,700-foot runway., The number of flight operations at Boeing Field was 422,000 in 1994, and 371,000 in 1997. and had 403,000 flight operations in 1990. There were over 6,000 operations at the privately-owned helistops and heliports in Seattle during 1990.

The Washington State Ferry (WSF) system operates two terminals in Seattle -- Colman Dock in downtown Seattle, and the Fauntleroy terminal in West Seattle. Passenger-and-vehicle service is provided on two ferry routes from Colman Dock -- to Bainbridge Island and to Bremerton; passenger-only boats also operate between Colman Dock and Vashon Island, and Colman Dock and Bremerton. Passenger-and-vehicle ferries link Fauntleroy with Vashon Island and Southworth.

The Royal Victorian operates one round trip daily between Seattle and Victoria, B.C. from May through September, carrying vehicles and passengers. The Victoria Clipper operates between one to four round trips daily, depending on the season, between Seattle and Victoria on passenger-only catamarans.

The Port of Seattle operates and supports marine, rail, and air intermodal facilities. Port of Seattle facilities include 25 commercial marine terminals, 7 container terminals with 23 container cranes, a warehouse complex and distribution center, and a deep-draft grain terminal. Services are offered by about 100 steamship operators and agents; about 30 tug and barge operators; about 100 truck and warehouse operators; and Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific railroads, operating intermodal yards. Transportation Figure A-113 shows the Port of Seattle facilities located in Seattle.

TRANSPO Fig A-1 (existing)

.

Transportation Figure A-5

Source: Metro, July 1993. (Second Quarter Statistics)

Source: Seattle Engineering Department, 1994.

Definitions:

N/A = Not Available Source: Puget Sound Regional Council, April-May 19929.

Transpo Fig A-113 (existing)

To estimate future travel levels, assumptions were made for a variety of factors related to future population, employment, and transportation facilities. These include the number and geographic distribution of both households and employment in Seattle and the region, characteristics of households and jobs (e.g., number of residents per household, household income), and the transportation network (e.g., streets, transit routes). Then, a computer model was used to predict the total number of person-trips between various zones, the number of trips that would use various modes (e.g., car, bus, bike, walk), and the resulting vehicle traffic volumes on various streets throughout the city.

In 1990, there were about 516,000 people living in Seattle; 1993 state estimates place the population at about 528,000. Seattle's daytime population is much larger than its residential population, currently totaling about 723,000, of which about 488,000 are people in jobs. These numbers reflect about 60,000 Seattle residents who work outside Seattle, 267,000 people who come to Seattle from other places for jobs, and 236,000 people living in Seattle who do not hold jobs.

Seattle covers about 54,000 acres of land. Most areas of the city are of predominantly one type of land use (e.g., residential, commercial, or industrial). About 40 percent of the city's land area is occupied by residential uses. In 1990, there were a total of about 249,000 housing units in the city. Estimates in 1993 place the total number of housing units in the city at about 257,000. The area north of the ship canal has more of its land area occupied by housing than mid-Seattle (south of the ship canal to I-90) or south Seattle (south of I-90).

Street rights-of-way take up the next largest amount of land, almost 26 percent. Commercial and industrial areas, where most of the jobs in the city are located, occupy about 13 percent of the land area. Parks occupy nine percent; cemeteries, reservoirs, and other uses occupy six percent; and six percent of the land is vacant.

The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) conducts regional planning for the four-county (Snohomish, King, Pierce, and Kitsap) central Puget Sound region. The PSRC's Vision 2020 Growth Strategy and Transportation Plan presents a vision and array of strategies designed to achieve goals of growth management, transportation demand management, and improved transportation investment decisions. The PSRC provides population and employment forecasts for the region, focusing future population and employment growth into urban centers.

The PSRC also provides population and employment forecasts for the year 2010. Seattle's transportation model used 2010 "Vision 1" population and employment allocations for the region. Vision 1 assumes 14 urban centers in the region, and assumes a large public transportation investment as outlined in the October 1992 Regional Transit Project (RTP) Draft System Plan, with additional rail service to Renton. The four-county projections for 2010 are:

Seattle Land Use Assumptions (Section amended 7/96)

Within Seattle, the upper limits of the growth targets in the adopted Plan for population, households, and employment were used to estimate future travel. These targets call for an additional 72,000 people, 60,000 households and 146,600 jobs over the 20-year life of this plan. This growth was allocated within the city as follows (using locations and adopted or unadopted boundaries of centers and villages as in the plan):

To analyze the traffic impacts of the Comprehensive Plan, the City modeled both the Plan itself and an Alternative Scenario. The Alternative Scenario assumes the same total growth in population and employment Citywide as in the Plan, but distributes that growth based on zoning capacity alone, without regard to Urban Center or Urban Village designations. In addition, the Alternative Scenario excludes policies included in the Plan that discourage use of single-occupant cars and encourage transit and non-motorized modes, which affect mode split assumptions.

Region-wide and city-limit traffic volume forecasts for the Comprehensive Plan and for the Alternative Scenario are as follows:

Total vehicle-miles-of-travel (VMT) for the region (per day):

Traffic volume at north city limit (vehicles per day):

Traffic volume at south city limit (vehicles per day):

Traffic volume at east city limit (SR 520 and I-90) (vehicles per day):

Regional transit trips as a percent of total motorized trips:

To analyze the transportation effects of the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies on the City's arterial streets in Urban Centers and in Urban Village areas, traffic conditions were analyzed for a system of 42 screenlines, shown in Transportation Figure A-124. These screenlines functionally cover the entire City, including Urban Centers and areas identified for future designation as Urban Villages. The Comprehensive Plan's level-of-service (LOS) system uses a similar screenline system, with 30 of the same screenlines. Twelve screenlines were added for this traffic forecast analysis to supplement the data in Urban Centers.

Traffic volumes were forecasted for arterial streets for the year 2010 under both the Comprehensive Plan and the Alternative Scenario. These forecasted volumes were summed for all arterials crossing a particular screenline, and this screenline volume was compared to the sum of the "planning capacities" for the arterials crossing the screenline, yielding a ratio of volume-to-capacity (v/c) for each direction of traffic for each screenline.

The screenline methodology was used both for the Comprehensive Plan's level-of-service system to judge the performance of the arterial system, and for the traffic forecast analysis described in this Appendix. This system was selected because it steps back from the micro-level focus of traditional intersection LOS analysis, and recognizes explicitly the broader geographic impacts of development and travel patterns. The system recognizes that no single intersection or arterial operates in isolation. Motorists have choices, and they select particular routes based on a wide variety of factors. If traffic congestion on one arterial increases, it may not make sense to expand the capacity of that arterial. The City, instead, may want to shift traffic to a nearby under-used arterial, or to expand capacity on a different nearby arterial, or to implement measures to reduce travel demand -- or a combination of these strategies. Accordingly, this analytic methodology focuses on a "traffic-shed," an area where arterials among which drivers logically can choose are organized for functional analysis.

Transportation Figure A-135 lists, for each screenline, the forecasted year 2010 v/c ratio with the Comprehensive Plan, and the forecasted year 2010 v/c ratio with the Alternative Scenario. (This Figure supplements the more limited information provided in Transportation Figure 3 in Section E. of the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element.)

As can be seen in Transportation Figure A-135, the forecasted screenline v/c ratios for the year 2010 under the Comprehensive Plan range from 0.23 to 1.13. For each screenline that serves as a level-of-service (LOS) screenline, the forecasted year 2010 v/c ratio is below the LOS standard established for that screenline. For all screenlines, the forecasted year 2010 v/c ratio under the Alternative Scenario is higher than the corresponding v/c ratio under the Comprehensive Plan. For some screenlines, the year 2010 v/c ratio values under the Alternative Scenario exceed the established LOS standards.

By analyzing the forecasted year 2010 v/c ratios under the Comprehensive Plan at screenlines in or near Urban Centers, one can evaluate the effects of the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies on the transportation systems in the Urban Centers. Each of the five Urban Centers is addressed below.

Downtown: Screenlines 10.11, 12.12, A1, A2, and A3 pass through or along the edge of the Downtown Urban Center, some encompassing north-south avenues, and some encompassing east-west streets. For all five of these screenlines, the year 2010 v/c ratios under the Comprehensive Plan are below 1.0. This means that for screenlines 10.11 and 12.12, the year 2010 v/c ratios are also below the established LOS standards of 1.0 for screenline 10.11 and 1.2 for screenline 12.12.

Seattle Center: For the Seattle Center Urban Center, screenline A4 is an east-west screenline while screenline A5 is drawn north-south through the Urban Center. For both of these screenlines, the year 2010 v/c ratios under the Comprehensive Plan are well below 1.0.

First Hill/Capitol Hill: Screenlines A6, A7, and A8 are drawn through the First Hill/ Capitol Hill Urban Center. Screenline 12.12, on the east edge of the Downtown Urban Center, is on the west edge of the First Hill/Capitol Hill Urban Center. For all four of these screenlines, the year 2010 v/c ratios under the Comprehensive Plan are well below 1.0.

University District: For the University District Urban Center, screenlines 5.16 and 13.13 cover the south and west boundaries of the Urban Center, while screenline A9 passes east-west through the Center and screenline A10 is drawn north-south through the Center. The year 2010 v/c ratios under the comprehensive Plan for all four of these screenlines are below 1.0. The forecasted year 2010 v/c ratios for screenline 5.16 are nearly 1.0, compared to the LOS standard of 1.2. These high v/c ratios reflect traffic congestion around the University District, much of which is due to through traffic.

Northgate: For the Northgate Urban Center, screenline A11 is drawn east-west through the Center, while screenline A12 passes north-south through the Center. The year 2010 v/c ratios for both of these screenlines are well below 1.0.

The Comprehensive Plan includes policies to improve transit service and related transit capital facilities, as well as to improve non-motorized transportation facilities, to afford ways for people to avoid the traffic congestion inherent in dense Urban Centers and Urban Village areas. In this way, people may avoid the congestion reflected in higher v/c ratios across some screenlines.

As this analysis of transportation impacts demonstrates, the forecasted year 2010 screenline volume-to-capacity ratios under the Comprehensive Plan do not exceed the established LOS standards for any screenlines. For the additional screenlines created for this traffic forecast analysis, the forecasted year 2010 v/c ratios are similarly within acceptable ranges. As provided in Comprehensive Plan Policy T23, when the calculated v/c ratio for a screenline approaches the LOS standard for that screenline, the City will pursue strategies to reduce vehicular travel demand across the screenline and/or increase the operating capacity across the screenline. Based on the analysis of screenlines described here, there are currently no additional capacity or facility needs necessitated by the Plan. (Appendix C amended 7/95)

Transpo Fig A-142 (NEW)

This section describes the City's intergovernmental coordination efforts during the development of the Comprehensive Plan, and potential impacts of the plan on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions.

Seattle is an active member of the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), which is charged with certifying that local transportation plans are consistent with regional plans and goals. The City supported PSRC's Vision 2020, a transportation/land use plan that describes linking high-density residential and employment centers throughout the region by high capacity transit and promoting a multi-modal transportation system. Vision 2020's goals are carried forward by this Comprehensive Plan.

The PSRC provides population, employment, and transportation data to Seattle and other jurisdictions -- coordination is established via this centralized information resource.

In addition, the PSRC is charged with allocating federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act funds. Seattle has participated in establishing the criteria and selection process to determine how funds will be distributed among transportation projects.

The City will continue to coordinate activities related to transportation planning and financing with the PSRC beyond the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.

Countywide coordination for growth management planning has occurred through ad hoc groups organized by King County. Seattle's Planning and Engineering Departments and the Department of Construction and Land Use participate in the Transportation Work Group. Other members of the Transportation Work Group include Metro (now part of Metropolitan King County), PSRC, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), and other cities and counties in the region. The group, and its sub-groups, provided technical information and advice to a group of city and county planning and public works directors, and contributed to the development of the Countywide Planning Policies.

The City will continue to participate in these work groups beyond the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.

The City sponsored intergovernmental coordination activities through an intergovernmental team with representatives from various City departments, Metro, King County, WSDOT, Port of Seattle, PSRC, and other interested agencies. This team contributed to the analysis and policy direction contained in this plan and participated in the review of draft products. This coordination effort will continue beyond the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan.

Four jurisdictions are adjacent to the City of Seattle: the City of Shoreline, King County, and the City of Lake Forest Park along Seattle's north boundary, and the City of Tukwila and King County along Seattle's south boundary. In consultation with adjacent jurisdictions, several major arterials that lie within these jurisdictions near the Seattle border were selected for analysis. For each arterial, the existing p.m. peak hour traffic volume and forecasted year 2010 traffic volume were compared to the "planning capacity" of the arterial, yielding a volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio. The results of this analysis are shown in Transportation Figure A-146.

For all but one of the arterials shown in Transportation Figure A-146, the p.m. peak hour v/c ratio is below 1.0, indicating that there is remaining traffic capacity currently and forecasted for the future. The exception is Bothell Way N.E. just north of N.E. 145th Street, where the existing v/c is estimated to be 1.03, and the forecasted year 2010 v/c is estimated to be 1.10.

These traffic volume and v/c figures reflect not only growth under Seattle's Comprehensive Plan, but also growth in the adjacent jurisdictions and throughout the central Puget Sound region. Much of the traffic on these arterials is through traffic, with neither an origin nor a destination near the arterial.

In addition to the City of Seattle's analysis of transportation impacts on adjacent jurisdictions, as described in this section, Seattle continues to work with the adjacent jurisdictions to coordinate traffic operations and to minimize cross-boundary impacts.

(Section amended 7/95)