Lynnwood to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study Option 7a SR 99 BRT Exclusive) This is a BRT option with more than 50 percent of its operation in exclusive transitway. Its route would include SR 525, SR 99, and Evergreen Way, and it would operate primarily in exclusive lanes Figure 5-5). Notable characteristics include: Option 7a would be HCT BRT in exclusive lanes for most of the route with shared arterial lanes in Alderwood Mall Boulevard and Alderwood Mall Parkway), exclusive lanes on SR 525, direct access to exclusive center lanes on SR 99/Evergreen Way from SR 525 to 41st Street, and shared lanes on Rucker Avenue and Pacific Avenue to the Everett Station. Potential stations would be near City Center, Alderwood Mall, and Swamp Creek Park-and-Ride. Only two of the following four stations would be provided: SR 525/SR 99, Airport Road/SR 99, 100th Street SW/Evergreen Way, and SR 526/Evergreen Way. Other stations would be at 41st Street/Rucker Avenue, downtown Everett, and Everett Station. Roadway improvements for Option 7a could include constructing exclusive HCT BRT lanes in SR 525 inside or outside), a flyer stop station at SR 525 and 164th Street SW, direct access between SR 525 and SR 99/Evergreen Way center HCT BRT lanes, and left-turn widening at critical intersections. Option 7b SR 99 BRT Non-Exclusive) This is a corridor-based BRT option operating on SR 525, SR 99, and Evergreen Way. The majority of its route would be in shared and/or BAT lanes Figure 5-5). Notable characteristics include: Option 7b would facilitate BRT operation with the majority of the route using shared lanes and/or BAT lanes. The route would share arterial lanes in Alderwood Mall Boulevard and Alderwood Mall Parkway); share or use shoulder i.e., hard shoulder running during peak periods) along SR 525; travel along SR 99/Evergreen Way in either a shared outside lane or an existing/added BAT lane between SR 525 and 41st Street; and use shared lanes on Rucker Avenue and Pacific Avenue to the Everett Station. Potential stations would be near City Center, Alderwood Mall, Swamp Creek Parkand-Ride, SR 525/SR 99, Airport Road/SR 99, 100th Street SW/Evergreen Way, SR 526/Evergreen Way, either Madison Street/Evergreen Way or 52nd Street SE/Evergreen Way, 41st Street/Rucker Avenue, downtown Everett, and Everett Station. Roadway improvements could include adding BAT lanes along SR 99/Evergreen Way where needed, improving the shoulder along SR 525 to accommodate shoulder use, installing a flyer stop station at SR 525 and 164th Street SW, and providing transit priority treatments at signalized intersections along SR 99/Evergreen Way. 5-8 Final Report

LARCH WAY LARCH WAY Station icinity Major Transit Facilities Existing) BRT At-grade, Exclusive BRT At-grade, Shared Snohomish River Station icinity Major Transit Facilities Existing) BRT At-grade, Exclusive BRT At-grade, Shared Snohomish River PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers Option 7a Full HCT BRT in exclusive lanes on SR 99 Bus rapid transit on arterials to reach new transit lanes along SR 525, then turning north to SR 99 and Evergreen Way with new transit lanes to near downtown Everett, then in mixed traffic on arterials to Everett Station. MKILTEO Center BRT exclusive lanes Paine GP +HCT lane each way) Field 525 AIRPORT RD. Shared lanes on arterials EERETT 526 EERGREEN WAY 112th ST. 99 W. MARINE IEW DR. COLBY AE. 19th AE. SE Downtown Everett I 5 2 Everett Station Rucker / 41st Evergreen Way / SR 526 ** Evergreen Way / 100th ** PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers Option 7b BRT in shared lanes on SR 99 Similar to 7a until SR 99, with semi-exclusive lanes on SR 99 and Evergreen Way to near downtown Everett, then in mixed traffic on arterials to Everett Station. Create BAT lanes for BRT on Evergreen Way - SR 525 to Airport Rd.: Construct MKILTEO 3rd lane Paine - Airport Rd. to 41st: Convert 3rd lane to BAT Field 525 AIRPORT RD. Shared lanes on arterials EERETT 526 EERGREEN WAY 112th ST. 99 W. MARINE IEW DR. 2 Evergreen Way / 52nd ** I 5 COLBY AE. 19th AE. SE Everett Station Rucker / 41st Evergreen Way / 100th Downtown Everett Evergreen Way / Madison ** Evergreen Way / SR 526 MKILTEO SPEEDWAY SR 99 / Airport Rd. ** MKILTEO SPEEDWAY SR 99 / Airport Rd. 128th ST. 128th ST. Widen to define exclusive BRT lanes. ROW available 99 525 SR 99 / SR I 5 525 ** ASH WAY SR 525 / 164th 164th ST. SW Direct access connection from MILL CREEK SR 525 to center SR 99 BRT in shared lane or shoulder - running in Peak 99 525 SR 99 / SR I 5 525 ASH WAY SR 525 / 164th 164th ST. SW MILL CREEK EDMONDS Transit Center 196th ST. SW City Center Alderwood Mall I 405 Shared lane on arterials EDMONDS Transit Center 196th ST. SW City Center Alderwood Mall I 405 BRT in shared lane WOODWAY 0 0.5 1 2 ** Only two of these stations will be included MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER Figure X-X Option 7a Full HCT BRT in exclusive lanes on SR 99 WOODWAY ** Only one of these stations will be included MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER Figure X-X Option 7b BRT Level in shared 1 lanes on SR 99 Miles Figure 5-5 Options 7a and 7b to Everett HCT Corridor Study

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study Option 8 I-5/SR 99 Light Rail This is a light rail transit option along I-5, Airport Road, and Evergreen Way Figure 5-6). Notable characteristics include: This alignment would run along the west side of I-5 from Transit Center to 128th Street SE Mariner Park-and-Ride), along 128th Street SE/Airport Road to SR 99, and then either the east or west side of SR 99/Evergreen Way. This option would be mostly elevated but at-grade opportunities will be explored. Potential light rail stations would be near City Center, Alderwood Mall, Ash Way Parkand-Ride, Mariner Park-and-Ride, Airport Road/SR 99, 100th Street SW/Evergreen Way, SR 526/Evergreen Way, 41st Street/Rucker Avenue, downtown Everett, and Everett Station. Option 9 SR 525/SR 99/I-5 Light Rail This light rail transit option would operate along SR 525, SR 99, and I-5 Figure 5-6). Notable characteristics include: From Transit Center to SR 525 the route would travel along the west side of I-5 and then along the east or west sides of SR 525 and SR 99. At SR 99/SE Everett Mall Way the route would travel east to I-5 along Everett Mall Way and then continue north along the west side of I-5. This option would be mostly elevated but at-grade opportunities will be explored, particularly along SR 525. This option would operate with peak and midday headways of 12 minutes and off-peak headways of 20 minutes. Potential light rail stations would be near City Center, Alderwood Mall, Swamp Creek Park-and-Ride, SR 525/SR 99, Airport Road/SR 99, 100th Street SW/Evergreen Way, Everett Mall, and Everett Station. 5-10 Final Report

LARCH WAY LARCH WAY Station icinity Major Transit Facilities Existing) At-grade Elevated PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers Option 8 on I-5 / SR 99 Mixed at-grade and elevated light rail alignment, running along west side of I-5 before turning west at 128th Street SW to Airport Road to SR 99, where it would be mostly elevated until downtown Everett to Everett Station. 525 MKILTEO Paine Field MKILTEO SPEEDWAY AIRPORT RD. EERETT 128th ST. I 5 526 EERGREEN WAY 112th ST. 99 Snohomish River W. MARINE IEW DR. COLBY AE. 19th AE. SE 2 Everett Station Rucker / 41st I 5 Evergreen Way / 100th SR 99 / Airport Rd. Downtown Everett Evergreen Way / SR 526 Station icinity Major Transit Facilities Existing) At-grade Elevated PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers Option 9 on SR 525 / SR 99 / I-5 Light rail following I-5 to SR 525 mostly at-grade) and then elevating to run up SR 99 to Everett Mall Way to I-5, and then mostly at-grade north along I-5 to Everett Station. 525 MKILTEO Paine Field MKILTEO SPEEDWAY AIRPORT RD. EERETT 128th ST. 526 EERGREEN WAY SR 99 / SR 525 I 5 112th ST. 99 Snohomish River W. MARINE IEW DR. COLBY AE. 19th AE. SE Evergreen Way / 100th SR 99 / Airport Rd. I 5 2 Everett Station Everett Mall EDMONDS 99 Transit Center 196th ST. SW 525 ASH WAY City Center I-5 / 164th I 405 164th ST. SW Alderwood Mall MILL CREEK EDMONDS 99 Transit Center 196th ST. SW 525 ASH WAY SR 525 / 164th City Center I 405 164th ST. SW Alderwood Mall MILL CREEK Figure X-X WOODWAY Miles X-X MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER WOODWAY MONTLAKE TERRACE Option 8 BRIER Figure 5-6 0 0.5 1 2 Option 9 on I-5 / SR 99 on SR 525 / SR 99 / I-5 Level 1 Options 8 and 9 to Everett HCT Corridor Study

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study 5.1 Evaluation Results Table 5-1 summarizes the Level 1 evaluation results, with key findings discussed below. 5.1.1 Paine Field/ Everett Area Options Among the three options that directly served the Paine Field/ Everett area, Option 1 performed the highest overall. Option 1 light rail on I-5, Airport Road, SR 526) generally had higher ratings than Option 2 light rail on SR 525/Airport Road/SR 526/SR 99) or Option 3 BRT on I-5/Airport Road/SR 99), including increased reliability and reduced travel time over Option 3. Option 1 had better regional connectivity than Option 2, and was less disruptive to other transit modes than either of the other two options. Option 1 also provided better service to major centers and nodes such as City Center and Ash Way by staying on I-5 at the south end of the corridor. Option 3 generally performed lower overall, and duplicated existing and planned Swift BRT service. All of the Paine Field/ Everett options performed well in regional connections, land use/development, and transportation impact measures, but they all also had higher costs than the other Level 1 options due primarily to longer distances. 5.1.2 I-5 Options Paine Field/ Everett area already has a high volume of aerospace and air-transport related businesses and industries Between the two options that were focused along I-5, Options 4 I-5 Light Rail) and 5 I-5 BRT) performed similarly. Option 4 scored slightly higher with better reliability, travel time improvement, and economic development. However, Option 5 had better results for costs i.e., lower capital cost estimate). Overall, both of these I-5 options performed well on transportation measures and comparative costs. They both would provide the best leverage of existing infrastructure compared to other options. However, they both also performed lower than other corridor options on land use and surrounding station area development or multimodal accessibility measures. This is largely because I-5 and other connecting transportation facilities in the potential station areas already occupy a large amount of the land in the immediate vicinity, which both limits the potential for redevelopment and presents physical barriers to multimodal access. 5-12 Final Report

Table 5-1. Level 1 Options Evaluation Results Summary LEEL 1 OPTIONS EALATION RESLTS SMMARY /Paine Field Options I-5 Options SR 99 Options I-5/SR 99 Options Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5 Option 6a Option 6b Option 7a Option 7b Option 8 Option 9 I-5/Airport Way/SR 526 SR 525/ Airport Road/SR 526/SR 99 I-5/Airport Road/SR 99 BRT I-5 I-5 BRT SR 99 Elevated SR 99 Atgrade SR 99 Exclusive Lanes BRT SR 99 Shared Lanes BRT I-5/SR 99 SR 525/SR 99/I-5 Travel Market Potential Reliability Travel Time Disruption to Other Modes Station Area Development Potential Cost Complexity Environmental Effects Lower Performing Higher Performing February 7, 2014

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study 5.1.3 SR 99 Options The four options along SR 99 and Evergreen Way examined light rail and BRT in exclusive and mixed traffic or non-exclusive) environments. Option 6a SR 99 Light Rail Elevated) performed the highest overall, with better reliability and travel time improvement than the other options. It also was less disruptive to other modes than Option 6b atgrade light rail on SR 99) or Option 7a BRT in exclusive lanes on SR 99), both of which would reconfigure SR 99/Evergreen Way and change their operations. Both of the BRT options 7a and 7b) were less costly and would be less complex to build than either of the light rail options 6a and 6b). Option 7b SR 99 BRT in shared lanes) performed better than the other three options regarding economic development and environmental effects because it would have the least change to the roadway or adjacent properties, and it had more stations. Overall, the SR 99 options performed well on most measures, although right-of-way constraints and congestion affect the surface running options and the SR 525 corridor provide fewer supportive land uses near the potential stations. All of the options could conflict with or duplicate existing Swift BRT service that currently operates along SR 99/Evergreen Way between Aurora illage and Everett Station in a mix of BAT lanes and shared lanes. It is possible that the existing Swift service could be an underlay service to a light rail option, and perhaps even a center-running high-capacity busway option; however, it would be redundant with Option 7b BRT on SR 99 in BAT lanes), and some form of consolidation of routes would be warranted in this case. In addition, the light rail options would all need a rail operations and maintenance facility, and the lack of large enough sites near a SR 99 alignment would be a challenge. 5.1.4 I-5/SR 99 Options Evergreen Way, in a section similar to parts of SR 99, where rights-of-way are constrained Between the two options with alignments that followed a mix of I-5 and SR 99, Options 8 I-5/SR 99 Light Rail) and 9 SR 525/SR 99/I-5 Light Rail) performed similarly. Option 8 performed best for regional connectivity and economic development combining the best elements of the I-5 and SR 99 concepts), while Option 9 performed better in relation to lower costs and complexity. Also, Option 9 allows for better placement of an Everett Mall Station than an I-5 route, even though it misses higher-rated I-5 stations particularly I-5 at 164th Street SW/Ash Way) in the southern part of the corridor. Overall, both options performed similar to other options with similar features. 5-14 Final Report

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study 6 LEEL 2 OPTIONS The five Level 2 options that emerged from the Level 1 evaluation combined the most promising features of the previous options. The choices that moved forward centered on how well they were able to serve higher ridership stations and areas targeted for major growth, while still offering an improvement in transportation service. A primary element for those options that were advanced was in the southern portion of the corridor, where the I 5 alignments from Transit Center up through 164th Street SW Ash Way) offered the best opportunities to connect s City Center to Ash Way. Ash Way has the largest transit center and park and ride in the corridor communities between and Everett. It is also one of the urban centers targeted for new growth by Snohomish County, and is already experiencing high levels of development around the current park and ride. Finally, via 164th Street SW, Ash Way is a major east west access point to I 5 transit service for communities to the east and west of I 5. Level 1 corridor options that transitioned to the west to SR 99 did not serve a comparable center; moreover, SR 99 already has Swift BRT service, which would overlap with HCT if they shared the same alignment. Portions of some Level 1 options posed notable challenges, such as where an alignment involved large amounts of new right of way, or would negatively affect the operation of roadways or other transportation facilities, without offering notably lower costs, competitive travel times, or access to high growth or high ridership station areas. Option choices that moved forward from Level 1 involved sub routes or design approaches that avoided these major impacts, operating constraints, or major engineering challenges. The Level 1 findings and Level 2 refinements were shared with area jurisdictions and agencies, including the Cities of Everett and, Snohomish County, WSDOT, and Community Transit. Further design details of the options, including maps with the assumed alignments, station areas, typical profiles, and operating and travel time estimates were developed. These formed the basis for more detailed evaluations of benefits, costs, and impacts, which are reported below. 6.1 Level 2 Options Definition The options evaluated in Level 2 are described below and illustrated in Figures 6 1 through 6 5. Final Report 6 1

LARCH WAY Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_A_Concepts.mxd Station icinity Parking Available at Station Major Transit Facilities Existing) At-grade Elevated PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers EDMONDS Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) Miles WOODWAY 0 0.5 1 2 525 MKILTEO Transit Center 99 196th ST. SW MKILTEO SPEEDWAY 525 AIRPORT RD. ASH WAY MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER 128th ST. I 5 I 405 526 City Center Paine Field EERETT EERGREEN WAY 112th ST. 99 164th ST. SW Snohomish River W. MARINE IEW DR. Downtown Everett SR 99 / Airport Rd. I-5 / 164th Alderwood Mall I-5 / 128th COLBY AE. 19th AE. SE I 5 MILL CREEK BOTHELL 2 Everett Station Evergreen Way / 52nd Evergreen Way / SR 526 Figure 6-1 Option A, / Paine Field, Everett to Everett HCT Corridor Study

LARCH WAY Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_B_Concepts.mxd Station icinity Parking Available at Station Major Transit Facilities Existing) At-grade Elevated PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers EDMONDS Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) Miles 0WOODWAY 0.5 1 2 525 MKILTEO 99 Transit Center 196th ST. SW MKILTEO SPEEDWAY Paine Field 525 AIRPORT RD. ASH WAY MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER City Center EERETT 128th ST. I 5 I 405 526 EERGREEN WAY 112th ST. 99 I-5 / 164th 164th ST. SW Alderwood Mall Snohomish River W. MARINE IEW DR. I-5 / 128th BOTHELL COLBY AE. 19th AE. SE I 5 MILL CREEK Everett Mall Figure 6-2 Option B on I-5 2 Everett Station to Everett HCT Corridor Study

LARCH WAY Station icinity Parking Available at Station Major Transit Facilities Existing) At-grade Snohomish River Elevated PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers W. MARINE IEW DR. Downtown Everett 2 Everett Station Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_C_Concepts.mxd EDMONDS Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) Miles 0WOODWAY 0.5 1 2 525 MKILTEO Transit Center MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER 99 196th ST. SW MKILTEO SPEEDWAY Paine Field 525 AIRPORT RD. ASH WAY City Center EERETT 128th ST. I 5 I 405 526 EERGREEN WAY MILL CREEK BOTHELL COLBY AE. I 5 Evergreen 99 Way / 100th 112th ST. SR 99 / Airport Rd. I-5 / 128th I-5 / 164th 164th ST. SW Alderwood Mall Evergreen Way / Madison Evergreen Way / Casino Rd 19th AE. SE Figure 6-3 Option C on I-5, SR 99 and Evergreen Way to Everett HCT Corridor Study

R Parking Available at Station Major Transit Facilities Existing) BRT in shared lanes PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Along Broadway in BAT lanes Snohomish County rban Centers BRT At-grade, Shared W. MARINE IEW DR. r ive Snohom ish P Â Station icinity Downtown Everett se existing direct access at Broadway BAT lanes along Evergreen Way/Rucker P Â 2 Everett Station Broadway / 41st BRT in shared lanes or shoulder running in peak on SR 526 COLBY AE. EERETT Evergreen Way / Madison 525 B RO A DW AY I5 526 N EE GR M 128th ST. P Â P Â 19th AE. SE ER E EE 112th ST. I-5 / 112th I-5 / 128th I5 H 525 AS P Â New pedestrian bridge to median flyer stop Alderwood) MILL CREEK WA Y Expand existing direct access - build to/from north I-5 / 164th LARCH WAY 164th ST. SW 99 se existing direct access 99 SP New pedestrian bridge to median flyer stop 128th) AY DW access Field W AY AIRPORT RD. MKILTEO se existing Paine direct O TE KIL Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_D_Concepts.mxd BRT in existing HO lanes shared) Alderwood Mall 196th ST. SW EDMONDS Transit Center I 405 Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) 0WOODWAY 0.5 1 Miles 2 MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER BOTHELL Figure 6-4 Option D BRT on I-5 with / Paine Field Connection to Everett HCT Corridor Study

LARCH WAY Station icinity Parking Available at Station Major Transit Facilities Existing) BRT At-grade, Exclusive Snohomish River BRT At-grade, Shared PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers Shared lanes on arterials W. MARINE IEW DR. Downtown Everett 2 Everett Station Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_E_Concepts.mxd Widen to define exclusive BRT lanes. ROW available, hard running shoulders EDMONDS Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) Miles 0WOODWAY 0.5 1 2 525 Create center MKILTEO BRT exclusive Paine lanes 3GP +HCT lane each way) Field Transit Center MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER 99 196th ST. SW MKILTEO SPEEDWAY 525 AIRPORT RD. ASH WAY EERETT 128th ST. I 5 I 405 526 SR 525 / 164th City Center EERGREEN WAY 112th ST. 99 164th ST. SW Alderwood Mall I 5 Direct access connection from MILL CREEK SR 525 to center of SR 99 BOTHELL COLBY AE. 19th AE. SE I 5 Evergreen Way / Casino Rd. Evergreen Way / 100th SR 99 / Airport Rd. Evergreen Way / Madison BRT in shared lanes until SR 525 interchange Shared lane on arterials Figure 6-5 Option E Full HCT BRT on I-5, SR 99 and Evergreen Way to Everett HCT Corridor Study

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study 6.2 Option A: I-5/Airport Road/SR 526 Light Rail From Transit Center to 128th Street SW Mariner Park and Ride), the Option A route would travel along the west side of I 5. At Mariner Park and Ride, it would travel along 128th Street SW and Airport Road to the Paine Field/ Everett area, and then east along SR 526 back to Evergreen Way. From there, the route would travel north along the east or west side of Evergreen Way and Rucker Avenue before heading east to Everett Station on Pacific Avenue. Key characteristics for Option A include the following: Mostly elevated with some short at grade portions one along I 5 south of 128th Street SW, and the other along Airport Road adjacent to the Paine Field aviation facility 12 minute headways all day 5 am to 1 am). Potential light rail stations near City Center, Alderwood Mall, Ash Way Park and Ride, Mariner Park and Ride, SR 99/Airport Road, Paine Field,, Evergreen Way/SR 526, Evergreen Way/52nd Street SE, and Everett Station 6.3 Option B: I-5 Light Rail The majority of Option B would run along the west side of I 5 within the WSDOT right of way, with the exceptions of the northern terminus at Everett Station, which would be reached from I 5 via Smith Avenue, and the southern terminus, which would connect to City Center Station via 200th Street SW and Alderwood Mall Boulevard. Key characteristics for Option B include the following: Mostly elevated with a short at grade portion along I 5 south of 128th Street SW 12 minute headways all day 5 am to 1 am) Potential light rail stations near City Center, Alderwood Mall, Ash Way Park and Ride, Mariner Park and Ride, Everett Mall, and Everett Station 6.4 Option C: I-5/SR 99 Light Rail This option would run along the west side of I 5 from Transit Center to 128th Street SW Mariner Park and Ride), continue west along 128th Street SW and Airport Road to SR 99, and then travel north along either the east or west side of SR 99 and Evergreen Way 1. Key characteristics for Option C include the following: Mostly elevated alignment with a short at grade portion along I 5 north of 164th Street SW 12 minute headways all day 5 am to 1 am) 1 At this level of analysis, the merits of an alignment along either the east or west side of SR 99/Evergreen Way appear comparable. For the purposes of the conceptual design and cost estimates, the alignment is assumed on the east side; however, further design and analysis would be needed to determine the relative differences in effects for either side. Final Report 6 7

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study Potential light rail stations near City Center, Alderwood Mall, Ash Way Park and Ride, Mariner Park and Ride, SR 99/Airport Road, Evergreen Way/100th Street SW, Evergreen Way/Casino Road, Evergreen Way/Madison Street, downtown Everett, and Everett Station 6.5 Option D: I-5 BRT Option D consists of two separate BRT routes: 1) Transit Center to Everett Station via I 5, and 2) Everett Station to via Pacific Avenue, Evergreen Way/Rucker Avenue, and SR 526. Key characteristics for Option D include the following: The majority of the I 5 route would travel along the existing I 5 HO lanes, utilizing direct access HO or transit facilities to access stations. Between I 5 and the Everett Station, the route would use the direct access ramps to/from Broadway, continue along Broadway in BAT lanes, and then along 33rd Street in shared lanes. Between Everett Station and, the route would travel along Pacific Avenue and the northern portion of Rucker Avenue in shared lanes. South of 41st Street SW, buses would travel in BAT lanes on Rucker Avenue and Evergreen Way south to SR 526. On SR 526, buses would use the shoulder during the peak periods as an exclusive transit running way, and travel in the shared general purpose lanes at other times. From SR 526, the route would travel north on Seaway Boulevard to its terminus transit center at 75th Street SW where it would interface with local transit and circulator shuttles. 12 minute headways all day 5 am to 1 am) Potential stations would be near Alderwood Mall, Ash Way Park and Ride, Mariner Park and Ride, South Everett Park and Ride, and Broadway/41st Street SW; Everett Station for the to Everett route; and downtown Everett, Evergreen Way/Madison, and for the Everett to route. Infrastructure improvements would include an I 5 median flyer stop station for Alderwood Mall, including pedestrian access facilities connecting the flyer stop and the mall area via the Alderwood Mall Parkway overcrossing of I 5; new direct access transit ramps between I 5 HO lanes and the Ash Way Park and Ride to/from the north; an I 5 median flyer stop station for Mariner Park and Ride, including pedestrian access facilities connecting the flyer stop and the park and ride; and new BAT lanes on Broadway and Evergreen Way/Rucker Avenue. Connection to the Paine Field/ Everett area from the south is anticipated from a future Community Transit Swift line running between Canyon Park and via SR 527, 128th/132nd Streets, Airport Road, and Seaway Boulevard. The planned Swift route would interface with Option D near the Mariner Park and Ride Station. 6.6 Option E: SR 99 BRT Option E features BRT in exclusive lanes for most of the route with some operation in shared arterial lanes in Alderwood Mall Boulevard and Alderwood Mall Parkway). However, this option will have exclusive center transit lanes on SR 525, direct access connectors to exclusive center transit lanes on SR 99/Evergreen Way from SR 525 to 41st Street SW, and 6 8 Final Report

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study shared lanes on Rucker Avenue and Pacific Avenue to Everett Station. Key characteristics for Option E include the following: 12 minute headways all day 5 am to 1 am) Potential stations near City Center, Alderwood Mall, Swamp Creek Park and Ride, SR 99/Airport Road, Evergreen Way/100th Street SW, Evergreen Way/Casino Road, Evergreen Way/Madison Street, downtown Everett, and Everett Station Infrastructure improvements including construction of exclusive center BRT lanes on SR 525, a flyer stop station at SR 525 and 164th Street SW, direct access connector ramps between SR 525 and SR 99/Evergreen Way center BRT lanes, SR 99/Evergreen Way exclusive center running lanes, and left turn widening at critical intersections along SR 99/Evergreen Way. 6.7 Evaluation Results The Level 2 evaluation results are summarized in Table 6 1, and the summary ratings are shown in Table 6 2. The narrative below discusses how each of the options performed in relation to each major criterion category. Ridership: Options A and C, both light rail, performed highest overall with respect to ridership, with projected daily riders in 2035 ranging from approximately 36,000 to 51,000 depending on headway assumptions. Option B, also light rail, was the next highest performing corridor with approximately 32,000 to 43,000 daily riders. The two BRT options, Options D and E, were lowest performing for ridership, with an estimated 12,000 to 21,000 daily riders between the two options. Light rail option A, B, and C would have a peak carrying capacity of 2,960 passengers per hour per direction. BRT Options D and E would have capacity to carry only 400 passengers per hour per direction during peak travel times a fraction of the three light rail options. Reliability: Options A, B, and C have the potential to be the most reliable corridors. These three options are all light rail with fully exclusive guideways. No at grade signalized intersections would be traversed for Options B and C. Potential delays from two at grade signals along Airport Road at 106th Street SW and 100th Street SW would be minimized by transit signal priority for Option A. Option E received a medium performance rating due to the highest number of at grade intersections traversed 44 intersections) and some travel in non exclusive guideways 4.8 miles). Option D was lowest performing for reliability due to a high number of at grade signalized intersections traversed 31 intersections including the Connector) combined with travel in non exclusive guideways i.e., the shared I 5 HO lanes) for 11.3 miles. Final Report 6 9

Table 6-1. Level 2 Options Evaluation Results Summary LEEL 2 EALATION RESLTS SMMARY Option A Option B Option C Option D Option E I-5/Airport Road/ SR 526 I-5 I-5/SR 99/ Evergreen Way I-5/ Connector BRT SR 99/ Evergreen Way BRT Ridership Ridership Total daily riders on project 37,000 to 50,000 32,000 to 43,000 36,000 to 51,000 14,000 to 21,000 12,000 to 18,000 Capacity Peak passenger capacity per hour per direction 2,960 2,960 2,960 400 400 Reliability Travel time reliability Potential travel time delays due to congestion or traffic control number of at-grade signals 2 0 0 31 44 crossed) Travel time reliability Miles of operation on non-exclusive guideway 0 0 0 11.3 4.8 Travel Time Potential to improve transit connections, compared to existing services i.e., rider benefits) Potential to improve transit connections, compared to existing services i.e., rider benefits) Disruption to Other Modes Potential Transportation System Effects Potential peak period travel time improvements between Everett and other regional centers compared to existing to : -15 min to Everett: -26 min to Everett: -7 min to : No improvement to Everett: -1 min to Everett: -18 min to : -1 min to Everett: -6 min to Everett: -11 min to : No improvement to Everett: -13 min to Everett: -10 min to : No improvement to Everett: No improvement to Everett: No improvement Number of transfers to reach regional transit system at Transfer Not Required Transfer Not Required Transfer Not Required Transfer Required Transfer Required Qualitative effects to existing transportation systems, including impacts to local bus service, general purpose traffic operations, freight and non-motorized modes, and parking Station Area Development Potential Ability to Equitably Serve Communities Potential to support economic development Potential to support economic development Connections/compatibility with local/regional system Improve connections between activity centers Presence of low-income, minority or zero-car populations in the corridor within 0.5 mile of alignment), compared to the general population. and type of potentially developable land within 0.5 mile of potential station areas Degree to which locally adopted land use plans support future development Quality of transit and ped/bike connections Number of identified existing and future activity centers within 0.5 mile of station areas weighted by intensity of use Low to Moderate Effects Low Effects Low to Moderate Effects Low to Moderate Effects Moderate to High Effects Moderately High Medium Moderately High Medium High Medium Medium Moderately High Medium Medium High Medium Moderately High Moderately High Medium Connects to two large PRs and Swift stations on Evergreen Way/SR 99; mixed ped access to stations Five out of eleven stations with high activity levels Connects to three large PRs and no Swift stations on Evergreen Way/SR 99; generally poor ped access to stations Four out of six stations with high activity levels Connects to two large PRs and Swift stations on Evergreen Way; mixed ped access to stations Five out of ten stations with high activity levels Connects to four large PRs and Swift stations on Evergreen Way; very good ped access to stations Five out of nine stations with high activity levels Connects to two large PRs and Swift stations on Evergreen Way/ SR 99; good ped access to stations Five out of nine stations with high activity levels

Table 6-1. Level 2 Options Evaluation Results Summary continued) LEEL 2 EALATION RESLTS SMMARY Option A Option B Option C Option D Option E I-5/Airport Road/ SR 526 I-5 I-5/SR 99/ Evergreen Way I-5/ Connector BRT SR 99/ Evergreen Way BRT Station Area Development Potential Cont d) Walkability access Cost Population and employment within 0.5 mile radius Captures pop and emp at: - City Center - Alderwood Mall - Planned growth at I-5/128th St - SR 99/Airport Road - Downtown Everett Station at SW Everett Industrial Center serves this area with the greatest employment Follows I-5 and captures the least pop and emp within 0.5 mile of the potential stations Captures pop and emp at: - City Center - Alderwood Mall - Planned growth at I-5/128th St - SR 99/Airport Road - Downtown Everett The route does not divert to serve SW Everett Industrial Center Follows I-5 and captures the least pop and emp within 0.5 mile of the stations. However, the segment from Everett Station to SW Everett Industrial Center serves two high employment centers, increasing the rating above Option B Captures pop and emp at: - City Center - Alderwood Mall - Along SR 99 - Downtown Everett The route does not divert to serve SW Everett Industrial Center Capital cost Capital cost estimate $M) $2,530 $3,420 $1,690 $2,290 $2,360 $3,190 $190 $260 $480 $650 Cost Effectiveness Complexity Constructability Construction impacts challenges - Construction near Paine Field - Construction impacts to traffic - Truck volumes - tility drainage conflicts - Overhead transmission lines Maintenance Base Considerations Environmental Effects General requirements for new right-of-way and associated implications to the built natural environment Potential availability and ease of access to maintenance and storage facility Potential for impacts due to right of way needed, including impacts to communities, natural resources, or other environmental components e.g., properties, parks, open space, wetlands, etc.). Moderately Low Moderate Moderately Low High Low Accessible to potential site near Paine Field - Truck volumes - tility drainage conflicts - Overhead transmission lines Accessible to potential site near I-5/SR 526 interchange - Construction impacts to traffic - Truck volumes - tility drainage conflicts - Overhead transmission lines No easily accessible sites other than near Everett Station ses existing roadways for majority of route Multiple sites available - High construction impacts to traffic - tility drainage conflicts Multiple sites available Moderately High Effects Moderately Low Effects Moderately High Effects No Effects Moderate Effects Community Impacts Noise impacts Moderate to High Effects Moderate Effects Moderate to High Effects Low to Moderate Effects Moderate Effects Community Impacts Impacts on access and parking Moderate to High Effects Low Effects Moderate to High Effects Low to Moderate Effects High Effects Natural environmental impacts Presence of wetlands, streams, or natural habitats along the corridor Moderately Low Effects Moderately Low Effects Moderately Low Effects Low Effects Moderately Low Effects

Table 6-2. Level 2 Options Evaluation Ratings Summary LEEL 2 EALATION RATINGS SMMARY Option A Option B Option C Option D Option E on I-5/ Airport Way/SR 526 I-5 on I-5/ SR 526/Evergreen Way I-5 BRT SR 99 BRT Ridership Reliability Travel Time Disruption to Other Modes Station Area Development Potential Cost Cost Effectiveness Complexity Environmental Effects Lower Performing Higher Performing

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study Travel Time: Transit travel times were developed for three trips: to Everett, to the Paine Field/ Everett area, and the Paine Field/ Everett area to Everett. Travel time improvements compared to existing conditions were calculated and weighted for the three trips as follows: the trip between and Everett was given a weight of 3, while the other two trips were given a weight of 1. This weighting reflects the regional importance of connecting Everett to because this link would provide connections to the rest of the region. This evaluation category also considered whether an option required a transfer to connect to the regional light rail system in because a transfer inherently requires more time. Light rail options would not require a transfer, but BRT options would. nder these assumptions, Option A received the highest overall performance rating for travel time improvements between regional centers, followed by Options B and C. Option A would provide the greatest improvement for trips to the Paine Field/ Everett area, while Option B would provide the greatest improvement in travel to the Transit Center. These trips, however, could continue on light rail to reach the rest of the regional system, enhancing travel times for trips on a regular basis. Option D received the next highest overall rating, with medium level travel time improvements to and from Everett, while Option E received the lowest rating with no travel time improvements compared with existing conditions. The two BRT options also rated lower because they would require a transfer to reach the regional rail system at. Disruption to Other Modes: Multiple factors are used to assess this measure category, including estimated effects on the following: General traffic operations Freight movement and mobility Property Access Parking Pedestrian travel Bicycle travel Local transit operations Overall, Option B received the highest performance rating for being the least disruptive to other modes of transport because it would be expected to have negligible negative effects on the modal elements listed above. Options A, C, and D were next highest in performance with low to moderate impacts on the transportation system. Option E, which would require taking a general purpose lane in each direction, received the lowest performance rating because it would be the most disruptive to other modes. The disruption would primarily be to general purpose traffic, which would have less capacity with the implementation of the center transit lanes on SR 99/Evergreen Way. Final Report 6 13

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study Station Area Development Potential: Option A received the highest performance rating for having the most potential for development in its station areas. This option serves the most activity centers, has the greatest potential to support economic development based on existing land uses, and has the highest amount of population and employment captured within 0.5 mile of the stations. Options C and D were next highest in performance, followed by Option E. Option B has the least potential to support station area development. This option has less total acreage in proximity with redevelopment potential, in part because it has the fewest number of stations. Similarly it captures the least amount of population and employment around station areas by following I 5. Cost: Options D and E, the BRT options, received the highest performance ratings because they had the lowest costs. Option D had a capital cost estimate of $190 to $260 million and approximately $17 million in annual operation and maintenance OM) costs, and Option E had a capital cost estimate of $480 to $650 million and approximately $14 million in annual OM costs. Option B received a slightly lower performance rating for having a higher capital cost estimate, ranging from $1,690 to $2,290, but similar OM costs as the two BRT options at a little over approximately $14.5 million per year. Options A and C, both light rail options, received the lowest ratings with capital cost estimates ranging from $2,360 to $3,420 million. These two options also had the highest estimated OM costs of approximately $17 to $19 million per year. Cost Effectiveness: The measure of cost effectiveness balances the cost of the alternatives compared to their ridership. Option D with BRT connecting to /Paine Field, had about half the ridership of several other alternatives but by far the lowest cost, which made it the most cost effective. Option B, with along I 5, had moderately high costs along with high ridership, which made it the next most cost effective. The other two alternatives Options A and C) had lower ratings; while having high ridership, their costs were the highest of the alternatives. Option E was the lowest, mostly due to lower ridership, even though it had the second lowest costs of the alternatives. Complexity: Option B and Option D performed the best in regards to complexity. Construction for Option B would likely have very little effect on traffic flow along the city streets and I 5, and would be accessible to a potential maintenance facility site near the I 5/SR 526 interchange. Option D would have the least construction impacts and risks by utilizing existing roadways for the majority of the BRT route. This option also would have an easily accessible maintenance and storage facility primarily because a bus maintenance site does not need to be immediately adjacent to the BRT alignment. Options A and E received slightly lower ratings for having moderate impacts on construction, but easy access to maintenance and storage facility locations. Option C performed the worst for complexity due to its expected moderately high construction impacts and challenges, and no easily accessible maintenance and storage facility site. 6 14 Final Report

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study Environmental Effects: Options B and D were highest performing for having the least potential adverse effects on communities and environmental resources. Options A, C, and E received medium ratings for having moderate impacts on residential neighborhoods, community facilities, parks, wetlands, and streams. Final Report 6 15

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study 7 COLLEGE EXTENSION OPTION EALATION This section summarizes the evaluation results for a BRT or light rail extension of the Level 2 options from Everett Station north to Everett Community College. The evaluation assessed the contribution the potential extension would have on the five Level 2 options defined through the previous screening, Level 1, and Level 2 evaluations. The same criteria applied to Level 2 options were used to assess the effects of the extension; the results are described for each option. For each measure, a summary shows whether the extension would be likely to change the comparative rating of the Level 2 options ratings from highest performance to lowest). A general summary also shows the relative change in select quantitative measures, such as distance, travel time, cost, and ridership. 7.1 College Extension Option Definition Figure 7-1 illustrates the extension to College Station for the five Level 2 options. All of them would continue north from the Everett Station and transition to Broadway, terminating near Tower Street adjacent to the Everett Community College. Light rail and BRT would have different configurations at both Everett Station and at the college, due to their different operating characteristics, design requirements for curves, and the need for light rail to have tail tracks at the terminus. The light rail option for the extension would be elevated and on the west side of Broadway. This option includes tail tracks at the College Station terminus near Tower Street instead of at Everett Station. Potential stations would be at Hewitt Street near the Comcast Arena), at 19th Street, and at the college. For light rail Option B, from I-5, the route would continue past the station and then curve over Pacific Avenue and across a corner parcel to reach the The college and the medical center complex could both be served by a potential extension Final Report 7-1

LARCH WAY Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Figure_XX_Level_2_All_Options_Concepts_CollegeTerminus.mxd Parking Available at Station Station icinity College Extension Option A ) Option B ) Option C ) Option D BRT) Option E BRT) Routes W. Marine iew Dr. Rucker Ave. Option A ) Option B ) Option C ) Option D BRT) Option E BRT) PSRC-designated Centers City Designated Centers Snohomish County rban Centers 11th St. 15th St. 19th St. 23rd St. Everett Ave. Everett Community College Broadway EDMONDS Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) Miles 0WOODWAY 0.5 1 2 Everett Community College 19th Walnut St. Downtown Everett I-5 Everett Station Broadway / 41st Transit Center 525 MKILTEO 99 196th ST. SW MKILTEO SPEEDWAY Paine Field Paine Field 525 MONTLAKE TERRACE BRIER AIRPORT RD. SR 99 / Airport Rd. SR 525 / 164th ASH WAY City Center Downtown Everett Evergreen Way / 52nd EERETT 128th ST. I 5 I 405 526 EERGREEN WAY 112th ST. 99 164th ST. SW I-5 / 164th Alderwood Mall Snohomish River W. MARINE IEW DR. I-5 / 128th COLBY AE. 19th AE. SE I 5 Evergreen Way / Madison I-5 / 112th MILL CREEK 19th Figure 7-1 BOTHELL All HCT Options plus a potential College Extension to Everett HCT Corridor Study Everett Community College 2 Everett Station Evergreen Way / SR 526 Everett Mall Broadway / 41st Evergreen Way / Casino Evergreen Way / 100th

to Everett High Capacity Transit Corridor Study west side of Broadway. For light rail Options A and C, which would connect to Everett Station from SR 99/Evergreen Way, the route would be realigned from Evergreen Way to travel west along 41st Street SW to I-5 to allow access into Everett Station from the south and to be aligned to continue north. This rerouting would remove the potential station along Pacific Avenue in downtown Everett, but the extension would then add a downtown station at Hewitt Street. The BRT option for the extension would have BAT lanes running on the east and west sides of Broadway, removing existing parking lanes. The route into Everett Station from the Level 2 options remains generally unchanged. At the north terminus of the extension, the BRT route would terminate in a triangular loop, following North Broadway to Tower Street, and then back on Broadway. This route is similar to the configuration for some Everett Transit buses serving the college, where a small transit station with layover is currently located. 7.2 Evaluation Results The evaluation results for the college extension are summarized below for the light rail and BRT options. Table 7-1 shows summary results of the college extension for key criteria for each of the options in comparison to results with just the base option. Light Rail Options A, B, and C Extending light rail to a terminus near Everett Community College would result in about 6.5 minutes travel time between Everett Station and College Station on an elevated, exclusive guideway. Because the route leading to Everett Station for Options A and C would need to be modified in order to extend the line north to the Community College, the net change in travel time would be different adding about 4 minutes to the original travel time to Everett Station for Option A, and about 5 minutes for Option C. This extension would add 1,600 to 5,000 daily riders, with the most significant increase in daily riders for Option B. Parking, local access, and turn movements would be affected. The same number of activity centers in downtown Everett would be served in addition to medical and college centers to the north. Added capital costs for the extension would range from $230 to $460 million, with the highest for Option B. Bus Rapid Transit Options D and E An extension to College Station would take roughly 14 minutes on average for BRT more than double the time of an elevated light rail. This extension would add between 1,800 and 2,400 daily riders. Reliability would decrease with the extension due to the high number of intersections. The extension would remove parking but otherwise result in few changes to traffic. The same number of activity centers in downtown Everett would be served in addition to the medical and college centers to the north. Added capital costs for the extension would range from $10 to $20 million. Final Report 7-3

Table 7-1. College Extension Options Effect on Level 2 Evaluation Results L E E L 2 E A L A T I O N R E S LT S S M M A R Y Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) Length 0 0.5 1 Miles 2 Travel Time -Everett) Ridership Cost * with College Extension option I 405 Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) 0 0.5 1 Miles Figure 2 X-X Option A, / Paine Field, Everett to Everett HCT Corridor Study I 405 Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) 12.6 miles 14.8 miles* R ish ish Snohom I5 525 526 Miles Figure 2 X-X Option B on I-5 to Everett HCT Corridor Study Paine Field 99 525 526 526 Paine Field 99 99 525 99 I 405 Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) 0 0.5 1 Miles Figure 2 X-X Option C on I-5, SR 99 and Evergreen Way to Everett HCT Corridor Study I5 I5 I5 14.0 miles 15.6 miles* I5 I5 99 1 2 525 0.5 r 2 0 i ve EERETT EERETT I5 99 SR 99/Evergreen Way BRT r 525 15.7 miles 17.3 miles* 99 Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Options_Simplified\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_D_ConceptsSimple.mxd Paine Field 99 525 I5 I5 525 99 526 Paine Field Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Options_Simplified\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_C_ConceptsSimple.mxd R R ish Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Options_Simplified\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_B_ConceptsSimple.mxd 525 526 Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Options_Simplified\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_A_ConceptsSimple.mxd Paine Field i ve 2 EERETT 2 I5 I5 Option E I-5/ Connector BRT r 525 i ve EERETT 2 EERETT I-5/SR 99/Evergreen Way r ish i ve Option D Path: P:\3164_SoundTransit\LynwoodToEverett\mapdocs\Figures\Level 2\Options_Simplified\Figure_XX_Level_2_Option_E_ConceptsSimple.mxd Snohom R I-5 r Snohom i ve ish R I-5/Airport Road/SR 526 Option C Snohom Option B Snohom Option A 525 99 I 405 I 405 Data Sources: Snohomish County, SGS, OSM) 19.6 miles 23.5 miles* 0 0.5 1 Miles Figure 2 X-X Option D BRT on I-5 with / Paine Field Connection to Everett HCT Corridor Study 13.6 miles 18.1 miles* 33 min 37 min* 22 min 29 min* 29 min 34 min* 30 min 44 min* 50 min 64 min* 37,000 50,000 daily riders 39,000 53,000 daily riders* 32,000 43,000 daily riders 35,000 48,000 daily riders* 36,000 51,000 daily riders 39,000 53,000 daily riders* 14,000 21,000 daily riders 15,000 23,000 daily riders* 12,000 18,000 daily riders 13,000 20,000 daily riders* $2,530 $3,420 m $2,760 $3,720 m* $1,690 $2,290 m $2,070 $2,810 m* $2,360 $3,190 m $2,590 $3,490 m* $190 $260 m $200 $270 m* $480 $650 m $490 $660 m* Figure X-X Option E Full HCT BRT on I-5, SR 99 and Evergreen W to Everett HC Corridor Study