APTD-1444
TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS
TO REDUCE
MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS
IN SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
APTD-1444
TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS
TO REDUCE MOTOR
VEHICLE EMISSIONS
IN SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
Prepared by
GCA Corporation
GCA Technology Division
Bedford, Massachusetts
Contract No. 68-02-0041
EPA Project Officer: Fred Winkler
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
December 1972
-------
The APTD (Air Pollution Technical Data) series of reports is issued
by the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Office of Air and
Water Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, to report technical
data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies of APTD reports
are available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors
and grantees, and non-profit organizations as supplies permit from
the Air Pollution Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, or may be obtained,
for a nominal cost, from the National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
GCA Corporation, Bedford, Massachusetts, in fulfillment of Contract
No. 68-02-0041. The contents of this report are reproduced herein
as received from GCA Corporation. The opinions, findings, and conclusions
expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the
Environmental Protection Agency.
Publication No. APTD-1444
11
-------
Acknowledgements
Many individuals and several organizations have been helpful in
carrying out this study; for these contributions the GCA Technology
Division extends its sincere gratitude.
Continued project direction and guidance were given by Mr. Fred
Winkler (Project Officer) and Mr. Dave Tamny of the Land Use Planning
Branch, EPA, Durham, North Carolina, and Mr. Jerry A. Kurtzweg (Co-
Project Officer) of EPA Region X.
Many members of local and state agencies supplied data and criti-
cal analysis to the study.
Alan M. Voorhees, Inc., acted as subcontractors to GCA Technology
Division and supplied major input to the study especially in the areas
of traffic data, control strategies and implementation obstacles.
ill
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Title
I INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
A. BACKGROUND
B. PURPOSE, SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
C. CONTENT OF REPORT
D. SUMMARY OF PROBLEM AND REQUIRED TRANSPORTATION
CONTROLS
II VERIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF AIR POLLUTION II-l
PROBLEM
A. OUTLINE OF METHODOLOGY II-l
1. General II-l
2. Methodology for Carbon Monoxide II-2
3. Discussion of Methodology for Carbon II-4
Monoxide
4. Methodology and Discussion for Oxidants II-8
B. DISCUSSION OF 1970-1972 AIR QUALITY LEVELS II-9
1. Natural Features Affecting Pollution Poten- II-9
tial
2. Monitoring -Network 11-13
3. Review of Air Quality Data 11-14
4. Impact of Stationary Sources 11-37
C. DISCUSSION OF 1971 and 1977 VEHICLE MILES OF 11-40
TRAVEL
1. General 11-40
2. Methodology 11-40
D. DERIVATION OF 1977 AIR QUALITY LEVELS 11-54
1. General 11-54
2. Estimation of CO Levels 11-56
3. Estimation of Oxidant Levels 11-65
E. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE LEVELS IN 1978 AND 11-72
1979
F. SUMMARY OF PROBLEM AND CONCLUSIONS 11-74
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Section Title
II 1. Implementation Flan Assessment of CO and
Oxidant Problems
2. Current Assessment of CO and Oxidant
Problems
III EVALUATION OF CANDIDATE TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS III-l
A. GENERAL III-l
B. STRATEGY EVALUATION III-4
1. Continue to Support the METRO Transit III-5
Program
2. Develop Fringe Parking with PRT Links to III-8
Downtown
3. Incentive Retrofit Programs III-9
4. Gaseous Conversion 111-10
5. Implement the Proposed 1-5 Surveillance, III-ll
Control and Ramp Metering Program
6. Develop Means to Bypass Through Traffic in 111-12
Downtown
7. Driver Advisories 111-14
8. Car Pools, Staggered Hours, and Staggered III-14
Days
9. Improved Signal Systems 111-16
10. Discourage Use of Older Vehicles 111-16
C. SUMMARY AND IMPACT 111-17
IV SELECTION OF TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS AND ESTIMATE
OF AIR QUALITY IMPACT IV-1
V OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTATION OF SELECTED CONTROLS V-l
A. GENERAL V-l
B. INSTITUTIONAL OBSTACLES V-l
C. LEGAL OBSTACLES V-2
D. POLITICAL AND SOCIAL OBSTACLES V-3
E. ECONOMIC OBSTACLES V-3
F. TECHNICAL OBSTACLES V-4
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
Section Title 3*S&-
VI SURVEILLANCE REVIEW PROCESS VI~l
APPENDIX A - VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL A-1
APPENDIX B - TABULATIONS OF VEHICULAR EMISSIONS B"1
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Number Title Page
1-1 Summary emission and CO air quality data for Seattle 1-8
CBD
II-l Average mixing depths and wind speeds at SEA-TAC 11-12
Airport
II-2 Summary of CO and Oxidant monitoring from 1/1/70 11-15
to 5/31/72
II-3 Summary of maximum 1-hour CO concentrations (in ppm) 11-17
at seven locations in the Seattle area
II-4 Maximum 1-hour CO concentrations (in ppm) observed 11-22
at Food Circus, Seattle.
II-5 Maximum 1-hour CO concentrations (in ppm) observed 11-23
at Smith Tower and Duwamish (5th and Michigan)
Seattle.
II-6 Maximum 1-hour CO concentration (in ppm) observed 11-24
at three locations in Seattle
II-7 Maximum 1-hour CO concentrations (in ppm) observed 11-25
at the Municipal Building, Seattle
II-8 Summary of maximum 8-hour CO concentrations (in ppm) 11-27
at 7 locations in Seattle.
II-9 Summary data for estimating required reductions in 11-28
CO emissions.
11-10 Summary of maximum 1-hour concentrations of total 11-29
oxidants (in ppm) at 6 locations in Seattle.
11-11 Maximum 1-hour concentrations of total oxidants (in 11-33
ppm) at Food Circus, Seattle.
11-12 Maximum 1-hour concentrations of total oxidants (in 11-34
ppm) observed at Smith Tower and Duwamish (5th and
Michigan), Seattle.
11-13 Maximum 1-hour concentrations of total oxidants (in 11-35
ppm) observed at three locations in Seattle
vn
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Cont.)
Table
Number Title 2§££
11-14 Summary data for estimating required reductions in 11-36
hydrocarbons emissions
11-15 Major point sources of CO emissions-King County (1970) 11-38
11-16 Major point sources of hydrocarbons emissions-King 11-39
County (1970)
11-17 Guideline average speeds (mph) 11-44
11-18 Percent of daily traffic by hour 11-46
11-19 Vehicle mix and classification 11-48
11-20 Vehicle age mix 11-49
11-21 CO emission estimates for King County in 1970 11-59
11-22 CO emission estimates for Puget Sound Intrastate 11-60
A.Q.C.R.
11-23 Summary data for Zone 21(CO) 11-64
11-24 Hydrocarbon emissions estimates for King County in 11-68
1970
11-25 Hydrocarbon emission estimates for Puget Sound 11-69
Intrastate A.Q.C.R.
11-26 Summary data for central 23 square mile area 11-71
(hydrocarbons-oxidants)
11-27 Projected CO emission levels in 1978 and 1979, 11-73
without strategies
III-l Potential strategies by feasibility grouping - III-2/3
Seattle area
III-2 Summary and evaluation of strategies for reduction 111-18
of CO emissions
IV-1 Vehicle miles traveled in 1977 for selected IV-2
strategies
IV-2 Impact of selected strategies on air quality in 1977 IV-3
Vlll
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Cent.)
Table
Number Title Page
IV-3 1977 CO emissions in the Seattle CBD by model year IV-4
and vehicle type
VI-1 Surveillance review process VI-2
IX
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Number Title
II-1 Annual surface wind roses at two Seattle-Tacoma
area airports for calendar year 1969.
II-2 Sketch of Seattle area showing locations of seven 11-16
monitoring sites.
II-3 Diurnal variation of CO concentration at the Muni- 11-19
cipal Building, Seattle, by season.
II-4 Diurnal variation in CO concentration at 5 loca- 11-20
tions in Seattle.
II-5 Diurnal variation of CO concentration at Food 11-21
Circus, Seattle, by season.
II-6 Diurnal variation in total oxidant concentration 11-30
at 5 locations in Seattle.
II-7 Diurnal variation in total oxidant concentration 11-32
at Food Circus by season.
II-8 Locations of One-Mile-Square Grids - Seattle Area 11-42
II-9 Percent of Average Daily Traffic by Hour - Seattle 11-45
Area
11-10 Daily vehicle miles per square mile. Grid locations 11-55
are: Seattle, 1-32; Renton, 33-37; Bellevue, 38-41;
Tacoma, 42-47; Everett, 48.
11-11 Maximum 8-Hour CO emission densities (KGM/Sq. Mile) 11-58
in Seattle. Upper values are for 1971, lower values
are 1977 emissions based on Federal Motor Vehicle
Control Program.
11-12 1971 vehicle miles traveled in Seattle CBD. Freeway 11-62
VMT's are indicated by the letter F. Approximate
locations of monitoring stations are shown by the
symbol A .
11-13 Hydrocarbon emission densities (KGM/Sq.Mi.) in 11-67
Seattle for 6 A.M. - 9 A.M. period. Upper values
are for 1971, lower values are 1977 emissions based
on Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program.
-------
LIST OF FIGURES (Cont.)
Figure
Number Title Page
III-l Blue Streak mode split curves III-7
VI-1 Projected 8-hour CO concentration in Seattle CBD VI-3
based on 1971 data
XI
-------
I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
A. BACKGROUND
States were required to submit implementation plans by January 30,
1972, that contained control strategies demonstrating how the national
ambient air quality standards would be achieved by 1975. Many urban areas
could not achieve the carbon monoxide and oxidant air quality standards
by 1975 or even 1977 through the expected emission reductions from the
1975 exhaust systems control. Major difficulty was encountered by many
states in the formulation of implementation plans that included transpor-
tation control strategies (including, for example, retrofit and inspection,
gaseous fuel conversions, traffic flow improvements, increased mass tran-
sit usage, car pools, motor vehicle restraints, and work schedule changes).
Because of the complex implementation problems associated with transpor-
tation controls, states were granted until February 15, 1973 to study
and select a combination of transportation controls that demonstrated how
the national air quality standards would be achieved and maintained by
1977.
B. PURPOSE, SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
The purpose of the study reported on herein was to identify and
develop transportation control strategies that will achieve the carbon
monoxide and oxidant air quality standards required to be met by the
State of Washington in the Seattle urban area by the year 1977. As part
of the study, calculations of motor vehicle emissions were also carried
1-1
-------
out for central areas of Tacoma and Everett. The results of the
study were to help determine the initial direction that
the State of Washington should take in selecting feasible and effective
transportation controls. It was anticipated that the control strategies
outlined in this study would be periodically revised in the coming years.
The State's Implementation Plan was analyzed to verify and assess the
severity of the carbon monoxide and oxidant pollutant problems, and the
most promising transportation controls and their likely air quality impact
were determined. Major implementation obstacles were noted after discus-
sions with those agencies responsible for implementing the controls, and
finally, a surveillance review process (January, 1973 - December, 1976,
inclusive) was developed for EPA to use in monitoring implementation
progress and air quality impact of transportation control strategies.
It should be noted that the study was carried out relying on the
best data and techniques available during the period of the study and
further, that a large number of assumptions were made as to the nature of
future events. The 1977 air quality predictions were based on extant air
quality data and on predicted stationary source emissions and predicted
traffic patterns, and these predicted parameters themselves were based on
anticipated emission control techniques, anticipated growth patterns, and
the assumed outcome of unresolved legal and political decisions. Further,
the development, ranking and selection of transportation controls were
based on extant and predicted economic, sociological, institutional and
legal considerations. Finally, the surveillance process presented in this
1-2
-------
report, although showing key checkpoints towards implementation of the
recommended controls, is in itself dependent upon the same assumed pattern
of future events.
It should be emphasized therefore, that to the extent that the
time-scale of the recommended program permits, the conclusions and recom-
mendations of this report should not be construed as a program which
must be rigidly followed until 1977, but rather it should be regarded
first, as a delineation as to what appears at the present time to be a
feasible course of action to attain air quality goals, and secondly, as
a framework upon which an optimum on-going program can be built as new
data and techniques become available, as legal and political decisions
are made, and as the assumptions as to future events are, or are not,
validated.
C. CONTENT OF REPORT
Section II of this report describes how the pollutant concentra-
tion levels which could be expected to occur in 1977 in the Seattle area
were predicted. These levels were determined by an adaptation of the
proportional model using motor vehicle emissions from traffic patterns
predicted for 1977 together with predicted non-vehicular emissions for
1977 obtained from state agencies. Comparison of these predicted 1977
air pollutant concentrations with the national air quality standards en-
abled the computation of the motor vehicle emissions which would result
in the air quality standards being met, and therefore, to what extent,
if any, reductions in the predicted .1977 motor vehicle emissions would be
required. In order to determine the pollutant concentration(s) which
1-3
-------
was to serve as the basis for the proportional model, an intensive evalu-
ation of all existing meteorological and air quality data was performed.
The final determination as to the concentration value used was made in
close cooperation with representatives of local and state agencies and
of EPA.
Section III describes how candidate control strategies were de-
veloped, evaluated and ranked having regard to technical, legal, insti-
tutional, sociological and economic criteria. An important feature of
this task was the continuing interaction between, on one hand, the GCA
study team, and on the other hand, representatives of local and state
environmental planning and transportation agencies, concerned citizen's
groups, and EPA representatives.
Section IV presents the rationale for selecting the optimum pack-
age of controls necessary to achieve the required reduction in motor
vehicle emissions and also presents the confirmed effect on air quality.
Section V deals in detail with the obstacles to the implementation
of the selected strategies. Since the obstacles to implementation were
important criteria in the evaluation of the feasibility of candidate
transportation controls, there is considerable discussion on such ob-
stacles in earlier sections.
Section VI presents the surveillance review process which will
enable EPA to monitor the implementation progress and air quality impact
of the recommended strategies. Curves showing predicted air quality lev-
els for the years 1973 to 1977 and beyond are presented, based on the
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program alone, and on the federal program
1-4
-------
in conjunction with three recommended transportation control strategies.
These curves indicate the rate at which air quality should improve as
time passes and as controls are implemented. In addition, important
checkpoints are provided delineating the salient actions which must be
taken in order to implement the strategies.
It should be noted, however, that the surveillance process thus
provided is of necessity based on the problem, and the concomitant trans-
portation controls as they are presently perceived. An equally important
part of any surveillance process is the continuing reassessment of both
the problem itself and the appropriateness of the required controls. As
was discussed earlier in this Introduction, the present study employed a
whole range of both of extant data and techniques, and also of assump-
tions about the course of future events. This data base should be con-
tinuously reviewed as new information becomes available. Thus, although
the key background parameters are called out in the Surveillance Process,
a thorough and continuing review of all the data, techniques and assump-
tions contained in this report will be required to properly update the
problem definition and appropriate control measures.
D. SUMMARY OF PROBLEM AND REQUIRED TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS
The analysis described in the body of this report indicates a
need for transportation control strategies to reduce CO emissions within
Seattle's central business district if the national 8-hour average standard
for CO concentration is to be met by 1977. On the other hand, the avail-
able data indicate that the oxidant standard and the 1-hour average
1-5
-------
CO standard will be met throughout the urban area by means of the Fed-
eral Motor Vehicle Control Program alone. This assessment is based on
recently acquired data and is somewhat at variance with the assessment
made in the Implementation Plan which was based upon air quality measure-
ments made in 1970 near a major freeway and indicated that both CO and
oxidant problems would still be present in Seattle in 1977 unless trans-
portation control strategies were adopted.
After evaluating a large number of possible controls, three
strategies are recommended for implementation. They are:
(1) METRO Transit development
(2) Fringe parking with Personalized Rapid Transit (PRT)
(3) Improved downtown signal system
These three strategies together provide about one-third of the reduction in
emissions required to meet the national 8-hour standard. The remaining re-
duction can be achieved through strategies which directly limit emissions
from operating vehicles, such as retrofit, gaseous conversion of fleet
vehicles and inspection, or by strategies which eliminate older vehicles
from the CBD. A table of 1977 emissions by model year and vehicle type
is included in Section IV to facilitate selection of a workable combina-
tion of these strategies. The single strategy of excluding all pre-con-
trolled vehicles from the CBD, in conjunction with Strategies 1, 2, and
3 above, is judged to be just sufficient. A margin of safety can be intro-
duced by means of additional strategies, if desired. The general use of
retrofit systems with the requisite annual inspection and maintenance pro-
gram, results in reductions considerably greater than required, but is not
looked upon with favor by the State of Washington at the present time.
1-6
-------
Table 1-1 summarizes the CO problem and the cumulative effects
of Strategies 1, 2, and 3 plus the exclusion of pre-controlled vehicles. It
is emphasized again that the air quality estimates are "best estimates" based
on available data and the proportional model. Also, experience shows that con-
siderable variation in the maximum (or second highest) 8-hour concentration will
be experienced at a given sampling location from year to year even under
relatively constant emission rates. Finally, in addition to the temporal
variation in air quality at a given station, substantial spatial varia-
tions are to be expected within the CBD. The predicted concentrations
are presented in tenths of a part per million simply to indicate the
anticipated overall trend in air quality.
The analysis of hydrocarbon emissions indicated that emissions
from motor vehicles will decrease by 51 percent between 1971 and 1977 as
a result of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program and that total
emissions of hydrocarbons in the 23 square milt eontral gone of Seattle
will be 16 percent below the allowable level in 1977. Use of the oxi-
dant data used in the Implementation Plan, however, indicates the need
for an additional reduction in vehicular emissions of 6.6 percent.
-------
TABLE 1-1
SUMMARY EMISSION AND CO AIR QUALITY DATA FOR SEATTLE CBD
Without Strategies
1971
a)
2
Emission Densities (kg/8 hr/mi )
Vehicular
Non- vehicular
Total
14
14
,301
292
,593
1977
8,175
292
8,467
1978
6,951
292
7,243
1979
6,001
292
6,293
With Strategies (1977)
METRO
8,032
292
8,324
+ PRT +
7,875
292
8,167
Sis
7
7
.Sys.
,579
292
,871
+ Exclusion
6,275
292
6,567
b) Air Quality (8-hr average in ppm)
Observed (2nd highest) 20
Estimated H-6 9.9 8.6 11.4 11.2 10.8 9.0
2
c) Maximum Allowable Emission Level (kg/8 hr/mi )
Total Non-Vehicular Vehicular
6,567 292 6,275
d) Reduction in Vehicular Emissions from 1971 levels
Percent
From Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program 43
Additional Required by Transportation Control 13
Strategies
d) Reduction in Vehicular Emissions from 1977 "no strategy" level
Percent
Required by Transportation Control Strategies 23
-------
II. VERIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF AIR POLLUTION PROBLEM
A. OUTLINE OF METHODOLOGY
1. General
The basic procedure employed was to develop, for the urban
area of Seattle, pollutant concentration levels which could be expected
in 1977 without the application of transportation controls (the poten-
tial 1977 levels). Pollutant levels were determined by the proportional
model using non-vehicular emissions supplied by state agencies and using
vehicular emissions based on traffic data developed during the course of
this study. More sophisticated techniques could not be employed due to
the lack of suitable extant calibrated diffusion models, and the short
time period of the contract which precluded the development of a suitable
model and the required inputs. Comparison of-potential 1977 air quality
levels with the appropriate standard gave the allowable motor vehicle
emissions in 1977, which in turn formed the basis for the development of
transportation control strategies.
Emissions from non-vehicular sources were obtained from the
State Implementation Plan. Emissions from vehicular sources were computed
following the recommendations given in EPA draft publication An Interim
Report on Motor Vehicle Emission Estimation by David S. Klrcher and Don-
ald P. Armstrong, dated October 1972. Air quality data for each sensor
within the city area were reviewed and evaluated in close cooperation with
state and local agencies. The instrumental method and sensor location
II-l
-------
was studied and records of instrument maintenance and calibration examined
so as to identify questionable readings. Meteorological records were
then examined and compared with seasonal and diurnal variations in air
quality levels. Finally the pollutant concentration which would form
the basis for the proportional rollback calculations was decided upon in
concert with state and local agencies and EPA representatives. The year
in which this concentration level occurred defined the base year for the
proportional rollback calculations.
The detailed methodologies for carbon monoxide and oxidants
are presented separately below.
2. Methodology for Carbon Monoxide
Because ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide at any
given location appear to be highly dependent on carbon monoxide emissions
in the near vicinity, it was felt that some justification existed for a
modification of the proportional model. It was felt that in order to re-
duce ambient CO levels in, for example, a central business district (CBD),
it would be more appropriate to roll back CO emissions in the CBD itself,
rather than the entire air quality region. Accordingly, the Seattle
urban area was divided into 32 one-mile-square traffic zones (one of
these zones being identified as the CBD) and the assumption was made
that pollutant concentration in each zone was directly proportional to
the emission rate of the pollutant within that zone. Eighteen additional
one-mile-square zones were defined for urban areas in Tacoma, Renton
Bellevue, Everett, and on Mercer Island.
II-2
-------
The application of the proportional model, generalized for
an urban area with multiple monitoring stations, comprises the fol-
lowing steps:
Calculation of the total CO emission density (vehicular
plus non-vehicular) for each zone in which CO concen-
trations are available for the baseline year. (In prac-
tice, baseline emission densities were calculated for
all zones).
Selection of the observed CO concentration for rollback
computations at each monitoring station.
Calculation of an emission density/concentration (e/c)
ratio at each monitoring station.
Calculation of the allowable emission density in each
zone from the appropriate e/c ratio. (When measured
e/c ratios differ from zone to zone, or within a single
zone, the selection of an e/c ratio for general applica-
tion is largely a matter of judgment.)
Calculation of the total CO emission density for each
zone for 1977 on the assumption that no transportation
controls are imposed.
Calculation, where required, of the reduction in emis-
sions needed to meet the national air quality standard.
Although the principal contributing sources of CO to the
urban area.are motor vehicles, an attempt was made to apportion total CO
emissions to vehicular and non-vehicular sources. Non-vehicular emissions
II-3
-------
for the years of interest were estimated from the State Implementation
Plan which took into account predicted growth and predicted control
strategies. The predicted control strategies were generally those that
state agencies considered to be the maximum feasible, and therefore the
predicted non-vehicular emissions were assumed to be irreducible for the
purposes of this study. On the assumption that the predicted emission
densities from non-vehicular sources were to be taken as irreducible,
the allowable emissions from motor vehicles in each zone for the year of
interest were then determined. For the purposes of evaluating the ef-
fects of candidate transportation controls, the maximum allowable emis-
sion density for the year 1977 was expressed as a percentage reduction
from the 1977 "no strategy" emission density. However, as will be seen
in following sections of this report, as each traffic control was developed,
emissions were recomputed, using the revised VMT's and speeds resulting
from the application of the control measures.
3. Discussion of Methodology for Carbon Monoxide
a. Modified Proportional Model
The applications and the limitations of the conventional
proportional rollback method have been well documented and reviewed* and
need not be discussed further here. The technique used in the present
study was an extension of the conventional rollback technique to the ex-
tent that it was assumed first that the constant of proportionality be-
tween emissions and concentration may be derived from emissions emanating
from the relatively small area around the sensor (the traffic zone), and
second, that this constant of proportionality (the emission/concentration
Noel de Nevers. Rollback Modeling, Basic and Modified. Draft
Document, EPA, Durham, N.C.(August 1972).
II-4
-------
ratio) could be applied to determine pollutant concentrations in other
zones of comparable area on the basis of the pollutant emissions in those
zones.
Some justification of the first assumption can be found, for example,
^C -I-,!
in recent work of Hanna and Gifford who demonstrate the dominance of
urban pollution patterns by the distribution of the local area sources.
The success of their urban diffusion model, in which concentration is
simply directly proportional to the area source strength and inversely
proportional to wind speed, is attributed largely to the relatively uni-
form distribution of emission within an urban area and the rate at which
the effect of an area source upon a given receptor decreases with distance.
In the proportional model, meteorological effects, such as wind speed, are
assumed to be duplicated over one-year periods. The validity of the
second assumption depends, in large part, upon the extent to which
diffusion and transport parameters are uniform from zone to zone - a
factor which could not be investigated because of the constraints of
the program. Thus, it was felt that, in the absence of a more sophis-
ticated technique, the use of this extension to the proportional model
was justified first, to obtain some assessment as to whether the existing
sensors were located in the hot-spots, and second, to obtain some assurance
that transportation strategies intended to reduce emission densities in
one zone (to the level required to meet ambient standards) did not increase
Hanna, S.R., "A Simple Method of Calculating Dispersion from Urban
Area Sources," J. APCA 21_, 774-777 (December 1971).
**Gifford, F.A., "Applications of a Simple Urban Pollution Model,"
(paper presented at the Conference on Urban Environment and Second Con-
ference on Biometeorology of the Amer. Meteor. Soc., October 31 - Novem-
ber 2, 1972, Philadelphia, Pa.).
II-5
-------
emission densities to unacceptable levels in adjacent zones. In many
cities it was found that the sensors were, in fact, in the "hot spot"
zones and also that the recommended transportation controls did not
increase emissions in adjacent areas to unacceptable levels. Thus the
final rollbacks were confined to the zones with a sensor within their
boundaries and the extensions of the techniques to other non-sensor zones
did not, therefore, play a primary role in the final computations.
Experience in urban areas that had several sensors showed
that the emission concentration ratio differed substantially from zone
to zone and served to underline the fundamental limitations of the technique
employed. An implicit assumption in the technique employed was that the
air quality in a traffic zone could be fairly represented by one concen-
.ration level and that this level depended only upon the average emission
density within that zone. The two major factors mitigating against thia
assumption are:
(a) Emission densities are not uniform across
even a small traffic zone.
(b) Concentration levels are not uniform across
the traffic zone partly because of the lack
of uniformity of emission density and partly
because the point surface concentrations are
affected by micrometeorology and microtopo-
graphy as well as emission density.
Considerable judgment had to be used, therefore, both in the derivation
of e/c ratios and in their subsequent use. In heavily trafficked down-
town areas the variation was judged not to be too great, so that the
single recorded concentration might reasonably be expected to be repre-
II-6
-------
sentative of the zone's air quality and emission density. However, in
suburban zones having overall low traffic densities, sensors were often
found to be placed at very localized hot spots, such as a traffic circle,
so that the recorded concentration levels were neither representative of
the overall air quality nor of the overall emission density in the zone.
Accordingly, e/c ratios were generally derived from sensors
in the central areas of the cities and applied to suburban areas for the
prediction of 1977 concentration levels. This procedure gave air quality
levels which were generally representative of the suburban zone. However
it must be realized that control strategies based on this procedure, while
they may ensure that the overall air quality in a suburban zone will not
exceed ambient standards, do not preclude the occurrence of higher con-
centrations in very localized hot spots such as might occur in the
immediate vicinity of a major traffic intersection.
The analysis indicated that the Seattle CBD was the zone of
maximum emissions and that the use of air quality data from the Munici-
pal Building (located within the CBD) would provide a conservative approach
to rollback calculations. The analysis also indicated that rollback would
not be required in other zones. Thus, the final rollback calculations
were confined to a single zone (the CBD) with a sensor within its bound-
aries.
b. Seasonal and Diurnal Variations
The CO observations at the Municipal Building showed that
the 1-hour average concentration was much closer to the standard than the
II-7
-------
8-hour average, so that controls required to meet the 8-hour standard
would also result in the 1-hour standard being met. The diurnal varia-
tion of concentration at the Municipal Building showed clos correspond-
ence to the daily traffic flow. Thus, strategies which reduce emissions
over the extended daytime heavy traffic period should prove effective.
Traffic data were not available on a seasonal basis, so vehicle emissions
were based on annual average workday traffic data. Emission densities
were calculated for the 8-hour period during the day with maximum traffic.
c. Background Concentration
Background concentration levels of CO were not taken into
account. "Worst case" diffusion calculations indicated that the contri-
bution of point sources upon the CBD could be safely neglected in the
rollback calculations.
4. Methodology and Discussion for Oxidants
The technique employed for oxidants was basically the same as
has just been described for CO with the major difference that only one,
very much larger area, was used as the basis for the proportional roll-
back. Because of the length of time required for the formation of oxi-
dants from hydrocarbon emissions, the relatively small areas used as the
basis for CO could not be justified. The actual area used was largely a
matter of judgement and comprised 23 square miles in the heart of Seattle.
The reductions in hydrocarbon emissions necessary to achieve
oxidant ambient standards were obtained from Appendix J, Federal Register
of August 14, 1971.
Il-f
-------
B. DISCUSSION OF 1970-1972 AIR QUALITY LEVELS
1. Natural Features Affecting Pollution Potential
a. Topography
Seattle, with a population in excess of one million, is
located in the heart of the urbanized corridor of land which extends along
the eastern shoreline of Puget Sound from Tacoma in the south to Everett
in the north. Geographically, the Puget Sound area comprises a north-
south basin lying between the Olympic Mountains to the west and the
Cascade Mountain Range to the east. Mount Olympus rises to a height of
nearly 8000 feet due west of Puget Sound, and numerous peaks of the
Cascade Range east of the Sound extend above 8000 feet. Mount Ranier,
with an elevation of 14,410 feet, lies approximately 60 miles to the south-
east of Seattle. Seattle contains a number of low hills. It is bordered
on the east by Lake Washington.
b. Meteorology
Because of the north-south orientation of the principal
topographic features of the area, the prevailing winds are either from the
south or from the north. Differences in wind direction within the area may
be attributed to local variations in the terrain and to thermally driven
mesoscale circulations. Land-sea breezes and mountain-valley winds tend
to dominate the local circulation during periods of weak pressure gradient.
Figure II-1, taken from the Implementation Plan, shows clearly the effect
of different exposures on wind directions. The upper and lower wind roses
II-9
-------
NNE
NE
WNW,
ENE
WSW
Boeing Field
Seattle, Wash.
Seattle-Taooma
International Airport
wsw
ESE
SSW
SSE
Percentage Frequency of Occurrence
Scale
0 4 8 12 16 20
Percent of Observations
Speed Intervals (MPH)
1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-J4 25+
Figure II-l. Annual surface wind roses at two Seattle-Tacoma
area airports for calendar year 1969.
11-10
-------
were developed respectively from observations at Boeing Field, located
in the north-northwest to south-southeast oriented Duwamish Valley, and
at the Seattle-Tacoma (SEA-TAG) International Airport, located on a plateau
southwest of the valley about 6 miles south of Boeing field.
During winter, the presence of a semi-permanent low-pressure
area off the coast results in prevailing southerly winds over the Seattle
region. The wind shifts briefly to the north following the passage of
storms. In summer, the prevailing winds bring air from the Pacific
through the Straits of Juan de Fuca to the northern part of Puget Sound,
and from the Grays Harbor area south of Olympic Mountains to the southern
part of Puget Sound. Typically, this results in a northerly flow which
reaches the northern portions of King County, and southwesterly flow
over the southern Puget Sound Area. As would be expected, the transition
months of spring and fall exhibit circulation patterns found in both the
winter and summer seasons.
Diurnal variation in wind direction is most pronounced during
the summer season. Although the winds are predominantly northerly both
day and night north of Seattle, a westerly component is evident during
the daytime. Immediately south of Seattle, the daytime winds have a
northerly component, while the nighttime winds are predominantly southerly.
Table II-1 gives the average mixing heights and mean wind
speeds averaged through the mixing layer by season and time of day at the
SEA-TAG Airport. These data are taken from Table B-l of Mixing Heights, Wind
11-11
-------
TABLE II-1
AVERAGE MIXING DEPTHS AND WIND SPEEDS AT SEA-TAG AIRPORT
A. Average Mixing Depths (m)
Summer Fall Annual
Morning 626 681 532 476 578
Afternoon 585 1490 1398 898 1092
B. Average Mixing Layer Wind Speeds (m sec"1)
Winter Spring Summer Fall Annual
Morning 5.1 4.6 4.0 4.3 4.5
Afternoon 4.7 5.7 4-8 4-6 4-9
11-12
-------
Speeds, and Potential for Urban Air Pollution Throughout the Contiguous
United States, by George C. Holzworth (Office of Air Programs Publication
No. AP-101, EPA).
2. Monitoring Network
a. General
Monitoring for oxidants and CO in the Seattle region is
carried out jointly by the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE)
and the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA). The respon-
sibilities of each organization, the concepts used in designing the
monitoring network, and details of network operation and data handling
are covered in the Implementation Plan. Only details of particular
relevance to the present study will be repeated here.
b. Type of Instrumentation
CO Analyzer - CO measurements are made by the EPA reference
method (non-dispersive infrared spectrometry). The MSA units in use are
operated continuously. They are calibrated by zero and span gas references
every working day. Water discrimination is accomplished by silica gel
drying columns changed three times each week.
Oxidant Analyzer - Oxidant measurements are made with
Mast Ozone Meters. This instrument depends upon the oxidation of iodide
to iodine and a subsequent coulometric reduction back to iodide for its
operation. It detects all oxidants reducible by the iodide ion unlike
the ozone-specific EPA reference method (chemiluminescence). The analyzers
are equiped with SOo scrubbers to minimize interferences. Major maintenance
11-13
-------
and dynamic calibration are performed every six months.
c. Monitor Locations
Concentration measurements made at seven sites in the
Seattle area during the period January 1970 - May 1972 were available
for analysis. The period of observations at the individual sites ranged
from two months to two years and five months. Table II-2 gives the
7 locations and specifies the period over which the pollutants were
measured at each location. The approximate geographic location of the
seven sites is given in Figure II-2.
3. Review of Air Quality Data
a. General
The CO and total oxidant concentrations observed at the
seven monitoring stations during the periods listed in Table II- 2 were
reviewed in detail. The inclusion of data collected since submission of
the Implementation Plan is believed to increase substantially the reliability
of the baseline concentrations used in projecting air quality and estimating
rollback requirements.
b. CO Air Quality Data
Table II-3 gives the highest 1-hour average concentration
observed at each site during each month of the sampling periods. The
national standard of 35 ppm was reached or exceeded once at 1-5 and Dearborn
(in Oct. 1970) and once at the Municipal Building (in Feb. 1972).
ri-14
-------
TABLE II-2
SUMMARY OF CO AND OXIDANT MONITORING FROM 1 JAN 1970 TO 31 MAY 1972
Height
Site Above
Name
Food
Circus
Smith
Tower
1-5 &
Westlake
Mall
Munici-
pal Bldg
McMicken
Hts.
Duwamish
Address Agency Pollutants Ground (ft) Location
Seattle DOE CO, Oxidants 70
Center
506-2nd Ave. DOE CO, Oxidants 225
Dearborn PSAPCA CO, Oxidants 55
5th & Pine PSAPCA CO, Oxidants 15
5th & James DOE CO 15
So. 176, PSAPCA CO, Oxidants 15
42nd Ave. S.
5th & Michigan DOE CO, Oxidants 30
Above Roof
Out Window
Above
Trailer
Above
Trailer
Side of
bldg.
Above
Trailer
Above
Trailer
Period o£
Observations
Jan 1970-
May 1972
Jan 1970-
May 1970
July 1970-
Oct 1970
May 1971-
Aug 1971
July 1971-
July 1972
Apr 1972-
July 1972
June 1972-
July 1972
Duration of
Sampling Period
(Months)
29
5
4
4
13
4
2
Approximately 32 feet above the north and southbound lanes of 1-5.
-------
MONITORING STATIONS
O DOE
© PSAPCA
Figure II-2. Sketch of Seattle area showing locations of seven monitoring
sites. -_,
-------
TABLE II-3
SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CO CONCENTRATIONS (IN PPM) AT SEVEN LOCATIONS
IN THE SEATTLE AREA
Year
1970
1971
1972
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Food
Circus
10
15
12
6
5
5
7
7
8
13
13
9
8
9
-5
6
9
5
5
5
7
8
5
7
5
7
6
4
4
Monitor Location
Smith 1-5 & Westlake McMicken Municipal
Tower Dearborn Mall Heights Building Duwatnish
18
17
12
7
8
13
13
21
3-5
12
10
10 20
10 20
30
27
30
27
29
38
31
4 24
5 19
6 18 4
5 20 4
11-17
-------
The diurnal variations of CO concentration observed at
*
the seven sites are shown in Figures II-3 through II-5. Average seas-
onal curves at the Municipal Building are included in Figure II-3. At
this location, high concentrations are consistently experienced during
working hours in all four seasons. The concentration increases sharply
to an early morning maximum at about 0800 local time, remains at high
levels throughout the middle of the day, increases to the maximum for the
day at about 1600 local time, and decreases abruptly thereafter to a
fairly uniform evening level. As would be expected, the lowest concen-
trations are experienced between 0200 and 0500 local time, when traffic
flow is at a minimum. The diurnal variations experienced at 1-5 and Dear-
born, Smith Tower, and at Westlake Mall (Figure II-4) are roughly similar
to the diurnal variation at the Municipal Building, but the amplitudes of
the curves are greatly reduced. Also, concentrations at 1-5 and Dearborn
remain relatively high throughout the evening. Concentrations at Duwamish,
McMicken Heights, and Food Circus remain low at all times of the day. The
seasonal variation between winter (January, February, and March) and spring
(April and May) months at Smith Tower is pronounced, and separate curves
are shown in Figure II-4 for the two seasons. Additional details of the
diurnal and seasonal variations of CO concentration can be obtained from
Tables II-4 through II-7 which give the highest 1-hour concentration ob-
served during each hour of the day for each month at the various sites.
*
In these figures, and in Tables 11-4 through II-7 which follow, aver-
age concentrations are entered in accord with the procedures of the moni-
toring agency. The PSAPCA records hourly average concentration as having
occurred at the end of the averaging period, while the DOE records the
hourly average concentration as having occurred at the beginning of the
period.
11-18
-------
12
10
T
T
O SPRING (M.A.M)
• SUMMER (J, J,A)
* FALL (S.O.N)
A WINTER (D.J.F)
I8
2
B
8
i i i i
9)000
0200 04OO 0600
0800 1000 1200 1400
TIME (PST)
1600 1800 20OO 2200
Figure II-3. Diurnal variation of CO concentration at the Municipal Building, Seattle, by season.
-------
6 -
E
ex
ill
SMITH TOWER
(J, F, M 1970)
SMITH TOWER
(A, M 1970)
* *——H i
I I I I I I
II I I J
0000 0200 0400 0600 0800 10'
o
o
o
0800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200
START OF I-HOUR SAMPLING PERIOD, (PST)
( —
1-5 AND DEARBORN
(J, A, S,0, 1970)
WESTLAKE MALL
(M, J, J,A 1971)
-O O O O O O O O -O O O O O O O
Me MICKEN HEIGHTS -7
(A.M.J.J 1972) /
*JL-
O O" O O O O-
J L
_| I I I I 1 I I I I I L
I I I
0000 0200 0400 0600 0800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200
END OF 1-HOUR SAMPLING PERIOD, (PST)
Figure II-4. Diurnal variation in CO concentration at 5 locations in Seattle.
-------
*t
~ 3
E
a.
a.
1 *
^ /
oc.
\-
1 l<
I
0
I 1 r-
. 0 SPRING
° SUMMER
- x FALL
A WINTER
i— X
k A A A
-
)— 0 0 O
-
, 1
— 1 1 1 1— — 1 1 1 1 \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ 1 1
(M,A,M)
(J, J, A)
(S,0,N) —
(D.J.F)
xxM«xxxAAA,*Ax xxxx;
OO°AAA&AOO AA A&AAAZ
•^
AAA oooo oooooooo
oooo ooo -c
-
._..! i i 1 i I i 1 i 1 i 1 i 1 i 1 i I
OOOO 0200 0400 0600 0800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200
TIME (PST)
Figure II-5. Diurnal variation of CO concentration at Food Circus, Seattle, by season.
-------
TABLE II-4
MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CO COHCENTRATIOHS (IN PPM) OBSERVED AT FOOD CIRCUS. SEATTLE
1971
HOUR JUNE
00 4
01 4
02 4
03 4
04 4
05 4
06 4
07 4
08 5
09 4
10 3
11 4
12 4
13 4
14 3
15 4
16 4
17 4
18 4
19 4
20 4
21 4
22 4
23 4
MAXIMUM 5
7. OBS. 92
JULY
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
5
4
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
AUG SEPT OCT
336
336
336
J 4 6
335
3 J 5
345
455
554
554
344
344
344
334
334
334
544
424
3 3 7
335
446
466
478
457
578
94 95 97
NOV
5
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
97
DEC
3
4
4
6
7
7
6
5
5
4
6
6
7
6
5
4
4
5
4
4
3
3
3
3
7
93
1972
JAN
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
4
4
4
5
5
4
4
4
3
3
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
5
97
FEB
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
5
6
7
6
7
92
MAR
4
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
6
5
5
5
6
5
5
6
74
API
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
3
2
2
3
3
4
4
3
3
2
3
3
3
4
81
HIT
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
4
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
4
91
MAXIMUM
6
6
6
6
7
7
6
5
5
S
6
6
7
6
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6
a
7
a
-------
TABLE II-5
MAXIMUM l-HOUR CO CONCENTRATIONS (IN PPM) OBSERVED AT SMITH TOWER AND DUWAM1SII (5th AND MICHIGAN) SEATTLE
Hour
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
JAN
10
8
8
7
8
4
5
6
9
18
10
12
11
10
8
10
9
12
13
12
10
7
10
8
Smith Tower
1970
FEE MAR APR
9
7
10
10
10
9
9
11
17
17
13
10
8
7
7
8
8
9
17
10
9
8
9
12
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
6
8
12
10
8
8
7
8
8
8
11
11
9
8
6
8
8
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
7
7
4
3
4
4
5
6
7
7
6
5
4
4
7
6
MAY
3
3
3
2
3
5
8
6
6
5
6
4
4
4
4
5
8
5
4
3
5
7
7
5
MAXIMUM
10
8
10
10
10
9
9
11
17
18
13
12
11
10
8
10
9
12
17
12
10
8
10
12
Duwamlsh
1972
JUNE JULY
4
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
3
3
2
1
2
3
4
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
4
4
2
3
2
3
3
4
4
MAXIM™
4
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
MAXIMUM
18
12
18
-------
TABLE II-6
MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CO CONCENTRATIONS (IN PPM) OBSERVED AT THREE LOCATIONS I» SEATTLE
HOUR
01
02
03
04
05
Ob
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MAXIMl'M
OBS.
JULY
9
9
6
8
8
10
12
13
13
12
12
11
.1
11
11
11
11
10
10
10
11
10
10
10
13
82
1-5 AND DEARBORN
1970
AUC SEPT
6
6
6
6
7
9
13
13
10
9
9
8
8
9
9
10
11
10
9
9
7
8
8
8
13
94
13
10
9
8
7
10
20
21
14
8
10
B
8
8
10
16
12
11
12
15
20
11
17
16
21
90
OCT
13
10
10
9
15
15
27
28
20
20
14
9
9
11
13
IB
IB
25
35
25
23
20
20
17
35
88
MAXIMUM
13
10
10
9
15
15
27
28
20
20
12
11
11
11
13
18
18
25
35
25
23
20
20
17
35
MAY
7
7
6
6
6
7
10
S
12
8
8
9
10
10
8
8
9
7
7
B
B
7
7
6
12
45
WE
JUNE
7
7
6
5
6
7
8
9
7
5
6
6
6
10
9
8
9
7
7
6
7
9
B
7
10
85
iSTLAKE HAL
1971
JULY
8
6
5
4
4
6
10
10
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
6
7
5
5
6
7
7
9
B
10
98
I
AUG
5
5
5
4
4
5
9
9
8
8
7
7
6
7
6
B
9
7
7
9
10
9
a
B
10
99
MAXIMUM
8
7
6
6
6
7
10
10
12
B
8
9
10
10
9
8
9
7
7
9
10
9
9
a
12
APR
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
4
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
21
HcMlCKDI HEIGHTS
1972
HAY JUNE JULY
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
4
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
3
3
5
91
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
4
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
6
95
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
B4
HAXDUf
1
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
4
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
6
-------
TABLE II-7
M
1
NJ
Cn
MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CO CONCENTRATIONS (IN PPM) OBSERVED AT THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING, SEATTLE.
AN ASTERISK INDICATES A VALUE GREATER THAN THE STANDARD OS PPM)
IWR
00
01
02
0}
04
OS
06
07
OB
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1»
19
20
21
22
23
MAXIMUM
; oas.
1971
Al'G
6
6
5
4
5
6
13
18
14
14
13
12
18
13
13
IB
20
10
10
12
10
13
12
8
20
95
SEPT
7
7
7
7
5
7
17
19
17
14
13
15
13
13
14
25
30
17
12
10
10
8
9
8
30
90
OCT
7
6
5
5
4
6
16
IB
14
13
13
14
17
17
16
27
20
12
14
13
13
10
9
8
27
95
NOV
8
4
3
3
3
3
6
16
IB
15
13
13
9
13
19
19
30
23
12
10
7
7
7
6
30
90
DEC
11
B
7
5
4
3
6
16
25
23
IB
13
13
IB
16
18
27
23
13
B
7
6
12
13
27
79
1972
JAN
5
4
6
4
4
4
5
15
23
15
a
10
14
16
15
19
29
25
11
B
B
7
4
5
29
93
FEE
a
7
7
4
4
4
6
10
20
15
14
13
18
20
19
22
29
38*
18
17
14
15
14
9
38*
92
MAR
7
5
5
4
3
3
5
IB
25
13
14
14
17
21
IB
22
31
30
14
16
13
13
10
7
31
96
APR
B
6
7
6
3
2
5
4
18
14
14
13
11
14
12
13
24
20
9
B
5
5
7
12
24
97
HAY
4
3
3
3
3
6
12
18
13
13
11
12
13
12
13
19
16
9
6
5
6
6
7
4
19
91
JUNE
4
4
3
3
2
5
12
16
14
13
14
13
16
13
13
IB
16
B
6
6
6
7
8
6
18
97
JULY
7
6
4
3
4
7
16
17
14
16
15
13
15
12
14
18
20
17
»
6
t
»
»
g
20
93
MM DUI
11
1
7
7
5
7
17
19
25
23
18
15
18
21
19
27
31
38*
18
17
14
15
14
13
38
-------
This summary data is given for the last one-year period only for the
Food Circus site.
Table II-8 gives the highest 8-hour concentration ob-
served each month at each site. Of the recent measurements, only the
8-hour concentrations at the Municipal Building exceed the standard.
Table II-8 also gives the number of times the 8-hour standard was exceeded
each month. However, these values are based on a running mean of 8 one-
hour averages . They do not, therefore, represent independent 8-hour
periods.
Table II-9 lists the highest and second highest 1-hour
and 8-hour average concentrations observed in Seattle between January
1970 and July 1972. The percent reductions in emissions required to
meet the national standards at the two sites where the high readings
occurred are also given in the table.
c. Oxidant Air Quality Data
Table 11-10 gives the highest 1-hour concentrations of
total oxidants at each site during each month of the sampling period.
The national standard was exceeded 85 times at the 1-5 and Dearborn site.
Since October, 1970, the standard has been exceeded only nine times:
three times at Food Circus in August 1971, and six times at Duwamish in
July 1972.
The diurnal variations of total oxidant concentration
at five of the six sites where oxidants were measured are shown in Fig-
ure II-6. The diurnal variation at the sixth site, Food Circus, is shown
11-26
-------
TABLE II-8
SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM 8-HOUR CO CONCENTRATIONS (IN PPM) AT 7 LOCATIONS IN SEATTLE. NUMBERS
IN PARENTHESES ARE NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS GREATER THAN STANDARD (9 ppm)
i
ho
Year
1970
1971
1972
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Food Smith
Circus Tower
7 9
12(81) 10(8)
10(110) 9
6 6
5 4
7
5
6
6
7
8
6
6
7
5
6
8
4
4
4
4
6
4
6
4
5
5
3
3
1-5 and Westlake McMicken Municipal Duwamish
Dearborn Mall Heights Bldg. (5th & Mich.)
11(14)
10(4)
14(40)
21(90)
8
8
6 13(94)
8 15(70)
18(94)
16(115)
19(69)
17(59)
14(55)
20(86)
21(66)
2 14(19)
4 17(65)
4 14(68) 4
4 14(60) 3
-------
to
oo
TABLE II-9
SUMMARY DATA FOR ESTIMATING REQUIRED REDUCTIONS IN CO EMISSIONS
Station
1-5 & Dearborn*
Municipal
Building
Sampling
Period
July 1970-
Oct. 1970
July 1971-
July 1972
Averaging
Time
1-hour
8 -hour
1-hour
8-hour
Concentrat ion
Highest
35
21
38
21
2nd
Highest
28
20
31
20
(ppm)
National
Standard**
35
9
35
9
Reduction Required
Percent
Based
Highest
0
57
8
57
on
2nd
Highest
0
55
0
55
* Used in Implementation Plan.
** Not to be exceeded more than once per year.
-------
TABLE 11-10
SUMMARY OF MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS OF TOTAL OXIDANTS
(IN PPM) AT 6 LOCATIONS IN SEATTLE. NUMBERS IN
PARENTHESES ARE NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS
GREATER THAN STANDARD (0.08 ppm)
Year
1970
1971
1972
Month
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Location
Food Smith 1-5 and West lake McMicken Duwamish
Circus Tower Dearborn Mall Heights (5th &Mich.)
.04 .07
.06 .08
.05 .05
.04 .04
.04 .06
.05
.06 .06
.06 .11(6)
.04 .16(39)
.06 .20(40)
.04
.04
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02 .02
.'02 .02
.03 .05
.11(3) .03
.03
.02
.01
.02
.07
.01
.02
.02 .03
.02 .07
.07 .04
.07 -13(6)
11-29
-------
0.04
0.02
~i 1 r
DUWAMSH
(J,J 1972)
1 - 1
1 - r
1 r
J _ I
L
J I
SMITH TOWER
(J, F, M 1970)
J l i i
1 1
04OO 0600 0800 1000 1200 1400 1600 I
START OF I-HOUR SAMPLING PERIOD (PST)
I
I
I
OOOO 02OO
20OO 2200
O
o
OJ
o
0.06
0.04 -
0.02
I 1 1 1 1 T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I
1-5 AND DEARBORN
McMICKEN HEIGHTS
(A, M,J, J 1972)
WESTLAKE MALL
(M.J.J.A 1971)
I I I I I III I l__ \ J I I I I
0000 0200 0400 0600 0800 1000 1200 1400 I60O 1800 2000 2200
END OF I-HOUR SAMPLING PERIOD (PST)
Figure II-6. Diurnal variation in total oxidant concentration at 5 locations
in Seattle.
-------
in Figure II-7. Again, hourly averages are entered in accord with the
procedures of the collecting agency in these figures and in Tables 11-11
through 11-13 (see footnote, p. 11-18 ). In a general sense, the five
curves of Figure II-6 reflect the increase in oxidant levels expected as
a result of photochemical reactions during the daytime period. However,
the curve at 1-5 and Dearborn shows a rapid increase in concentration
starting between 0500 and 0600 PST, considerably earlier than would be
expected as a result of photochemical reactions. The average concentra-
tion at this site continued to increase throughout the day reaching its
peak in the early evening. Figure II-7 is a plot of the diurnal varia-
tion of oxidant concentration at Food Circus by season. Oxidant levels
are generally quite low at all times of the day. Maximum values occur
during the middle of the day in summer as expected. The average summertime
daytime values measured at Food Circus are in close agreement with the
average summertime values measured at Westlake Mall.
Tables 11-11, 11-12, and 11-13 show the highest 1-hour
concentration of the day for each month at each of the six sites. This
detailed summary is given for the last one-year period only for the Food
Circus site.
Table 11-14 lists the highest and second highest 1-hour
average oxidant concentrations observed in Seattle between January 1970
and July 1972. The percent reductions in hydrocarbon emissions required
to meet the national standard (as indicated by Appendix J of 42 CFR, Part
420) at the three sites where the high readings occurred are also given
in the table.
11-31
-------
i
Q.
I
O
0.03
0.02
Or\t
\Jt
L
\
0 SPRING
• SUMMER
* FALL
- A WINTER
k O • 0
1 1 :
(M.A.M)
( J,J,A)
(S.O.N)
(D.J.F)
A A ^
®— ^» 0
| ' I I | ' | ' | ' | ' | ' I
A 0oOQ®0000
1 J^ X tA S^ A « tA —
-------
TABLE II- 11
MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS OF TOTAL OXIDANTS (IN PPM) AT FOOD CIRCUS, SEATTLE.
AN ASTERISK INDICATES A VALUE GREATER THAK STAXDARU (0.08 PPM).
HOUR
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
It
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
MAXIMUM
;. OBS.
1»71
JUNE
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.01
.01
.02
.02
.02
.01
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
95
JULY
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.03
.02
.02
.(Si
.02
.01
.02
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.03
AUG
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.01
.02
.02
.03
.04
.06
.10*
.11*
.09*
.07
.06
.05
.05
.05
.04
.04
.02
.02
.11*
91
SE1T
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.03
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.03
84
OCT
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
OL
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.01
.02
95
NOV
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
98
DEC
.01
.01
.01
.02
.02
.02
.01
.02
.02
.01
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
96
1972
JAN
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.01
.01
.01
.07
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.07
97
FEE
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.00
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
72
MAR
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
96
APR
.01
.01
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
81
HAT
.01
.02
.02
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
01
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.01
.01
.02
94
MAXIMUM
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.07
0*
06
.10*
.11*
.09*
.07
.06
.05
.05
.05
.04
.04
.02
.02
*
.11
-------
TABLE II- L2
MAXIMUM 1-HOUR CONCENTRATIONS OF TOTAL OXIDANTS (IN PPM) OBSERVED AT SMITH TOWER AND DUWAHISH (5th AND MICHIGAN), SEATTLE
AN ASTERISK INDICATES A VALUE GBEATER THAN STANDARD (0.08 PPM).
Hour
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
MAXIMUM
JAN
.04
.04
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.04
.06
.07
.04
.04
.04
.04
.02
.03
.03
.04
.05
.06
.04
.04
.04
.03
.07
Smith Tower
1970
FEB MAR APR
.04
.03
.04
.04
.04
.04
.05
.06
.08
.08
.05
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
.04
.03
.03
.03
.03
.05
.08
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.04
.05
.04
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.04
.04
.03
.04
.04
.04
.04
.03
.05
.03
.03
.03
.03
.04
.04
.03
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.03
.03
.04
.04
.04
.03
.03
.03
.02
.OJ
.03
.02
.04
MAY
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.03
.04
.05
.05
.05
.06
.05
.06
.06
.04
.03
.03
.04
.04
.03
.04
.06
MAXIMUM
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.05
.06
.08
.08
.05
.05
.05
.06
.05
.06
.06
.04
.05
.06
.04
.04
.04
.05
.08
Duvamiah
1972
JUNE JULY
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.04
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.04
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.03
.04
.06
.08
*
.10
.08
.09*
A
.10
*
.10
if
.13
.10*
.08
.06
.06
.04
.03
.03
.13*
MAXIMUM
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.04
.06
.08
*
.10
.08
.09*
i,
.10
1t
.10
It
.13
.10*
.08
.06
.06
.04
.03
.03
.13*
-------
TABLE 11-13
i
w
Ul
MAXIMUM 1-HOJR CONCENTRATIONS OF TOTAL OXIDANTS (IN PPM) OBSERVED AT THREE LOCATIONS Di SEATTLE.
NUMBERS IN PARENTHESES ARE NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS GREATER THAN STANDARD (0.08 PPM).
X~5 AND DEARBORN
HOUR JULY
01 .02
02 .02
03 .02
04 .02
05 .02
06 .03
07 .06
08 .06
09 .04
10 .04
11 .03
12 .03
13 .03
14 .03
15 .03
16 .04
17 .03
18 .03
19 .03
21 .04
22 .03
23 .03
24 .02
MAXIMUM .06
OBS. 63
1970
AUG SEPT
.06
.04
.04
.03
.03
.04
.07
.09(1)
.09(1)
.06
.07
.07
.07
.07
.07
.09(1)
.09(2)
.11(1)
.09(2)
.OB
.08
.07
.07
.11
58
.09(1)
.07
.05
.05
.04
.06
.08
.07
.08
.14
.15(1)
.16(2)
.09(1)
.08
.10(3)
.13(7)
.10(2)
.U(3)
.12(6)
.15(2)
.10(2)
.13(2)
.10(2)
.16
78
OCT
.06
.05
.04
.03
.04
.05
.10
.08
.07
.07
.07
.06
.07
.07
.09(2)
.12(4)
.13(6)
.19(8)
.20(4)
.13(4)
.10(4)
.10(3)
.08
.20
91
MAXIMUM
.09
.07
.05
.05
.04
.06
.10
.09
.09
.14
.15
.16
.09
.08
.10
.13
.13
.19
.20
.15
.10
.13
.10
.20
MAY
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
51
WESTLAKE MA
1971
JUNE JULY
.01
.02
.02
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.01
.02
.01
.02
.02
.02
.02
. 01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
99
.02
.01
.01
.02
.01
.01
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.03
.04
.05
.05
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.05
82
LI
AUG
.02
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.03
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
93
MAXIMUM
.02
.02
.02
.02
.01
.02
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.03
.04
.05
.05
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.05
APR
.01
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
28
McMICKEH HEIGHTS
1972
MAY JUNE JULT
.06
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.05
.05
.05
.07
.06
.06
.05
.05
.05
.05
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.07
58
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.05
.06
.07
.07
.05
.05
.04
.03
.03
.03
.03
.03
.04
.07
46
.03
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.03
.03
.03
.04
.05
.06
.06
.06
.07
.07
.07
.06
.05
.04
.03
.03
.03
.03
.07
72
KAIIMUK
.04
.«
.0*
.04
.«
.0*
.04
.04
.05
.05
.05
.07
.06
.07
.07
.07
.07
.06
.05
.04
.04
.04
.04
.04
.07
-------
TABLE 11-14
SUMMARY DATA FOR ESTIMATING REQUIRED REDUCTIONS IN HYDROCARBONS
EMISSIONS
Oxidant
Concentration (ppm)
Station
1-5 and Dear-
born*
Food Circus
Duwamish
Sampling
Period
July 1970-
Oct 1970
Jan 1970-
May 1972
June 1972-
July 1972
Averaging
Time
1-hour
1-hour
1-hour
2nd
Highest Highest
0.16 0.15
0.11 0.10
0.13 0.10
National A
Standard
0.08
0.08
0.08
Reductions in Hydrocarbons
Required (Percent)
Based on
2nd
Highest Highest
53 48
26 18
38 18
Used in Implementation Plan. Only values measured between 0900 and 1600 PST were considered.
Not to be exceeded more than once per year.
-------
4. Impact of Stationary Sources
a. Major CO Sources
The major point-sources (emission rate greater than
50 tons per year) of CO in King County, arranged in descending order of
emission rate, are listed in Table 11-15. Except for aircraft oper-
ations, the largest source is the Olympic Foundry which emits 455 tons
per year or 13 grams per second. This foundry is located approximately
three miles south of the CBD. The use of any conventional point source
diffusion model (see, for example, Turner's Workbook of Atmospheric Dis-
persion Estimates) will show that the maximum ground level concentration
expected from a source of this magnitude is a small fraction of the
allowable concentration even under unfavorable meteorological conditions.
As an example, a low-level source of 13 grams per second under class E
stability conditions and a wind speed of 2 meters per second yields a
peak ground level concentration (10-min average) 1 kilometer from the
source of about 1.8 milligrams per cubic meter, or about five percent of
the one-hour standard. Accordingly, as a sufficiently accurate approximation
for the proportional modeling carried out in Section IID, CO emissions other
than those from vehicular traffic are considered uniform throughout the
critical area.
b. Major Hydrocarbon Sources
Table 11-16 lists the major points sources of
hydrocarbons in King County in descending order of emission rate. For the
proportional modeling carried out in Section IID, hydrocarbon emissions from
non-vehicular sources are considered uniform throughout the critical area.
11-37
-------
TABLE II- 15
MAJOR POINT SOURCES OF CO EMISSIONS - KING COUNTY (1970)
COMPANY
Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
Boeing Field
Renton Municipal Airport
Olympic Foundry
Weyerhaeuser Co. (Snow Falls)
Bellevue Airfield
Weyerhaeuser Co. (White River)
Auburn Field
Pacific Car and Foundry
Kenmore Air Harbor
Lake Union Air Service
SOURCE
CATEGORY
Aircraft
Aircraft
Aircraft
Process Losses
Hogged Fuel
Aircraft
Hogged Fuel
Aircraft
Process Losses
Aircraft
Aircraft
EMISSIONS
(TON /YEAR)
2830
1205
517
455
192
163
128
109
96
79
63
11-38
-------
TABLE 11-16
MAJOR POINT SOURCES OF HYDROCARBONS EMISSIONS-KING COUNTY (1970)
COMPANY
SOURCE
CATEGORY
EMISSIONS
(TONS/YEAR)
Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
American Can
Pacific Car and Foundry
Weyerhaeuser Co.(Snow Falls)
Todd Shipyards
Weyerhauser Co. (White River)
Boeing (Auburn)
Lockheed Shipbuilding
Boeing Field
Boeing/Plant II
Boeing/Renton
U. S. Plywood Corp.
Ideal Cement Co.
Aircraft
Fuel
Process Losses
Fuel
Process Losses
Hogged Fuel
Process Losses
Fuel
Process Losses
Hogged Fuel
Fuel
Process Losses
Fuel
Process Losses
Aircraft
Fuel
Process Losses
Fuel
Process Losses
Hogged Fuel
Process Losses
Fuel
2928
27
592
5
442
192
2
3
145
128
17
105
2
105
100
' 22
57
23
41
44
19
52
11-39
-------
C. DISCUSSION OF 1971 Alto 1977 VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL
1. General
This section provides information on vehicle mil s of travel
(VMT) within high traffic density areas of the Puget Sound Intrastate
Area for the calculation of vehicle emissions and subsequent evaluation
of air quality. The travel data is one of the bases for developing trans-
portation control strategies that will achieve air quality standards for
carbon monoxide and oxidants by 1977. The steps in the procedure include
selection of critical areas by inspection of traffic counts, calculation
of vehicle miles of travel for 1971, and projection of vehicle miles of
travel to 1977 based on recent growth trends.
The higher traffic densities in the Puget Sound Area are
found in Seattle and vicinity (King County), Tacoma (Pierce County), and
Everett (Snohomish County).
2, Methodology
a. Development of Grid Network
Vehicle mile data for the Puget Sound region were developed
by the Washington State Highway Department and the Puget Sound Governmental
Conference. These data, however, were either for the region as a whole or
were for specific facilities within the region. Therefore, methodology
had to be developed to provide data on vehicle miles of travel for small
areas within the region where air pollution emissions were high and air
quality was poor.
11-40
-------
One-square-mile grids were developed (along range and
township lines for possible coordination with the Puget Sound Govern-
mental Conference) on USGS maps at a scale of 1:24,000. Using a twenty-
four hour average daily traffic (ACT) flow map produced in 1969 for the
Puget Sound Region by the Puget Sound Governmental Conference, areas of
greatest traffic concentration were selected for coverage with these mile-
square grids. Initially, 19 square-mile grids were analyzed in the Seattle,
Tacoma and Bellevue area.
To ensure that calculations of vehicle miles of travel
were available for all potential "hot spots" of poor air quality, a rough
estimate of a critical VMT level was made by examining air quality data
and associated VMT's. The grid network was increased until grids with
estimated high emission levels were surrounded by grids with VMT's well
below the critical level, initially estimated to be 130,000. To do this,
the number of grids in the Seattle area were increased to 50, as shown in
Figure II-8.
b. 1971 Vehicle Miles of Travel
The 1971 daily vehicle miles of travel were calculated
for each square mile studied by measuring the length of each street or
highway facility within each grid and multiplying its length times the
ADT volume obtained from the most current traffic flow maps, plus data
from the Annual Traffic Report Series produced by the Washington State
Highway Commission. Traffic flow maps were obtained from the cities of
Seattle, Bellevue, Renton, Everett, and Tacoma.
11-41
-------
MONITORING STATIONS
O DOE
© PSAPCA
— —PRINCIPAL
HIGHWAYS
Figure .II-8; Locations of One-Mile-Square Grids - Seattle Area
11-42
-------
This calculation was carried out separately for each
roadway that was on a flow map and included in a grid. In cases where
a length of roadway within a grid had substantially different traffic
volumes in various locations, the roadway was split into two or more
sections for the vehicle mile calculation.
Information for average network speed was obtained from
TOPICS studies or from surveys of peak and off-peak roadway speeds which
were made by the city traffic engineers. Table 11-17 summarizes these
data. Table 11-17 was used as a guideline for selecting and assigning
average speeds on each roadway in the absence of specific data for that
facility.
Data were collected from screenline and arterial traffic
counts so that the hourly traffic profile could be evaluated. Figure II-9
shows the profile used for Seattle, and Table 11-18 lists the hourly per-
centages .
From the diurnal traffic profile data, the percentages of
daily traffic that would occur in various critical time periods were de-
veloped. These time periods were:
(1) The peak hour (usually in the afternoon)
(2) 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. in the morning
(3) The highest 8 hours of the day.
The appropriate portion of the daily vehicle miles of travel occurring in
each time period was calculated using these percentages, and the average
-------
TABLE 11-17 GUIDELINE AVERAGE SPEEDS (MPH)
Roadway
Classification
Freeway
Expressway
Arterial and
Collector
CBD
Peak Off-Peak
40-45 45-50
18 18
CBD Fringe
Peak Off-Peak
20 20
Other Urban
Peak Off-Peak_
•
50 55-60
35 35
20 25
11-44
-------
i-a -I
ItfOO \00 tOO 3100 4-.00 S=00 Irm 7:00 «-00 9.00 10:00 (|:OO IZOO I:OO Z>OO *OO JtOO *OI fcOO "TOO
Figure II- 9. Percent of Average Daily Traffic by Hour - Seattle Area
-------
TABLE 11-18 PERCENT OF DAILY TRAFFIC BY HOUR
SEATTLE
12:00 - 1:00 AM 1-5
1:00 - 2:00 AM 0.8
2:00- 3:00 AM 0.6
3:00 - 4:00 AM 0.3
4:00 - 5:00 AM 0.3
5:00 - 6:00 AM 1. 1
6:00 - 7:00 AM 3.2
7:00 - 8:00 AM 7.6
8:00 - 9:00 AM 6.9
9:00 - 10:00 AM 4.8
10:00 - 11:00 AM 4.9
11:00 - 12:00 Noon 5.4
12:00 - 1:00 PM 5.3
1:00 - 2:00 PM 5.3
2:00 - 3:00 PM 6.4
3:00 - 4:00 PM 7.1
4:00 - 5:00 PM 9.0
5:00 - 6:00 PM 8.4
6:00 - 7:00 PM 5.3
7:00 - 8:00 PM 4.3
8:00 - 9:00 PM 3.2
9:00 - 10:00 PM 3.2
10:00 - 11:00 PM 2.8
11:00 - 12:00 Midnight 2.3
100. 0%
11-46
-------
speed for each facility was assigned for that particular time period. In
the Puget Sound Region the peak hour was 9.0 percent, the morning three
hours were 17.7 percent, the highest 8 hours 51.8 percent.
Streets that were not included on the traffic flow maps
were assumed to be in the "local streets" category. Mileage for these
streets was measured by grid. A speed of 15 miles per hour and ah ACT
of 500 vehicles per day was assumed for local streets. The vehicle miles
of travel generated for local streets were added to that estimated for
the freeways, arterials, and collector roadways appearing on traffic flow
maps.
Table 11-19 shows vehicle mix and classification data
for the Puget Sound region. The 1971 registration data by vehicle type
were obtained using the State registration data as a basic source. The
daily vehicle trip information is from origin and destination surveys con-
ducted by the transportation study groups in each area. The breakdown on
daily vehicle miles of travel is from similar information, but has been
sub-divided into the three vehicle types using information on the trip
lengths for automobiles and commercial vehicles and for internal trips and
through trips.
Vehicle age mix was obtained from two sources. Statewide
data was obtained from the Washington Department of Motor Vehicles by
the Department of Ecology. A breakdown by county was obtained from the
R.L. Polk and Company. These data are summarized in Table 11-20.
11-47
-------
TABLE 11-19
VEHICLE MIX AND CLASSIFICATION
1971 Registration:
Gasoline light duty
Gasoline heavy duty
Non-gasoline
Study Year:
Daily Vehicle Trip:
Auto
Truck
Daily VMT:
Gasoline, light duty
Gasoline, heavy duty
Non-gasoline
Puget Sound Region
** *** v
King Pierce Snohomish
83.3% 80.6% 76.0%
16.2 19.2 22.7
0.5 0.2 1.3
100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
1961
87.4%
_!2_-J>%
100.0%
88 . 8%
9.1
2.1
100.0%
Statewide
79 . 1%
20.5
0.4
100.0%
**
Not including motorcycles
Seattle, Renton, Bellevue
***
Tacotna
V
Everett
11-48
-------
TABLE 11-20
VEHICLE AGE MIX
Model
Year
72
71
70
69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62 § prior
Total
Statewide
as of
_ _
58,644
108,632
132,956
132,599
129,889
136,964
136,427
116,486
107,192
403,260
1,463,049
King County
1972
16,439
31,990
32,911
43,717
43,829
43,231
44,261
41,183
32,933
28,891
80,736
Pierce County
1972
5,131
9,700
9,861
12,433
12,565
12,338
12,892
12,829
10,999
9,486 1
28,376
1
440,121 136,610
Source: Washington Department of Motor Vehicles and
R. L. Polk & Co.
11-49
-------
c. 1977 Vehicle Miles of Travel
For 1977 it is assumed that:
. The distribution of vehicle miles of travel by
type of vehicle is the same as 1971.
. The diurnal traffic profile is the same as 1971.
The two techniques used in estimating 1977 vehicle miles of travel were
(1) trend projections and (2) growth factors. Since the time period from
1971 to 1977 is relatively short term, a trend projection method was
judged to be at least as accurate as using currently available travel
forecasts based on model and traffic assignment techniques. Moreover,
short-range future assignments of travel to current streets were not
available.
For Seattle, trends of growth are confused by a down-
turn in volume from 1969 to 1971, undoubtedly caused by economic set-
backs. It is now felt that growth will be more-or-less level for a few
years, and then growth will accelerate to previous rates. Continuing
studies by the State Department of Employment Security, Pacific Northwest
Bell, and those reported in A Transit Plan for the Metropolitan Area -
Seattle-King County, by Daniel, Mann, Johnson and Mendenhall in May 1972
indicate that King County growth would be at a ratio 1.17 from 1971 to
1977. This ratio was calculated by taking the product of growth of
employment, growth in labor force, and growth of vehicles per person.
With this as a guideline, volumes were estimated at little or no growth
to 1975, and extrapolated at rates exhibited during the 1960's from 1975
to 1977. Each grid was analyzed separately for freeway and surface street
11-50
-------
Interstate 5 (1-5) presented problems related to speed,
as did several other freeways and heavily traveled arterials. During
certain periods of the day these facilities were at capacity in 1969.
Although the volumes are below 1969 levels, these facilities are nearly
at capacity today. Therefore, speed was reduced as volume increased on
these facilities along lines indicated by speed-volume curves in the High-
way Capacity Manual. (Highway Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual,
Special Report No. 87, 1965). The little diversion away from the freeway
to adjacent arterials was estimated under these conditions.
In developing the 1977 VMT's transportation system improve-
ments currently under consideration were treated in the following manner:
(1) A project involving surveillance of traffic, geometric
improvements, ramp metering, and driver information is proposed for Inter-
state 5 from the Seattle central business district to the North. The
initial calculations of the 1977 vehicle miles of travel was done under
the assumption that this project is not implemented. Therefore, this free-
way traffic control project could become a candidate strategy for subse-
quent evaluation if an air quality problem is identified in the 1-5 cor-
ridor.
(2) The METRO bus system has been approved by King County
voters. This system (financed by a sales tax increase) will preserve bus
service within the City of Seattle, expand local bus service into subur-
ban areas, and create express bus service throughout the area using the
freeways. The implementation of this system (starting in 1973) will
11-51
-------
cause patronage to increase in 1977 24 percent in Seattle, and over 600
percent in the suburbs. The impact of this increase was accounted for
with the following methodology.
All available screenline data were plotted for
auto users and bus passengers. This included
screenlines along the north Seattle City Limits,
the Ship Canal, the southerly Seattle City
Limits, and the easterly Seattle City Limits
at Lake Washington.
. The plan for the METRO bus system included fore-
casts of patronage by year from 1973 to 1980.
These forecasts were used> to scale back 1980
screenline transit forecasts to the 1977 period.
The growth factor for auto travel (previously
calculated using growth trends) was then re-
duced to reflect the impact of increased
transit use. Data were available from the
METRO Transit Plan to differentiate between
growth of local service and passengers using
the express service. These data indicate that
little growth in transit patronage should be
expected in the Seattle area where an extensive
transit system already exists. However, for
express service connecting to Seattle a sub-
stantial growth in patronage was forecasted.
The actual adjustment to the auto growth fac-
tor was a reduction in that factor which was
calculated by dividing the difference in bus
passengers (1977 minus 1971) by vehicle occu-
pancy and the 1971 vehicle volume.
11-52
-------
This modified growth factor is applied to
the 1971 vehicle miles of travel selectively
by grid zone.
(3) The King County Domed Stadium is scheduled to open
in the fall of 1975 just south of downtown Seattle. This facility will
have two impacts on travel. First, normal daily travel in the vicinity
of the stadium will be dispersed over more streets than at the present
through the construction of an arterial along the southern boundary of
the stadium. This new east-west arterial will provide additional travel
routes and thereby reduce volumes and improve speeds on other adjacent
arterials. A manual re-assignment of volumes was made to reflect this
system modification.
Traffic generated by the. stadium itself will also impact
on the adjacent street system. Weekday stadium events are expected to
occur about 130 days a year. Planning studies for the stadium indicate
an average weekday attendance of 10,000 persons utilizing 4,000 parking
spaces, and maximum attendance of 13,000. This would generate about 11,000
trips and about 8,000 vehicle miles of travel. However, this travel will
occur after 6:00 p.m. and is therefore outside of the maximum 8- hour
period.
Saturday events would include some peak crowds, and
average weekend attendance is estimated at 39,000 utilizing 8,300 parking
spaces. Maximum attendance would be 62,000 using some 10,800 parking
spaces. With an average trip length of .67 miles assumed within the
grid, 14,000 vehicle miles of travel were estimated. This travel, when
11-53
-------
added to expected Saturday daily vehicle miles of travel in^the grid
zone, is less than weekday totals. The 8-hour total is also less than
weekdays, and the peak hour is about the same.
Therefore, unless Saturday VMT grows excessively by
1977, it is assumed that an analysis of weekday travel under non-stadium
conditions would provide a reasonable evaluation for the grid zone.
The total daily vehicle miles of travel resulting from
the calculations and assumptions described above for grids in Seattle
are shown in Figure 11-10.
(4) The improvement of Interstate 90 from Bellevue into
Seattle will create additional vehicle capacity to 1-5 (at a higher level
of service than at present) plus exclusive lanes for express bus transit.
However, it is estimated that 1-90 will not be fully open for traffic
until 1980. Therefore, its impact in 1977 (and 1978 and 1979) is included,
on the premise that facilities will exist only for express buses. No
increase in average speeds is assumed and volume growth is forecasted
along current trend lines.
D. DERIVATION OF 1977 AIR QUALITY LEVELS
1. General
The methodology presented in Section II-A, which assumes
that ambient concentrations are directly proportional to the total emis-
sions of the pollutant over an area of appropriate size, was used to
11-54
-------
CBO
400 K
300K
i
l/i
Ln
» 200 M
o
•rl
0)
IOOK-B
1 2
Grid
3 i| 5 6 7
Numbers
e 9 10 11 12
Figure II
1971
1977
PUGET SOUND
REGION
IS 1>| IS It 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 2* 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 8 W U tt M tk *S.4C *l I*
10. Daily vehicle miles per square mile. Grid locations are: Seattle,
1-32; Renton, 33-37; Bellevue, 38-41; Tacoma, 42-47; Everett, 48.
-------
estimate the maximum allowable emission density and the level of air
quality expected in 1977 as a result of the Federal Motor Vehicle Con-
trol Program. The 1977 estimates were made using baseline VMT and air
quality data for 1971. The percent reduction in vehicular emissions re-
quired by means of strategies was estimated by comparing calculated 1977
emission densities with the maximum allowable emission density. Allow-
ance was made for non-vehicular emissions in the calculations.
The areas for which vehicle emissions were calculated were
shown in Figure II-9. To ensure consideration of all areas with high
emission rates, preliminary calculations were made for 18 square miles
in Tacoma, Renton, Bellevue, Mercer Island, and Everett in addition to
the principal area of 32 square miles in Seattle.
Hydrocarbon emission densities were calculated for the 3-
hour period from 0600 to 0900 local time in agreement with the time
period specified by the national standard for hydrocarbons. Carbon
monoxide emission densities were calculated for the 8-hour period of
maximum traffic.
2. Estimation of CO Levels
a. Emission Densities within Core Area
Vehicular Emissions - Emission densities were calculated for
all 50 one-mile-square zones for 1971 and 1977 using the traffic data given
in Appendix A, and the EPA emission factors discussed in Section II A.
11-56
-------
Emission densities were also calculated for 1970 for Zones 1-41 by in-
creasing the 1971 VMT's by 2.5 percent. Figure 11-11 shows the results
for all zones for 1971 and 1977. The computer printout listing the
results for all three years by vehicle type is included in Appendix B.
Non-Vehicular Emissions - Table 11-21, compiled from
data presented in Appendix C of the Implementation Plan, shows that of
the 742,956 tons of CO estimated to have been emitted within King County
during 1970, only 29,397 tons, or 4 percent, are from non-vehicular sources.
Also, more than half of this amount was from sources such as aircraft and
solid waste disposal which are not likely to significantly affect concen-
trations within the CBD. Table 11-22 gives the emission rates for various
source categories for the Puget Sound Intrastate A.Q.C.R. in 1970 and 1975.
For non-vehicular sources, these estimates show either no change or a
decrease in emission rate between the two years. In the proportional
modeling which follows, we attribute 2 percent of the CO emissions affecting
the CBD to non-vehicular sources in 1970 and leave their emission rate un-
changed throughout the 1970-1979 period.
Selection of Air Quality Baseline - As shown in Section
II-B-3, the CO monitor that was located at 1-5 and Dearborn for four months
in 1970 yielded a second-highest, 8-hour average concentration of 20 ppm.
However, as pointed out in the Implementation Plan, it is inappropriate
to compare measurements made along a major freeway with the 8-hour standard
11-57
-------
BELLEVUE
Figure II- 11. Maximum 8-Hour CO emission densities (KGM/Sq. Mil) in Seattle.
Upper values are for 1971, lower values are 1977 emissions based on
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program.
11-58
-------
TABLE 11-21
CO EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR KING COUNTY IN 1970
SOURCE CATEGORY EMISSIONS (TONS/YEAR)
Fuel Combustion 4,469
Process Losses 598*
Solid Waste Disposal 9,418*
Transportation
Motor Vehicles 713,559
Aircraft 5,077*
Other 6,977
Miscellaneous Area 2,858*
Subtotal (Non-Vehicular) 29,397 (4%)
Total 742,956
*From sources not likely to significantly affect the CBD.
11-59
-------
TABLE II- 22
CO EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR PUGET SOUND INTRASTATE A.Q.C.R.
SOURCE CATEGORY EMISSIONS (TONS/YEAR)
1970 1975
Process Losses
Fuel Combustion
Transportation
Motor Vehicles
Other
Solid Waste Disposal
Miscellaneous Area Sources
9,627
8,363
1,095,438
18,505
23,782
8,675
7,197
8,363
809,438
18,^05
14,052
8,175
Subtotal (Non-Vehicular) 68,952 56,292
Total 1,164,390 865,730
*1970 values have been distributed in accord with breakdown given in King
County 1970 estimates (Appendix C, Implementation Plan). "Other" trans-
portation emissions are left unchanged for 1975.
11-60
-------
unless the monitored area is occupied by people for a comparable period.
This statement simply represents, in GCA's opinion, preferred monitoring
practice. It is not meant to preclude the possibility that a local area
of high concentrations existed (or exists) in the vicinity of 1-5 and
Dearborn. When concentrations were averaged over a one-hour period, which
more closely corresponds to the period of exposure experienced by freeway
drivers, the highest value equaled, but did not exceed, the one-hour stand-
ard of 35 ppm.
The second monitor that measured concentrations of possible
concern was located at the City Municipal Building. This monitor is
currently in operation at this location, and the site was visited by GCA
personnel. The intake of the monitor extends outward from the face of the
parking building over the edge of the sidewalk, and is at a height of about
15 feet above the ground. In our opinion, the instrument is not excessively
influenced by vehicles entering and leaving the parking building, although
the measured values include some contribution from those vehicles. The
Municipal Building is located within the CBD in the one-mile-square zone
(Zone 21) of maximum CO emissions.
A second site within the CBD, Westlake Mall, was monitored
for four months in 1971. During this period, no 8-hour concentrations
were measured which were in excess of the standards. In fact, during the
two months when observations were made at both the Municipal Building and
Westlake Mall, the maximum 8-hour concentrations at Westlake Mall were approx-
imately one-half those at the Municipal Building. Figure 11-12 shows the
11-61
-------
I
-------
distribution of daily VMT's by subgrid for the CBD. It appears from this
distribution that the Municipal Building Monitor (Subzone Z) receives
large contributions from both local city streets and from the freeway,
whereas the Westlake Mall monitor (Subzone M) is less influenced by free-
way emissions. The average VMT for Subzones 21-Z, 23-A, and 23-B is
19,533, and the average VMT for Subzones 21--M and 21-S is 12,935. The
ratio of these VMT's is 1.5, whereas the average ratio between 8-hour
maximum concentrations measured by the two monitors over corresponding
periods was 2.0. We believe that the difference in concentration at the
two sites reflects both a difference in area-wide emissions affecting
the sites, and a somewhat more open exposure at the Westlake Mall trailer
site.
The proportional modeling in the following section is
based on the second-highest, 8-hour average concentration at the Municipal
Building and the average emission density for Zone 21. We consider the
development of control strategies from these data to be a sound, but
conservative, approach to the reduction of CO levels in Seattle. Veri-
fication of the baseline concentration at other carefully selected locations
within the CBD is highly desirable.
b. Results
Table 11-23 summarizes relevant emission density and
air quality data for Zone 21. According to these estimates, a 12.7 percent
reduction in vehicular emissions from 1971 levels is required from trans-
portation control strategies.
11-63
-------
TABLE 11-23
SUMMARY DATA FOR ZONE 21 (CO)
a) Emission Densities (kg/8hr/mi )
Category
Vehicular
Non-Vehicular
Total
b) Air Quality (8-hr average in ppm)
Observed (2nd highest)
Estimated
YEAR
197.1
14,301
292
14,593
YEAR
1971
20
2
c) Maximum Allowable Emissions Level (kg/8hr/mi )
Total Non-Vehicular
6,567 292
d) Reduction in Vehicular Emissions from 1971 Levels
1977
8,175
292
8,467
1977
11.6
Vehicular
6,275
PERCENT
From Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program by 1977 43.4
Additional Required by Transportation Control 12.7
Strategies
11-64
-------
The maximum allowable vehicular emissions level is
2
6275 kg/8-hr/mi . Figure 11-11 shows that the 1977 emission levels
expected as a result of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program are
well below this acceptable level except for Zone 21. In Tacoma, the
highest 1977 emission density is approximately one-half of the allow-
able level.
3. Estimation of Oxidant Levels
a. Emission Densities within Core Area
For the proportional modeling used to estimate air
quality for 1977, it is necessary to apportion the total initial hydro-
carbon content of the local air mass within which the highest oxidant
concentrations are produced to vehicular and non-vehicular sources. No
spatial relationship between the source of the hydrocarbons and the region
of high oxidant concentrations need be postulated. The following basic
assumptions were used in making the apportionment:
(1) The local air mass of concern is the one
having the highest hydrocarbon content.
It's source is the central Seattle region
defined by Zones 7 through 29, where maxi-
mum vehicular emissions occur.
(2) Hydrocarbons from non-vehicular sources are
uniformly distributed throughout the city of
Seattle.
(3) The amount of hydrocarbon emissions within
Seattle is directly related by population to
total emissions within King County.
11-65
-------
Vehicular Emissions - Figure 11-13 shows 1971. and 1977
three-hour hydrocarbon emission densities calculated for the Seattle
area from the traffic data in Appendix A. Emission densities for 1970,
1971, and 1977 are listed by vehicle type in Appendix B. The emission
densities for 1970 were calculated by increasing the 1971 VMT's by 2.5
percent.
Total 1970 hydrocarbon emissions for the 23 square mile
area comprised of Zones 7 through 29 during the 0600-0900 period were 7052
kilograms. When adjusted on the basis of traffic flow, this is equivalent
to 39,842 kilograms per day.
Non-Vehicular Emissions - Table 11-24, compiled from
the emission inventory data in Appendix C of the Implementation Plan, gives
the distribution of hydrocarbon emissions, by source category within King
County in 1970. The non-vehicular emissions attributed to Seattle were
calculated from the County emissions by population as follows:
City Emissions = County Emissions X City Population -
' County Population
35,969 X = 16'608
These emissions were assumed to be evenly distributed throughout the city
2
(76.4 mi ) and emissions from the central 23 square mile area was calculated
to be 4,970 tons/year or 12,352 kg/day using this assumption. Based on these
very rough approximations, the non-vehicular emissions make up 24 percent
of the total hydrocarbon emissions within the central area. Table 11-25
gives estimated 1970 and 1977 hydrocarbon emission rates for the Puget
11-66
-------
Gr««n Lake- 146 348
68 I 186
Figure 11-13. Hydrocarbon emission densities (KGM/Sq. Mi.) in Seattle for
6 A.M. --9 A.M. period. Upper values are for 1971, lower
values are 1977 emissions based on Federal Motor Vehical
Control Program.
11-67
-------
TABLE 11-24
HYDROCARBON EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR KING COUNTY IN 1970
SOURCE CATEGORY
EMISSION (TONS/YEAR)
Fuel Combustion
Process Losses
Solid Waste Disposal
Transportation
Motor Vehicles
Aircraft
Other
Miscellaneous Area
Subtotal (non-vehicular)
Total
2126
7959
2100
118,283
3,066
20,146
572
35,969 (23.37o)
154,252
11-68
-------
TABLE II- 25
HYDROCARBON EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR PUGET SOUND INTRASTATE A.Q.C.R.
SOURCE CATEGORY EMISSIONS ( TONS/YEAR)
1970 1975
Process Losses
Fuel Combustion
Transportation*
Motor Vehicles
Other
Solid Waste Disposal
Miscellaneous Area Sources
Subtotal (Non-Vehicular)
Total
13,520
4,623
185,791
36,447
5,100
1,736
61,426
247,217
13,520
4,623
124,391
36,447
3,075
1,636
59,301
183,692
*
1970 values have been distributed in accord with breakdown given in
King County 1970 estimates (Appendix C, Implementation Plan). "Other"
transportation emissions are left unchanged for 1975.
11-69
-------
Sound Intrastate A.Q.C.R. The sum of the non-vehicular sources shows a
slight decrease between 1970 and 1975. In the proportional modeling
which follows, non-vehicular hydrocarbon emissions in the area of con-
cern are assumed to be 24 percent of the total in 1970 and to remain
constant throughout the 1970-1979 period.
Selection of Air Quality Baseline - Table 11-10 shows
that the highest oxidant concentrations observed within the Seattle area
were measured at the 1-5 and Dearborn sampling station. However, as men-
tioned in Section II-B, the average diurnal variation of concentration at
this site showed a rapid rise from 0500 to 0800 in the morning and maxi-
mum concentrations toward the end of the afternoon and early evening.
Also, the maximum one-hour concentration observed during each of the four
months of the sampling increased steadily from July to October. This
behavior, which is not typical of the behavior of photo-oxidants, plus
the fact that the monitor was located at a major freeways has raised ques-
tions concerning the representativeness of the data. In evaluating the
oxidant problem, we have, therefore, chosen to disregard the 1970 data
from 1-5 and Dearborn and to rely on the more recent data taken at the
four widely distributed sites in operation during the summers of 1971 and
1972.
b. Results
Table 11-26 summarizes the results of the proportional
modeling of hydrocarbons based on the second-highest, one-hour oxidant
concentration observed in the Seattle area in 1971 and 1972 and hydro-
11-70
-------
TABLE 11-26
SUMMARY DATA FOR CENTRAL 23 SQUARE MILE AREA (HYDROCARBONS-OXIDANTS)
a) Emission Rates of Hydrocarbons (kg/3hr/23 mi2)
YEAR
Vehicular
Non-Vehicular
1971
6,308
2,227
Total 8,535
b) Air Quality - Oxidants (1-hr average in ppm)
1977
3,063
2,227
5,290
YEAR
Observed (2nd Highest)
Estimated
1971
0.11
1977
< 0.08
c) Maximum Allowable Emission Level of Hydrocarbons (kg/3hr/23mi )
Total Non-Vehicular Vehicular
6316 2227 4089
d) Reduction in Vehicular Emission of Hydrocarbons from 1971 Levels
From Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program by 1977
Additional Required by Transportation Control Strategies
PERCENT
51
0
11-71
-------
carbon emissions within the 23 square mile central zone of the city.
Estimates of air quality and allowable emission rates were mad^ by means
of the curve given in Appendix J of 42CFR, Part 420.
The estimates in Table 11-26 show that the hydrocarbon
2
emission rate expected in the central area (5290 kg/3-hr/23 mi ) is 16
percent below the maximum allowable rate. In our judgment, the data
available at the present time indicate that photochemical oxidants in
the Seattle area will fall within the national standards by 1977 without
the imposition of special transportation control strategies.
E. PROJECTED CARBON MONOXIDE LEVELS IN 1978 AND 1979
Vehicular CO emission densities in 1978 and 1979 were calculated
for the CBD, using projected VMT's and the appropriate emission factors,
on the assumption of no additional transportation control strategies. The
results are given in Table 11-27. These estimates indicate that the
national standards for CO will be met by 1979 by means of the Federal
Motor Vehicle Control Program.
*
The use of the 1-5 and Dearborn 1970 oxidant data (2nd highest, 1-hour
average concentration of 0.15 ppm) and the 1970 vehicular emission rates given
in Appendix B (7052 kg/3 hr./23 mi2) yields a required total reduction in
hydrocarbons of 5 percent, and a required reduction by transportation control
strategies of 6.6 percent.
11-72
-------
TABLE 11-27
PROJECTED CO EMISSION LEVELS IN 1978 AND 1979, WITHOUT STRATEGIES
SOURCE CATEGORY
• 2,
EMISSION DENSITY (kg/Shr/mi/)
Allowable 1978 1979
Vehicular
Non-Vehicular
6275
292
6951
292
6001
292
TOTAL
6597
7243
6293
11-73
-------
F. SUMMARY OF PROBLEM AND CONCLUSIONS
1. Implementation Plan Assessment of CO and Oxidant Problems
The assessments of the CO and oxidant problems in Seattle
and environs made in the Implementation Plan were based on procedures
specified in Appendix I of the Federal Register, Vol. 36, No. 153,
pp. 15500-15501. The degree of improvement in air quality needed for
attainment of the national air quality standards was made by the propor-
tional model
(A - QlOO
A - B
where A = the second highest concentration observed over the period
of observation;
B = the air quality .standard ;
C = the background value, set equal to zero.
The formula for calculating the air quality level for some
future year, as specified in Appendix I is:
Fo+
where:
Subscripts 0 and 1 denote the base year and future year of
interest, respectively.
A.Q. = Air quality (measured or estimated) in region
E = Normalized emissions from Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix I
11-74
-------
F = Ratio of motor vehicle emissions to total emissions of
each pollutant in region
GF = Growth factor for emission increases from stationary sources
This equation was applied directly for carbon monoxide. The percent
reduction in hydrocarbon emissions expected from the Federal Motor Vehicle
Control Program was estimated by the portion of the equation in brackets
and compared with the percent reduction required to meet the standard
for photochemical oxidants obtained from Appendix J of the same Federal
Register (p. 15502).
The rollback calculations for both CO and oxidants were
based on the 1970 observations made at 1-5 and Dearborn. These calcula-
tions indicated that a 20 percent reduction in CO and a 7 percent reduc-
tion in hydrocarbon emissions from 1970 levels would be required to meet
the national standards, in addition to the reductions expected through
the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program. Ressrvations were made about
the use of the CO and oxidant data from this location, in the rollback
calculations, and the need for more complete and reliable information
before a valid assessment of the problem could be made was pointed out.
The limited data from other sources indicated that the CO standards would
be met in 1977 by means of the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program, and
that the oxidant standard was currently being met. In its review of the
Implementation Plan, the Division of Air Surveillance, EPA, expressed
the opinion that rollback calculations for the region should not be based
on 8-hour average concentrations from the 1-5 and Dearborn site, but
11-75
-------
that, because of the very limited oxidant data available upon which to
base the need for transportation controls, the oxidant data measured
between 0900 and 1600 PST should be considered.
2. Current Assessment of CO and Oxidant Problems
As explained earlier in Section II, it was decided to take
full advantage in the present study of all data currently available and
to shift the base year to 1971. The use of the more comprehensive set
of air quality data collected since submission of the Implementation Plan
is believed to increase substantially the reliability of the baseline
concentrations used in projecting air quality and estimating rollback re-
quirements. The results of this reassessment of the problem may be sum-
marized as follows:
(1) The national oxidant standard will be attained
throughout Seattle and environs by 1977 without the use of transpor-
tation control strategies .
(2) The national CO standards will be attained through-
out Seattle and environs by 1977 without the use of transportation
control strategies except within the CBD.
(3) Attainment of the 8-hour CO standard within the CBD
will require a reduction in CO emissions by transportation controls of
13 percent from 1971 levels. This is equivalent to a reduction of
23 percent from the 1977 "no strategy" emission level.
11-76
-------
(4) The Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program will ensure
that the national CO standards will be met by 1979 without the use of
transportation control strategies.
(5) In Tacoma, the calculated reduction in motor vehicle
emissions between 1971 and 1977 is approximately 43 percent, and the 1977
vehicular emissions within the CBD are about half the level allowable in
the Seattle CBD.
In summary, the current assessment of the problem, based
principally upon air quality data collected since the submission of the
Implementation Plan, indicates that the oxidant problem in the Seattle
area is less severe than initially thought and will not require the impo-
sition of transportation control strategies. However, the recent CO data
collected at the Municipal Building in the Seattle CBD indicates a local
problem that will require a decrease in CO emissions within the CBD
greater than that anticipated from the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Pro-
gram.
11-77
-------
III. EVALUATION OF CANDIDATE TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS
A. GENERAL
The proportional analysis carried out in Section II indicates
that by 1977 the motor vehicle pollution problem in Seattle and its
environs will be limited to CO concentrations in the CBD. The reduc-
tion in CO emissions required from transportation control strategies to
ensure that the national standards be met was estimated to be 13 percent
from 1971 levels, or 23 percent from the 1977 "no strategy" level. Pre-
liminary estimates showed that meeting this goal would require the joint
implementation of a number of the most feasible transportation controls,
and a list of potential strategies was developed for initial screening.
These strategies, and preliminary estimates of their impact on air quality,
are discussed in Section B, below. The estimates of emission reductions
in these evaluations are from the 1977 "no strategy" level.
The list of potential strategies is shown in Table III-l arranged
into groups by a feasibility rating. These groupings were decided as a
result of discussions with representatives from the City of Seattle,
Washington State Highway Department, and Washington State Department of
Ecology.
Simply stated, the strategies listed in Group II through V are
not applicable because they are too long-range, not practical in down-
town Seattle, or run counter to present local and statewide policy.
III-l
-------
TABLE III-l
POTENTIAL STRATEGIES BY FEASIBILITY GROUPING - SEATTLE AREA
I. Strategies for Evaluation:
a. Continue to support the METRO transit development program.
b. Develop fringe parking with PRT links to downtown.
c. Develop incentive programs for retrofit (and inspection) of
heavy-duty fleet vehicles.
d. Encourage gaseous conversion for fleet vehicles.
e. Implement the proposed 1-5 surveillance, control, and ramps
metering program.
f. Develop means to bypass through traffic in downtown.
g. Driver advisories directed to parking and loading.
h. Plan to exploit opportunities to encourage car pools, staggered
hours, and staggered day programs.
i. Improved signal systems.
j. Support incentive programs to discourage ownership of older,
uncontrolled vehicles.
II. Strategies of Doubtful Effectiveness in Downtown:
a. Air watch driver advisory.
b. Regional area traffic bypass.
c. Fuel additives.
III. Strategies Outside Policies and Goals for Downtown:
a. Increase in parking fees.
b. Large-scale parking prohibitions without replacement elsewhere.
c. Large-scale vehicle prohibitions.
III-2
-------
TABLE III-l (Cont.)
d. Limitations in street capacity.
e. Computer controlled signal system.
f. Controls on pedestrian movements.
g. Additional one-way or reversible streets.
h. Large-scale street capacity increases.
IV. Strategies for Long-range Consideration, but Effective Only Beyond 1977:
a. New-type vehicles.
b. Communications substitutes for travel.
c. Land use policies.
d. Planning of facilities to reduce emissions.
V. Strategies Outside Present Policy Framework:
a. Impose tolls.
b. Fuel rationing.
c. Increased user taxes and fees.
d. Road use taxes.
e. Rationing of vehicle ownership.
f. Inspection and maintenance of all vehicles.
III-3
-------
Increases in parking fees and large-scale prohibitions of
parking and vehicles themselves seem far from practical from the stand-
point of downtown business. Such steps might become practical only as
part of programs to replace parking using fringe parking with equally
convenient access.
Strategies such as prohibiting or imposing tolls on older, un-
controlled vehicles are viewed as discriminatory. Street capacity
improvements, particularly signal improvements, are considered acceptable
to relieve hot spot problems, reduce idling, or solve safety problems.
However, improvements with the aim of accommodating more vehicles in
downtown appear to be counter to the present thrust of planning for down-
town Seattle. Also, the development of an elaborate computer-controlled
signal system for downtown falls very low in priority due to high cost
and the need to improve and develop signal systems in areas other than
downtown.
Land use policies can be an important tool for downtown by
encouraging second-level sidewalks, parking control, and building bulk
control (perhaps to improve air circulation). The impact, however, is
long-range. In the meantime, all significant improvement projects should
be reviewed for their air quality impact.
B. STRATEGY EVALUATION
Group I in Table III-3 includes a fairly extensive list of
activities that can become elements of one or more candidate strategies
III-4
-------
for Seattle. The strategies discussed in the following paragraphs are
recommended candidates for inclusion in any air quality implementation
plan for Seattle - either in total or in part.
1. Continue to Support the METRO Transit Program
The METRO Transit Plan was described briefly in Section
II C since the elements of the Plan expected to be operating in 1977 were
used to estimate the 1977 vehicle miles of travel. Generally speaking,
there was little impact estimated from the new transit system on arterials,
but new express service was estimated to have an important effect on free-
ways. Freeway vehicle miles were cut back from levels based on past
trends in the central business district and elsewhere. Surface street
trips in downtown, on the other hand, were not. Therefore, it seemed
important to investigate this impact in more detail.
Several approaches were tried. Background work fpr Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for the Metropolitan Area Transit Plan;
Cornell, Rowland, Hayes, and Merryfield, June 1972; estimated that peak
hour modal split for downtown would increase from 21.7 to 34.9 percent.
This large increase in the transit share of trips to downtown is equiva-
lent to a condition where transit absorbs all growth and vehicle miles
remain the same as 1971. This is equivalent to a further reduction in
emissions from the calculated 1977 level of some 8 percent.
However, the forecasts of transit travel in 1980 across
various screenlines including one surrounding downtown Seattle, indicate
III-5
-------
that growth in transit passengers may be much more modest. Therefore,
an estimate was made keeping local transit route loadings the same as
1971, but calculating express transit use with mode split curves developed
in the evaluation of the Blue Streak Bus Rapid Transit Demonstration
Project. These curves are illustrated in Figure III-l.
In addition, several assumptions relating to regional travel
were made:
(1) The park-ride lots will be located an average of
12 miles from downtown.
(2) The starting point of these trips would approxi-
mate the same distribution of trip lengths as
found in the Blue Streak corridor north of down-
town Seattle.
(3) Average auto speed to downtown will be 47 mph,
and transit travel time will be 1.5 times auto
travel time.
With such assumptions, it was calculated that 11 percent of 195,000 daily
trips would be attracted to the express bus park and ride system.
These trips had already been deducted from freeway volumes
in the downtown area. However, the portion of the vehicle miles represent-
ing travel from the freeway to parking was not accounted for in the 1977
estimates. This amounted to 4,000 vehicle miles during the 8-hour period.
Deducting this from the 8-hour vehicle miles results in an emissions re-
duction of 2.2 percent. This figure is judged to be a fair evaluation
III-6
-------
TlOO PERCENT TRANSIT
FREEHAND PARK-RIDE CURVE
PHASE I MODAL SPLIT CURVE
-70 -60 -50 -kO -30 -20 -10
TRANSIT BETTER -«
10 20 30 kO 50 60 70
»- AUTO BETTER
Transit Minus Highway In Equivalent Minutes
Figure III-l. Blue Streak mode split curves.
-------
of the impact of METRO Transit, although it is in the lower part of
the terminal.
2. Develop Fringe Parking with PRT Links to Downtown
Serious consideration is being given to development of
Personalized Rapid Transit (PRT) in Seattle's downtown area. "People-
movers" were recommended in previous studies. The Boeing Company of
Seattle is installing a PRT in Morgantown, West Virginia. The famous
Seattle Monorail presently connects downtown and Seattle Center to the
north.
Although a PRT system oriented east-west in Seattle's down-
town could be very important in linking vital land uses and overcoming
severe topographical barriers, the potential for connections to fringe
parking appears to lie in a north-south oriented system connecting to
an existing 2,000 parking spaces at Seattle Center on the north and to
a future 1,800 spaces at the King County Stadium on the south. A loca-
tion for such a system is presently under study.
To evaluate the impact of a PRT park-ride, the Blue Streak
mode split curves were again utilized. For this application, the follow-
ing generous assumptions were made:
Free parking
. A 20-cent fare
A waiting time of 5 minutes
An average PRT speed of 30 mph
III-8
-------
Diversion from auto to PRT was tested for autos approaching via 1-5
from the north, Aurora Avenue from the north, Elliott Avenue from the
northwest, 1-90 from the east, and 1st Avenue from the south. Modal
splits of 16 percent to 20 percent were calculated with the low cost
assumptions. This would mean a large number of daily trips diverted,
probably exceeding the capacity of the 3,800 spaces available and
planned.
Diversion of 3,800 trips in the critical 8-hour period
is very likely since users of the PRT will probably be downtown workers.
Such a diversion would reduce vehicle miles in downtown (with only a
slight increase in adjacent areas) and produce an emissions reduction
of 1.9 percent.
It must be pointed out that a bus park-ride already exists
at the Seattle Center, but without the high PRT level of service. Also,
it must be noted that the planning, financing, design, construction,
and commencement of operations for the PRT by 1977 are unrealistic. Al-
though only a slight reduction in/emissions is estimated for 1977, the
potential appears to be much^'much greater. However, obstacles to imple-
mentation by 1977 are also great, as described in Section V.
3. Incentive Retrofit Programs
The retrofit program for heavy-duty fleet vehicles has
been suggested by the Department of Ecology and would be acceptable to
City Officials as an incentive-type program.
III-9
-------
A 58 percent reduction in carbon monoxide emissions from
)V
light duty vehicles is cited by EPA for an "air bleed to intake mani-
fold" device, available at a nominal $40 cost. Estimates place the
portion of uncontrolled heavy-duty vehicles at between 45 and 55 percent
of total heavy-duty vehicles by 1977. For Seattle, heavy-duty gasoline
vehicles produce approximately 21 percent of the carbon monoxide emis-
sions. Assuming an identical effect on heavy-duty vehicles, the poten-
tial impact could be:
(0.21 emissions)(0.58 reduction)(0.50 uncontrolled) = 0.062 = 6 percent
If only fleet vehicles are regulated (about 9 percent of all trucks are
in fleets of 10 or more) the potential reduction would be approximately
0.4 percent.
Advantages to such a program could be its ease of admini-
stration and enforcement as compared to retrofit of all older vehicles,
and its relatively low cost. However, an evaluation of the effectiveness
of such a device on heavy-duty vehicles has not been made but EPA, and
its acceptance as a strategy requires justification. Development of such
a program would require the support of the City of Seattle and other
agencies.
4. Gaseous Conversion
Present legislation in the State of Washington provides a
tax incentive for conversion of vehicles to liquified natural gas (LNG)
*Control Strategies for In-Use Vehicles, Office of Air and Water
Programs, Mobile Source Pollution Control Program, Washington, B.C.,
November 1972.
111-10
-------
or liquified petroleum gas (LPG). Like retrofit, this program is best
suited to fleet operation. Reductions in emissions for light-duty
•&
vehicles range from 65 to 90 percent, and similar reductions are assumed
for heavy duty. Considering the percent of emissions from each class,
overall reductions could be:
Heavy-duty, fleets of 10 or more: 1.1 percent
Light-duty, fleets of 10 or more: 0.7 percent
Light-duty, fleets of 10 or more plus all govern-
ment: 2.2 percent
Similar to the retrofit strategy, this program would require the support
of many agencies to extend legislation providing the incentive and to
develop a public relations program aimed at fleet owners.
5. Implement the Proposed 1-5 Surveillance, Control and
Ramp Metering Program
Like METRO transit, this strategy is mentioned in Section
II C but with the suggestion that it be considered as a candidate strategy
if air quality problems are identified in the 1-5 corridor. Such a
problem has not been identified for 1977, but the impact of the freeway
control project from downtown north has been evaluated as far as it may
impact on downtown.
Essentially, the project is designed to limit peak volumes
on 1-5 to a level where 50 mph average speeds will result. This will
be accomplished mainly through ramp metering where an approaching motorist
will face a green or red light depending on the traffic density on the
Preliminary EPA estimates. Actual emission reductions have been found
to vary widely. See Control Strategies for In-Use Vehicles, pp. 4-3 to 4-5.
111-11
-------
freeway itself. The signal control of ramps will assist with merging,
will allow express transit access without delay via a bypass lane, and
will divert "excess" vehicles to parallel arterials. This would cause
some additional VMT on these arterials, however.
In areas where this system is in operation, increases in
traffic volumes on parallel surface routes have not been detected. Nev-
ertheless, the presence of diverted traffic on parallel arterials has
been assumed for this analysis. Growth of freeway volumes to 1977 has
been estimated for all hours of the day. Any hourly volume exceeding
1969 levels (representing the capacity of 1-5) was then manually assigned
to parallel arterials such as Aurora Avenue.
In downtown, the effect of this is to increase peak period
vehicle miles on north-south arterials and decrease vehicle miles on
the freeway and east-west streets connecting to ramps.
The net effect on downtown is calculated as an even balance,
with no reduction in emissions.
6. Develop Means to Bypass Through Traffic in Downtown
In the report 1970 Study of Traffic and Parking in Seattle's
Central Business District, Seattle Traffic Engineering Division, two
types of through traffic were identified. It was calculated that 20
percent of the volume to and from 1-5 travels through downtown to park
on the west side. Bypassing this traffic would seem to require new
111-12
-------
facilities providing access to the west side of downtown. Development
of such facilities by 1977 certainly must be considered doubtful,
especially in view of the voter defeat of the Bay Freeway (east-west
service between 1-5 and the Alaskan Way Viaduct). Should such bypass
routes, which together could serve as a ring road around the downtown
area, be constructed, however, a partial traffic free zone, such as that
in effect in Gothenburgh, Sweden, might be developed.
The study identified a through traffic volume of 17,250
and a total inbound volume of 175,600. If it is assumed that this through
volume includes several components such as north to south, north to east,
and south to east; the magnitude of each component can be estimated in
direct ratio to total volume on the respective sides of downtown. Doing
so indicates that the north-south component should be about one-third of
the total.
If this volume is bypassed to 1-5 (through some combination
of impedance in downtown and improvement of the bypass route), it is
estimated that vehicle miles will actually increase , with emissions up
1.9 percent.
The problem of through traffic in downtown would seem to
be relatively small, and bypass of such traffic not a profitable strategy
for improving air quality.
111-13
-------
7. Driver Advisories
Some sort of driver information system to guide vehicles
to parking and to curb loading zones may be effective in reducing the
downtown "search for parking" vehicle miles. In 1968, Los Angeles found
22 percent of downtown travel during peak periods to be of this type.
Assuming 10 percent effectiveness of such a program (it could include
information brochures, fixed signs, or changeable message sign systems)
and a 20 percent share of downtown traffic affected, a reduction in
total downtown 8-hour emissions of 1.3 percent was estimated.
8. Car Pools, Staggered Hours, and Staggered Days
Although there are no large-scale plans for such programs,
and voluntary programs are favored, a considerable potential exists for
the use of car pools and staggered days in solving the 8-hour CO problem.
Staggered hours might help peak hour (or half-hour) air quality, but
probably would not move significant vehicle miles of travel outside of
the 8-hour period or even into hours of higher travel speeds.
Car Pools - This technique is one that is frequently men-
tioned as a means to reduce vehicular travel demand, but is seldom found
in actual practice except at large employment centers.
A practical maximum vehicle occupancy from a car pool pro-
gram is 1.7 persons per car average, and 1.6 is more realistic. Based
on the 1970 survey of downtown traffic, present occupancy is about 1.3.
With an increase of occupancy from 1.3 to 1.6, vehicle miles could be
111-14
-------
reduced about 11 percent. If a car-pool program included only govern-
ment employees (about one-third of downtown employment) the reduction
could still be 3.6 percent. Realistically, a lesser effectiveness must
be assumed, but the potential certainly exists.
A car pool program could be approached from several stand-
points. Incentives are important in terms of preferred parking loca-
tion and access to any reserved lanes (such as exclusive bus lanes on
streets, freeways, or ramps). The second method has real potential in
Seattle with the existing exclusive bus ramp at Columbia-Cherry Streets,
and the proposed exclusive bus lanes on the Lake Washington bridges.
Publicity is another factor, along with a "matching" ser-
vice to locate travellers with close-by origins and destinations.
Staggered Days - This program involves a four-day work week
or similar approach. The effect could be removal of employee work trips
from downtown on the fifth day - the "off" day.
The "4-40" plan has been implemented in some areas, usually
on an experimental basis. Initial implementation on a large-scale could
be with government employees. To be effective, the plan would have to
spread the "off" day evenly throughout the week. Assuming 100 percent
compliance (unlikely), the daily 20 percent employee reduction would pro-
duce a maximum reduction in vehicle miles of 9.6 percent. As with car
pools, a lower level of effectiveness must be assumed although the
potential is there.
111-15
-------
9. Improved Signal Systems
The City of Seattle is about to implement and test a "SIGOP"
project. This project involves use of a computer program to prepare
timing plans for the existing downtown signal system that will improve
traffic flow through better progressive speeds. The program is experi-
mental, and a major product of the operation is an evaluation of just
what improvements do result. However, the goals of the SIGOP program
may be a fair indication of what might be achieved in terms of improving
air quality.
With implementation of SIGOP, progressive speeds ranging
from 15 mph on steep crosstown routes to 30 mph on major downtown arter-
ials (these goals expressed to the nearest 5 mph) might be achieved.
With allowance for the difference between progressive speed and actual
average speed (less), improvements in average speed are indicated for
some streets in the 18 mph and 20 mph categories used in the 1977 esti-
mate. Calculating the effect of these speed changes resulted in an esti-
mated emissions reduction of 6.2 percent.
10. Discourage Use of Older Vehicles
This strategy could be directed towards an incentive pro-
gram to remove older, pre-controlled vehicles from the traffic stream.
By 1977, vehicles of 1966 vintage and older will probably have reached
their minimum value. Therefore, a program to offer a "bounty" of $100.00
or so to scrap such vehicles might encourage owners to obtain and use
newer model autos.
111-16
-------
Such a program would undoubtedly have to be approached on
& Statewide basis, or at least through State legislation. Financing
such a program might be done by increasing user taxes or taxes on new
vehicles. An additional benefit to this program would be improvement in
visual pollution. The pay-off for such a program in terms of reduced
pollution could be high, up to 20 percent.
C. SUMMARY AND IMPACT
The strategies discussed above are ranked in Table III-2 based on
the combination of reduction in emissions provided and the potential for
implementation. The impact of each strategy is listed under several
categories. Two strategies evaluated, bypass of downtown through traffic
and the 1-5 control project, are deleted as not effective. Rather than
attempt to stipulate one strategy as being a higher priority than another,
the rankings are by groups.
As mentioned earlier, prohibiting the use of older vehicles
is viewed by the various state and local agencies as discriminatory.
However, because of its high potential for reducing emissions, the ex-
clusion of older model vehicles from the CBD has been included in Table
III-2, and its potential evaluated in the following section. Its use is
suggested if an incentive program to discourage the use of older vehicles
fails.
111-17
-------
TABLE III-2
SUHHABX AND EVAUIATICH OF STRATEGIES FOR REDUCTION OF CO QOSSIOHS
Rank Strategy
1 Support METRO
Transit develop-
ment
Develop fringe
parking
and PRT
laprove down-
town olgnal
system
Retrofit heavy-
duty fleet
vehicle!
Exclusion of
pre-controlled
vehiclea
2 Gaaeous conver-
aion of fleet
vehlclea;
Light duty
Heavy duty
Program to d la-
courage owner-
•hlp of older,
pre-controlled autoa
3 Driver advisories
guiding to packing
Car poola
Stafeared day*
bluion
Reduction
(fro. 1977)
2.21 and up
1.91
and up
6.21
0.51
Up to 201
0.71 to 2.21
1.11
01 to 201
1.31
01 to 6.01
01 to 9.61
Implementation
Potential
High
Moderate
to high
High
Moderate
Low to
Moderate
Moderate
Low to
Moderate
Low to
Moderate
Low
Low
Cost
High
(Funded)
High
Low
Low unit
cost
Low
High Unit
Coat
High
Moderate
to Low
Low
Low
Political
Tax Support
Approved .
Eavorable
Image
Favorable
image. Re-
quires fed-
eral aupport
May not be
part of down-
town goal a &
objective!
Should be an
incentive
program.
Unfavorable
Favorable image
for fleet opera-
tor. Should con-
tinue Incentive
program.
Probably required
tax increases. Wll
ficatlon.
Strong agency
•upper t re-
quired.
IMPACT
Economic
sually a
eflcit
ctlvity
tllizea
vailable
ark ing.
'avorable
o down-
own actl-
Itiea.
fay divert
rom downtown
Could Improve
lowntown envir-
anntent
tay Impact
•OBW
lualnessaf.
Institutional
Public
ownership
to protest
Small
identified
group for
Adds to admin la -
t r en.
Small identi-
fied group for
administration.
Adda to atate
administrative
Public relation!
program required.
Hay not be
popular with long
weekend*. Require*
public relation*
Legal
Operating
agency must
»e •elected.
Preaent
legisla-
tion must
past 1975.
Legislation
Present Leg-
islation must
be extended
paat 1975.
Legislation
required,
specific area
Access to re-
•erved lane t
and reap*
aust be «pp-
rorwd. Enfor-
caswDt pro-
blaau.
Labor lain
•ay be ot>-
atacla*.
Social
Highly
favorable
to low la-
COM groups
Could en-
courage In-
city residen-
tial develop-
ment.
Discrimin-
T
Should laprova
mobility for low
income group..
Public attitudes
au»t b* altered.
Chanje! life
atyle
Technical
DaBonstratlon
underway.
talsaioo re-
tuctioa could
be ahort-ten.
Air bleed to
intake mani-
fold available
Requires en-
Fuel handling
and aome main'
tenanca pro-
blems. Poten-
tial shortage
of natural gaa.
Requires towing
dlaposal avanf.
Tech. of ad-
vanced system*
may require
development.
lider^etchln^
program re-
quired.
-------
IV. SELECTION OF TRANSPORTATION CONTROLS AND ESTIMATE OF AIR QUALITY
IMPACT
The first three .strategies listed under Rank I of Table III-2 re-
sult in changes either in the distribution of VMT's among the various
speed categories, or in the total number of VMT's for certain speed
categories. Estimates of VMT's by speed category after applying the
three strategies in sequence are given in Table IV-1. These estimates
were used to calculate 1977 emissions and the emissions converted to CO
concentrations by the proportional model discussed in Section II-D.
The results are shown in Table IV-2.
o
These estimates indicate that a further reduction of 1304 kg/8 hr/mi
will be required to meet the 8-hour standard. Judged by their potential
for implementation (See Table III-2), the next two strategies for selec-
tion are retrofit heavy duty fleet vehicles, with an estimated yield of
2
41 kg/8 hr/mi (0.005 x 8175), and the gaseous conversion of fleet ve-
hicles. The estimated yield for conversion of light duty fleets of 10
o
or more plus all government light duty vehicles is 180 kg/8 hr/mi (0.022
x 8175). Although useful, these two strategies combined contribute only
2
about 17 percent of the 1304 kg/8 hr/mi reduction required.
It appears from these that a strategy with much higher potential
yield is required. Two strategies with high potential are the exclusion
of pre-controlled vehicles from the CBD and a more general use of retrofit
systems. Table IV-3, which gives the expected 1977 emissions after the
application of Strategies 1, 2, and 3, provides a convenient means of
IV-1
-------
TABLE IV-1
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED IN 1977 FOR SELECTED STRATEGIES
8 -Hour VMT
Average
Speed
(mph)
50
25
24
20
18
12
15
Total
Without
Strategies
79,736
1,300
0
96,240
22,079
23,172
881
223,408
1
79,736
1,300
0
92,968
22,079
23,033
881
219,997
Strategies
1 + 2
79,736
1,300
0
89,168
22,079
23,033
881
216,197
1 + 2 + 3
79,736
1,300
51,807
51,977
7,463
23,033
881
216,197
IV-2
-------
TABLE IV-2
IMPACT OF SELECTED STRATEGIES ON AIR QUALITY IN 1977
Without
Allowable Strategies
Vehicular Emissions 6275 8175
(kg/8 hr/mi2)
8-Hr CO Cone. 9.0 11.6
(ppm)
With Strategies
1
8032
11.4
1 & 2
7875
11.2
1 & 2 & 2
7579
10.8
1 & 2 & 3
Exclusion
6275
9.0
Retrofit*
3830
5.6
Key to Strategies
(1) METRO Transit Development.
(2) Fringe Parking and PRT.
(3) Improved Signal System.
* Example calculation based on: (1) "air bleed to intake manifold" on pre-1968
models, and (2) "oxidizing catalytic converter with distributor vacuum advance
disconnect" on 1968-1974 models.
IV-3
-------
TABLE IV-3
1977 CO EMISSIONS IN THE SEATTLE CBD BY MODEL YEAR AND VEHICLE TYPE
Model Year
1965 and earlier
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
2
Emissions (kg/mi )
Light Duty '
477
302
436
524
948
675
925
439
501
477
85
73
27
2
Heavy Duty
217
32
38
58
77
116
134
180
193
117
145
186
100
3
Total 5891 1596
IV-4
-------
evaluating strategies that affect selected years or vehicle types. For
example, pre-controlled light duty vehicles (pre-1968 models) contribute
2
1215 kg/8 hr/mi , and pre-controlled heavy duty vehicles (pre-1970 models)
o
contribute 422 kg/8 hr/mi . Presumably, a policy of vehicular exclusion
from the CBD would result, in part, in an increased use of public trans-
portation systems, and, in part, in a shift in the age distribution of
vehicles. For purposes of estimation, the following two assumptions have
been made for pre-1968, light duty vehicle emissions:
1) Vehicle-trips contributing one-fourth of the emissions
(304 kg/8 hr/mi2) will be eliminated;
2) The remaining excluded vehicle trips will be replaced
by trips made by more recent models: % by 1972-1974
models, and % by 1975 and later models.
The second assumption results in a drop in emissions of approximately 770
2
kg/8 hr/mi . Thus, the total decrease accomplished by the exclusion of
2
light duty vehicles is 1074 kg/8 hr/mi , leaving a further required re-
2
duction of 230 kg/8 hr/mi . This reduction can be accomplished in a
number of ways. For example, the use of the "air bleed to intake manifold"
on light duty vehicles is estimated to yield a 58 percent reduction in
emissions from a maintained baseline. A similar reduction in emissions
from heavy duty vehicles (as yet undocumented) would yield a reduction
of 262 kg/8 hr/mi2 (0.10 x 422 + 0.58 x 380) if pre-controlled heavy duty
vehicles were so equipped. It is also the approximate reduction likely to
*
be achieved by excluding pre-controlled heavy duty vehicles from the CBD.
* Assuming an average reduction in emissions from pre-controlled to
replacement vehicles of 45 percent.
IV-5
-------
Although the general use of retrofit systems and the establishment
of the requisite inspection and maintenance facilities is not looked upon
with favor in the State of Washington, computations based on Table IV-3
illustrate the potential impact of such a strategy. For example, the
1215 kg/8 hr/mi2 contributed by pre-1968 light duty vehicles could be
reduced by 755 kg/8 hr/mi2 by the use of "air bleed to intake manifold"
devices (assuming a 10 percent adjustment to a maintained baseline, and
a 58 percent reduction due to the retrofit device ). Similarly, the use
of an "oxidizing catalytic converter" on 1968-1974 light duty vehicles
2
could yield a reduction of 2469 kg/8 hr/mi (assuming a 50 percent re-
duction from a maintained baseline); or the use of the converter in con-
junction with a distributor vacuum advance disconnect could yield a re-
duction of 2994 kg/8 hr/mi2 (assuming a 63 percent reduction from a main-
tained baseline). Thus, the use of retrofit devices, in conjunction with
the requisite annual inspection and maintenance, could easily provide the
o
required reduction. In fact, the reduction of 3749 kg/8 hr/mi accomplished
o
by the two examples above is nearly twice the 1900 kg/8 hr/mi reduction
required by all strategies.
It is significant to note that, with the principal exception of the
downtown signal system, the proposed strategies will lead to reduced area-
vide emissions, and that their favorable impact on air quality will not be
limited to the CBD.
* See Control Strategies for In-Use Vehicles for percent reductions ex-
pected from retrofit devices.
IV-6
-------
V. OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTATION OF SELECTED CONTROLS
A. GENERAL
In general, the implementation climate for transportation pro-
jects in and around downtown Seattle seems to be more favorable towards
projects that encourage public transportation than towards projects that
favor private vehicle travel. This is in part ,due to the fact that, as
in many urban areas, large highway and street projects are difficult to
implement and require long lead times which effectively eliminate such
strategies from consideration by 1977.
Again, in general, there seem to be few if any obstacles to imple-
mentation of a top-ranked strategy: development of the METRO transit
system. The system is legally authorized, funded, planned and scheduled
for development. Minor obstacles are:
Many steps must be taken to start operation by Janu-
ary 1973. The time is short, but activity is intense.
Acquisition of present transit systems is underway.
There may be some technical difficulties in obtaining
gaseous fueled buses, as desired, in sufficient quan-
tity by the time desired.
Obstacles are catalogued in following paragraphs only for the top two
priority groups where effective implementation seems to be a real pos-
sibility.
V-l
-------
B. INSTITUTIONAL OBSTACLES
Planning, designing, and building a major project ] <.ice one and
one-half miles of PRT through a major downtown can involve a large
number of institutional problems. While the general attitude towards
such a project is favorable, individuals and groups are likely to be
affected by the specific location. Also, the matter of jurisdiction
must be solved. The choice would, in simple terms, be between the City
and METRO as the sponsoring and operating agency.
The strategies of retrofit and gaseous conversion are both viewed
with reluctance on the part of owners, particularly the small fleets.
The success of these techniques is likely to depend on incentives offered
and on a sound selling job by local and state agencies.
C. LEGAL OBSTACLES
For the PRT proposal, legislation maybe required, probably on
the local level, to sort out the question of jurisdiction. Legislation
on the State level is certainly needed for retrofit, gaseous conversion,
and the "bounty" on older cars or the exclusion from the CBD.
Present legislation providing fuel tax relief for gaseous con-
version must be extended beyond 1975. Similar legislation must be
developed and enacted for retrofit. If an inspection program is included,
this too must be enacted. It should be noted that Washington does not
have a vehicle inspection law, and does not meet Federal traffic safety
standards in this area.
V-2
-------
The "bounty" program to discourage ownership of older autos
would certainly face serious legislative obstacles because of funding
requirements. Increases in fuel and user taxes and fees, or new taxes
on new vehicles would be obviously unpopular.
D. POLITICAL AND SOCIAL OBSTACLES
It is in this area that improvements to downtown signals may en-
counter problems. It is anticipated that such a program would receive
mixed reaction, ranging from enthusiasm for improved access to disapproval
of any action enhancing the automobile's position in downtown access and
circulation.
The exclusion of older vehicles from the CBD is likely to face
strong political opposition because of its discriminatory nature.
E. ECONOMIC OBSTACLES
The PRT idea will certainly involve high costs. Funding assist-
ance is available through Federal Department of Transportation programs,
and revenue sharing may help. Nevertheless, funding such a project is
a major obstacle to be overcome. It should be kept in mind, however,
that this project is intended to achieve goals other than air quality
improvement.
Signal improvements are, of course, much less costly. Still,
City budgets are tight, and signal improvements in other areas have call
on available monies. The Federal TOPICS program can assist.
The retrofit program has the advantage of low unit cost (about $40
per vehicle for the "air bleed to intake manifold" device), but gaseous con-
V-3
-------
version is up to ten times that in unit cost. Also as mentioned before,
funding a "bounty" program for older cars could involve large sums - per-
haps millions of dollars. This is a definite obstacle from an economic
and political standpoint.
F. TECHNICAL OBSTACLES
PRT's are being studied widely and a working demonstration exists
in Morgantown. Nevertheless, the technology must be classified as
"emerging," and care should be exercised in selecting designs for appli-
cation. For the PRT, time is an obstacle. Preliminary planning, detailed
planning, hearings and applications, design, construction, and testing
must be accomplished. Many sidetracks and detours could occur before 1977.
It has been mentioned that, the downtown signal plans are experi-
mental in nature. Definitive application must await this testing phase.
Technical obstacles to gaseous conversion are documented; and
include fuel handling, maintenance problems for pre-1971 engines and the
shortage of natural gas if that alternative is selected.
The "bounty" strategy creates a whole range of technical obstacles,
but ones more related to scale than to methodology. Disposal problems
must be solved.
V-4
-------
VI. SURVEILLANCE REVIEW PROCESS
Surveillance review involves several overall steps. Initially, an
air quality implementation plan must be adopted and promulgated. Then,
specific elements within that plan must be implemented. Finally, the
impact of each element must be monitored continually in terms of legis-
lative and administrative actions, physical implementation, and air
quality improvement.
Table VI-1 lists various milestones for each Group 1 and Group 2
strategy evaluated, assuming that all are initiated by the first of the
year 1973. Of course it is far from sure that each strategy will find
its way into an adopted implementation plan. Also the initiation of
some strategies may be delayed for various reasons, and others may have
different schedules after detailed design. Therefore, Table VI-1 should
be considered as a general source for more detailed scheduling.
The three curves in Figure VI-1 show the decrease in CO concentration
expected from 1970 through 1979 at the Municipal Building as a result of:
. No strategies
. Strategies 1, 2, and 3 (METRO, PRT, Signal System)
Strategies 1, 2, and 3 plus the exclusion of pre-controlled
vehicles from the CBD.
These curves:can be used as guides to the success of the emission control
program. However, because of year-to-year variations in meteorological
and other controlling factors, actual observations are expected to show
considerable scatter about the predicted curves.
VI-1
-------
TABLE VI-1
SURVEILLANCE REVIEW PROCESS
STRATEGY
development
Develop fringe parking
and PST
Improve downtown
slgnali
Retrofit heavy duty
fleet vehicles
trolled vehicles
conversion of fleets
Program to discourage
ownership of older, pre-
c on trolled vehicles.
1973
a) Acquisition of properties
(early in year)
of detailed planning for
park-ride facilities
Check status and progress of
route location study. Moni-
provements.
Check results of SIGOP test.
Monitor status of permanent
improvements.
Check progress:
a) Development of legislation.
b) Enactment
c) Development of administrative
regulations.
d) Development of implementation
programs.
a) Development of legislation.
b) Enactment
c) Development of administrative
regulations.
program. Check progreaa of
promotion program.
Check progress:
a) Development of legislation
b) Enactment
c) Development of administrative
regulations.
d) Development of Implementation
program*.
1974
commencement of design. Moni-
tor progress of hearings, ap-
provals, and grant applications.
award and beginning of construc-
tion.
grant applications.
Monitor Implementation progress.
program. Check progress of pro-
motion program.
Monitor Implementation pro-
gress.
1975
progress . Monitor
opening of park-ride
lots and diversion of
Check on construction
monitor progress.
Monitor implementation
progress.
procedures.
a) Development of leg-
islation extending
incentive program.
b) Enactment
Monitor success of con-
version program and pro-
motional activities.
Monitor implementation
progress.
1976
Monitor construction
Monitor implementation
progress.
procedures.
Monitor program.
Monitor implementation
progress.
1977
Monitor construction
of operation.
Monitor implementation
progress.
j^oc'eTurCi .
Monitor program.
Monitor Implementation
progress.
-------
24
22
20
18
16
§ 14
T^
n)
a 12
-------
APPENDIX A
VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL (VMT)
The data contained in the following tables were provided as input
to the emissions model. Total district VMT was estimated by facility
type as described in Section II C of the text. VMT by vehicle type
was factored, as described in the text. It should be noted that the
estimates for heavy duty vehicles (trucks) and diesel vehicles (non-
gasoline) are based on regional and area factors, as real data for this
level of detail is not available. These figures provide the best esti-
mates of regional travel prorated to a district level for purposes of
analysis.
In the tables which follow, roadway types have been classified in
standard terminology as follows:
Freeway: A high-standard, grade-separated highway with
complete control of access.
Arterial: A surface street or highway with limited or no
access control and traffic signals at major
intersections.
Collector: A surface street that feeds traffic to arterials.
Local:
A surface street that provides access to adjacent
land.
A-l
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area Seattle
Year
1971
Time Period_Peak=Hour_
District
1
2
3
4
6
7
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
20
15
50
20-25
15
20-25
15
40
18-25
15
50
20-25
15
20-25
15
VMT
LD
6, 242
2,573
--
272
9,087
7, 193
4,434
—
300
11,927
0
4,083
--
515
4,598
9,146
3,641
--
360
13,147
9, 324
1,954
__
588
11,866
0
4,848
--
567
5,415
HD
640
264
—
28
932
737
454
—
31
1, 222
0
418
—
53
471
937
373
--
37
1, 347
956
200
__
60
1,216
0
497
--
58
555
Diesel
147
61
--
6
214
170
105
—
7
282
0
97
__
12
109
217
86
--
8
311
220
46
__
14
280
0
115
__
14
129
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-2
-------
Seattle - 1971 - Peak-Hour
District
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
20-35
15
20-35
15
50
20-25
15
20-35
15
50
20-25
15
15-20
15
20-35
15
VMT
LD
10, 390
5,328
__
643
16, 361
0
5,035
--
540
5,575
10, 300
5, 506
—
823
16,629
0
7,330
--
551
7,881
11,544
6,038
--
535
18, 117
0
4,843
--
252
5,095
0
6,478
—
403
6,881
HD
1,065
546
__
66
1,677
0
516
—
55
571
1,056
564
—
84
1,704
0
751
—
57
808
1,183
619
—
55
1,857
0
496
—
26
522
0
664
—
41
705
Diesel
245
126
__
15
386
0
119
—
13
132
244
130
—
20
394
0
174
—
13
187
273
143
—
13
429
0
115
—
6
121
0
153
—
10
163
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-3
-------
Seattle - 1971 - Peak-Hour
District
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
20-25
15
40
20
15
20-25
15
18-35
15
45
20
15
20
15
40
12-25
15
VMT
LD
13, 320
2,753
--
527
16,600
3, 132
3,183
—
432
6,747
0
6, 482
—
344
6,826
0
12, 352
__
400
12, 752
12,610
5, 328
__
643
18,581
0
3, 125
—
751
3,876
11, 633
19, 270
--
136
31,039
HD
1, 365
282
—
54
1,701
321
326
—
44
691
0
664
—
35
699
0
1,266
—
41
1,307
1,292
546
—
66
1,904
0
320
—
77
397
1, 192
1,975
—
14
3, 181
Diesel
315
65
—
13
393
75
75
—
10
160
0
153
—
8
161
0
292
—
9
301
298
126
—
15
439
0
74
--
18
92
275
455
—
3
733
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-4
-------
Seattle - 1971 - Peak-Hour
District
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local .
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
20
15
45
18-20
15
15-25
15
20-40
15
40
20
15
20-35
15
20-40
1.5
VMT
LD
0
6,633
--
684
7, 317
7,903
9, 235
--
339
17,477
0
7,680
--
959
8,639
0
6, 305
__
120
6,425
7,548
4, 884
--
232
12, 664
0
7,648
—
268
7, 916
0
9,413
--
40
9,453
HD
0
680
—
70
750
810.
946
--
35
1,791
0
787
—
98
885
0
646
--
12
658
773
501
--
24
1, 298
0
784
--
27
811
0
965
--
4
969
Diesel
0
157
--
16
173
187
219
—
8
414
0
182
—
23
205
0
149
—
3
152
179
115
--
5
299
U
181
--
7
188
0
222
--
1
223
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-5
-------
Seattle - 1971 - Peak-Hour
District
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
40
20-40
15
50
20-25
15
20-35
15
50
20
15
40-50
35
15
40
20-25
15
45-50
20-35
15
VMT
LD
7, 548
7,193
--
364
15, 105
6, 721
4, 372
--
403
11,496
0
5,403
__
236
5, 639
4, 020
3,205
--
195
7,420
9, 387
703
--
284
10, 374
4,618
1, 154
--
144
5,916
5, 550
2, 939
__
220
8,709
HD
774
737
--
37
1, 548
689
448
—
41
1, 178
0
554
__
24
578
412
328
—
20
760
962
72
—
29
1,063
473
118
--
15
606
569
301
— —
24
894
Diesel
178
170
--
9
357
159
103
--
10
272
0
127
_ _
6
133
95
76
—
5
176
222
17
--
7
246
109
28
-_
3
140
131
70
_ _
4
205
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-6
-------
Seattle - 1971 - Peak-Hour
District
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
45
20
15
40
20-25
15
40
25
15
55
25
15
50
19-25
15
50
30
15
20
15
VMT
LD
3, 374
6, 926
_ _
339
10, 639
3,019
3, 108
272
6, 399
2,753
799
--
272
3,824
3, 907
977
--
256
5,140
2, 753
6,838
--
220
9,811
6, 127
799
--
179
7, 105
0
10, 390
--
240
10, 630
HD
346
710
— —
35
1,091
309
319
28
656
282
82
--
28
392
400
100
--
26
526
282
701
—
23
1,006
628
82
--
18
728
0
1,065
—
25
1,090
Diesel
80
164
8
252
72
73
__
6
151
65
19
--
6
90
93
23
--
6
122
65
161
--
5
231
145
19
—
5
169
0
245
--
5
250
Area
(aq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-7
-------
Seattle - 1971 - Peak-Hour
District
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
20-25
15
20
15
VMT
LD
0
8, 347
— —
184
8, 531
0
5,091
--
160
5, 251
55 4, 547
20-25
15
50
20-35
15
50
20-25
15
50
20
15
4,667
__
444
9, 658
5, 328
7, 104
--
355
12, 787
4, 795
1,687
533
7,015
3, 374
3, 197
--
599
7, 170
TOTAL
467,510
HD
0
855
_ —
19
874
0
522
--
16
538
466
478
— _
46
990
546
728
__
36
1, 310
491
173
55
719
346
328
—
61
735
TOTAL
47, 911
Diesel
0
198
__
4
202
0
120
--
4
124
108
111
_ _
10
229
126
168
--
9
303
114
40
12
166
80
75
--
15
170
TOTAL
11,058
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
VMT
Total
For All
Vehicle
Types
526,479
A-8
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area Seattle
Year
1971
Time Period.
12-Hour
District
1
2
3
4
6
7
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
60
25
15
60
25
15
20-30
15
60
20-25
15
60
25
15
20-30
15
VMT
LD
51, 479
21, 220
2, 243
74, 942
59, 323
36, 568
2, 474
98, 365
0
33, 673
4, 248
37, 921
75, 430
30, 028
2, 969
108, 427
76, 898
16, 115
4, 850
97, 863
0
39, 983
-
4, 676
44, 659
HD
5, 278
2, 177
-
231
7, 686
6, 078
3, 744
-
256
10, 078
0
3, 447
437
3, 884
7, 727
3, 076
-
305
11, 109
7, 885
1, 649
495
10, 029
0
4,099
-
478
4, 577
Diesel
1, 213
503
50
1,766
1, 402
866
58
2,326
0
800
-
99
899
1, 790
710
-
66
2, 566
1,814
379
-
115
2, 309
0
949
-
115
1,064
Area
(sq. mi. )
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-y
-------
SeattLe - 1971 - 12-Hour
District
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
60
20-35
15
20-35
15
55
20-25
15
20-35
15
55
20-25
15
20-25
15
25-35
15
VMT
LD
85, 689
43, 942
-
5, 303
134, 934
0
41, 526
4,454
45, 980
84, 947
45, 410
-
6, 787
137, 144
0
60, 453
-
4, 544
64, 997
95, 207
49, 797
-
4, 413
149, 417
0
39, 941
2, 078
42, 019
0
53, 426
-
3,323
56, 749
HD
8, 784
4, 503
545
13, 832
0
4, 255
454
4, 709
8, 709
4, 651
693
14, 053
0
6, 194
470
6,664
9, 756
5, 105
374
15, 315
0
4, 091
215
4, 306
0
5, 476
338
5, 814
Diesel
2, 021
1, 039
-
124
3, 184
0
981
107
1, 088
2,012
1, 072
-
165
3, 249
0
1, 435
-
107
1,542
2, 251
1, 179
107
3, 537
0
949
50
999
0
1, 262
82
1,344
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-10
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 12-Hour
District
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL,
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
55
20-25
15
50
25
15
20-30
15
20-35
15
50
20
15
25
15
50
12-25
15
VMT
LD
109, 854
22,705
4, 346
136, 905
25,830
26, 251
_
3, 563
55, 644
0
53,459
-
2, 837
56, 296
0
101, 871
3, 299
105, 170
103, 998
43, 942
5, 303
153, 243
0
25,773
_
6, 194
31,967
95, 941
158, 925
-
1, 122
255, 988
HD
11, 258
2, 326
445
14,029
2,647
2,689
_
363
5,699
0
5,476
289
5, 765
0
10, 441
-
338
10, 779
10, 655
4, 503
-
545
15,703
0
2, 639
635
3,274
9, 831
16, 288
-
115
26, 234
Diesel
2, 598
536
107
3, 241
619
619
_
82
1, 320
0
1, 262
66
1, 328
0
2,408
-
74
2,482
2,458
1,039
-
124
3,621
0
610
149
759
2,268
3,753
-
25
6,046
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-ll
-------
Seattle - 1971
12-Hour
District
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
|
Avg Speed
(mph)
20-25
15
50
20-25
15
20-35
15
25-50
15
60
25
15
25-35
15
25-50
15
VMT
LD
0
54, 704
5, 641
60, 345
65, 178
76, 164
2, 796
144, 138
0
63, 339
7, 909
71, 248
0
52, 000
990
52, 990
62, 251
40, 280
-
1,913
104, 444
0
63, 075
-
2, 210
65, 285
0
77, 632
330
77,962
HD
0
5, 608
-
577
6, 185
6, 680
7, 802
-
289
14, 771
0
6,491
-
808
7, 299
0
5, 328
99
5, 427
6, 375
4, 132
-
198
10,705
0
6,466
-
223
6,689
0
7,959
33
7,992
Diesel
0
1, 295
-
132
1,427
1, 542
1, 806
66
3, 414
0
1, 501
-
189
1, 690
0
1, 229
25
1, 254
1,476
949
42
2,467
0
1,493
-
58
1, 551
0
1, 831
_
8
1, 839
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-12
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 12-Hour
District
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50-55
25-35
15
60
25
15
25-35
15
60
25
15
55-60
35
15
50
25-35
15
55
25-35
15
VMT
LD
62, 251
50, 323
3, 002
124, 576
55, 430
36, 057
3, 324
94, 811
HD
6, 383
6,078
305
12,766
5, 682
3,695
338
9,715
0 0
44, 560
1, 946
46, 506
33, 154
26, 433
1, 608
61, 195
77, 418
5,798
2, 342
85, 558
38,086
9, 517
-
I, 188
48,791
45,773
24, 239
1, 814
71, 826
4, 569
198
4,767
3, 398
2,705
165
6, 268
7,934
594
-
239
8,767
3, 901
973
124
4,998,
4,693
2,482
198
7, 373
Diesel
1,468
1,402
-
74
2,944
1, 311
849
-
82
2,242
n
1,048
50
1, 098
784
627
42
1,453
1, 831
140
-
58
2,029
899
231
-
25
1, 155
1,080
577
-
33
1,690
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-13
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 12-Hour
District
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
55
25
15
55
25
15
55
25
15
60
30
15
60
20-25
15
55
30
15
20
15
VMT
LD
27, 826
57, 121
2, 796
87, 743
24, 899
25, 633
2,243
52,775
22,705
6, 590
2,243
31, 538
32, 222
8,058
2, 112
42, 392
22, 705
56, 395
-
1, 814
80,914
50, 531
6, 590
-
1,476
58, 597
0
85,689
-
1, 979
87, 668
HD
2, 854
5,855
-
289
8,998
2,548
2,631
231
5,410
2,326
676
-
231
3, 233
3,299
825
-
214
4,338
2,326
5,781
-
189
8,296
5, 179
676
-
149
6,004
0
8,784
207
8,991
Diesel
660
1, 352
-
66
2,078
594
602
-
49
1,245
536
157
50
743
767
190
-
49
1,006
536
1, 328
-
42
1,906
1, 196
157
-
42
1, 395
0
2,021
-
42
2, 063
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-14
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 12-Hour
District
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
25-30
15
25
15
60
25
15
60
25-35
15
60
25
15
60
25
15
VMT
LD
0
68, 840
-
1, 517
70, 357
0
41, 987
1, 320
43, 307
37, 501
38, 490
3, 662
79, 653
43, 942
58, 589
2, 928
105, 459
39, 546
13, 913
-
4, 396
57, 855
27, 826
26, 367
4, 940
59, 133
TOTAL
3,855, 696
HD
0
7, 052
157
7, 209
0
4, 305
132
4,437
3,844
3, 942
380
8, 166
4, 503
6, 004
-
297
10, 804
4, 049
1, 427
454
5, 930
2, 854
2,705
-
503
6, 062
TOTAL
395, 139
Diesel
0
1, 633
33
1, 666
0
990
33
1,023
891
915
82
1, 888
1, 039
1, 386
74
2,499
940
330
99
1, 369
660
619
124
1,403
TOTAL
91, 207
Area
(aq. mi. )
1
1
1
1
1
1
VMT
Total
For All
Vehicle
Types
4,342, 042
A-15
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area Seattle
Year_12Il.
Time Period.
24-Hour
District
1
2
3
4
6
7
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
60
25
15
60
25
15
20-30
15
60
20-25
15
60
25
15
20-30
15
VMT
LD
69, 286
28, 560
3.019
100.865
79, 842
49,217
3, 330
132. 389
0
45, 321
5, 717
51,038
101, 521
40,415
3,996
145,932
103,496
21, 689
6, 527
131, 712
0
53,813
6, 294
60, 107
HD
7, 104
2, 930
311
10. 345
8, 181
5,039
344
13, 564
0
4,640
588
5, 228
10,401
4, 140
411
14, 952
10,612
2,220
666
13,498
0
5, 517
644
6, 161
Diesel
1,632
677
67
2. 376
1,887
1, 166
78
3r 131
0
1,077
133
1, 210
2,409
955
89
3.453
2,442
511
155
3, 108
0
1,277
155
1,432
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-16
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 24-Hour
District
8
Q
10
11
12
13
14
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
60
20-35
15
20-35
15
55
20-25
15
20-35
15
55
20-25
15
20-25
15
25-35
15
VMT
LD
115, 329
59, 141
7, 137
181, 607
0
55, 889
5, 994
61, 883
114, 330
61, 117
9, 135
184, 582
0
81, 363
6, 116
87, 479
128, 138
67, 022
--
5, 939
201, 099
0
53, 757
2, 797
56, 554
0
71, 906
--
4,473
76, 379
HD
11, 822
6,061
733
18, 616
0
5, 728
611
6, 339
11, 722
6,260
__
932
18, 914
0
8, 336
__
633
8, 969
13,131
6, 871
--
611
20,613
0
5, 506
289
5, 795
0
7, 370
--
455
7,825
Diesel
2, 720
1,399
— —
167
4,286
0
1,321
' 144
1,465
2, 708
1,443
__
222
4,373
0
1,931
__
144
2,075
3,030
1,587
--
144
4,761
0
1,277
—
67
1,344
0
1,698
--
111
1,809
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 24-Hour
District
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
55
20-25
15
50
25
15
25-30
15
25-35
15
50
20
15
25
15
50
12-25
15
VMT
LD
147,852
30, 558
5,850
184, 260
34, 765
35,331
4,795
74,891
0
71, 950
_.
3, 818
75, 768
0
137, 107
4,440
141,547
139, 971
59, 141
7, 137
206,249
0
34,688
8, 336
43,024
129, 126
213,897
1,510
344,533
HD
15,152
3, 130
599
18.881
3, 563
3, 619
488
1, 670 _
0
7, 370
__
389
7, 759
0
14,053
455
14,508
14,341
6,061
733
21, 135
0
3,552
__
855
4,407
13,231
21,923
155
35, 309
Diesel
3,497
722
144
4.363
833
833
Ull
1, 777
0
1,698
__
89
1, 787
0
3,241
100
3, 341
3,308
1,399
167
4,874
0
821
200
1,021
3,053
5,051
33
8,137
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-18
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 24-Hour
District
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
20-25
15
50
20-25
15
20-35
15
25-50
15
60
25
15
25-35
15
25-50
15
VMT
LD
0
73,626
__
7,592
81. 218
87, 723
102,509
3, 763
193, 995
0
85,248
10,645
95.893
0
69, 986
1,332
71, 318
83, 783
54, 212
2,575
140,570
0
84,893
2,975
87,868
0
104,484
444
104,928
HD
0
7,548
--
777
8, 325
8,991
10,501
389
19,881
0
8, 736
1,088
9,824
0
7, 171
133
7, 304
8,580
5, 561
266
14,407
0
8, 702
-. _
300
9,002
0
10, 712
_ _
44
10,756
Diesel
0
1, 743
--
178
1.921
2,076
2,431
89
4,596
0
2,020
255
2,275
0
1,654
33
1,687
1,987
1,277
56
3,320
0
2,009
_ _
78
2,087
0
2,464
__
11
2,475
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-19
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 24-Hour
District
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50-55
25-35
15
60
25
15
25-35
15
60
25
15
55-60
35
15
50
25-35
15
55
25-35
15
VMT
LD
83, 783
79, 842
4,040
167, 665
74, 603
48, 529
4,473
127, 605
0
59, 973
2,620
62,593
44,622
35, 576
__
2, 165
82,363
104,196
7,803
3,152
115,151
51,260
12,809
1,598
65,667
61,605
32, 623
2,442
96, 670
HD
8, 591
8, 181
411
17, 183
7, 648
4, 973
__
455
13,076
0
6, 149
266
6,415
4,573
3,641
_.
222
8,436
10,678
799
322
11, 799
5,250
1,310
167
6,727
6, 316
3, 341
266
9, 923
Diesel
1,976
1,887
100
3, 963
1,765
1,143
111
3,019
0
1,410
__
67
1,477
1,055
844
_ _
56
1,955
2,464
189
78
2, 731
1,210
311
33
1,554
1,454
111
44
2,275
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-20
-------
aeattle - 1971 - 24-Hour
District
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
55
25
15
55
25
15
55
25
15
60
30
15
60
20-25
15
55
30
15
20
15
VMT
LD
37,451
76, 879
3,763
118,093
33, 511
34,499
3,019
71,029
30,558
8,869
3,019
42,446
43,368
10,845
- v
2,842
57,055
30,558
75,902
2,442
108,902
68,010
8,869
1,987
78.866
0
115,329
2,664
117,993
HD
3,841
7,881
388
12,110
3,430
3, 541
311
7,282
3,130
910
311
4,351
4,440
1,110
289
5,839
3, 130
7, 781
255
11,166
6, 971
910
200
8,081
0
11,822
__
278
12,100
Diesel
888
1,820
89
2, 797
799
810
"" 67
1,676
722
211
67
1,000
1,032
255
67
1,354
722
1,787
56
2, 565
1,610
211
56
1.877
0
2, 720
._
56
2, 776
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-21
-------
Seattle - 1971 - 24-Hour
District
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
25-30
15
25
15
60
25
15
VMT
LD
0
92, 652
__
2,042
94,694
0
56, 510
1, 776
58, 286
50,472
51, 804
4,928
107,204
60 59,141
25-35
15
60
25
15
60
25
15
78, 854
3, 941
141, 936
53, 225
18, 726
5,916
77,867
37,451
35,487
6,649
79, 587
TOTAL
5, 189, 360
HD
0
9,491
211
9, 702
0
5, 794
_ _
178
5,972
5,173
5, 306
--
511
10,990
6,061
8,081
400
14, 542
5,450
1,920
611
7, 981
3,841
3, 641
677
8, 159
TOTAL
531, 821
Diesel
0
2, 198
_. _
44
2,242
0
1,332
—
44
1,376
1,199
1,232
--
111
2,542
1,399
1,865
100
3,364
1,265
444
133
1,842 .
888
833
167
1,888
TOTAL
122,757
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
VMT
Total
For All
Vehicle
Types
, 843, 938
A-22
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area Seattle
Year-
1977
Time Period Peak-Hour
District
1
2
3
4
6
7
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
40
20
15
40
15-25
15
20-25
15
35
18-20
15
40
20-25
15
20-25
15
VMT
LD
1, 241
3, 357
313
10, 911
8, 344
5,427
333
14, 104
0
4,933
567
5, 500
10, 541
4, 489
403
15,433
10,744
2,445
646
13, 835
0
5, 646
613
6, 259
HD
742
344
32
1. 118
855
556
34
1, 445
0
506
58
564
1, 080
460
-
41
1, 581
1, 101
251
66
1, 4i8
0
579
63
642
Diesel
171
79
7
257
197
128
-
8
333
0
117
13
130
249
106
-
10
365
254
58
15
327
0
134
-
14
148
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-23
-------
Seattle 1977 - Peak Hour
District
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Cpllector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
25-35
20
15
20-35
15
50
15-25
15
20-30
15
35
15-25
15
12-20
15
20-30
15
VMT
LD
13, 266
4, 868
701
18, 835
0
5,911
583
-6, 494
11,614
6, 107
-
873
18, 594
0
8,424
590
9,014
12,925
8,749
567
22, 241
0
5,096
-
265
5, 361
0
6, 871
416
7, 287
HD
1, 359
499
-
72
1, 930
0
606
-
60
666
1, 190
626
-
89
1,905
0
863
-
60
923
1, 325
897
58
2, 280
0
522
-
27
549
0
704
-
43
747
Diesel
314
115
17
446
0
140
-
14
154
275
144
21
440
0
199
14
213
306
207
-
13
526
0
121
6
127
0
162
-
10
172
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-24
-------
Seattle - 1977 - Peak Hour
District
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
35-40
20-25
15
35
15
15
20-25
15
18-30
15
35
20
15
20
15
35-40
12-25
15
VMT
LD
14, 812
3,078
-
554
18,444
3, 383
3, 315
-
445
7, 143
0
6,926
344
7,270
0
12,726
-
404
13, 130
13,205
5, 369
-
655
19,229
0
3, 343
-
804
4, 147
12, 301
23,291
-
136
35,728
HD
1, 518
315
-
57
1,890
347
340
-
46
733
0
710
35
745
0
1, 304
-
41
1,345
1, 353
550
-
67
1,970
0
343
-
82
425
1, 261
2, 387
-
14
3,662
Diesel
350
73
-
13
436
80
78
-
11
169
0
164
-
8
172
0
301
-
10
311
312
127
-
15
454
0
79
-
19
98
291
551
-
3
845
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-25
-------
Seattle - 1977 - Peak
District
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
20
15
35-40
18-25
15
15-25
15
20-40
15
50
20
15
20-35
15
20-40
15
VMT
LD
0
6,677
-
684
7, 361
8,658
9, 182
-
346
18, 186
0
7,848
-
959
8,807
0
6,305
-
120
6,425
8,543
4, 887
-
231
13,661
0
7,784
-
268
8,052
0
9, 653
-
40
9,693
HD
0
684
-
70
754
887
941
-
35
1, 863
0
804
-
98
902
0
646
-
12
658
876
501
-
24
1,401
0
798
-
27
825
0
989
-
4
993
Diesel
0
158
-
6
^74
205
217
-
8
430
0
186
-
23
209
0
149
-
3
152
202
116
-
5
323
0
184
-
6
190
0
228
-
1
229
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-26
-------
Seattle - 1977 - Peak Hour
District
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
35-40
20-35
15
50
20-25
15
20-35
15
40
20
15
35-45
35
15
35
20-25
15
35-40
20-35
15
VMT
LD
10,393
5,347
-
364
16, 104
7,528
4,372
-
403
12, 303
0
5,773
-
236
6,009
4,502
3,205
-
195
7,902
10,430
915
313
11,658
5,475
1, 191
-
144
6, 810
6, 337
3, 162
-
220
9,719
HD
1,065
548
-
37
1,650
771
448
-
41
1, 260
0
592
-
24
616
461
328
-
20
809
1,069
94
-
32
1, 195
561
122
-
15
698
649
324
-
23
996
Diesel
246
126
-
9
381
178
103
-
10
291
0
137
-
6
143
106
76
-
5
187
247
22
-
7
276
129
28
-
3
160
150
75
5
230
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-27
-------
Seattle - 1977
Peak-Hour
District
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
FaciLcy
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
45
20
15
40
20-25
15
35
25
15
55
25
15
50
19-25
15
50
30
15
20-45
15
VMT
LD
3,712
6,926
-
339
10,977
3,351
3, 347
-
285
6,983
3,221
799
-
272
4,292
4,534
1,255
-
307
6,096
3,028
8,511
-
256
11,795
7,201
968
251
8,420
0
10,770
-
249
11,019
HD
380
710
-
35
1, 125
343
343
-
29
715
330
82
-
28
L_ 440
465
129
-
31
625
310
872
-
26
1,208
738
99
-
26
863
0
1, 104
-
25
1, 129
Diesel
88
164
-
8
260
79
79
-
7
165
76
19
-
6
101
107
30
-
7
144
72
201
-
6
279
170
23
-
6
199
0
255
-
6
261
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-28
-------
Seattle - 1977 - Peak-Hour
District
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
20-25
15
20
15
55
20-25
15
50
20-35
15
50
20-25
15
50
20
15
VMT
LD
0
9, 182
-
202
9, 384
0
5,871
-
168
6,039
5,047
4,901
466
10,414
5,914
7,459
-
373
13,746
5, 131
1,780
559
7,470
5,079
3,620
-
660
9,359
TOTAL
517,643
HD
0
941
-
21
962
0
602
-
17
619
517
502
-
48
1,067
606
764
-
38
1,408
526
182
-
57
765
521
371
-
68
960
TOTAL
53,044
Diesel
0
217
-
5
222
0
139
-
4
143
119
116
_
11
246
140
176
-
9
325
121
42
-
13
176
120
86
-
16
222
TOTAL
12,241
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
VMT
Total
For AL1
Vehicle
Types
582, 928
A-29
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Ar^a Seattle _
1977
Time Period.
1 9-Hrmr-
District
1
2
3
4
6
7
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
55
25
15
55
25
15
20-30
15
55
20-25
15
55
25
15
20-30
15
VMT
LD
59, 719
27, 686
--
2, 581
89,986
68,815
44, 758
—
2,746
116, 319
0
40,684
__
4,676
45, 360
86, 935
37,022
—
3, 323
127,280
88,609
20,165
--
5, 328
114, 102
0
46,565
—
5,055
51,620
HD
6,119
2,837
—
264
9,220
7,052
4, 586
—
280
11,918
0
4, 173
—
478
4,651
8,907
3, 794
—
338
13,039
9,080
2,070
—
545
11,695
0
4,775
—
520
5,295
Diesel
1,410
652
--
58
2, 120
1,625
1,056
—
66
2, 747
0
965
—
107
1,072
2,054
874
—
82
3,010
2,095
478
—
124
2,697
0
1, 105
—
115
1, 220
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-30
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 12-Hour
District
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
35-55
20-25
15
25-35
15
55
20-25
15
20-35
15
50
20-25
15
20-25
15
25-35
15
VMT
LD
109,409
40, 148
—
5,781
155,338
0
48, 750
--
4,808
53, 558
95, 784
50, 366
—
7, 200
153, 350
0
69,475
—
4,866
74, 341
106,597
72, 156
—
4, 676
183,429
0
42,029
--
2,186
44,215
0
56,667
--
3,431
60, 098
HD
11,208
4, 115
--
594
15,917
0
4,998
--
495
5,493
9,814
5, 163
—
734
15, 711
0
7,117
--
495
7,612
10,928
7, 398
—
478
18,804
0
4, 305
—
223
4, 528
0
5,806
—
354
6, 160
Diesel
2, 589
949
--
140
3,678
0
1, 155
—
115
1,270
2,268
1,188
--
173
3,629
0
1,641
—
115
1,756
2,524
1,707
—
107
4, 338
0
998
—
50
1,048
0
1, 336
—
82
1,418
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-31
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 12-Hour
District
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
20-25
15
50
25
15
25-30
15
25-35
15
50
20
15
25
15
50
12-25
15
VMT
LD
122,159
25, 385
--
4,569
152, 113
27,900
27, 340
--
3,670
58,910
0
57,121
"-
2,837
59, 958
0
104,955
--
3, 332
108, 287
108, 906
44,280
—
5,402
158, 588
0
27,571
--
6,631
34,202
101,450
192,088
—
1,122
294, 660
HD
12, 520
2, 598
—
470
15^588
2,862
2,804
—
380
6,046
0
5,856
—
289
6,145
0
10, 754
__
338
11,092
11,158
4,536
--
553
16,247
0
2,829
--
676
3,505
10,400
19,687
—
115
30, 202
Diesel
2,887
602
—
107
3,596
660
643
—
91
1, 394
0
1,352
—
66
1,418
0
2,482
—
82
2, 564
2,573
1,048
—
124
3,745
0
652
—
157
809
2,400
4, 544
—
25
6, 969
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
A-32
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 12-Hour
District
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
20-25
15
5_0
20-25
15
20-40
15
25-50
15
60
25
15
25-35
15
25-50
15
VMT
LD
0
55, 067
--
5,641
60, 708
71,405
75, 727
--
2,854
149, 986
0
64, 725
—
7,909
72,634
0
52,000
—
990
52, 990
70,456
40, 305
—
1,905
112,666
0
64,197
--
2,210
66,407
0
79,611
—
330
79, 941
HD
0
5,641
--
577
6,218
7, 316
7, 761
—
289
15, 366
0
6,631
--
808
7,439
0
5, 328
—
99
5,427
7,225
4, 132
—
198
11,555
0
6,581
—
223
6,804
0
8,157
—
33
8,190
Diesel
0
1, 303
--
132
1,435
1,691
1,790
--
66
3, 547
0
1,534
—
190
1, 724
0
1,229
--
25
1, 254
1,666
957
--
41
2,664
0
1, 517
—
50
1,567
0
1,881
--
8
1,889
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-33
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 12-Hour
District
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
25-35
15
55
25
15
25-35
15
55
25
15
55-60
35
15
50
30
15
55
25-35
15
VMT
LD
85, 714
44, 099
—
3,002
132,815
62,086
36,057
—
3,323
101,466
0
47,611
—
1,947
49, 558
37,129
26,433
--
1,609
65,171
86,019
7,547
—
2, 581
96, 147
45,154
9,822
--
1,188
56,164
52,263
26,078
—
1,814
80, 155
HD
8,784
4, 520
—
305
13,609
6, 359
3,695
—
338
10, 392
0
4, 882
—
198
5,080
3,802
2, 705
—
165
6,672
8,816
775
—
264
9,855
4,627
1,006
—
124
5, 757
5, 353
2,672
—
190
8,215
Diesel
2,029
1,039
—
74
3,142
1,468
849
__
82
2,399
0
1,130
—
50
1,180
874
627
--
41
1,542
2,037
181
—
58
2,276
1,064
231
—
25
1, 320
i,237
619
—
42
1, 898
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-34
-------
Seattle - 1977
12-Hour
District
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
55
25
15
55
25
15
55
25
15
60
30
15
60
20-25
15
55
30
15
20-45
15
VMT
LD
30, 614
57, 121
--
2, 796
90, 531
27, 637
27,604
--
2, 351
57, 592
26, 564
6, 590
—
2,243
35,397
37, 393
10, 351
--
2, 532
50,276
24,.973
70, 193
—
2, 112
97, 278
59, 389
7,984
—
2,070
69,443
0
88,823
—
2,054
90,877
HD
3, 134
5,856
--
289
9,279
2,829
2,829
--
239
5,897
2, 722
676
--
231
3, 629
3,835
1,064
--
256
5, 155
2, 557
7, 191
--
215
9,963
6,087
817
—
214
7,118
0
9,105
--
206
9,311
Diesel
726
1, 352
--
66
2, 144
652
652
—
58
1,362
627
157
--
50
834
883
247
—
58
1, 188
594
1, 658
—
50
2,302
1,402
189
--
50
1,641
0
2,103
—
50
2, 153
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-35
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 12-Hour
District
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
25-30
15
25
15
60
25
15
60
25-35
15
60
25
15
60
25
15
VMT
LD
0
75,727
—
1,666
77, 393
0
48, 420
--
1, 386
49,806
41,624
40,420
—
3, 844
85, 888
48, 774
61, 517
—
3,076
113, 367
42,317
14,680
--
4,610
61,607
41, 888
29, 855
—
5,443
77,186
TOTAL
1,269, 163
HD
0
7, 761
—
173
7,934
0
4,965
—
140
5,105
4,264
4,140
—
396
8,800
4, 998
6, 301
—
314
11,613
4, 338
1,501
—
470
6,309
4,297
3,060
—
561
7, 918
TOTAL
437,478
Diesel
0
1,790
—
41
1,831
0
1,146
—
33
1,179
981
957
—
91
2,029
1,155
1,452
—
74
2,681
998
346
--
107
1,451
990
710
—
132
1,832
TOTAL
100, 962
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
VMT
Total
For All
Vehicle
Types
,807, 603
A-36
-------
Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT)
Metropolitan Area "Seattle _
Time Priori 24-Hour
District
1
2
3
4
6
7
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
55
25
15
55
25
15
20-30
15
55
20-25
15
55
25
15
20-30
15
VMT
LD
80,375
37,263
-
3,474
121, 112
92,618
60, 240
-
3,696
156, 554
0
54,756
-
6,294
61,050
117,005
49,828
-
4,473
17.1, 306
119, 258
27, 140
-
7,171
153,569
0
62,671
-
6,804
69,475
HD
8, 236
3, 818
-
355
12,409
9,491
6, 172
-
377
16,040
0
5, 617
-
644
6, 261
11,988
5, 106
-
455
17,549
12, 221
2,786
-
733
15,740
0
6,427
-
699
7, 126
Diesel
1,898
877
78
2,853
2, 187
1,421
89
3. 697
0
1, 299
-
144
1,443
2,764
1, 177
-
Ill
4,052
2,819
644
-
167
3,630
0
1,487
155
1,642
Area
(sq. mi. )
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-37
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 24-Hour
District
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
35-55
20-25
15
25-35
15
55
20-25
15
20-35
15
50
20-25
15
20-25
15
25-35
15
VMT
LD
147,253
54,035
-
7,781
209,069
0
65,612
-
6,471
72,083
128,915
67,788
-
9,690
206, 393
0
93,506
6, 549
100,055
143,468
97, 114
-
6,294
246, 876
0
56; 566
-
2,942
59, 508
0
76,268
-
4,618
80,886
HD
15,085
5, 539
799
21,423
0
6,727
-
666
7, 393
13, 209
6,949
-
988
21, 146
0
9,579
-
666
10, 245
14,708
9,957
-
644
25, 309
0
5,794
-
300
6,094
0
7, 814
-
477
8,291
Diesel
3,485
1,277
-
189
4, 951
0
1,554
-
155
1,709
3,053
1, 598
-
233
4, 884
0
2,209
-
155
2,364
3, 397
2,298
-
144
5,839
0
1,343
67
1.410
0
1,798
_
Ill
1,909
Area
(sq. rni. )
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-38
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 24-Hour
District
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
20-25
15
50
25
15
25-30
15
25-35
15
50
20
15
25
15
50
12-25
15
VMT
LD
164,413
34, 166
-
6, 149
204,728
37,551
36,797
-
4,940
79,288
0
76,879
-
3,818
80,697
0
141,259
-
4,484
145,743
146,576
59,596
-
7,271
213,443
0
37, 107
-
8,924
46,031
136,541
258, 530
-
1, 510
396,581
HD
16, 850
3,497
-
633
20,980
3, 852
3,774
-
511
8, 137
0
7, 881
-
389
8,270
0
14, 474
-
455
14, 929
15,018
6, 105
-
744
21, 867
0
3,807
-
910
4,717
13,997
26,496
-
155
40, 648
Diesel
3,885
810
-
144
4,839
888
866
-
122
1,876
0
1,820
89
1,909
0
3,341
-
Ill
3,452
3,463
1,410
-
167
5,040
0
877
211
1,088
3,230
6, 116
-
33
9.379
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-39
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 24-Hour
District
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
20-25
15
50
20-25
15
20-40
15
25-50
15
60
25
15
25-35
15
25-50
15
VMT
LD
0
74, 115
-
7,592
81,707
96, 104
101,920
-
3,841
201,865
0
87, 113
-
10,645
97,758
0
69,986
-
1, 332
71^318
94,827
54, 246
2, 564
151,637
0
86,402
-
2,975
89,377
0
107, 148
444
107, 592
HD
0
7, 592
-
777
8, 369
9,846
10, 445
-
389
20, 680
0
8, 924
-
1,088
10,012
0
7, 171
-
133
7,304
9,724
5,561
-
266
15, 551
0
8,858
-
300
9, 158
0
10, 978
-
44
11, 022
Diesel
0
1,754
-
178
1,932
2,276
2,409
-
89
4,774
0
2,065
-
255
2, 320
0
1,654
-
33
1,687
2,242
1,288
-
55
3,585
0
2,042
-
67
2, 109
0
2,531
-
11
2,542
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-40
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 24-Hour
District
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
50
25-35
15
55
25
15
25-35
15
55
25
15
55-60
35
15
50
30
15
55
25-35
15
VMT
LD
115, 362
59, 352
-
4,040
178,754
83,561
48, 529
-
4,473
136, 563
0
64,080
-
2,620
66,700
49,972
35,576
-
2, 165
87,713
115,773
10, 157
-
3,474
129,404
60,773
13,220
-
1,598
75,591
70,341
35,098
-
2,442
107,881
HD
11, 822
6,083
-
411
18,316
8,558
4,973
-
455
13,986
0
6, 571
-
266
6, 837
5, 117
3,641
-
222
8,980
11, 866
1,043
-
355
13,264
6,227
1, 354
-
167
7,748
7,204
3, 596
255
11,055
Diesel
2,731
1, 399
-
100
4, 230
1,976
1, 143
111
3,230
0
1, 521
-
67
1,588
1, 177
844
-
55
2,076
2,742
244
78
3,064
1,432
311
-
33
1,776
1,665
833
-
56
2,554
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-41
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 24-Hour
District
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
55
25
15
55
25
15
55
25
15
60
30
15
60
20-25
15
55
30
15
20-45
15
VMT
LJD
41, 203
76,879
-
3,763
121,845
37,196
37, 152
-
3,164
77,512
35,753
8,869
-
3,019
47,641
50, 327
13,931
-
3,408
67,666
33,611
94,472
-
2,842
130,925
79,931
10,745
-
2,786
93,462
0
119,547
-
2,764
122,311
HD
4,218
7,881
-
389
12,488
3,807
3,807
-
322
7,936
3,663
910
311
4,884
5, 162
1,432
-
344
6,938
3,441
9,679
-
289
13,409
8, 192
1,099
-
289
9, 580
0
12, 254
-
278
12,532
Diesel
977
1,820
-
89
2,886
877
877
-
78
1,832
844
211
-
67
1,122
1, 188
333
-
78
1,599
799
2,231
-
67
3,097
1,887
255
-
67
2,209
0
2,831
-
67
2,898
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
A-42
-------
Seattle - 1977 - 24-Hour
District
43
44
45
46
47
48
Facility
Type
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial i
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Freeway
Arterial
Collector
Local
TOTAL
Avg Speed
(mph)
25-30
15
25
15
60
25
! VMT
j ' LD
0
101,920
-
2,242
104, 162
0
65,168
-
1,865
67,033
56,022
54,401
_
HD
0
10,445
-
233
10,678
"o
6,682
-
189
6,871
5,739
5,572
_
1
15 5, 173 533
115,596 11,844
60 65,645 6,727
! 1
25-35
15
60
25
15
60
25
15
i
i
1
82,795 8,480
j
4, 140 422
152,580 j 15,629
56,954 5,839
19,758 2,020
-
6,205
82,917
56,377 |
40, 182
633
8,492
5,783
4,118
I
7,326 755
103,885 10,656
•1
TOTAL TOTAL
1
5, 745,842 588,793
Diesel
0
2,409
-
56
2,465
0
1,543
"
44
1,587
1,321
1, 288
_
122
2,731
1,554
1,954
-
100
3,608
1,343
466
-
144
1,953
1,332
955
-
178
2,465
TOTAL
135, 885
Area
(sq. mi.)
1
1
1
1
1
1
VMT
Total
For All
Vehicle
Types
6,470, 520
A-43
-------
APPENDIX B
TABULATIONS OF VEHICULAR EMISSIONS
The computer printout contained in Appendix B provides a breakdown
of emissions by vehicle type for the various zones as well as the total
emissions for each zone which were presented in the body of the report.
1970 CO emissions for Zones 1-41 are given on page B-2, and 1971 and
1977 CO emissions for Zones 1-50 are given on Pages B-3 and B-4, respec-
tively. Hydrocarbon emissions for Zones 1-41 for these three years are
given on pages B-5, B-6 and B-7. CO emissions for Zone 21 (CBD) for
years 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1978, and 1979 are given on pages
B-8, B-9, and B-10. 1977 CO emissions for Zone 21 under three strategy
combinations are given on page B-ll.
B-l
-------
CITY OF SEATTLE CALENDAR YEAR IS 1970
REGION NO. 1 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 1958 TO 1971
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 8 HOURS
VFHtCLE
CATEGORY -
ZONE AREA
NT.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1*
15
'.(.
'.7
18
T9
20
2)
22
73
2*
25
76
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
(SO. MI)
'.000
1.000
1..000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1..000
1.000
1.000
'.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
'.300
1.000
I. 000
'.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.OOO
1.000
UDOO
I.OOO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1 .000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
i.boo
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
LIGHT
EMISSIONS
(XGM)
2475.9*
3463.16
2036.68
3679.47
0.0
304*. 99
2376.11
4547.51
2501.56
5233.81
3223.71
6170.98
2267.43
2592.20
4363.78
2340.00
2576.71
5063.80
5966.88
1789.94
13317.42
3451.60
5944.58
3414.34
1987.98
3484.85
2731. 61
2566.82
4115.54
3409.76
2019.14
2259.05
2298.71
1549.26
2414.42
3846.73
225B.75
1110.39
1265.32
4036.23
1705.67
DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
IKGM/SQ.MII
2475.94
3463.16
2036.68
3679.47
0.0
3044.99
2376.1.1
4547.51
'501.56
5233.81
3223. 71
6170.98
2267. 43
2592.20
4363.78
2340.00
2576.71
5063. 8C
5966.88
1789.94
13317.42
3451.60
5944.58
3414.34
1.987.98
3484.85
2738.61
2566.82
4115.54
3409.76
2019.14
2259.05
2298.71
1549.26
2414.42
3846. 73
2258.75
1110.39
1265.32
4036.23
1705.67
HEAVY DUTY OTHER
EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY DENS ITY
(KGM) (KGM/SQ.MI)
378.62
529.56
311.36
562.58
0.0
465.69
363.34
695.41
382. 59
800.42
492. 98
943.75
346.76
396.44
667.32
357. 80
394.06
774.44
912.50
273.72
2036.68
527.86
909.05
522.18
494. 44
866.73
418.77
638.43
1023.66
521.46
308.84
345.49
351. 5J.
236.99
369.25
588.24
345.42
169.86
193.53
617.21
260.86
378.6-2
529.56
311.36
562.58
0.0
465.69
363.34
695.41
387. 59
800.42
49?. 98
943.75
346.76
396.44
667.32
357. 80
394.06
774.44
912.50
273.72
2036.68
527.86
909. 05
522.18
494.44
866.73
418.77
638.43
1023.66
521.46
308.84
345.49
351.51
236.89
369.25
588.24
345.42
169.86
193.53
617.21
260.86
IKGHI (KGH/SQ.MII
25.86
33.94
13.08
37.47
0.0
34.00
15.41
47.53
15.86
47.23
22.43
56.21
14.49
19.59
47.39
19.19
19.43
36.31
52.80
11.04
88.54
20.88
49.76
24.59
1.7.31
34.39
22. 5J
25.70
41.02
32.74
16.04
21.25
29.53
16.76
24.76
30.27
19.82
11.00
14.70
27.91
20.27
25.86
33.94
13.08
37.47
0.0
34.00
15.41
47.53
15.86
47.23
22.43
56.21
14.49
19.59
47.39
19.19
19.43
36.31
52.80
11.04
88.54
20.88
49.76
?4.59
17.31
34.39
22.51
25.70
41.02
32.74
16.04
21.25
29.53
16.76
24.76
30.27
19.82
11.00
14.70
27.98
20.27
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM)
2880.43
4026.66
2361.13
4279.52
0.0
3544.68
2754.86
5290.45
2900.01
6081.46
3739.13
7170.93
2628.67
3008.23
5078.48
2716.99
2990.21
5874.55
6932.17
2074.70
15442.64
4000. 34
6903.38
3961.12
2499.73
4385.97
3179.89
3230.94
5180.22
3963.95
2344.02
2625.79
2679.75
1802.91
2*08.43
4465.24
2623.94
1291.24
1473.54
4*81.42
1986.80
(KGM/SQ.NI)
2880.43
4026.66
2361.13
4279.52
0.0
3544.68
2754.86
5290.45
2900.01
6081.46
3739.13
7170.93
2628.67
3008.23
5078.48
2716.99
2990.21
5874.55
6932.17
2074.70
15442.64
4000.34
6903.38
3961.12
2499.73
4385.97
3179.89
3230.94
5180/22
3963.95
2344.02
2625.79
2679. It
1802.91
2808.43
44-61.24
2623.99
1291.24
1473. 54
4*81.42
1986.80
-------
CITY OF SEATTLE CALENDAR TEAR IS 1971
REGION NO. 2 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
NOOEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS TROH 1959~TDT972
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 8 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ZONE
NO.
1
2
10
11
12
13
14
It
16
17
IB
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
4t
47
4a
4»
50
AREA
ISO.NII
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
I. 000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOO
1.000
1.000
l.OOO
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOO
1.000
1.000
i.ooo
l.CUC
l.OOC
1.000
LIGHT
EMISSIONS
IKGHI
2283.92
3194.54
1671.75
3394.08
0.0
2(01.82
2191.63
4194.79
2307.53
4827.66
2973.67
5692.37
2091.56
2391.14
4025.33
2158.54
2376.85
4671.04
5504.09
1651.15
12284.45
3183.90
5483.49
3149.51
1X33. 13
3214.56
2526.18
2367.75
3796.32
3145.29
1162.54
2083.86
2120.43
1429.11
2227.18
3548.39
20»3. 50
1024.27
1167.20
3723.20
1573.40
4905.12
631.42
2074.34
2372.66
3600.12
1867.33
213*. 3",
2235.99
1504.96
DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
IKGM/SO.NII
2283.92
3194.54
1878.75
3394.08
0.0
2 BOS .82
2191.83
4194.79
2307.53
4827.86
2973.67
S692.37
2091.56
2391.14
4025.33
2158.54
2376.85
4671 .04
5504.09
1651.15
12284.45
3183.90
5483 .49
3149.51
1*33.03
3214.56
2526.18
2367.75
3796.32
3145.29
1X62.54
2083.86
2120.43
1429.11
2227.18
3548.39
20P3.5I"
1024.27
1167.20
3723.20
1573.40
4905.12
631.42
2074.34
2872.66
3600.12
1867.33"
21-J4.34
2235.99
1504.96
HEAVY T5DTY"
EMISSIONS
(KGHI
359.01
502.09
295.26
533.35
0.0
441.49
344.55
659.33
362.72
758.87
467.38
894.71
328.75
375.88
632.66
339.25
373.64
734.20
365.10
259.51
1930.89
500.45
S61.S6
495.08
468.80
821.73
397.07
605.26
970.47
494.39
292. '0
327.56
333.29
224.63
350.08
557.73
327.53
161.03
183.48
585.23
247.31
769.30
99.03
325.3?
450.56
564.61
292~i86"
343.35
359.34
236.57
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SO.MI I
359.01
502.09
295.26
533.35
0.0
441.49
344.55
659.33
362.72
758.87
467.38
894.71
328.75
375. P»
632.66
339.25
373.64
734. 2C
865.10
259.51
1930.89
500.45
361.36
495.08
468.30
321.73
397.07
605.26
970.47
494.39
292.30
327.56
333.29
224.63
350.08
557.73
327.53
161.03
183.48
585.23
247.31
769.50
99.03
325.32
450.56
564.61
~29T7as-
.143.35
359.34
236.57
OTHER
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
25.25
33.13
12.78
36.57
0.0
33.19
15.04
46.39
15.49
46.09
21.90
54.84
14.14
19.12
46.25
18.74
18.96
35.43
51.51
10. 7P
86.40
20.39
48.56
24.00
16.90
33.55
21.98
25.03
40.02
31.94
15.65
20.74
28.82
16.35
24.17
29.53
19.35
10.74
14.35
27.31
19.78
29.55
4.63
14.59
26.72
35.57
T9-.T2"
19.30
19.68
14.74
EMISSION
DENSITY
IKGM/SO.MII
25.25
33.13
12.78
36.57
0.0
33.19
15.04
46.39
15.49
46.09
21.90
54784
14.14
19.12
46.25
18.74
18.96
35.43
51.51
10. 7*
86.40
20.39
46.56
24.00
16.90
33.55
21.98
25.08
40.02
31 .94
15.65
20.74
23.32
16.35
24.17
29.53
19.35
10.74
14.35
27.31
19.78
29.55
4.63
14.59
26.72
35.57
19"; 72"
19.80
19.68
14.74
TOTAL"
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
2668.17
3729.76
2186.79
3964.00
0.0
3283 Y5(T
2551.42
4900.50
2685.75
5632.81
3462.96
6641.91
2434.45
27P6.14
4704.24
2516.52
2769.45
5440.66
6420.70
1921.44
14301.73
3704.74
6393.91
3668.59
2319.53
4069. «4
2945.24
2998.08
4806.81
3671.62
2171.00
2432.16
2482.54
1670.09
2601.43
4135.65
2430.45
1196.04
1365.03
4335.73
1840.49
5703.96
735.08
2414.26
3349.93
4200.30
Z179"i9r
2547.49
2665.00
1756.26
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SO.NI)
2668.17
3729.76
2186.79
3964.00
0.0
3283.50
2551.42
4900.50
2685.75
5632.81
3462.96
6641.91
2434.45
27P6.14
4704.24
2516.52
2769.45
5440.66
6420.70
1921.44
14301.73
3704.74
6393.91
3663.59
2319.53
4069. P4
2945.24
2998.08
4806.81
3671.62
2171. CO
2432.16
2482.54
1670.09
2601.43
4135.65
2430.45
1196.04
1365.03
4335.73
1840.49
5703.96
735.08
2414.26
3349.93
4200.30
2IT»;9T
2547.49
2665.00
1756.26
-------
CITY OF SEATTLE CALENDAR TEAR IS 1977
REGION NO. 2 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
MODEL TEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 1965 TO ITTff
LENGTH OF TINE PERIOD IS 8 HOURS
•F-
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ZONE AREA
NO.
ISO.NII
1.000
I. 000
1.000
l.OOO
1.000
1.000
l.OOO
1.000
l.OOO
10 1.000
11 1.000
12 1.000
13 1.000
1* 1.000
13 1.000
14 1.000
IT 1.000
» 1.000
If 1.000
20 1.000
21 l.ioo
22 1.000
23 1.000
2* 1.000
25 I MOO
26 l.OOO
2T 1.000
21
29
30
31
32
33
34
3!
36
3T
38
39
40
41
42
41
44
45
4*
47
41
4*
y
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.ceo
.000
.000
LIGHT
EMISSIONS
IKGNI
13T0.2O
1830.73
1033.37
2022.91
0.0
1424.3T
1U9.J9
2349.91
1122.11
2SIP.TT
1370.74
3102.42
1011.93
1173.14
2213.23
1059.25
1170.7*
2230.32
2651.16
814.07
637:. *••
1491.31
2669.73
1494.49
903.67
1989.48
1202.34
1193.3P
1931.93
1602.92
924.29
1092.68
1137.89
772.92
1073.89
1683.67
1047.40
529.66
661.34
2121.87
889.50
2303.14
333.44
1142.57
1494.33
1862.76
962.47
1267. 4H
1107. 5i
747.33
DOTT
EMISSION
DENSITY
IKCM/SO.NII
1370 JO
1830.73
1033.37
2022.91
0.0
1624 .37
lit* .3*
236*. 31
1122 Jl
2918.77
1370.74
3102.42
1011.93
1173.84
2213.29
1059.29
1170.79
2230.32
2*91.16
816.07
•>)'.'.,!
1491 .31
2669.79
1494 .49
903.67
1989.48
1202.34
1153.3'
1931.93
1602.92
924 .25
1052.68
1 137 .89
772.92
1073.83
1683.67
1047.40
529.66
661 .34
2121. »7
889.90
2303.14
333.44
U42. 57
1464.33
1862.76
962.47
1Z67.-0
11U7.52
747.33
HEAVY
EMISSIONS
IKGM1
408.77
344.31
276.37
393.22
0.0
4*3.13
312.33
706.33
303.89
733.91
427.03
896.87
271.27
326.10
669.86
300.67
324.8?
610.32
769.42
219.90
17-7. 4-.
391.23
762.43
4O9.98
260.29
776.14
340.33
339.79
934.28
472 .66
259.66
308.27
370.08
23*. 30
326.86
473.22
303.11
198.60
207.09
573.27
281.19
59*. 41
87.18
295.96
414.59
529.30
278;&5"
369.41
312. 06
219.05
DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
IKGN/SO.NI)
408.77
944.91
276.37
3*3.22
0.0
4*3.13
312.33
706.33
309.8*
733.91
427.03
8*6.97
271.27
326. 10
669. »6
300.62
324.12
610.3?
765.42
215.50
H ;.,,
391.23
762.43
409.98
260.29
776.14
340.53
339.79
934.28
472.66
259.66
308.27
370.08
23". 30
326.86
473.22
303.11
158.60
207.09
973.27
281.15
590.41
87. IS
295.96
414.59
529.30
27S.65
369.41
312.^6
219.05
OTHER
EMISSIONS
IKGMI
30.33
39.19
13.29
42.18
0.0
31.43
17.3*
52.33
18.04
91.46
23.04
61.14
14.90
20.29
91.21
19.84
20.19
36.47
93.41
11.93
95.78
20.43
51.13
24.47
17.74
361.62
22.37
29.72
42.62
34.19
16.70
21.96
32.35
IK. 92
25.29
3O.47
20.98
120.79
16.94
32.9"
23.39
30.59
5.09
16.79
28. 80
38.25
20.96
26. (JL
20.41
15.63
EMISSION
DENSITY
IKGH/SO.HII
30.33
39.19
13.29
42.88
0.0
38.43
17.3*
32.33
18.04
31.66
29.04
61.84
14.90
20.29
31.23
19.84
20.19
36.47
33.41
11.33
95.78
20.49
51.13
24.47
17.74
361.62
22.37
23.72
42.62
34.19
16.70
21.96
32.35
18.92
25.29
30.47
20.98
120.79
16.94
32.90
23.39
30.59
5.0»
lo.76
29. 80
39.25
20.96
Jo. 02
?0.41
15.63
TOTAT.
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
1809.30
2434.49
1327.23
2661.01
0.0
2137.95
1499.31
3128.19
1446.75
3304.33
2022.04
4061.13
1305.12
1522.19
2934.34
1379.71
1515.00
2877.31
3473.00
1043.10
6170.13
1902.99
3403.32
1928.94
1183.70
2727.25
1565.26
1736.84
2900.02
2109.77
1200.60
1382.92
1540.32
1030.14
1426.01
2187.36
1371.49
805.05
885.37
2728.13
1194.04
3012.14
425.70
1455.30
1927.72
2430.31
1262 .ft
1062.92
1440.79
982.01
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGN/SO.HI)
1809.30
2434.45
1327.23
2661.01
0.0
2157.95
1499.31
3128.19
1446.75
3304.33
2022.84
4061.13
1305.12
1522.19
2934.34
1379.71
1515.00
2BT7.3I
3473.00
1043.10
6176.13
1902.99
3403.32
1928.94
1183.70
2727.25
1565.26
1738.84
2900.02
2109. 7T
1200.60
1382.92
1540.32
1030.14
1426.01
2187.36
1371.49
805.05
885.37
2728.13
1194.04
3012.14
425.70
1455.30
1927.72
243C.31
1262.09
1662.92
1440.79
982.01
-------
CITY OF SEATTLE CALENDAR YEAR IS 1970
REGION NO. 1 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS HYDROCARBONS
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 1958 TO 1971
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 3 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY - LIGHT DUTY HEAVY DUTY OTHER
!ONE AREA EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION
NO. DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I»
12
•3
14
15
•16
17
1.8
19
70
21
72
23
24
25
26
77
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
ISO. Nil
1.000
I. 000
1.000
1.000
1.000
(.303
1.000
1.000
J .000
I. 000
'..300
1.000
1 .300
1.000
l.OOO
'.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
liDoa
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
l.OOO
1.000
1.000
l.OOO
1.000
1.000
1.000
7.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1..000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.003
1.000
IKCMI IKGM/SO.MII
179.86
243.11
116.22
263.40
0.0
229.06
156.24
327.03
141. .20
351.02
191 .11
416.66
129.05
160.43
323.94
149.70
160.37
308.40
395.42
99.91
71 8. 44
190.28
385.25
201.09
13' .09
244.01
177.39
181.81
290.95
236.54
128.98
1.54.65
193.20
115.16
174.33
241.50
141.3'
78.50
97.27
737.65
133.99
1 79. 86
243.11
116.22
263.40
0.0
229.86
136.24
327.03
141.20
351.02
191.11
436.66
'.29.05
160.43
323.94
149.70
160.37
308.40
395.42
99.91
718.44
190.28
385. ?5
208.09
13' .09
244.01
177.39
181.81
290.95
236.54
128.98
154.65
193.20
115.16
174.33
241. SO
141.31
78.50
97.27
237.65
133.99
IKGMI (KGH/SO.MII
33.30
45.22
22.18
48.86
0.0
42.40
26.00
60.65
26.95
65.58
36.11
77.06
24.6^
30.34
5».B5
79.14
?0.37
58.58
73.96
19.10
136.56
36.42
72.37
39.49
39.96
73.81
33.37
54.95
87.97
44.04
24.33
28.85
35.47
21.30
32.33
45.53
26.50
14.58
17.89
45.10
24.63
33.30
45.22
22.18
48.86
0.0
47.40
26.00
60.65
76.95
65.58
'6.31
77.06
2
-------
CITY OF SEATTLE CALENDAR YEAR IS 1971
REGION NO. 2 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS HYDROCARBONS
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 1959 TO 1972
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 3 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY - LIGHT DUTY HEAVY DUTY OTHER
ZONE AREA EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION
NO. DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY
ISO. Mil
1 .000
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
la
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2»
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
(KGM) (KGM/S3.MI)
1*8.63
214.51
102.66
232.34
0.0
202.62
120.58
286.46
124.98
309.90
169.06
367.83
114.23
141.84
2R5.61
132.26
141.80
272.80
349.14
88.46
635. 5S
16».4»
340.33
184.06
115.78
214.31
156.74
160.41
256.71
208.74
114. OP
136.51
170.21
101.54
153.79
213.45
124.81
69.26
85.73
210.21
118.07
1*8.63
21*. SI
IC2.86
232.34
0.0
202.62
120.53
238.46
124.99
309.90
lt.9.16
T>7.°3
114. IT
141.°4
295.61
132.26
141.10
272.30
349.14
ns.46
635.55
16».4»
340.13
114.06
115.78
215.31
156.74
160.41
256.71
208.74
114. PC
136.51
17P.21
101.54
153.79
213.45
124.81
69.26
85.73
210.21
118.07
IKGMI IKGM/S3.MI)
31.18
42.37
20.92
45.74
0.0
39.64
24.51
56.79
25.41
41.5?
J4.2I
72. 2=-
21.24
25.54
54.99
?4.45
2t.5B
55.17
49.39
18.02
12P.6P
34.38
67.96
37.20
37.5?
69.15
31.37
51.4'
32.41
41.28
22.ee
27.06
33.13
19.93
30.28
42.81
24.89
13.66
16.73
42. 4P
23.02
31.18
42.37
20.92
45.74
0.0
39.44
24.-J1
56.79
24.41
41.52
34.71
72.23
23.24
23.55
45.99
26.45
2f.5»
55.17
69. )9
13. "2
123. oC
34.38
67.96
37.20
37.52
69.15
31.37
51.48
82.41
41.28
22.98
27. P6
33.13
19.93
30.28
42.81
24.89
13.66
16.73
42.4'
23.02
IKGMI (KGM/SC.MII
1.42
1.86
0.72
2.06
0.0
1.37
O.f.5
2.55
0.87
2.59
1.23
3.09
0.30
1.07
2. 60
1.05
1.06
1.99
2.81
0.60
4.62
1.14
2.73
1.35
0.95
1.8?
1.24
1.41
2.25
1.80
0.3B
1.14
1.62
0.92
1.36
1.66 .
1.01
0.61
0.80
1.54
1.11
1.42
1.36
0.72
2.06
0.0
1.07
O.B5
2.55
O.B7
2.59
1.23
3.09
0.80
1.07
2.60
1.05
1.06
1.99
2. SI
C.6P
4.62
1.14
2.73
1.35
0.95
1.88
1.24
1.41
2.25
1.80
0.88
1.16
1.62
0.92
1.36
1.66
1.01
0.61
0.8C
1.54
1.11
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SO.MII
191.22
258.74
124.50
28P.14
0.0
244.13
145.94
347.80
151.25
374.01
204.50
443.20
138.26
171.47
344.20
159.77
171.45
329.96
421.34
107. C9
766.77
2C4.0P
411.03
222.61
154.25
2R6.33
189.35
213.30
341.37
251.82
137.76
164.73
204.95
122.39
11=5.43
257.92
150.71
83.54
103.26
254.23
142.20
191.22
258.74
124.50
28C.14
0.0
244.13
144.94
347.80
151.25
374.01
204.50
443.20
13S.20
171.47
344.20
159.77
171.45
329.96
421.34
1C7.09
7ob.77
2C4.CO
411.03
222.61
144. ?5
236.33
189.35
213.30
341.37
251.02
137.70
164.73
204.95
122.39
1«5.43
257.92
150.71
83.54
103.26
254.23
142.20
-------
CITY OF SEATTLE CALENDAR YEAR IS 1977
REGION NO. 2 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS HYDROCARBONS
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 1965 TO 1978
LENGTH OF TINE PERIOD IS 3 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY -
LIGHT DUTY
ZONE AREA EMISSIONS EMISSION
NO. DENSITY
ISO.MI) IKGMI (KGM/SO.MI)
HEAVY DUTY
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGMI (KGM/SO.MI)
OTHER
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGH) IKGM/SO.MII
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SO.MI)
td
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2*
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.GOO
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
.000
73.11
101.38
46.69
109.05
0.0
89.53
47.77
132.60
52.55
129.57
73.21
160.99
47.65
56.78
124.24
55.79
,57.01
106.47
143.78
36.08
292.22
65.08
136.63
7l.l<=
45.99
85.85
60.21
61.79
106.94
85.96
45.87
55.84
72.36
44.81
65.07
83.35
51.33
29.36
3P.04
97.02
51.83
73.11
101.38
46.69
109.05
0.0
B9.53
47.77
132.60
52.55
129.57
73.21
160.99
47.65
56.73
124.24
55.79
57.01
106.47
143.78
36.08
292.22
65.CIB
136.63
71.19
45.99
B5.35
60.21
61 .79
106.94
E5.96
45.87
55.84
72.36
44.31
f>5.07
63.35
51.33
29.36
3P.04
97.02
M.33
28J17
38.55
17.37
41.67
0.0
34.71
19.70
50.70
19.67
49.62
27.40
61.28
17.60
21.3!v
47. P5
21.00
21.44
39.85
54.46
13.37
10P.69
24.06
51.83
26.66
17.52
53.39
22. PI
39.72
66.53
32.91
17.32
21.34
2C.25
17.32
25.08
31.49
19.52
11.31
14. «5
36.28
20.27
28.17
38.55
17.37
41.67
0.0
34.71
19.70
50.70
19.67
49.62
27.40
61.28
17.60
21.38
47. P5
21.00
21.44
39.35
54.46
13.37
1CP.69
C4.16
51. 13
26.66
17.52
53.39
2i.«-l
33.72
66.53
32.91
17.32
71.34
2f .25
17.32
25.0?
31.49
19.52
11.31
14. "5
36.28
2C.27
I.V.,
2.20
0.86
2.41
0.0
2.16
0.98
2.94
1.01
2.90
1.41
3.47
0.84
1.14
2.88
1.11
1.13
2.05
3.GC'
C.65
5.33
1.15
2.89
1.38
l.Ofi
2.03
1.26
1.44
2.39
1.92
0.94
1.24
1.82
1.06
1.52
1.71
1.1C
C.65
G.95
1.36
1.32
1.70
2.20
0.86
2.41
0.0
2.16
0.98
2.94
1.01
2.90
1.41
3.47
O.B4
1.14
2.38
1.11
1.13
2.05
3.00
0.65
5.38
1.15
2.B9
1.3B
l.OC
2.03
1.26
1.44
2.39
1.92
C.9»
1.24
1.82
1.06
1.52
1.71
I. IP
0.6E
0.95
1.66
1.32
102.99
142.13
64.91
153.13
0.0
126.40
68.45
186.24
73.23
1»2.09
102.01
225.74
66.09
79.29
174.96
77.91
79.58
148.38
201.24
50.10
406.29
90.29
191.35
99.22
64.51
141.77
84.27
101.95
175. 8t>
120.79
64.12
78.41
102.43
63'. 19
91. of
116.55
71.95
41.36
53.84
135.16
73.42
102.99
142.13
64.91
153.13
0.0
126.40
68.45
186.24
73.23
1*2.09
102.01
225.74
66.09
79.29
174.96
77.91
79.58
148.38
201.24
50.10
406.29
90.29
191.35
99.22
64.51
141.77
B4.27
101.95
175.86
12C.79
64.12
70.41
102.43
63.19
91.69
116.55
71.95
41.36
53.84
135.16
73.42
-------
CITY Of SEATTLE CALENDAR YEAR IS 1972
REGION NU. 1 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 1960 TO 1973
LENGTH OF TIHE PERIOD IS 8 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ZONE AREA
NO.
ISO.MI)
21 1.000
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ZONE ARC A
NO.
(SO. HI)
21 1.000
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
ZONE AREA
NO.
ISO.MI)
LIGHT DUTY
HEAVY DUTY OTHER
EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY
(KGMI (KGM/SO.MI) (KGM) (KGM/SO.MI) (KGM) (KGM/SO.MI)
11405.42 11405.42
CITY OF SEATTLE
REGION NO. 1
MODEL YtARS CONSIDERED
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD
LIGHT DOTY
1898.32 1898.32 86.40 86.40
CALENDAR YEAR IS 1973
POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
IS FROM 1961 TO 1974
IS 6 HOURS
HEAVY IlLJfY ilTHJR
EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSION! t'MIiSION -MISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY UrNSITY OtNSITY
(K3M) (KGM/SJ.MI) (KGM) (KO..M/S J.MI 1 (KVO (KC.M/SQ.MI)
10348.25 10348.25
CITr OF SEATTLE
REGION NO. I
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED
LENGTH JF TIME P=1IJD
LIGHT DUTY
1174.13 1-7'.. 1I> 3i>.4J "0.40
CALbr.JiR YiArt IS 1974
PJLLUTANT SPECIE! IS CARSON MONOXIDE
IS FROM 1962 TO 1975
IS 8 HOURS
HEAVY DUTY OTHER"
EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY DENSITY DENSITY
(KGM) IKGM/S9.MI) (KGMI IKGM/SQ.MII K.GMI IKGM/Sd.NII
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGMI (KGM/SO.MI)
13390.14 13390.1*
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SO.NI)
12308.79 12308.79
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(K.GMI (KGM/SO.MII
1794.6*
86.40
1113*.79 11134.79
-------
CITY OF SEATTLE CALENDAR YEAR IS 1975
REGION NO. 1 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED is FROM 1963 TO 1976
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 8 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY - LIGHT DUTY
ZONE AREA EMISSIONS EMISSION
NO. DENSITY
(SQ.MI) (KGM) (KGM/SQ.MI)
HEAVY DUTY
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SQ.MI)
OTHER
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SQ.MI)
TOTAL
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SQ.MI)
21
1.000
3414.38
3414.38
1726.02
1726.02
88.74
88.74
10229.14
10229.14
CITY UF SEATTLE CALENDAR YEAR IS 1976
REGION NO. 1 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARSON MONOXIDE
MODEL YEARS CONSIDERED IS FROM 19b4 TO 1977
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 8 HOURS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY -
ZJNE
NO.
LIGHT DUTY
AREA EMISSIONS
HEAVY DUTY
EMISSIONS
(SO.MI)
(KGM)
EMISSION EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY DENSITY
(KGM/SQ.MI) (KGM) (KGM/SQ.MI)
OTHER
EMISSIONS
(KS.1I
EMISSION
DENSITY
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SO.MI)
21
1.000
72.12.86
7222.86
1097.61
1697.61
91.C7
91.C-7
9011.53
9011.53
-------
CITY OF SEATTLE CALENDAR YEAR IS 1978
REGION NO. 1 POLLUTANT SPECIES IS CARBON MONOXIDE
MODEL YEARS~C6NSID~EREO"IS FROM 1966 TO 1979
LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD IS 8 HOURS
VEHICLE:
CATEGORY - LIGHT DUTY
ZONE AREA EMISSIJNS EMISSION
NO. DENSITY
(SO.MI) (KGM) (KGM/SO.MI)
HEAVY DUTY
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGMI (KGM/SO.MI)
OTHER
EMISSIONS
(KGM)
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SC.MI)
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SQ.MIJ
21
l.CCO
5200.05
5ZOO.C5
1654.17
1654.17
96.80
96.80
6951.02
6951.02
to
i-"
o
CITY OF SEATTLE
REGION NL). 1
MODrL .YrAKS CONSIDEK.
CALF*OAR YFAK is 1979
3.ILLUTANT SPLCI--C IS CARBON MONOXIDE
ir, FROM 19o7 t.i 19bC>
LENGTH OF TIME P^rtUD IS
VEHICLE
CATEGORY -
ZUNE
NO.
LIGHT DUTY
ARtA EMISSIONS
(SO.MI)
21 1.000
(KGM)
4235.21
EMISSION
DtNSITY
(KGM/SO.MI)
4255.21
HFAVY DUTY
LMISilONS
(KGM)
DENSITY
OTHEK
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/Stt.MI)
1617.13
1617.13
9B.70
98.70
TUTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SO.MI)
6001.04
6001.04
-------
ts
I
t-'
~CTTY OI?rSE^TTn
REGION NO. 1
^T*
~T^F
•2 +
VEHICLE
CATEGORY
OKI AREA
"TSQ.HT1
MODEL YEARS CONSIDEI
LTHGTR OF TIME PER~I 1
LIGHT
EMISSIONS
— iKEMi —
1 1.000 6259.64
2 T.13OT5 6T357F4
3 1.000 5*90.02
DUTY
EMISSION
DENSITY
TKGM7SQ.MU
6259.64
5C90.02
(
POLLUTAI
RED IS FROM
30 TS" 81
HEAVY
"^MISSTWIS
~~ (KGH)
1678.42
"" 1646.21
1596.11
:ALENDAR YEAR :is T977
«T SPECIES I5~"CARBON' MONOXIDE
~R^5"TD 1^78"^
100RS •'
ZONK 21
DUTY ~
EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGM/SO.HI)
1678.42
1646.21
1596.11
OTHER
EMISSIONS EMISSION
DENSITY
(KGH) (KGM/SQ.MI)
94.29 94.29
92.66 92.66
92.66 92.66
TOTAL
EMISSIONS EMISSION"
DENSITY
(KGM) (KGM/SQ.MI)
8032.35 8032.35
7874.71 7874.71
7578.79 7578.79
-------
I. Title and Subtitle
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
Report No.
3. Recipient's Accession No.
5- Report Date
December 1972
Transportation Controls to Reduce Motor Vehicle
Emissions in Seattle, Washington
6.
7. Author(s)
8> Performing Organization Kept.
No.
>• Performing Organization Name and Address
GCA Corporation
GCA Technology Division
Bedford, Massachusetts
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
DU-72-B895
11. Contract/Grant No.
68-02-0041
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
13. Type of Report & Period
..Covered 8/1/1/72
Final t(,
Report 12/1£"72
14.
is. Supplementary Notes Prepared to assist in the development of transportation control plans
by those State Governments demonstrating that National Ambient Air Quality Standards
cannot be attained by implementing emission standards for stationary sources only.
16. Abstracts
The document demonstrates the nature of the Air Quality problem attributed to motor
vehicle operation, the magnitude of the problem and a strategy developed to neutralize
these effects in order that National Ambient air quality1 standard may be attained and
maintained.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis. 17o. Descriptors
Motor Vehicle emitted pollutants - air pollutants originating within a motor vehicle
and released to the atmosphere.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards - Air Quality Standards promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency and pub"-
lished as a Federal Regulation in the
Federal Register.
17b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
VMT - Vehicle Miles Traveled.
Vehicle Mix - distribution of motor vehicle population by age group.
LDV - light duty vehicle - less than 6500 Ibs.
HDV - heavy duty vehicle - greater than 6500 Ibs.
i7e. COSATI Field/Group Environmental Quality Control of Motor Vehicle Pollutants
18. Availability Statement
For release to public
19. Security Class (This
Report)
______ UCLASSIFIED _
N
20. Security Class (This
Page
UNCLASSIFIED
21. No. of Pages
all
22. Price
FORM NTIS-33 (REV. 3-72)
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FORM NTIS-35 (10-70) (Bibliographic Data Sheet based on COSATI
Guidelines to Format Standards for Scientific and Technical Reports Prepared by or for the Federal Government,
PB-180 600).
1. Report Dumber. Each individually bound report shall carry a unique alphanumeric designation selected by the performing
organization or provided by the sponsoring organization. Use uppercase letters and Arabic numerals only. Examples
FASEB-NS-87 and FAA-RD-68-09.
2. Leave blank.
3. Recipient's Accession Number. . Reserved for use by each report recipient.
4. Title and Subtitle. Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed promi-
nently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more
than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume number and include subtitle for the specific volume.
5- Report Dote, l-iach report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected
(e.g., date of issue, date of approval, date of preparation.
6. Performing Organization Code. Leave blank.
7. Authors). Give name(s) in conventional order (e.g., John R. Doe, or J.Robert Doe). List author's affiliation if it differs
from the performing organization.
8. Performing Organization Report Number. Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address. Give name, street, city, state, and zip code. List no more than two levels of
an organizational hierarchy. Display the name of the organization exactly as it should appear in Government indexes such
as USGRDR-1.
10. Project/Task/Work Unit Number. Use the project, task and work unit numbers under which the report was prepared.
11. Contraet/Gront Number. Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address. Include zip code.
13* Type of Report and Period Covered. Indicate interim, final, etc., and, if applicable, dates covered.
14. Sponsoring Agency Code. Leave blank.
15. Supplementary Notes. Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared in cooperation with . . .
Translation of ... Presented at conference of ... To be published in ... Supersedes . . . Supplements
16. Abstroct. Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report.
If the report contains a significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.
17. Key Words and Document Analysis, (a). Descriptors. Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the
proper authorized terms that identify the major concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used
as index entries for cataloging.
(b). Identifiers and Open-Ended Terms. Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use
open-ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
(c). COSATI Field/Group. Field and Group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List.
Since the majority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be the specific
discipline, area of human endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary
Field/Group assignments that will follow the primary posting(s).
18. Distribution Statement. Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Re-
lease unlimited"- Cite any availability to the public, with address and price.
19 & 20. Security Classification. Do not submit classified reports to the National Technical
r'Yo'-T^ ,.„.«.
21. Number of Pages. Insert ther«otaTnumber.,of*pales, including this one and unnumbered pages, but excluding distribution
list, if any. ^"'
22. Price. Insert the price set by the>NaWongiJpeclmical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
USCOMM-DC 149S2-P72
•0U.S. Government Printing Office: 1973--7'l6-768/'il58 Region No.
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGE
Technical Publications Branch
Office of Administration
Research Triangle Park. N C. 2771
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
: AND FEES PAID
IL PROTECTION AGENCY
'A - 335
IURTH CLASS RATE
BOOK
If you do not desire to continue receiving this technical report
series, please CHECK HEREQ , tear off this label, and return
it to the above address. Your name will then be promptly removed
from the appropriate mailing list.
------- |