Implementing transportation projects that satisfy objectives to support sustainable development and infrastructure in urban environments is made challenging when traditional transportation evaluation criteria and analysis tools are used. Traditional evaluation criteria related to level of service put greater value on infrastructure that provides wide streets, high speeds, and limited access. In evaluating solutions, other performance metrics related to livability, walkability, and interaction with land use are often secondary or rely more on subjective or qualitative information. Past evaluation of options for the Mercer Corridor within the City of Seattle focused on vehicular traffic travel time and intersection operations. This led to alternatives that were limited-access highways that required wide, multi-lane cross-sections. Concerns about impacts and costs for those types of alternatives led to opposition and indecision regarding a transportation solution. The context and stakeholder values have evolved leading to consideration of broader project objectives. A wider range of evaluation criteria have been used to reflect the broader objectives of the project purpose and need. A new preferred alternative solution has been selected that meets the broader objectives of the city.
Abstract