Puget Sound Gateway Program (WA-167 and WA-509 Extensions)

[pderocco]

I don't get what the tunnel is about. It's not big enough to carry a freeway, and right next to it is an underpass that might actually be big enough. Could the tunnel have been intended for a pair of train tracks?

[jakeroot]

I don't get what the tunnel is about. It's not big enough to carry a freeway, and right next to it is an underpass that might actually be big enough. Could the tunnel have been intended for a pair of train tracks?

As Arthur indicated in his post, the tunnel is intended to be used by an on-ramp (probably single lane) from the Seatac Airport Southern Access Freeway. However, at least as far as I know, that project remains unfunded.

It's worth mentioning the tunnel was built a number of years ago, back when 24th/28th was originally built and the overpass was put in (around 2017).

[Bruce]

The bike/walk trail that will follow SR 167 from the Port of Tacoma to Puyallup has been named the spuyaləpabš Trail by WSDOT and the Puyallup Tribe of Indians.

[jakeroot]

I like the name, and the confidence WSDOT and the Puyallup Indians have when it comes to it...but I'm not sure the name will catch on. Not its correct pronunciation, anyhow.

[pderocco]

Sounds equally good backwards.

[ErmineNotyours]

Look what I found by the side of the road in Renton, some distance away from the actual project.  (I tried finding the plans online instead, but I don't have the magic touch that the rest of you have.)

[Bruce]

Drove by a bit of the tideflats east of Tacoma yesterday and noticed quite a bit of grading and bridgework on the new expressway there. Just a heads up for those who want to check it out (though I didn't have time to hunt for photo spots).

[Bruce]

SeaTac section of the SR 509 project is progressing:

https://x.com/wsdot_traffic/status/1821956388098318828

[jakeroot]

Overhead photo of the WA-167 project in Fife, courtesy of my father, taken within the last 48 hours:


WA-167 / WA-509 Spur Construction by Jacob Root, on Flickr

[Bruce]

WSTC has some proposed toll rates: https://wstc.wa.gov/online-open-houses/puget-sound-gateway-toll-rate-setting/sr-509-and-sr-167-expressways/

SR 509 would range from $1.20 to $2.40 depending on hour of travel, with most of the day set at $1.80.

SR 167 would be $1 all day everyday west of I-5 in Fife and $1.20 to $3.00 east of I-5 from Fife to Puyallup. Rate would be $2.10 for most of the day.

Both rates would be higher for larger vehicles and increase by 2.15% annually. WSTC is also considering one of two options for low-income households: a 50% discount on SR 509 tolls or a systemwide discount program (the latter would be very nice to have).

[Plutonic Panda]

So the tolls would be set strictly by the hour? That's a little odd. It seems like dynamic pricing would work better to go up and down based on the current traffic loads.

[jakeroot]

So the tolls would be set strictly by the hour? That's a little odd. It seems like dynamic pricing would work better to go up and down based on the current traffic loads.

The only real incentive for that style of pricing scheme is when the lane has to maintain a certain average speed. The express toll lanes on 167 and 405 being the best example. Dynamic pricing for all lanes along a particular stretch (perhaps like I-66 in DC) isn't done in Washington State, to my knowledge.

They are basically operating it the same as the 520 Bridge, with "preset" dynamic pricing. However, unlike the 520, I see no mention of holiday or weekend pricing. There is no reason to charge rush hour rates on weekends. I'd just do a flat $2 or $3 charge from 08:00 to 20:00 on Saturday, Sunday, and holidays.

I think preset pricing is more diplomatic, too. Knowing the price before you head out the door does make tolling a bit more socially acceptable.

One possible downside (and this might already be an issue with the 520): if people know the toll rate will increase at a certain hour, might they drive unacceptably fast in order to pass through the toll gantry prior to the increased rate taking effect?

Regarding the rates, they seem extremely reasonable. Obviously, they will slowly increase over the years, and the rates are relatively expensive without Good to Go, but they are at least comparable, if not cheaper, than the expressway toll rates I see here in Japan. Although our tolled expressways don't have traffic lights to get from one to another ...

[Bruce]

The first mile of the new SR 509 section opens tomorrow morning: https://wsdot.wa.gov/about/news/2025/wsdot-opens-section-new-sr-509-expressway-seatac-june-28

[Bruce]

A few shots from my opening day drive:

[The Ghostbuster]

Hopefully, when completed, the WA 167 and WA 509 extensions relieve congestion in their areas. They seem like crucial links in the freeway system to me.

[jakeroot]

Here is some of the signage installed for the project along I-5, between the 509 and 516 ramps:


WA-509 Freeway exit from Northbound I-5 by Jacob Root, on Flickr


C/D road sign for WA-516 / I-5 split by Jacob Root, on Flickr


C/D road sign for WA-516 / I-5 split (at split) by Jacob Root, on Flickr


WA-516 Exit Ramp from Southbound I-5 by Jacob Root, on Flickr

[Bruce]

Funny that quite a few of those light rail signs are now uncovered at the SR 516 interchange but remained covered in Federal Way. The extension could open later this year, but timing is still fluid.

[stevashe]

I keep forgetting to post this, but I snagged a picture of the advance exit sign for SR 509 right after it was put up. The sign was completely visible at the time as the old sign was just a few feet in front of it and (mostly) blocking the view.

Currently, the yellow "TOLL ROAD" banner is still covered. (Does anyone know when tolls are supposed to go into effect?)


Future SR 509 Advance Exit Sign by Steven Ashe, on Flickr

[jakeroot]

I keep forgetting to post this, but I snagged a picture of the advance exit sign for SR 509 right after it was put up. The sign was completely visible at the time as the old sign was just a few feet in front of it and (mostly) blocking the view.

Currently, the yellow "TOLL ROAD" banner is still covered. (Does anyone know when tolls are supposed to go into effect?)


Future SR 509 Advance Exit Sign by Steven Ashe, on Flickr

Great spot! That must have been there for only a very short time. Certainly all evidence of it being a toll road was covered up shortly after installation.

According to the press release, tolling starts in "fall".
https://wsdot.wa.gov/about/news/2025/wsdot-opens-section-new-sr-509-expressway-seatac-june-28

As an aside, is this the first use of a "TOLL ROAD" banner in Washington? Every other use of the TOLL banner seems to be "Toll Tunnel" or "Toll Bridge".

[stevashe]

Great spot! That must have been there for only a very short time. Certainly all evidence of it being a toll road was covered up shortly after installation.

According to the press release, tolling starts in "fall".
https://wsdot.wa.gov/about/news/2025/wsdot-opens-section-new-sr-509-expressway-seatac-june-28

As an aside, is this the first use of a "TOLL ROAD" banner in Washington? Every other use of the TOLL banner seems to be "Toll Tunnel" or "Toll Bridge".

I believe it would be the first toll road banner. And yeah it was only up for a week or two, but it wasn't hard for me to catch since it's along my regular commute when I'm working in the office and I usually go in two or three times a week.

[jakeroot]

Speaking of signs:

I'm sure we've all noticed that all of WSDOT's PR for this project has refused to call either of these freeways a "freeway" and instead "expressway".

Driving it a couple weeks ago, I couldn't help but notice two things about the 509 extension from 24th I-5: it has posted "FREEWAY ENTRANCE" assemblies, and the road is posted at 60 MPH (or it will be... the advisory signs indicate a suggested 55 for the final curve onto I-5, implying the limit is at least 60). Therefore the 509, and likely 167, will be textbook WSDOT definition of an urban freeway.

I know at one point, one or both of these roadways were planned to be pathetic two-lane highways where "expressway" might have been a more apt description. But despite late-stage funding elevating them both to full freeways, this "expressway" nomenclature has refused to die.

What are we, Chicagoland?

[stevashe]

Speaking of signs:

I'm sure we've all noticed that all of WSDOT's PR for this project has refused to call either of these freeways a "freeway" and instead "expressway".

Driving it a couple weeks ago, I couldn't help but notice two things about the 509 extension from 24th I-5: it has posted "FREEWAY ENTRANCE" assemblies, and the road is posted at 60 MPH (or it will be... the advisory signs indicate a suggested 55 for the final curve onto I-5, implying the limit is at least 60). Therefore the 509, and likely 167, will be textbook WSDOT definition of an urban freeway.

I know at one point, one or both of these roadways were planned to be pathetic two-lane highways where "expressway" might have been a more apt description. But despite late-stage funding elevating them both to full freeways, this "expressway" nomenclature has refused to die.

What are we, Chicagoland?

The expressway naming is definitely 100% just a PR thing for 509 to try to reduce backlash from new freeway construction. I wouldn't be surprised if they just revert to calling it a freeway once it's fully open.

On the other hand, the 167 extension really is an expressway. The diverging diamond interchange with I-5 and the intersection with Alexander Avenue will both have signals that mainline traffic will have to pass through.