Lynnwood-to-Mukilteo bus service is coming back!
Lynnwood-to-Mukilteo bus service is coming back!

On June 6, the Snohomish Community Transit Board of Directors approved a plan to restore 7500 annual service hours, starting with the September 29 service change. Community Transit is planning on adding an additional 25,000 annual service hours in 2015, which still leaves it well behind its high point before the recession forced it to cut 160,000 annual service hours from 2010 to 2012.

Eight routes will be impacted by the September 2014 service change.

Three routes (130, 201, and 202) will get frequency bumps:

Route 130 (Edmonds Station to Lynnwood Transit Center via Aurora Village and Mountlake Terrace) will see its weekday mid-day frequency increase from every 60 minutes to every 30 minutes.

Routes 201 and 202 (Smokey Point Transit Center to Lynnwood TC) will see their weekday frequency increased to provide combined 15-minute service between Smokey Point TC and Lynnwood TC all day. This increased frequency will add 23 daily trips to Community Transit’s longest local north-south route and improve connections with east/west service, especially in the north and east county.

Both routes will operate on I-5 between Ash Way Park & Ride and Lynnwood TC, rather than on streets. This change saves significant service hours and improves service time on these routes. Passengers who wish to travel to Alderwood Mall can transfer at Ash Way P&R to revised routes 115 and 116.

Route 120 (currently Lynnwood TC to Canyon P&R) will be extended to Edmonds Community College and two afternoon trips will be added. This change increases the number of buses between Lynnwood TC and Edmonds CC from 4 to 6 per hour each weekday to address high demand.

Routes 113, 115, and 116 will be re-routed in the vicinity of Alderwood Mall.

Route 113 (currently Ash Way P&R to Mukilteo Ferry Dock) will be extended to Lynnwood TC via the west side of Alderwood Mall along 36th and 33rd Avenues, Alderwood Mall Blvd and 200th St. This change will restore a one-seat ride between Mukilteo and Lynnwood TC. Route 113 will no longer serve 164th St and Ash Way P&R.

Route 115 (Aurora Village to Mariner P&R via Edmonds CC and Lynnwood TC) & route 116 (Edmonds Station to Silver Firs via Edmond CC and Lynnwood TC) will be realigned between Ash Way P&R and Lynnwood TC to operate on the east side of Alderwood Mall (Alderwood Mall Parkway and Blvd) rather than on the west side of the mall. This change saves significant service hours and improves service time on these routes. Routes 115 and 116 will no longer serve Swamp Creek P&R.

Route 110 (Mountlake Terrace TC to Edmonds Station) will be eliminated due to low ridership, and its hours redeployed elsewhere.

All these changes point to Lynnwood Transit Center Station being a serious regional hub when it opens in 2023.

New Pierce Transit route 425 (in red)
New Pierce Transit route 425 (in red)

Meanwhile, down in Puyallup, Pierce Transit rolled out new route 425, dubbed the Puyallup Connector, on June 8, for a 1-year pilot project. The connector circulates among several Puyallup destinations, including Puyallup Station, with 30-minute frequency from at least 10 am to at least 6 pm seven days a week. From now until September 25, service on Thursdays will run until 9 PM to transport more riders to and from concerts in Pioneer Park. On Saturdays through September 27, service will begin at 9 AM to accommodate Puyallup Farmer’s Market customers.

26 Replies to “Bus Service Added in Snohomish County & Puyallup”

  1. Pierce Transit rolled out new route 425, dubbed the Puyallup Connector, on June 8, for a 1-year pilot project. The connector circulates among several Puyallup destinations, including Puyallup Station, with 30-minute frequency from at least 10 am to at least 6 pm seven days a week.

    Not early enough to serve Sounder.

      1. Don’t forget about the 495 and 400 which also provide service in the area to the south of the station. In addition to the 402, the 503 gets people in from Fife. These routes (503, 504, and 425) are all a work in progress and are subject to modification. The 425 in a sense complements the 495 and 400.

      2. @brent on paper yes, however both routes go uphill (and on different levels of the hill), in areas with very limited access to meridian and very limited pedestrian access in general.

    1. I think that these community connector routes are a complete waste of service hours and money which could be better put to use on the 402, 501, and 500.

  2. The 201 and 202 change is fairly dismal. They might as well truncate the route at Everett instead of sending buses to Lynnwood. This is terribly redundant to the 512, except that it serves Ash Way via Mariner P&R. Or fold the southern Ash Way routing into some other local.

  3. I don’t really see how the 425 is particularly useful. It always runs very close to the 402. Why didn’t Pierce Transit do something like restore service on the old 413 route, for example, which served Shaw road before the cuts due to the recession?

    1. I believe it has to do with the funding sources. Notice all those front-door stops for various businesses. That and the fact that it is a 1-year pilot suggest that the local businesses pitched in a big chunk of the funding.

    2. I don’t know where the funding came from, but the poster is correct in stating that there is third parties in play here. The City of Puyallup or the chamber of commerce i’m sure is paying a good amount for this service.

      1. I’m not sure that there is a 3rd party funding source for the 425, 503, 504. The 101 has a 3rd party funding source (the city of Gig Harbor).

      2. Actually I’ve been on those buses before and I know for a fact the 503 and 504 have other funding sources (as in a partnership) between the cities and pierce transit. The 425 I’m not sure about but it’s likely as well.

  4. I always thought having the 201/202 continue north on 4th Ave W, instead of turning to get on I-5, and going up to 112th and serving the South Everettt Park and ride and continue on I-5 from there. The bus service north of 128th is terrible AND it would be able to serve the park and ride as well.

    1. That’s a good idea, but you’re in Everett now. It would require cooperation (i.e. $$$$) from Everett to make that happen.

  5. Am I the only one who thinks that a major Puget Sound Region county with no Sunday transit service whatever except for the County Seat is a local, regional, State, and national disgrace? I know, not my business, since I don’t pay taxes there- though I do have a client there.

    Honestly do not see why CT needs any express service to Seattle at all, at least running out of Lynnwood Transit Center. Also, since outvoted status is so comfortably familiar, would point out that it would be easier for ST than CT to put 500-series into the DSTT- saving hundreds of operating hours per years.

    Without trolleypoles, from frequent observation, CT drivers can handle the Tunnel just fine. The necessary indoctrination for coordination, communication, and cooperation can be worked into the extra classes that, again by direct observation, are overdue for KC Metro as well.

    Saving even more operating hours and constant drain on passenger good will.

    All above freeing up money to put back the Sunday service available everywhere in the world from Bulgaria to Everett, and points south to Cape Town and Tierra del Fuego.

    Geographically,

    Mark Dublin

    1. When CT made its big cuts several years ago, most of the citizen feedback was to preserve the commuter routes first, so that’s what CT did. Not necessarily every single route unchanged, but the general concept of downtown and UW service beyond what ST Express is offering. It’s their money so they should have some say on what it’s spent on. Farther-out cities are just more commute-minded, at least when it comes to transit. However, CT is leaning toward truncating all these routes when the Lynnwood Extension opens.

      If CT were to delete the commuter routes now, it would raise several issues. (1) Does ST have capacity on its existing buses to absorb all those riders? That’s certainly no. (2) Does ST have enough spare buses and budget to run additional buses? Probably not. (3) ST’s U-District service is limited to the 45th freeway station. I can’t see hundreds of students walking from there. ST could of course create a new route, but that takes resources. (4) CT could pay ST to run these extra buses, but that’s of limited value. It would be more psychologically correct, but financially it’s -1 + 1 = 0, especially if ST contracts operations back to CT anyway. (5) CT could just delete the routes and ST do nothing. That would strand thousands of people who couldn’t fit on ST’s buses, and make them switch to driving, and make them anti-transit.

      Another interesting question is, why is Pierce County so much different from Snohomish? PT has no equivalent commuter routes. Although perhaps that’s because ST gives Pierce more service? Is the total amount of commuter service from Snohomish and Pierce proportional? There’s also the fact that Tacoma and Puyallup are further away than Everett, so Pierce may be a more isolated job market, as it historically was.

      1. Re #3: ST’s U-District service is limited to the 45th freeway station except during peak hours, when the 512 is running in the express lanes and doesn’t stop there at all. CT 8xx routes cover that gap.

      2. The 512 is the all day, all week route. It doesn’t go in the express lanes and always stops at NE 45th. The 511 and 513, peak express routes, do use the express lanes.

      3. Right, I forgot that — the 512 always stops at 45th and the 510, 511, and 513 are the routes that skip it. But the 512 does not run during the forward peak, so my main thrust stands: there’s no forward-peak service at I-5/45th (or I-5/145th), and the CT 8xx cover that gap.

    2. Am I the only one who thinks that a major Puget Sound Region county with no Sunday transit service whatever except for the County Seat is a local, regional, State, and national disgrace?

      I think it’s awful, and I very much hope it will be rectified soon, and I’d support identifying additional funding for it if I were a stakeholder. However, I can’t see how it’s a “national disgrace.” Plenty of areas with similar density lack Sunday service all over the country.

      1. And that could change next year. CT is in the process of a significant overhaul in 2015 (the 2014 is relatively minor). This could potentially include Sunday service (limited hours but some is better than none). So it’s a work in progress. Five years is a long time without Sunday service but we could get it next year.

      2. No, I’m sorry, but not having Sunday service is a joke. You can’t seriously expect people to do without a car if you don’t offer bus service 7-days-a-week. And there are lots of people–especially young people, elderly people, and disabled folks–who can’t drive. On Sundays they have to rely on friends and relatives to drive them around, and they’re screwed if nobody’s available. CT needs to step up and provide Sunday service ASAP.

  6. I’ve arrived on Island Transit and Washington State Ferries at Mukilteo, and been really annoyed that the only option is a local bus that is exceptionally slow, yet an express commuter bus arrives there going the other way, and then deadheads back the other way.

    It is especially annoying considering FTA grants cover revenue runs and not deadheads, so if CT were to open that route to passengers going the other way they would get more federal money.

Comments are closed.