Countdowns: Lynnwood Link (August 30); RapidRide G (September 14)
Transit Updates:
More midday water taxi trips for the Vashon Route. Seattle Times ($) says the additional runs hope to make up for reduced WA State Ferries service.
Four Pierce Transit operators join the 1-million-club. The “club” includes operators who have driven 1 million miles or more with zero preventable accidents.
Reconstruction of 15 Ave NW and repaving of Ballard Bridge to start July 8; overnight closures expected. No word on RapidRide D-etours, yet.
Kitsap Transit celebrates grand opening of Silverdale Transit Center.
Kitsap Transit also looking for feedback on proposed fare changes.
Sound Transit’s OMF-South will be at South 336th Street in Federal Way.
An article summarizing transit service for the 4th of July will post after midnight.
Local News:
As WA housing costs climb, incomes aren’t keeping up ($). Meanwhile, commercial offices are still dropping ($).
Seattle Times notes sidewalks are top of mind in upcoming Transportation Levy. The Levy will be $1.55 billion; CM Morales’ proposed amendment failed to pass yesterday.
After Supreme Court Decision, homeless camping bans might gain traction in WA. Also discussed in Bloomberg CityLab($).
Downtown Seattle is working from home; what about your neighborhood?
Seismic retrofit work on Admiral Way bridges starts this month.
Other News & Opinion:
Seattle nears 800,000 residents in latest estimates from WA Office of Financial Management.
Kevin Schofield reviews data from analytics firm StreetLight Data regarding the greenhouse gas impacts from transportation in the USA’s 100 largest cities.
The PSRC released a report on communities around industrial lands in the region.
A Big Picture of the US Housing Market
A couple good Op-Eds in the Urbanist: Sound Transit Needs Its Own Permitting Authority and Steering Away from Car Dependency Is Not About Toughing It Out
Over the (Northern) Border:
Vancouver eliminates parking minimums.
TransLink reveals cost-cutting measures to address funding gap.
Riding the rails via VIA in Canada.
This is an Open Thread.
Wow. That is some surprising population growth data from OFM.
It’s not surprising that Seattle is leading the state in growth again. That was clear. And it was also clear that a majority of KC growth was going to be inside the city limits of Seattle.
But the fact that Spokane didn’t even make the top 25 cities statewide in growth is really surprising. And that is in total numbers, not percentages. You would expect better numbers from the state’s second most populous city.
Going directly to the report you can see why. Although Spokane County is growing fast, almost all that growth is outside of the city limits of Spokane (city). In fact, Spokane city only added 300 people total. That is tiny, and probably wouldn’t even put Spokane in the top 50.
This is a failure of urbanism and a continuation of Spokane’s car centric development pattern. I actually thought Spokane was doing better, but I guess after the collapse of their rezoning efforts they are retrenching a bit.
I always check these numbers to see if Tacoma has passed Spokane as the number 2 most populous city in the state. Only ~8000 people separate the two cities now, and Tacoma is growing about 9 times faster than Spokane (city).
I give Tacoma 4 years before they pass Spokane.
Tacoma’s population is a bit misleading. If they had annexed their semi-urban old streetcar expanses like Seattle has annexed, they would be twice the size.
Lakewood is as dense as Seattle above 85th St, and it’s odd it isn’t part of Tacoma. Spanaway and Parkland are probably more Shoreline than 125th, but they certainly aren’t rural. I would categorize them more as unincorporated urban. I won’t even discuss the weirdness that is University Place, Fircrest and Ruston. I need a local to explain how that happened.
These areas aren’t really what you think of as “suburbia”, or any more suburbia than Wallingford.
Lakewood is as dense as Seattle above 85th St.
No, it isn’t. South of Tacoma you’ve got a couple census blocks that are about 12,500 (people per square mile). Everything else is under 10,000. There are even huge swaths under 5,000.
In contrast, in Seattle north of 85th you’ve got nine census blocks over 10,000. In Lake City it is over 20,000 and Bitter Lake is over 17,000. Northgate isn’t quite as high, but will likely reach those numbers (and exceed them) as development finishes up and people move in. Likewise the part of Lake City that has the most population density is not the area seeing the most growth. Bitter Lake is growing as well.
it’s odd [Lakewood] isn’t part of Tacoma
Agreed. Borders are often arbitrary. The northern border of Seattle is a rarity, in that you can see the population drop quite significantly as you cross the border. That is changing as I write this though, as there has been a fair amount of development in Shoreline. Anyway, you don’t really see that with Lakewood. Lakewood density is not that much different than Tacoma density. But that is because Tacoma has surprisingly low density. At least I was surprised when someone pointed it out. Tacoma feels like it is bigger (and more dense) than it really is. It has good bones (as they say).
But Pierce County in general really sprawls. It isn’t like Mill Creek (a bedroom community almost entirely made of low-density housing). It is more like L. A. (but not as dense). There are multiple centers. Downtown Tacoma is still the biggest in every respect, especially culturally. But from an employment standpoint it isn’t huge, and there are multiple centers all over the place. A lot of these are operated by the state or federal government. JBLM is the big one, but it sprawls as well. For example Madigan and American Lake are close as the crow flies, but a 15 minute drive (https://maps.app.goo.gl/bEFUUmaRMa42H2J7A). In general the various hospitals, distribution centers and malls spread from Steilacoom to Sumner; Spanaway to Gig Harbor.*
In between the various centers there is a mix, but it is mostly low density housing. It is like a scaled down version of L. A., which is why transit is so challenging, but not hopeless. It isn’t a sprawling bedroom community, where the only option is some combination of commuter service to the big city and park & rides. It is a lot more complicated than that, but not easy. In that respect it is quite a bit different than Magnolia, let alone Wallingford. Magnolia is one of the most suburban parts of Seattle in terms of what people think of when they think of a suburb. There is nothing but housing for acres and acres. But the lots are still fairly small compared to those in most North American suburbs. The streets are standard grids (not cul-de-sacs). Density is low, but not that low. More importantly, you aren’t that far from far more urban areas. Northern Capitol Hill can be considered suburban in that there is nothing but housing, and almost all single family housing at that. But you can easily walk to downtown, and it is even easier to walk to the urban part of Capitol Hill which is about as urban as it gets in this state. Magnolia isn’t quite so lucky, but there are similarities. A lot of people can walk to Ballard. You can easily ride a bike to Downtown Seattle or the UW. There is potential there for really good transit that wouldn’t cost that much money. Run the buses to downtown and the UW a bit more often and you are set. Proximity is very important when it comes to transit and despite all the other flaws, Magnolia has that (as does Wallingford). In contrast Pierce County would need a lot more money to get that level of service, and if they did, they wouldn’t get anywhere close to the number of riders. This is what I mean by challenging.
* You can see this via https://onthemap.ces.census.gov/. It doesn’t generate links (unfortunately) but it isn’t too hard to use: First search for Pierce County and then select the one for Washington. Then “Perform Analysis on Selection Area”. Go with the default, but select “All Jobs” (not just private jobs).
Thanks, Ross! I was looking for that census data last week. Very helpful.
I was trying to find job density info for King, actually. Troy’s map has the Pierce jobs layer already.
https://troyserad.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=9a9bfba5f90c491396150972a25dcdca
Yeah, it is a cool website. There are a bunch of options that allow you to look at all sorts of things. My only complaints are that for whatever reason it puts the maps at an angle (not north-south) and the inability to generate a link.
Spokane Valley is quite close to Spokane itself. It starts about 3 miles from downtown and then extends out about 8 miles. It is not much different than the part of Seattle north of the ship canal. The big difference is that the city has a lot fewer people. The other difference is Spokane Valley sits closer to Idaho (and Coeur d’Alene). Development sprawls between Spokane County and Kootenai County. Both are growing. It isn’t clear how much of it is new (low density) housing developments (AKA sprawl) and how much is new apartments. From what I can tell it is mostly the former. The area has become more popular as a retirement community. Folks cash out (from cities like Seattle) and buy a (relatively) cheap house between Spokane and Coeur d’Alene. They visit both places.
Meanwhile, Spokane itself just went through a major zoning change. It takes a while to actually build the housing and have people move in. From everything I’ve read, the changes are widespread, and “more of a slow build”. In general you can’t read too much into one year numbers. Ten years is a much better guide. For the last couple decades Spokane itself has been growing at about 10% (although some of that may be sprawl and some of it annexation). In any event, I expect another 20,000 or so people in the next decade (just like the last one).
Will Seattle’s Streetcars Ever Connect? (Short YouTube video by Classy Whale).
I sometimes like hearing a non-resident’s perspective on our transit. I get used to the way things are, and over time, tend not to notice things like streetcar shelters that haven’t been cleaned in … years?
“I took a look at the shelter, and boy was it a mess. The thing was covered in dirt and grime. With an old and broken screen. This would sadly hold true for many of the streetcar shelters I would encounter during the day. Could someone explain to me why King County Metro can’t just send out a guy in a truck with a power washer once a month to take care of things?”
https://youtu.be/Nca16Gpk-R4
Shh, this is my backup video for Sunday unless something more interesting comes out in the meantime.
Why aren’t they going to create the joint Link/Sounder station at Boeing Access Road?
In addition to the general benefit of adding to the network, specifically it would allow people to bypass MLK using Sounder and then Link, or vice versa, when the tracks are blocked. Yes, this doesn’t happen often, but it does happen.
and yet, I think I remember ST took the joint station off the table…
In my opinion BAR should be a major transit hub. There isn’t much there, but it is where I-5, Sounder and Link all meet up. The advantages from a regional transportation standpoint if you could transfer between the three would be big. You might not get a huge number of riders, but it would add up, and the riders would save a lot of time versus the options available now. Without connecting services the station doesn’t add much value.
Agreed. Sounder and Link only connecting at TDS and King St decreases their functionality.
I was shocked when I discovered they hadn’t co-located in Tukwila. I figured “I’ll just walk.” Then I realized they were more than 3 miles away from each other, and you had to navigate around 2 major highways. WTF, ST.
My feedback to ST was that the BAR station is useless without the joint station and all-day Sounder service.
I always thought the area just south of a BAR station would be a great place for a low-rise TOD village. Any new station should be part of a larger plan to reimagine and remake the neighborhood.
I agree with Sam, and it could make a MUCH better bus intercept with bus-only ramps to and from 599 just east of East Marginal Way.
Without all-day Sounder a station along BAR is absolutely useless.
There were candidate projects for the BAR Link and Sounder stations in the run-up to ST3. The Link station was selected; the Sounder station was not.
Tukwila lobbied hard for the Link station. It wants it for three reasons: a RapidRide A extension to BAR to serve an emerging village at 144th, and better access to the Museum of Flight and Aviation High School. The museum would require transferring to the 124. I’m not sure where the high school is, but I assume it’s also on 99 near Boeing.
We have debated whether the 101 or 150 could be truncated at BAR station. It would likely worsen travel time, especially for the 101. The Metro Connects long-range vision has routes going through the station with some continuing to Rainier Beach. I don’t think any terminate at it.
Sounder-Link transfers aren’t very realistic. Sounder runs only a few times a day. If you’re on Sounder going north to downtown, you’re much better off staying on Sounder. If you’re on Sounder going north to the airport, you could transfer to Link. But in either case if you’re transferring to Sounder, you’d better not, because if you miss the train you’ll be waiting quite a while or taking the next Link run. You could take Sounder+Link north to Rainier Valley or SODO, but it’s doubtful many people would do that.
The other problem is BAR Sounder station is so close to Tukwila Sounder station. If we open BAR, do we close Tukwila? Or will Sounder wastefully stop at both. Cascades stops at Tukwila (unfortunately, it should stop at Kent or Auburn instead, but Tukwila has the political clout).
We have debated whether the 101 or 150 could be truncated at BAR station.
I wouldn’t truncate them. I would have them stop and then keep going, so that people could transfer. Bus to Link, Link to bus. For example Kent to Rainier Valley or Beacon Hill. Same with Renton. Yes, Renton has the 106 but it serves different parts of Renton (and doesn’t serve Beacon Hill). Even where they overlap you would benefit. You increase frequency (if you miss the 106 you catch the 101 and transfer to Link). Even some reverse-direction trips aren’t that crazy. If I’m on Sunset Boulevard and want to go to SeaTac I would probably just go north (via the 101) and then take Link (heading south). That beats the three-seat ride (101 south, then Stride, then Link).
ST didn’t say BAR Sounder station could never be built; it just declined to do so at this time. That may have been for absolute reasons (questioning the value) or relative reasons (it had higher priorities in ST3). South King’s highest priorities were Federal Way Link, BAR Link station, and more Sounder service. That probably maxed out its ST3 budget because South King is the poorest subarea.
When two major routes cross, I usually expect transferring to be possible.
Instead ST3 leaves the Tukwila area full of missed connections.
BAR Link Station doesn’t link with Sounder — but it doesn’t connect to Routes 101 and 150, RapidRide A and F and ST Express buses on I-5 either. Stride is also close by. I’m ok with Sounder not stopping because a stop there would be quite a 3-D walk between Sounder and Link. If Sounder was running all day every 30 minutes in both directions it could be worth it — but it’s not.
Stride doesn’t connect with Sounder, Route 150 or ST Express buses on I-5 as well as it skips SouthCenter (and Factoria and Renton Landing and SeaTac Airport). To me, this is the more significant missed opportunity. The TIBS stop is even down in a gulch a block away from Link.
It’s one of the things that irks me about ST3. There are many places that appear to be a transfer point on a regional diagram, yet the site layouts either don’t connect or connect really badly. ST got away with implying connectivity but didn’t deliver. There was a wholesale denial about whether any of these connections are important. Instead the projects were added or dropped on political whims and no study of their value.
And I gladly would have rather seen Stride connect to more — Tukwila Sounder, SouthCenter, Factoria, and Renton Landing — than spend the money on a BAR Link stop. RMTransit was so gushing about the idea of Stride that he didn’t discuss its fundamental connectivity problems. RMTransit does mention right shoulder bus lanes, which would seem to be applicable to connecting these 405S destinations and transfer points.
> BAR Link Station doesn’t link with Sounder — but it doesn’t connect to Routes 101 and 150, RapidRide A and F and ST Express buses on I-5 either.
I don’t support the idea, but the plan with the Boeing Access Road station would be to truncate the route 150 there. For route 101 it was suggested to truncate at rainier beach station. For rapidride A it just depends but there were ideas about extending to boeing access road or all the way to rainier beach.
> And I gladly would have rather seen Stride connect to more — Tukwila Sounder, SouthCenter, Factoria, and Renton Landing — than spend the money on a BAR Link stop. RMTransit was so gushing about the idea of Stride that he didn’t discuss its fundamental connectivity problems. RMTransit does mention right shoulder bus lanes, which would seem to be applicable to connecting these 405S destinations and transfer points.
Agreed, I honestly really wish they’d build a southcenter center hov direct access ramp. Or at least tukwila station one. That’d make the stride much more useful. For renton landing there’s a ne 8th street hov access ramp idea, but I don’t think they are planning on stride 1 to use it.
Was pondering trying to get to Skyway from the south, just now. Nope.
“When two major routes cross, I usually expect transferring to be possible. ”
I expect a large urban village so that it can be an destination as well as a transfer, and so that you can stopover while you’re waiting. BAR is such a highway-oriented no-man’s-land that I doubt it could get this, and Tukwila hasn’t announced any steps about changing it.
“the plan with the Boeing Access Road station would be to truncate the route 150 there.”
That’s not ST’s plan, and it’s just one possibility Metro is considering. I linked to the Metro Connects maps in an earlier article. In the 2050 map:
* 101: continues as is.
* 1047: A RapidRide A extension to BAR and Rainier beach.
* 1049: RapidRide 150, from Kent and Southcenter to BAR and Rainier Beach station.
* 1088: A frequent route from CID station to 4th Ave S/East Marginal Way, BAR station, then follows the 107 to Rainier View and the future Renton TC.
* 3053: A coverage route from Rainier Beach to 51st, BAR station, East Marginal Way/42nd/Military Road, a long detour to TIB station, and S 200th Street (Angle Lake station), to 1st Ave S.
These are all preliminary concepts, so they may be changed or abandoned in concrete restructures, as we’re seeing in the RapidRide G restructure.
> * 101: continues as is.
Thanks for the correction. Sorry I was referring to the renton bus aka the route 106. The “route” 1075 aka from renton is truncated at rainier beach.
“1088: A frequent route from CID station to 4th Ave S/East Marginal Way”
Hmm, does that mean I’ll have a 3-seat ride from southwest Capitol Hill to Costco? (1) Pine Street bus to Westlake station or 4th. (2) Link to SODO or or 3rd Ave bus to CID. (3) 1088 to Costco.
That might still be better than the current situation. Currently I have to wait for the 131/132 at “the worst bus stop in Seattle”; they’re notoriously late 5-15 minutes almost every time; and there’s no bench so I have to stand the whole time; and it’s all closed storefronts and the periphery of the sketchy people.ple.
“When two major routes cross, I usually expect transferring to be possible. ”
I expect a large urban village so that it can be an destination as well as a transfer, and so that you can stopover while you’re waiting.
Sure, but we are talking about a freeway bus. By its very nature the development around the area will be minimal, unless you want the bus to detour or end there. A detour costs everyone time (including the agency). If the plan is just to truncate the buses then they could do that now. Just send the buses to Rainier Beach and stop by the station along the way (thus serving the main part of Rainier Beach and connecting to the 7).
But again, these are freeway buses. The trade-off is much faster service from the remote location (Renton or Kent) to Seattle. It is common for freeway buses to serve freeway stops that are nothing more than transfer points. Sometimes to make a connection to a train, but often just bus to bus. In this case it would be bus to train.
For tukwila if they want an infill station I’d say just build it say 144th St nearby the Tukwila village
https://maps.app.goo.gl/5Kb6uqtF6fKx9G7s7
Or alternatively build it near the i5/i-405 interchange and use it as a closer transfer point to southcenter
https://maps.app.goo.gl/CrKbmpUzD6tBbZxk6
Could probably still build some exit/entrance ramp or rightside freeway bus stops for some minor connections.
What to Expect when You’re Expecting Lynnwood Link
https://www.soundtransit.org/blog/platform/what-to-expect-when-youre-expecting-lynnwood-link
Important note in there: when full Lynnwood Link testing starts July 8, northbound station displays will say “Lynnwood” even though passengers will have to get off at Northgate. The trains themselves will say “Northgate”.
We may have to help confused visitors going to Lynnwood, who don’t know about the 512 bus or where its stop is.
@Mike Orr,
This is no different than today.
And anyone actually arriving at NGS on link will be seeing “Northgate” as the final destination for their entire trip. So there shouldn’t be any confusion if you are actually on the train.
So I don’t see any of this as a problem.
@Lazarus: There’s no problem with having station displays say the next train is to Lynnwood (which isn’t open yet), and then have a train labelled Northgate arrive? If a RapidRide line had that mismatch, you’d be all over Metro’s supposed incompetence.
@Nathan,
It’s no big deal. There will be plenty of signs, audible announcements, and secondary labeling in the stations indicating the trains only go as far as NGS. And none of the digital tools will indicate otherwise.
This isn’t ST’s first time doing this, and ultimately it is a federal requirement. ST needs to demonstrate that the entire system will function reliably in service, and that means the station systems need function too. It’s pretty much SOP for opening rail extensions.
As per Metro, they don’t have any systems this sophisticated, so the bar is much lower. With a bus, if there is a problem you just stop the bus and the passengers walk away. No big deal. And ultimately the bus isn’t that tightly integrated into the larger system anyhow.
But the federal requirements for rail are much tighter because of the number of passengers involved and the speeds involved. And because it is harder to evacuate a full train on elevated dedicated ROW, especially with limited emergency access.
This is as it should be, although it is certainly annoying to would be passengers who will spend the next 2 months watching trains zip by in what looks like normal service while they are still stuck sitting in traffic. That will be the most difficult part of the next 2 months.
But August 30th is coming soon. A can’t wait!
I don’t see a problem here. The fixed northbound signage is changing from Northgate to Lynnwood but not the trains. It’s like the fixed signage has said Northgate even though the trains after midnight end at Stadium.
It’s going to end at Lynnwood for the next 12-17 years too. Get used to it!
I don’t think anyone pays attention to what the train says. It isn’t as sophisticated as the New York City Subway, or even a typical bus stop. There is only one route in the entire system. The trains go north or they go south. All you have to do is get yourself to the correct platform and take whatever train arrives. If the train stops short of your destination (for some reason) you follow the crowd and figure it out. But it is quite simple otherwise.
When East Link crosses the lake it will be different. People will have to get used to whatever term they use to represent “east” and “south”. Personally I would just choose those terms, but my guess it will be the specific station, as if the entire region knows where the hell Angle Lake is.
@Al S,
Ya, this isn’t ST’s first rodeo. This might be a huge expansion, but it is also ST’s 5th expansion.
Everything will work out fine. And, at the end of the day, it is only 2 months.
“I don’t think anyone pays attention to what the train says.”
The changeable realtime destination arrival screens should all read Northgate even though the fixed signage would say Lynnwood. So I think people pay more attention to the train screens than the fixed signage. I doubt that anyone who is a frequent rider even reads the fixed signs beyond an occasional glance.
@ Lazarus:
ST has recently eliminated the “northbound / southbound” references. Considering that the 2 Line goes in all four directions at some point it’s a good thing. For years the audio declared directions even though no directional signs were visible to refer to.
@Al S,
I think you meant to respond to someone else with your north/south comments. I’m not confused by any of that.
@ Lazarus:
When you said “this isn’t ST’s first rodeo. This might be a huge expansion, but it is also ST’s 5th expansion” it reminded me of how ST did a terrible job signing things when they first opened — like use of directions in the audio when the signage wasn’t there,
@Al S,
I don’t remember much confusion regarding signs and messaging when Central Link initially opened. But my first ride was actually the presser a few days (IIRC) before the public opening, and that was pretty well orchestrated. After that I didn’t use Link much because it didn’t meet my needs at the time.
I do remember some passengers in the early days doing things like holding doors open, or trying to ask the drivers questions like, “Where does this train go?” Of course it isn’t possible to interact with the operator on a train, and yelling while knocking on the door won’t help. But people still tried.
I give most of those people in the early days a pass. Seattle was so long without mass transit that a lot of people simply didn’t understand it. We are better now, and thank gawd.
I think Lynnwood Link will open just fine, and it will be a massive transit improvement for the region. Can’t wait.
This is the first time the displays have listed a destination the train is only in testing to; that’s where the confusion may lie. I double-checked the announcement to confirm it’s displays and not fixed signs, and it says “electronic signage”; i.e., displays.
@Mike Orr,
“ This is the first time the displays have listed a destination the train is only in testing to”
I don’t think this is true. I distinctly remember during other simulated service phases that ST made audio announcements to inform passengers that the platform displays were listing the wrong final destination. It didn’t seem like a big deal at the time.
And not including station displays in simulated service testing would negate the whole purpose of the testing. The purpose is exactly as ST states, “ making sure our stations, tracks, utilities, escalators, elevators, systems, and vehicles all work together as expected before we welcome you aboard. ”
There is a reason that ST includes “systems” in that list, because demonstrating that the systems work too is a key part of the testing. And ST wouldn’t be allowed to open the extension without demonstrating that all the systems work correctly, including PIMS.
It should also be noted that the testing is for the entire line — old and new parts together. They must all work together. It’s a big task.
That said, the new displays probably offer ST more flexibility to add messaging in some sort of “PSA slot.”
But we will see. The main point is that this phase won’t last long, and then LLE will be open!
Why not attach “via” on the signs, like Metro buses in the ’80s? “To Lynnwood, via Northgate”.
Thanks Cole. That is an excellent summary by ST! Things are happening.
So now “Al S” has confirmation as to when full run through service begins. Monday the 8th. Really good news.
The next 2 years of advances in local transit will be absolutely awesome. Can’t wait.
And can’t wait for Aug 30 and the LLE opening. Step one in a multi-step improvement in local transit.
The Symphony Station name change is happening too, according to the article.
Finally!!! I think it’s better to do it now than to wait for the full 2 Line.
Now where will the classical musicians set up inside the station!?
@Al S,
Ya. That change is long overdue. My wife works near there and is constantly helping confused out of towners.
It’s a welcome change.
August 30th is coming up!
Flagging it for an article. There are several other changes listed there too.
thanks, it’ll pretty exciting when it opens.
Speaking of changes what do ya’ll think about the station stop code numbering they’ll use.
“””
New numerical station codes: As our system keeps growing and maturing, now’s the time for our region to shift toward the international station coding standard used in places like Tokyo, Dubai, Seoul, and other world-class transit cities. You’ll see this change included in the new signage we roll out over the next few weeks, replacing our original system of pictograms.
Going forward, each of our stations will have a three-digit numerical code to help riders with limited proficiency in English or low literacy navigate the system. While many riders might not use these codes, for those who need them, they represent a huge leap forward in making our transit network easier to understand and use.
“””
https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/11/07/station-codes-are-set-to-replace-pictograms-on-link/
I’m actually a bit unsure from the wording which exact format they ended up choosing for the stations.
https://seattletransitblog.com/2022/11/04/station-codes-will-replace-link-pictograms/
https://seattletransitblog.com/2020/12/17/an-alternative-to-link-station-pictograms/
@Mike
To explain the preferred option was the option 2b stop codes, but in the news article it says they choose the 3 digital numerical code which sounds like option 1 instead?
The ST announcement doesn’t say. It may be in a staff presentation to the board whenever the board made the decision. Somebody who’s good at finding those may be able to post a link.
Honestly, I find the non-intuitive logic of these numbers to be pretty useless for most people. I know it’s used in a few cities around the world, but those usually have extensive systems where navigation can get confusing. Link on the other hand will be a simple wishbone for at least 10-15 more years.
I realize the ST has to do something rather than nothing. I’m not sure if there is a better way so I just see it as an aid for the few that need it and can figure it out.
Wondering if they’ll leave the pictograms up or get removed as part of the change to the numbering and the overall redesign of ST Link station wayfinding design and style guide. It’d be weird to keep them up as some odd orphaned remnant of the old system and nobody understands what they’re supposed to do or why they’re still up in the first place.
“New numerical station codes: … You’ll see this change included in the new signage we roll out over the next few weeks, replacing our original system of pictograms.”
“each of our stations will have a three-digit numerical code”
This sounds like preferred alternative 2b.
“ The fact that there’s a station should indicate there’s a village.”
Absolutely, Mike! That’s the ideal!
There are a number of Link stations that don’t have that though. Star Lake, Angle Lake, South Bellevue, BAR, Fife, East Tacoma, 130th, SODO, Stadium and Shoreline North are all examples of that unless you call a convenience store a village.
New physical map on link vehicles:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/s/Wka14vop0e
I’ll admit I will miss the icons. Not for navigation, just because I thought they were interesting to look at.
I also miss them. Gave the stations a bit of personality.
Good conversation starter too:
“Is that a Roosevelt Elk?”
“No, it is a Moose. Bull Moose Party. “
Thanks! I was eager to see the new diagrams!
A few observations:
The Redmond and Federal Way openings are highlighted but not the full 2 Line. That seems odd. Is this a harbinger of bad news?
The 2 Line will appear as a U on the diagram. The graphics will need to be shifted a bit. That is probably fine as north will remain to the left for both lines.
The station reference numbers are fuzzy, but it appears that the 2 Line stations will increase then decrease. This strikes me as non-intuitive as it would be easy to number both lines to increase from their end points to Lynnwood. Did ST mess up the 2 Line numbering by accident? The earlier presentations had them increasing heading towards Lynnwood the entire distance.
130th St station needs to be officially named! Where’s the ST discussion on the station name? It looks like there is already a new name for it on the photo but it’s too fuzzy for me to read. What is ST proposing?
The missing 2 line link is strange. Maybe they didn’t want to have to deal with having both lines from Lynnwood to CID yet?
The new station just says “Station coming soon”
Thanks for the language about 130th, Seb!
It’s ST admitting that they’ve not chosen a name. I guess they’ll post a survey soon.
There are several decent choices for a name: Haller Lake. Northacres. Thornton Creek. Jackson Park. Lake City West. Pinehurst. Others?
There are lots of other stations with “Lake” in the name, and “North” in the name. So even though they would make good names I think they probably should be avoided.
One other graphics note: it’s “Shoreline S” and “Shoreline N” rather than “Shoreline South” and “Shoreline North”. It’s not abbreviated anywhere else.
I sure wish that ST would have written those fully out — and dropped the cross street numbers.
“There are lots of other stations with “Lake” in the name, and “North” in the name.”
People get along fine with the lakes themselves. Every lake has a name. “Lake” is a short word, and the lake stations give our region a soothing environmental feel, and cool in hot summers like today.
What doesn’t make sense is the word “Downtown” and its variations. All cities have downtowns, and that’s where the city’s only or main station should be, and where people who don’t know the area will get off.
In Lynnwood and Federal Way’s case, it’s aspirational, to make you think those cities have downtowns when the current land use doesn’t show it. And to make the look like they’re as big as downtown Seattle and all the other cities that don’t have “Downtown” or a variation in their name. Mercer Island is the opposite; it probably doesn’t want “downtown” in the name because that would increase pressure for density, which it doesn’t want. Maybe we can suggest a subtitle: “Mercer Island: Smaller Than Northgate”.
We could do something about the name “Westlake”. There’s no lake there, and it’s not west of anything. And it is the place where “Downtown” would be most appropriate. I guess we’d need to rename the park, and the station can go with it. Westlake Avenue doesn’t matter.
Moscow’s most central station has a similar problem. It’s called Kitay-Gorod, which translates to China-Town, but nobody can remember there ever being any Chinese there. There may have been a little village there whose name evolved to be identical to China, but nobody is sure of that either. The name does have some advantages for visitors unfamiliar with the Cyrillic alphabet, as it’s one of the few stations with a hyphen in it, and it starts with K. So somebody can tell them, “To get to the Kremlin, go to Kitay-Gorod station.” And if they only know a few Russian words, they might recognize “China” and “city”.
@ Mike:
I’ve often thought that “village” would work well in circumstances like Mercer Island. It implies that there is commercial activity without being a dense urban environment like a “downtown”.
I’m surprised that the term “central” hasn’t appeared in a station name. Maybe it’s because it’s used in Central District. But for something that is as suburban as Federal Way or Lynnwood it could have worked well.
I especially dislike “city center”. Just say “center”! (Is there ever a non-city center? lol)
I see that the biggest “lake” confusion is with Angle Lake and Star Lake being close to each other (only one station in between). Not only is it “lake” but the name refers to geometry too. Of course, both have numerous other applications around the stations so it makes it more reasonable to use.
Another geographic name not yet used is “valley”.
At 130th, there really isn’t a common area name in use at the station site. There isn’t an important destination either. So almost anything could work. The area could even invent a new name to rebrand its identity.
Thanks for the update
Also I guess this answers the question that they are moving forward with station stop codes (colored number for the lines)
Also second interesting thing is that they’ve opted to number westlake with the middle 50 instead of cid — probably because with the cid north and south alternative the line 1 won’t go to cid station anymore.
They also opted to change how the numbers increase/decrease from previously suggested. Originally it was going to increase with the line 1 heading north but now it’s reversed (lynnwood was 63 now it’s 40). The line 2 numbers are the same.
I guess with the new scheme it’s generally southbound trains increasing in number?
Though I don’t understand how the numbers will connect up when the east link connects.
Cid is 53 then
Judkins park 51?
Mercer island 49?
South Bellevue is 47
I guess that kind of works with it switching to decreasing numbers
@ WL:
I think they gave ST mistakenly printed the wrong codes to the 2 Line WL. It appears that ST reversed the 1 Line to increase heading south rather than heading north and made Westlake 50 — but didn’t change the prior 2 Line station numbering to match so it sill increases towards Lynnwood and uses CID as 50.
* I think ST mistakenly printed the wrong codes to the 2 Line WL.
I’m sorta meh on the concern of repeating terms in station name like
– Geographic indicators (Hill, Lake, Valley, etc)
– Compass Directions (N, S, E, W)
– City Center
– Downtown
Etc etc etc
They’re fine to use and don’t create much in terms of confusion from my eyes. Most people are looking for an important neighborhood, city, landmark, etc first when riding. What I listed above is generally secondary information someone may need to know for whatever reason.
Like the most confusion we have had was University Street but that’s being changed next month.
As for 130th, Pinehurst or Haller Lake works. Although Pinehurst – Haller Lake would also work fine.
Heading south makes more sense because that’s where two lines diverge. Whenever routes branch off like East Link there will be a jump; that’s an inevitable part of the numbering system. What I’m most concerned about is ST not leaving room for unknown infill stations or extension stations.
“I’ve often thought that “village” would work well in circumstances like Mercer Island. It implies that there is commercial activity without being a dense urban environment like a “downtown”.”
The fact that there’s a station should indicate there’s a village.
The obvious choice for 130th would be … wait for it … 130th. In general our names are way too long. The lettering has to be tiny to fit all the various ways of basically saying something as simple as “185th”. I get why we have “Mountlake Terrace” and “Northgate”, but in between the stations should be numeric (130th, 148th, 185th) which makes it really easy to understand. If you are going away from the center of the city the numbers get bigger. For that matter U-District should have been “45th” and Roosevelt should have been “65th”.
> The obvious choice for 130th would be … wait for it … 130th. In general our names are way too long
130th is too generic.
If they had done the same on east link it would have been 120th Ave and 130th Ave stations. Bel-red stations official name used to be was “bel-red/130th”
Plus say 130th st as in say Everett is near Mariner park and ride.
These Link stations have direct exits on a numbered street or street corner in Seattle alone:
– Beacon Hill (16)
– Mt Baker (27)
– Judkins Park (23)
– Alaska Junction (42)
– Avalon (35)
– U-District (43)
– Roosevelt (66)
– Pioneer Square (3)
– International District/ Chinatown (5)
– Symphony (3)
– Westlake (4)
– Northgate (1/ 103)
– 130th (5/ 130)
The list is so long it would have been easier to list the 7 stations that don’t exit onto a numbered street. And pretty much all of those are just a block from a numbered street.
We have many numbered steeets that use many different numbering systems. And that’s just in Seattle! It would be very, very confusing for any primary station name to just be a numbered street.
How far is 148th from 154th?
The numbers increase in north King County, then decrease in Snohomish County, and there’s a jump in between. How far is 185th from 236th? And SW is north of NE.
It would be very, very confusing for any primary station name to just be a numbered street.
Right. Could you imagine if the New York City Subway System used numbers? It would be chaos! Except, of course, they do. It is very common to just name stations after the cross street. In New York there are dozens. In Chicago there are 13 that start with numbers, and 9 of those only have numbers. Our system is tiny in comparison, with only a handful of stations.
Not every station can or should be named after numbered streets. But a lot more of them should, as it makes it much easier to understand.
Street is default. Avenues are not (and should have “Avenue” or “Ave” next to them). Add the cardinal direction when it is appropriate (they would typically be abbreviated on maps). As it turns out, almost all the stations would have cardinal directions, as we have only a handful of stations in the middle of the city (there is no “9th Avenue” station). To the north it is obvious and much better than what they will go with. It would be like this (north to south):
Lynnwood
Mountlake Terrace
North 185th
North 148th
North 130th
Northgate (although “North 100th” would work too)
North 65th
North 45th
Everything else would be the same. Northgate could be named “North Seattle College”, but the term Northgate is fine (although “North 100th” makes it really straightforward). If we had more stations then we could use more addresses and cross streets. For example Capitol Hill Station could be called “Broadway & John”. But since we scrimped on stations, there is no point.
East Link doesn’t have the same sort of numeric advantages of the north end of the line. But I could see Judkins Park being called “23rd Avenue”. One advantage of this is that most would guess you are still in the city (and you are). If you are heading east it is your last chance to avoid going over the lake. The name “East Main” is just weird. It seems as if they go out of their way to avoid street names and then pick one that seems fairly confusing. Either just give up (“Surrey Downs”) or have an address that makes sense (112th SE & Main). “Bellevue Downtown” should just be called “Bellevue”. Same goes for every other similar station. Other than that the names are fine.
To the south there are a few changes I would consider, but again, it isn’t like those in the north. “Stadium” sounds pretty generic. I would probably go with “Martinez Drive”. “SoDo” is fine, and shorter than “South Lander”. “Mount Baker” is on the edge of the neighborhood but on Mount Baker Boulevard so it is fine (“Rainier & MLK” would have worked). They named Othello and Graham after the cross streets (which is good). “Rainier Beach” could have been named “Henderson” (and was originally). I would call “Tukwila International Boulevard” just “Tukwila” (there is only one station in Tukwila). “SeaTac” is good. South of there you finally get into the numbers again (or at least you should). I would name the stations south of SeaTac:
South 200th
South 236th (“Highline College” would also work)
South 272nd
South 320th
South 320th could be called “Federal Way”, but since they want to extend it, that becomes problematic. Next thing you know you have “South Federal Way” and other needlessly long names.
I mean north of lynnwood if you continued the pattern it’d be
188th St Sw (alderwood mall)
164th st sw (ash way)
128th st sw or 130th (mariner)
100th st sw
> Could you imagine if the New York City Subway System used numbers
I mean it’s more useful there with the frequent stop spacing for walking. I’m not quite sure what large advantage one gets with naming with streets numbers for sound transit.
Plus the street numbering is confusing for people sometimes. I mean “ 125th Street” there’s four stations called that hardly simple to use where you have to qualify it with the line number
Imagine saying 130th st station and having to say “the Eastside one” not Seattle so one doesn’t head to pinehurst.
I guess if the system stayed within lynnwood to federal way it might make a bit more sense
So future conversation will go something like … Me: I want to go to Northgate Station. You: Do you mean Station 57? Me: What’s Station 57? You: It’s 100th. Me: What’s 100th? You: It’s Northgate Station. You: Which train are you trying to catch? Me: The light rail train to Seattle. You: No, which color Line? Me: I thought the Line were numbers. You: The lines are colors and numbers. Which number station do you want to go to in Seattle? Me: Westlake. You: Westlake isn’t a number …
This conversation about me simply trying to get to Northgate Station could conceivably go on for hours.
How far is 148th from 154th?
I’m guessing six blocks.
The numbers increase in north King County, then decrease in Snohomish County, and there’s a jump in between.
I know, it makes delivering pizzas hard.
How far is 185th from 236th?
Oh, I know this one. King County numbers end at 205, while Snohomish County numbers end at 244, so the answer is 28 (I used to deliver pizzas up there).
Now a quiz for you. How many blocks is it from Lynnwood to Mountlake Terrace?
Anyway, Link is centered around Seattle, just like the numbering system in King County. Obviously it makes sense to use the numbers in King County. In other counties there aren’t as many advantages. Not only can it be confusing, but there are only a handful of stations in Snohomish County. You gain little by using numbers north of the border. In contrast in King County you have the opportunity for a very intuitive, very easy to read set of stops north of the ship canal. But instead they pick cutesy names, or names that sound like they were designed by a committee of first-year marketing students.
I’m not quite sure what large advantage one gets with naming with streets numbers for sound transit.
I thought that was pretty obvious with my example. Here is a fictitious one. Imagine a subway line with a dozen stations (all named after food). Now find a particular station, like “French Onion Soup”. The stations are named:
Fried Rice with Vegetables
French Fries and Onion Rings
Meat and Cheese Burrito
Apple Sauce
Pizza South/148th Street
Pizza North/185th Street
Almond Chicken
Spaghetti with Meat Sauce
Phad Thai with Vegetables
Tortellini in White Wine Sauce
French Onion Soup
Cheese Burger
Your eye moves slowly through each one. Eventually you start to skim, but you want to make sure you don’t miss it somehow. Now imagine this:
Fried Rice
Burrito
Apple Sauce
Tortellini
N. 45th
N. 65th
N. 100th
N. 130th
N. 148th
N. 185th
French Onion Soup
Cheese Burger
You start reading and quickly go through the first four because they are all much simpler. Then you hit the numbers and go even faster. You skip right through those. Then you got it. Now imagine you are looking for 148th. Same idea, in reverse. You look only at the numbers. Making things even better, the numbers are in order.
Numbered lists in this way are just a lot easier to understand, even if they make up a subset of the entire list. If you have ever been on a subway line in New York and glanced at the map you get this. On some maps the streets are all random words, and unless you know the city you have no idea what they mean. On others you see a list of numbers (in order) and there is an obvious pattern there. It is easier to understand and adds to a sense of calm (especially if you are nervous about missing your stop).
But it isn’t just the fact that there are numbers. They actually mean something. This is not like the numbers ST is giving stations, which are purely arbitrary and will likely be ignored by the vast majority of riders. These are actual street names. If you get off at 45th Street Station you will be on 45th (or close to it). These numbers are every bit as meaningful as terms like “Shoreline South” — if not more so. There is an obvious advantage to using numbered street names in that they can:
1) Represent a geographic order.
2) Use few letters.
3) Are easy to read.
Now consider that first one (geographic order). Say we just numbered all the stations north of the ship canal and I board in a hurry at Roosevelt, but it is named “65th”. The train is crowded, and I just want to make sure I’m heading the right direction (towards downtown). I overhear “100th” and think “Oh shit, I am going the wrong way!” or “45th” and my mind is at ease. In contrast, if I get on at Roosevelt and they say “Northgate” or “U-District” I have no idea where I’m headed (unless I know the city). Or say I’m headed north this time, from Capitol Hill to 130th. Again, I’m unfamiliar with the city. I see (or hear) the numbers getting bigger. This makes sense, as I am heading away from town. It is pretty clear when I’m getting close (100th) or have missed my stop (148th).
Again, I wouldn’t name all of the stations after the cross streets. So enough with the “what about this one, smart guy” bullshit. But there are advantages when it works. What station do you use if you want to get to 46th and Othello? Othello. But it goes beyond that. We had a golden opportunity with the station names north of the ship canal to establish a very nice numeric pattern, but we blew it. The names are way too long, which means they are harder to understand. There is little to no pattern anywhere.
It isn’t the end of the world, but it is symbolic of a larger problem. Link loves monuments. The names represent that. “North 45th” or “North 148th” sound small. Even the term “station” is meant to convey bigness. Behold — we have built something grand! It also implies that it serves the entire area. “Shoreline South” is for everyone in South Shoreline. But the city name means more than that. It is a civic promise kept. You are welcome, Shoreline! On top of that there is an attempt at marketing: “This is downtown!”. Not the main downtown. Not even a large suburban downtown. But the biggest downtown this little suburb has to offer. Maybe. For now. Eventually Alderwood could add office buildings that make it more of a downtown than “Downtown Lynnwood” but right now we are betting that this is the downtown, such as it is.
Again, it isn’t the worst thing in the world and it doesn’t come close to being the worst thing in Link, but the names are way too long and way too sloppy.
> Your eye moves slowly through each one. Eventually you start to skim, but you want to make sure you don’t miss it somehow. Now imagine this:
Aren’t we implementing the same benefit with the station stop codes?
@ Sam:
Haha! That pretty much summarizes the problem for applying numbers to everything!
We now have numbers for lines, station positions and exits! And then the street grid has numbers too that some want to use as the only station names!
Maybe the pictograms should be replaced with QR codes!
@ Ross: The development of subway systems in Chicago and New York occurred at the height of growth when private companies quickly chose station names (without public input) to identify stations in mostly flat terrain with little to no established historic neighborhood identity. Between 1990 and 2010, the population of the City of Chicago doubled and 1.1 million more residents were recorded. New York was similar by growing by 2.2 million between 1900 and 1920 (The city’s borough merger geography happened in 1898) to 5.6 million residents or about 2/3 more residents. They were crazy booming times !
Add to that the flatness. A naive person glancing at a 2D map would think Harborview is an easy walk from Third Avenue but it’s not. In those cities, terrain is a minor factor to picking a station.
Plus, Chicago only has one part of town with numbered major streets. Notably, Chicago usually adds the grid position coordinates at every station as secondary signage. That helps with duplicate station names. Maybe ST should do what Chicago did with coordinates as secondary sign info — except we have several grids going on and many stations with multiple entrances.
Both Miami and Salt Lake City use street numbering in both directions more widely than even here and each county has just one grid. Even there, Miami has no numbered street station names and Salt Lake City seems to use them only as a last resort (always stating direction). Salt Lake City does include coordinate references at all stations like Chicago does.
@ Ross:
I noticed that ST calls the station “NE 130th Street” and not “North 130th Street” or “130th Street”.
https://www.soundtransit.org/system-expansion/ne-130th-st-infill-station
ST doesn’t include “NE” or “Street” for 148th or 185th in the station names.
“How far is 148th from 154th?”
“I’m guessing six blocks.”
Nope, 21 miles. Shoreline North vs Tukwila Intl Blvd.
“Could you imagine if the New York City Subway System used numbers? It would be chaos! Except, of course, thCould you imagine if the New York City Subway System used numbers? It would be chaos! Except, of course, they do. It is very common to just name stations after the cross street.”
In Mahhattan the neighborhoods are widely identified by their cross streets. “Miracle on 34th Street”. “42nd Street”. “14th Street”. That’s what’s missing here.
“Northgate (although “North 100th” would work too)”
That doesn’t say anything about whether there’s a mall or college there or whether it’s a major stop. If people have heard of Northgate Mall, they can surmise it’s at Northgate station. People have heard of the U-District and Capitol Hill. “45th” or “43rd” or “148th” is rather meaningless.
The Vancouver Skytrain’s expo line is especially bad in this way. From downtown Vancouver the Expo Line has 3 named stations, then “29th Avenue”, then 5 named stations, then “22nd Street”, then the rest all named. Are 29th Avenue and 22nd Street so famous that everyone would recognize the neighborhood by the name and know what’s there? Are 22nd and 29th seven blocks apart? Does Vancouver have a tradition of mostly numbered stations or neighborhoods? No, no, no.
Or let’s look at MUNI and BART. On Mission Street there’s a tradition of using numbers, so BART’s “16th Street Mission”, “24th Street Mission”, and someday “30th Street Mission” makes sense. On MUNI’s T Line, the only numbered streets are 20th and 23rd. When the T used to be part of Caltrain I remember the only stations in southern San Francisco were I think 23rd Street and Paul Ave.
“How many blocks is it from Lynnwood to Mountlake Terrace?”
I’ve never considered walking it so that has never occurred to me. I happen to know that Lynnwood is at 196th and Mountlake Terrace at 236th, so I can guess a couple miles. If I didn’t, Lynnwood is the second-largest city in Snohomish County, and I’d probably be going to Lynnwood, so that’s that. If I recognized Mountlake Terrace I’d know it’s a smaller city in Snohomish County, so it must be north of the county border, and the map says it’s between Seattle and Lynnwood, not north of Lynnwood. So I go to Mountlake Terrace station, and that’s that.
> Again, I wouldn’t name all of the stations after the cross streets. So enough with the “what about this one, smart guy” bullshit.
I am not naming a “hypothetical” example. That was the literal state of the stations less than a year ago.
You can view it in the station code document, the infill seattle station was named “NE 130th” and then the one in Bellevue was named “Bel-Red/130th”
https://www.theurbanist.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Screenshot-2022-11-05-at-00.09.48.png
The bel-red station was shortened from “Bel-Red/130th” to just “Bel-red” last october 26, 2023, otherwise that would have been the official name. https://www.soundtransit.org/st_sharepoint/download/sites/PRDA/FinalRecords/2023/Motion%20M2023-86.pdf
“But instead they pick cutesy names, or names that sound like they were designed by a committee of first-year marketing students.”
“Capitol Hill”, “U-District”, and “Roosevelt” are the names of the neighborhoods and business districts. There’s nothing cutesy about that.
“Shoreline South/148th” and “Shoreline North/185th” were influenced by the city of Shoreline, which vainly wanted its name on both stations. Why not call 185th “Shoreline”.
148th is only 148th because ST sited the station three blocks north of 145th. So Shoreline lucked out it’s three blocks into the interior of Shoreline instead of on the border? Meanwhile ordinary people have heard of 145th but not 148th. Is 148th a major arterial with businesses along it? No? Then call it 145th even if it’s three blocks north. Link stations are two blocks long anyway. And the station serves not only Shoreline but Seattle and the 522 corridor. Yet Shoreline wants to hog all of its identity.
“Here is a fictitious one. Imagine a subway line with a dozen stations (all named after food)”
That would happen only in a city where the neighborhoods were primarily identified with a particular food, and it’s widely known that Applesauce is the largest regional center.
@ Mike:
I was expecting salmon to be prominent in station names! lol
Of course, Sound Transit would use only bland food names to match the uniformly bland square glass panes in most stations. Chicken Broth Station! Vanilla Shake Station! Tater Tot Station! Anything spicy would probably offend those who are digestion challenged.
Although…. It would be a clever fundraising idea to temporarily rename every station for food truck themed station stops once a year. It’d be a decentralized “Bite of Seattle” and each station could be given a unique cuisine theme temporary name. Just no food out on the trains!
And the best station in Bellevue:
Chick-Fil-A Station.
Well my suspicions are correct. ST did in fact not update the codes for the 2 Line when they printed the new Link diagrams. They screwed up!
https://www.theurbanist.org/2024/07/06/sound-transit-adds-lynnwood-link-to-system-diagrams/
The Urbanist article has a diagram of what the corrected 2 Line station codes will be.
You gotta love the way that ST PR handles mistakes. They use the word “rectified” rather than “corrected”.
@Al
I thought lazarus said sound transit doesn’t make mistakes and that we cannot figure out stuff /jk jk.
Anyways on a more important note
“””
Sound Transit hasn’t said when sequential numbering will be rectified, but the agency did provide a Link progression diagram with current 2 Line stations being renumbered, with South Bellevue having a base number of 56. This would presumably mean giving base numbers of 55 and 54 to Mercer Island and Judkins Park, respectively, thereby fitting neatly into the 1 Line numbering scheme.
“””
This seems rather poor to use south Bellevue station somehow as the pivot point. This also means they’ll be two duplicate station stop codes now.
2-55 would mean both Mercer island and east main.
2-54 would mean both Judkins park and downtown Bellevue
@ WL:
I would think that ST will update codes on the 2 Line trains when the two Redmond Stations open. The progress report says 12-31 of 2024 but the web page says Spring 2025. So all the trains will be getting new maps in only a few more months.
I guess ST could put sticky patches on with corrected numbers if they wanted!
Has anyone on here seen the D-Line (or old route 15/18) be forced to detour due to the Ballard bridge closing? As a Ballard resident, I’ve often thought of mitigation plans if the bridge were to suddenly close. The only viable option is going across the Fremont Bridge – which would be a tremendous nightmare. But I’m assuming the bridge closure will take place post midnight, so the impact would be minimal….hopefully.
I don’t recall any previous time the Ballard Bridge closed, or any contingency plan. The D would most likely follow the 40.
The only viable option is going across the Fremont Bridge – which would be a tremendous nightmare. But I’m assuming the bridge closure will take place post midnight, so the impact would be minimal….hopefully.
Agreed. I assume that it will basically just detour using the Fremont Bridge (but with no stops). It is a big delay, but not horrible if it happens after midnight. If the bridge went down completely it would be a much bigger mess. It would make the West Seattle Bridge failure look like a picnic. With West Seattle they had good alternatives. They had the ferry and they were able to make the lower bridge transit-and-freight only. I doubt they would do that with the Fremont Bridge. Meanwhile, there are no bus lanes on Nickerson. There are no bus lanes on 36th or Leary (yet). There would be a lot of congestion and the buses would be in the thick of it with no decent alternative (other than biking).
West Seattle would like to say it has only the 1st Ave S and South Park bridges, which are a long way from northern West Seattle. Ballard has the Fremont, Aurora, I-5, and University bridges.
This is one of the reasons they’re arguing for West Seattle Link, to have an alternative when the West Seattle Bridge is closed.
This is one of the reasons they’re arguing for West Seattle Link, to have an alternative when the West Seattle Bridge is closed.
The lower bridge is right next to the upper one. The only people I heard complaining were those that drive. Build West Seattle Link and people will still complain if the upper bridge goes down. I did like the jokes though (“Welcome to East Vashon” was my favorite).
There have been times when the Ballard Bridge has been stuck open and the D used Leary to cross at Fremont, and then Nickerson to get back to 15th. For the upcoming maintenance, the closures are overnight Monday – Thursday, from 10PM – 5AM each night. During those periods, the D will use temporary stops north and south of the bridge to accommodate those turns. Details here:
https://www.seattle.gov/transportation/projects-and-programs/programs/maintenance-and-paving/current-paving-projects/15th-ave-w/nw-and-ballard-bridge-paving-project
Would be nice to see Union Station become an actual public space, rather than a place you are technically allowed to go inside. By which I mostly mean retail.
It’d also be nice to see it become a station again. Maybe a connection could be added to the northbound Link platform?
Do you mean the southbound Link platform rather than the northbound platform?
It would also be a good way to add up and down escalators and required adjacent elevator in a weather protected environment. That’s regardless of what happens with the second downtown Link tunnel.
Of course, the station figures prominently in the Fourth Avenue shallow option for that second Link Downtown tunnel. If that option is chosen (noting it’s currently not the official preferred option) the building would be closed for several years of construction. Until the new EIS is published and final plans are prepared, the uncertainty will dampen long-term reuse ideas.
Activating the space for retail use may not pencil out. Food services like the Armory at Seattle Center may be a more profitable approach.
In any case, the way that the building’s security works would likely affect what happens to it. It would seemingly require that a private corporation would need to control the building to provide a higher degree of safety for those in inside the building.
Not quite exactly what you are asking about but there was a study about adding retail to sound transit property/stations ranging from vending machines to food stalls to full on retail stores
https://www.theurbanist.org/2023/02/13/sound-transit-now-has-a-strategy-for-bringing-retail-into-stations/
New affordable housing for young adults on the Eastside: https://www.425business.com/news/friends-of-youth-affordable-housing-kirkland/article_0a5e8da4-3931-11ef-83ed-6bbf3721fe1c.html
I was looking at the BAR Station survey a little closer.
I noticed from the map that they are studying two sites.
https://boeingaccessroadstation.infocommunity.org/
I also noticed that they highlight only that Sounder passes by, and they don’t show the frequent buses nearby like Routes 101 and 150 as well as a possible RapidRide A connection.
It’s very early in the process.
Unless this station ties in with Metro bus routes, I don’t see its utility being much. The Sounder connection would not have many transfers or initial boardings assuming the current Sounder timetable.
So to me it really begs a more fundamental question: should a connected regional transit center be built there or not?
If the answer is no, the station is a huge waste of money.
If the answer is yes, how would buses access it? And should Cascades trains stop there, and the parking repurposed to allow overnight?
My concern is that the station gets built but doesn’t easily connect to any other transit — without a forced massive bus rerouting. I raise this because there doesn’t seem to be any organized effort to propose the necessary access ramps and bus routing ideas to make this happen.
Of course, the station may end up on “permanent deferral” and it reverts to wish list status due to a lack of remaining ST3 funding.
They’re not highlighting Sounder; they’re just showing whether other fixed-route transit is. It’s like city street maps that often show train stations and maybe lines but not bus routes.
BAR won’t have a transfer to Sounder because the BAR Sounder station wasn’t included in ST3. It could theoretically be built in the far future, so that may affect your location choice.
Since we’ve been so hot on getting Link on 99 where potential housing and retail could be, the 112th option is a welcome surprise. Does the area have potential for something walkable there, or is it all large industrial buildings that won’t go away?
As for Metro routes, I can’t think of another case where ST has put them on a station alternative proposal. It can’t put the 150 there because it’s on I-5, and the idea of routing it there is just a long-term concept that may not happen. The same goes for the A and 101.
We know Tukwila wants the A there because that’s one of the reasons Tukwila wanted the station. The 124 is the other local route. But rerouting the A, 150, and 101 there are just long-term concepts outside ST’s control. We don’t even know if Metro has decided or if it’s just throwing out the concept for consideration. And Metro did not suggest the 101 might go there; that’s just some STB commentators suggesting it.
So you could make a map with whatever routes you think should go there.
@Al
Fyi I found a community questions and answers by sound transit to Tukwila at the Allentown community center for the BAR station. The construction difficulty of building at BAR/EMW sites seems much harder than I thought. Also a bit surprised the sound transit guy didn’t know the station was sold to the public as connection to Sounder.
Regarding bus connections it also seems a bit lacking, they still don’t know yet. Or at least surprised they didn’t say at least might connect to say route 124
Included snippets of what I found interesting but feel free to read the full thing:
Q: Reiterated that with any of the options for the BAR station (whether it is on E Marginal Way or BAR), there will be a ground-level parking lot and a raised platform for train access.
A: One option is for the station to be on the south side of the BAR, and there will be boarding platforms on both sides of the guideway.
Q: How much influence does Tukwila have on the planning and design of the station?
A: For both the BAR and Graham light rail extensions, we consider both Tukwila and Seattle as partners.
Q: Are other sites in the City being considered? Like Gateway Drive and Interurban? Seems to be closer
to work centers.
A: No – we are only looking in this area (BAR/EMW vicinity) based on the language in the ST3 ballot measure. The only way another site would be considered if none of these are options are feasible.
Q: When ST 1 came out, one way it was sold to the community was that it is the only place along the route to connect with Sounder commuter rail. Why is this?
A: I don’t know all the reasons why this site was sold as that, but I can look into it more. My assumption is it has to do with cost and ridership implications, but I don’t know.
Q: Will there also be a bus service to the station? What kind? King County Metro?
A: We have been and will continue to coordinate with KC Metro as they develop their “LongRange Connect” planning effort. Through this effort, we will talk about the best way to coordinate bus/train transfers.
https://www.tukwilawa.gov/wp-content/uploads/PW-Allentown-Meeting-Minutes-05-28-24.pdf
“Also a bit surprised the sound transit guy didn’t know the station was sold to the public as connection to Sounder.”
It wasn’t. That was just a possibility if ST chose to build the Sounder station, which it didn’t. Some people may have assumed it was, but people assume a lot of things the government didn’t tell them. The rep may have assumed from the question that ST had promised it.
“We have been and will continue to coordinate with KC Metro as they develop their “LongRange Connect” planning effort.”
That’s the same as all Link stations. The only bus routes that are certain are those that Link was predicated to replace: the 512, 545, and 550. Or if there are plans for a RapidRide line there. Everything else is uncertain until a year before opening, when Metro and ST will make concrete proposals and get public feedback and refine them. We still don’t know whether the 577, 578, and 594 will remain after Federal Way Link and Tacoma Dome Link. They weren’t in the planning scenarios in January 2016, but those were just possibilities and nothing was ever decided about them.
> It wasn’t. That was just a possibility if ST chose to build the Sounder station, which it didn’t. Some people may have assumed it was, but people assume a lot of things the government didn’t tell them. The rep may have assumed from the question that ST had promised it.
That’s kind of news to me as well then. Or at least it’s been heavily implied everywhere that it’d be a connection to sounder.
checking the urbanist article it says “Sound Transit included the station at S Boeing Access Road in its first transit expansion plan, Sound Move in 1996, pairing the idea with a corresponding Sounder infill station at the site to be built as an interchange station.”
I guess I didn’t quite realize Sound Transit is not moving forward with the sounder connection idea anymore even post ST3
The BAR Sounder station was a candidate project in 2014. ST didn’t carry it forward in 2016. That’s eight years ago, so plenty of time for people to find out what’s in ST3 if they care. I don’t know which news sources besides The Urbanist have implied BAR would be a Sounder transfer — at least since 2016 — but wherever it was didn’t double-check their sources.
That rep in the Q&A inadvertently made it worse. Not all staff were there then or know the history, and it’s a detail that hasn’t been significant for years so the outreach team may not have expected it or had a talking point for it.
> The BAR Sounder station was a candidate project in 2014. ST didn’t carry it forward in 2016
I mean yes I understand that but I didn’t realize Sound transit was dropping the concept completely even for the future.
Like say with the south kirkland link extension it is kinda obvious sound transit is kinda planning for it to be further extended north to totem lake/woodinville.
In any case if they don’t necessarily need to build a connection to Sounder then I think building at say S 144th would make more sense to reach more of tukwila. I don’t think the bus / freeway connections really save that much time in that location. Or the i-405 / i-5 idea for closer interchange to southcenter
“I didn’t realize Sound transit was dropping the concept completely even for the future. ”
It didn’t say it can never happen. It’s just not in ST3.
I mean if it moves forward with the east marginal way site that practically can’t connect with a sounder station.
BAR Sounder Station is more of shelved than dead. Same with platform lengthing. It’s a thing that could come back based on interest and ridership, but not a priority for Sounder service atm.
Really the only projects set to happen with Sounder atm is
– More Sounder trips
– Lakewood to Dupont extension
– Double tracking the Lakewood to Tacoma Dome section (tho this is also for Cascades now that the Point Defiance Section is not used anymore)
– Additional Parking for Kent, Auburn, Puyallup, etc stations
“I mean if it moves forward with the east marginal way site that practically can’t connect with a sounder station.”
That’s why I alerted to that in my first comment. If you tell ST to prefer the western alternative where a walkable station area is theoretically possible, it won’t be next to Sounder, so that would hinder any future Link+Sounder transfer.
A Lakewood to DuPont extension seems like a great way to get Sounder’ operating cost per rider even higher.
I visited Dupont a few months ago. With apologies to Dupont, talk about a whole lotta nothin.
JBLM can easily set up a short shuttle to the existing Lakewood Station, if they think it will be used.
“I visited Dupont a few months ago. With apologies to Dupont, talk about a whole lotta nothin.”
True enough, but from what I’ve seen, DuPont has more within walking distance of its transit center than either Lakewood Station or South Tacoma.
Could someone markup a Google map showing where all the current BAR-area transit lines are, where BAR infill stations could go, and potential areas of TOD? It would make it easier to understand which areas of that neighborhood some of you are talking about.
Sadly, Sam, ST should have done this for this open house notice.
ST only likes to show bus connections at open houses once they’ve chosen the site plan layouts that they want to push, and which buses they want to stop at the station.
They can’t risk having the public giving input on something they’ve already decided! Oh the horrors of open-ended input!
I know I’m being cynical here — but it’s true!
* They can’t risk having the public giving input on something they’ve NOT already decided!
ST doesn’t control Metro. How many times do I have to say this? ST can’t promise what the bus routes will be. Metro has its long-range concepts I linked to above, but it hasn’t committed to them.
We can tie these all together and do what ST and Metro can’t, and we can argue for restructures the agencies aren’t ready to commit to. That’s part of the value STB adds. Sam, do you need ink for your mapmaking pen?
I thought it would be interesting to see the various STB commenter ideas for a potential BAR station on a map. This person thinks it should be here. Another person thinks it should be there. Etc. And show where current train line and bus routes are.
It would be. I didn’t realize a station on East Marginal Way was a possibility, and I’m intrigued by it. I don’t know the area well enough to offer any other location suggestions, and I certainly don’t understand these highway-ramp alternatives because I don’t drive. We’d also want to know Tukwila’s long-term goal for the area: would it allow it to have housing? So you may see an article eventually, but everyone seems to be busy and has a backlog of articles.
Metro bus restructures have to be approved by the county council. As a result Metro works closely with the local city councils for any restructure. Other major factors for Metro are increasing costs, labor shortages, and declining revenue. There is only so much service Metro can afford, although there is no county subarea equity.
But obviously north and east KC are the big dogs, although each has significantly different needs when it comes to Metro post pandemic. The Eastside is struggling with East Link whose vision in 2008 was to ferry large numbers of commuters to downtown Seattle. Without that need today reinventing East Link is proving difficult. Today Redmond with an estimated 3000 boardings is apparently the new purpose of East Link, or future development along East Link that looks more questionable today if office oriented.
The ST Board is also heavily dominated by powerful KC Council members. So ST works closely with local councils, and Metro, whether is light rail station location or bus routes.
A good example is the Eastside transit restructure for when East Link opens across the lake. Metro has already cut many peak runs, and ST deferred to local interests on the route of the 554, which the local interests were right about and ST couldn’t see.
The problem, at least on the Eastside, is getting the many different councils to pay attention to transit, and to understand it, is like herding cats. This includes Balducci. So Metro and ST spend years coming up with transit restructures only to have Eastside councils pay attention in the third phase and want major changes, which they usually get in the end. After all, Metro and King Co. don’t want Eastside cities demanding some kind of Metro subarea equity, or asking for a breakdown.
In the end the new restructure opens and some works and some doesn’t and changes are made. It is hard to predict the future, and the benefit of buses is routes can be changed. Metro simply can’t afford to run empty buses in an area as large as East King Co. (unless there is Metro subarea equity).
I think the biggest issue once East Link fully opens but is much more Eastside oriented is how east side riders adapt to transfers and feeder buses. As long as there is space at East Link park and rides I think eastsiders, at least those still riding transit, will be ok with the changes because they can drive directly to the park and ride like they did in the past and do today. Mostly that will be to avoid parking costs in downtown Seattle and Bellevue although East Link really doesn’t go to downtown Bellevue although the 554 will.
Changing the land use on the Eastside, or the unfortunate route of East Link through Bellevue will take decades, if ever. So we really don’t know the new purpose of East Link when it fully opens, but I am sure Metro and ST can adjust their bus routes to focus on where the riders are.
Don’t be surprised if there isn’t a demand for a peak one seat bus from Issaquah to downtown Seattle like the 554 serves downtown Bellevue with one seat but with few stops downtown unless traffic congestion on I-90 gets bad. If the riders are there Metro can afford a peak run or two from Issaquah. Or ST if Issaquah sells it as a precursor to Issaquah Link.
Federal Way and S. King Co. have different issues for transit restructures. Lack of money and riders are two, plus a very large undense area with fewer needing to take transit to Seattle. Plus although Link across the Lake between Seattle and Bellevue will be fast with few stops over long distances Link from FW to downtown Seattle or the UW will be slooooow. So a bus restructure that is slower for many won’t be popular or east.
A few regular posters are good at overlay maps. I’m not one.
The KC Metro map is a good reference:
https://kingcounty.gov/en/-/media/king-county/depts/metro/maps/system/03302024/metro-system-map-sw
The map doesn’t show that there are several ST express routes running by the area without stopping on I-5 — with many of them potentially cancelled in 2026 when Federal Way Link opens.
It also does not show the last Route 101 or 150 stops, which are at MLK and S 128th St and at the Interurban Ave / I-5 interchange, respectively .
Then there are the other related ideas that already have legs:
1. Route 124. I think this route will serve the station no matter what. Tukwila has floated the idea of moving the route 124 segment between this proposed station and the current TIBS end point to RapidRide A. The EMW station site would be less of a diversion.
2. Tukwila s Allentown neighborhood has no nearby transit service. It’s low income but not very populous. Residents have a bit of a walk to any stop. To remedy this, proposals to move the station closer to Allentown are pitched — yet ST says that they can’t push the platform further than S 112th St because it would violate the “intent of ST3”. (Never mind that the Board voted to not have a transfer station at Fourth and Jackson and to not have a Midtown Station thus not following this amorphous “ST3 intent”.) The new EMW site is closer to Allentown but still pretty far.
3. The original station concept included parking (Oran thankfully posted it on Flickr):
https://www.flickr.com/photos/viriyincy/4418834682
It’s not clear if the station will have parking in the future.
And the original site could get Sounder platforms at a later date. But without Sounder, why build it? Even with Sounder, how useful is it? There is nowhere to walk to without going at least 1/3 of a mile crossing busy high speed arterials! The parking is limited! Outside of Route 124 it’s not able to serve buses without significant route restructuring perhaps needing expensive access improvements ! Sounder is great in one direction but for only a few hours so I doubt many would transfer there, if SeaTac is the destination, there are better (higher all day frequency) ways to get to it from all of the other Sounder stations.
4. The transit in the area also has a general connectivity problem with lots of routes but none that meet for transfers closer than TIBS, SODO / King St and South Renton. There are some transfers possible at Southcenter and Tukwila Sounder Station but neither connect to Stride.
These kinds of big picture concerns overshadow where to put the station platforms. Even if we all sketched up ideas, it would be pretty academic.
What I think is needed at this point is for a group to say “stop planning BAR Station until more cogent transit access and connectivity concepts are discussed first”.
If ST is unwilling to do that, I think we should get behind moving the station to EMW, extending RapidRide A to the station, and moving the Route 124 alignment to run through Allentown and end at either Southcenter or South Renton. Either that or we should suggest that ST cancel the whole BAR thing and build better transit connectivity with Stride in the Southcenter Area instead. We can ponder about other elements later; let’s just get ST to move the station to EMW or table it!
“without Sounder, why build it? Even with Sounder, how useful is it? There is nowhere to walk to without going at least 1/3 of a mile crossing busy high speed arterials!”
The reason it’s being built is Tukwila wanted it, and ST made a political decision. Tukwila cited a RapidRide A extension to serve an emerging village at 124th, and access to the Museum of Flight (on the 124) and Aviation High School (I assume on the 124).
I’m not sure the 124 needs to continue to Tukwila if the A is extended. It would create a 3-seat ride from 124-land to Southcenter, if that matters.
We could pressure Tukwila to upzone the station area. I’d like somebody with more knowledge of the area to evaluate whether that would be a good village and whether we should push for it. But since Tukwila got the station, it should at least do something along those lines, or explain why it would be inappropriate for the area.
Two infill stations have been floated going all the way back to the line’s planning: TIB and 133rd. This is TIB. 133rd is where the Metro bus barn is.
Nobody has suggested 144th until now so I don’t know if a station there is feasible. 144th & 99 is where Tukwila is promising a village. Link is a half mile away from there next to I-5, so it wouldn’t serve the village very well. In between is Tukwila Pool and a middle school. 154th (TIB) is just ten blocks away and is also on 99, whereas 144th is short and not on the way to anywhere.
The 124 is a RapidRide candidate. (1088: Like the 124 to BAR station, then turning east to the 107 corridor — Rainier View to Renton.)
Speeding up 124 to be similar to 101 in travel time would open up opportunities. Like the 124 segment south of here could be added to RapidRide A while a new RapidRide could follow 124 north of here and Route 101 southeast of here — to South Renton. That would get 101 out of I-5 congestion reliability issues but it would add time at off-peak hours to that route.
Of course, Metro may want to not run Route 101 into Seattle if this station opens. In that case, this routing would be a viable replacement politically. Renton riders could either trabsfer to Link or stay on their slightly slower RapidRide bus.
Then this station would have Link, RapidRide A and this new frequent RapidRide between Seattle and Renton (two directions).
That leaves the fate of Route 150 on its connectivity to Southcenter and Kent and whether the station needs a direct bus to SE Seattle. And of course possible Link overcrowding. It would be amazing to extend Route 50 or Route 107 to Southcenter via this station but that may be too unproductive.
It all comes back to the basic premise of that station though: why build the station unless there’s a bus network reason? I am pretty sure that its location at the end of a long runway limits doing any TOD taller than a few stories no matter what feasibility exists for TOD there.
“Metro may want to not run Route 101 into Seattle if this station opens.”
Metro does. A truncated 101 has never been in Metro’s long-range plans or restructure proposals. It’s seen as too much of a travel-time hit for Renton.
“It all comes back to the basic premise of that station though: why build the station unless there’s a bus network reason?”
Why build a Ballard line if ST can’t do better than a 10-minute transfer between lines? Why put Lynnwood and Federal Way Link on I-5 instead of 99? Why put Bellevue Downtown station a block east of the bus bays instead of under 110th? Why not include a transfer stub interface in U-District station for a 45th line? Why not put West Seattle Link on Fauntleroy Way?
This is one of those situations that seems best as a broader, coordinated rethinking of the area’sccirculation.
For example, should there be a road access from SR 900? Should it be for buses only? That would make Route 101 connect much easier. A variation on this would be a multi-use path in the area that bridges over MLK and I-5 to connect the station better to the east and is positioned to allow Route 101 stops..
Another example: Should WSDOT move the HOV lane to the right side like SR 520 in this vicinity — and use that opportunity to make it HOV3? That would put Route 150 and Route 101 in a better position to connect to the SODO busway as well as their exit ramps. Where the HOV lane is would affect if it’s feasible to create direct access to the station and how the ramps would be built.
These are both unstudied and unfunded connection ideas — but seem worthy of assessment if the agency’s all agree that better connections are needed.
Unless this station ties in with Metro bus routes, I don’t see its utility being much.
I agree. To be clear, there are two possible connections from a bus standpoint:
1) Freeway station
2) Local connections
All we can do is guess about the local connections. It doesn’t seem like a great location for a bus terminus though. It seems like you add more value by crossing over the freeway. For example you could form an ‘X’ by combining the northern half of the 124 with the southern half of the 107 (and vice versa). This means the buses not only connect to Link, but also provide additional functionality. In any event, I think the station can handle this without much work.
In contrast I think the freeway connection is a major project. WSDOT has done most of the heavy lifting, but ST has been involved with a lot of these projects. The station should be integrated with the freeway bus station. To be clear I’m not talking about a bus station that allows the buses to terminate there. Again, I don’t see much point in doing that. I am talking about a freeway station like those found on 520 (or those that will be added on 405). The buses leave the HOV lane, go into the bus stop, then get back onto the HOV lane. I suppose they can be added later (like they are doing at TIBS) but it makes more sense to me to build the station with that in mind from the beginning.
Again, that doesn’t mean we know exactly what buses will run on I-5. But I think it is quite reasonable to assume that buses like the 101 and 105 (if not those exact buses) will run. Having the ability to connect to Link at BAR a lot of value to the station. Not just for bus to Link connections, but bus to bus.
Al mentioned running HOV on the side. At one point the state had a project for connecting the I-5 HOV lanes to the SoDo busway (via the Spokane Street Viaduct). That got put on the back-burner for some reason. I think for now we should assume the HOV lanes are in the middle.
Certainly it requires lots of money to build a freeway connection to a BAR station from either the median or the side. That’s why some serious effort about how to do that needs to be made.
It would be better for Metro to not have to cross over to the HOV lane between Spokane Street and again at their exit ramps at MLK or Interurban Ave even if there isn’t a BAR Link station.
I’m just wondering if a BAR Station bus access project could eliminate this lane crossover double challenge at at least one point. That’s why I see the BAR station evolution as an opportunity to fix some other transit operations challenges as well as enable more transfers all around.
The project would cost hundreds of millions. But a feasibility study would be much less.
Enabling a same stop transfer between Route 150, Route 101, Route 124, Link and maybe other routes would be powerful. It just takes more vision, interest, analysis and money. But without such connectivity exploration, the area’s transit will remain disconnected.
YES to the East Marginal Way site, unless ST makes a solemn pledge — backed by research dollars — to go to all-day Sounder.
EMW would make a fantastic bus intercept using the East Marginal Way bridge and a bus-only connection from the northbound HOV lane to the northbound to westbound ramp to 599. A ramp from the northbound HOV lane could be added in the little hill between the I-5 lanes south of the SR599 westbound flyover. There is enough room. The new ramp would join the flyover bridge a bit west of the Interurban Avenue off-ramp and take the left lane from there most of the way to East Marginal Way. General traffic on the two-lane flyover would have to merge to a single lane just after the off-ramp exit, but there is never enough traffic that goes that way to make it a problem. And if South Park gets its way in “Boulevardizing” SR99, there will be even less.
The buses would have the left lane until a few hundred feet east of East Marginal Way and would then exit left to a ramp that rises to turn onto EMW northbound.
Southbound the EMWay bridge of 599 would have to have a lane added for a bus-only left-turn pocket at its south end. There could be a bus-actuated left-turn signal there so that they did not have to stop while turning left onto a bus-only on-ramp that descends to a merge with eastbound SR599. There is already a center access to the HOV in the SR599 to I-5 south interchange.
Because this connects to the HOV lanes it would also serve SR167 buses without forcing them into the general traffic lanes on I-5 as using the Boeing Access Road ramps do. They have to cross all the way from the HOV lanes to the exit in that horrid stretch between the 599 interchange and BAR if they want to exit or enter there.
I’m not following you Tom. There are some HOV options with SR 599 but the path to get to the station and continue northward looks dicey.
I think that Route 150 would be the best to be connected there, followed by Route 101. They have lots of riders and offer bus service in directions that Link doesn’t go.
Connecting SR 167 buses would be nice — but using 405 HOV lanes isn’t easy and Stride isn’t making it easier either.
Finally, any bus freeway ramps would appear to cost more than the infill Link station itself.
A short two-way busway from the I-5 median (shift I-5 lanes to the west to create room) over BAR with a stop at the station — where the busway would split to have direct access to SR 900 for Route 101 buses to use and to the right side of I-5 for Route 150 buses to use it seems lots easier to d to me.
I will say that a station and EMW would make it easier for ST to both create a Duwamish bypass and to branch off a Renton-Burien Link Line (extended from West Seattle in the distant future) that could stop at both there and TIBS.
Anyway, all of these things are way more expensive and complicated than simply slapping down two side platforms on the Link tracks. That’s why I think the scope of the infill station is too limited. What I think is needed is to first develop full connectivity ideas of all the transit that runs near the station but has no abilities to let riders transfer to Link or to each other. Transfers are instead pushed to TIBS, South Renton or CID. “You can’t get there from here” if you’re on transit.
Our region on the past decade is addicted to the “project” mentality rather than the “systems” mentality and it’s creating less and less effective transit solutions.
I detailed the path to the station. There is a left exit to an ascending ramp that ends at the widened East Marginal Way overpass. The buses turn right and serve the station by turning left onto 112th. If the route terminates at BAR the buses pull forward to bus parking along 112th between EMW and Tukwila International Boulevard. Four minutes before time to be at the southbound platform they pull forward on 112th, turn right on TIB, turn right onto EMW and stop directly below the station.
Upon departure they go straight down EMW to the newly widened bridge, take the bus-only center left turn lane which ends in a bus-priority protected stoplight intersection onto a bus-only ramp down the the roadway between the South Base parking lot and the freeway. It merges just about underneath the Link bridge, giving plenty of time to move left a lane and use the common middle on ramp to I-5.
Yes, I get that using the I-405 HOV lanes, since they’re in the middle also, but it’s 1.6 miles from the point at which the I-5 to I-405 HOV ramp joins the through lanes from SR518 to the point at which the I-405 to SR167 south off-ramp diverges to the right. That’s not a LONG way, but it’s not just a few blocks either.
The northbound direction is 2.0 miles from the merge of the north-to-west cloverleaf and the left side low-speed diversion to the HOV ramp to NB I-5.
And I have to say, I’m having a very hard time imagining how the “short two-way busway from the I-5 median (shift I-5 lanes to the west to create room) to over BAR” would work. Are you thinking of something like Federal Way 312th in the middle of the freeway with a bus loop further elevated above the LinkStation? I guess that would work, but it would not allow for any “through” routing of the buses using the HOV interchange. They’d HAVE to turn around, or there would have to be a big ramp down to BAR and East Marginal. I think that would be too steep.
A station site on East Marginal works very well with Ross’s idea of a Big “X” , for instance between Kent and West Seattle and Des Moines and South Seattle. They even have two legs of the X in that route Ross described as South Seattle, EMW, Military Road, Angle Lake, Des Moines (IIRC).
Apologies for leaving out the hard part…..
And yes, part of my preference for a station at 112th and EMW is that it allows a connection to a future “bypass” north to Forest Street either just north of the station for the ultra-expensive South Park / Georgetown tunneled fantasy favored by Seattle Subway or the very low-cost and efficient, use one lane of Airport Way and stick another track between the street and railroad storage tracks with a single station at Georgetown and merging using Forest Street’s outer loop version I’ve advocated for several years.
Putting a station at ST’s favored location forecloses the “flying junction” that would be needed for the Airport Way budget version.
Bike the Link Light Rail 2 Line. (bobco85). He starts at the CID, and ends at Downtown Redmond, with video of each station along the way. Check out the very creative first 30 seconds of the video.
https://youtu.be/kWqnZRtfX2g
Cool video, thanks.
sorry posted under wrong thread you can delete this.
Union Station will be open this weekend as a cooling center, 8am to 6pm. An oppotunity to check out its recent public reopening, art deco architecture, and 1920s signage.
Its regular hours are 8am-5pm weekdays.
Speaking of infill stations what do yall think about the semi (not officially) proposed 220th st sw station in between Lynnwood and mountlake terrace station.
I saw it in documents that Edmonds wanted it for an easier bus connection but generally i only saw a slight benefit over mountlake terrace station
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZQG1dbxWrpkuiyVg6
220th is a deferred station, so it just needs to be funded to be built. ST thought it has some station-area potential for the insurance offices there or future station-area development, but not enough yet to include it in Lynnwood Link.
The federal government is warning VTA building the Jose bart that they might not fund what the extension completely. It’s relevant to Ballard link as it’s a pretty similar situation
“””
One of those risks is VTA’s controversial decision to go with a single-bore tunnel design. The approach is a departure from BART’s decades-long practice of using a twin-bore tunnel design with two smaller side-by-side tunnels instead of one large one. VTA last year ordered a $76 million tunnel boring machine, akin to a mechanical earthworm, that is 54-feet in diameter and will dig one of the largest subway tunnels in the nation in Silicon Valley.
“The larger bore machine has the potential for slower mining speeds and greater maintenance schedules according to tunnel boring machine research,” the FTA report said. “This has the risk of cost escalation for schedule delays due to the tunneling on the project schedule critical path.”
“””
https://www.mercurynews.com/2024/07/05/as-vta-waits-for-federal-funding-decision-on-the-san-jose-bart-extension-a-report-from-the-feds-details-additional-project-risks
the Ballard link extension the current proposed tunnel is to use a single bore large tunnel as well rather than two twin tunnels. If VTA in San Jose ends up backtracking on the single large tunnel; sound transit might rethink the use of the single large tunnel as well, move back to twin tunnel and end up changing many of the station designs.