60 Replies to “Spring 2025 Service Changes”

1. Sometimes, the little, essentially free, improvements can have the largest impact.

   CT routes 201 and 202, and ST Express routes 512 and 513, will all congregate at Bay D4 in the Lynnwood Station bus loop. These are the four routes expressing to Ash Way P&R, and then (with the exception of the 513) eventually to Everett Station.

   This is the second-closest bus bay to the Lynnwood Station south entrance. The closest is the eastbound Swift Orange Line Station.

   This consolidation doubles as a traffic safety improvement. No longer will riders waiting for the next bus to Ash Way or Everett dart across bus traffic when they guessed wrong on where to wait.

   These four routes are also being consolidated in the southbound direction into one bay (2) at Ash Way P&R. Thank you, CT and ST!

   1. *eastbound* Swift Orange Line Station.

      Doh!

      1. Fixed.

   2. That is great news. I remember we discussed that here. You are right, sometimes relatively little things make a big difference.

      1. I should also mention that ST Express 532, which has been stopping at Ash Way P&R Bay 1, both ways, will move to Bay 3, the big pile ‘o miscellaneous less-frequent routes.

         I still don’t know why northbound 532 can’t just join ST Express 512 at Bay 4, along the off-ramp from northbound I-5. They are both headed to Everett via I-5. By having to stop at Bay 3, route 532 has to do the inner loop before proceeding to the outer loop to get back on I-5, needlessly adding a couple more minutes to the trip.

         And riders are still running in front of the buses when they guess wrong about where to wait. So it is also an easily-eliminated traffic safety issue.

         .

         All that said, getting from Ash Way to Everett via ST Express or CT 201/202 is basically a dead heat, according to the schedules. I would love to see ST Express 510 become the all-day express between Lynnwood and Everett Stations, and ST Express 512 euthanized. I was one of the advocates for splicing the 511 and 510 together off-peak, years ago. The point of that splicing no longer exists.

      2. I still don’t know why northbound 532 can’t just join ST Express 512 at Bay 4, along the off-ramp from northbound I-5.

         I’m guessing because it isn’t using that ramp. Someone who has actually ridden it can correct me, but I think when the 532 is heading north it stays in the right lane as it runs from I-405 to I-5 until it exits at 164th. This is how it is shown on the map for the schedule: https://www.soundtransit.org/ride-with-us/routes-schedules/532. For the bus to use the special HOV ramp it would have to move across all those lanes in a little over a mile. It could do it, but the my guess is the drivers prefer staying in the right lane (it is easier and may actually be faster — or at least more consistent). Things would be different if there was a HOV connection between I-5 and 405. The buses that serve Bay 4 all come from Lynnwood Transit Center which means they are already in that HOV lane.

         I would love to see ST Express 510 become the all-day express between Lynnwood and Everett Stations, and ST Express 512 euthanized.

         Numbering aside I agree with you. I would have the 512 skip Ash Way. It should run from Everett to Lynnwood and only make one stop along the way (at South Everett). The 201/202 can serve Ash Way.

         This would come at a price though. Right now there is frequent service between the Ash Way Park and Ride and the Lynnwood TC. This allows riders to park and Ash Way when Lynnwood TC is full and not pay much of a penalty. You would still have the 201, 202 and 513 but I’m not sure that is enough. The three buses all run every half hour. The 201 and 202 are timed to work with each other (thus providing combined fifteen minute headways). There are other buses but they aren’t express (and they also serve other bus stops). Ideally you would have another half hour bus that would run opposite the 513 (even if it just runs during peak, like the 513). Of course the 513 could just run every fifteen minutes but it is hard to see that being a great value (given the low ridership of the 513).

      3. Do car drivers headed to Lynnwood have a way of knowing whether the garage is almost full? If not, I would expect them to continue south to the next not-full garage.

         If the 201, 202, 513, 166, and Orange don’t provide enough peak service among them for peak AshWay-Lynnwood service, CT could ask ST to run some short 511s, which would probably amount to just one bus going back and forth, in practice.

         At any rate, I think we are into next-open-thread territory.

      4. ST just sent an announcement about that:

         https://www.soundtransit.org/blog/platform/connecting-to-1-line-snohomish-county

         “Lately, patrons of the Lynnwood City Center and Mountlake Terrace stations on the 1 Line have been feeling a parking pinch, as those garages routinely fill up Monday through Thursday. Early arrivals, before 9 a.m., can usually get a spot. If that’s not an option, there are many other ways to connect to the 1 Line, including some that don’t involve parking right at the stations:
         – Zip Shuttle in Alderwood
         – secure bike lockers at Lynnwood City Center station
         – Sounder N Line
         – Ash Way P&R
         – Swamp Creek Park & Ride
         “

      5. Referring to the ST press release that Mike Orr highlighted:

         The ST press release suggests that Ash Way and Swamp Creek lots are good alternatives for the Lynnwood City Center station. I have to wonder if these lots have significantly less usage since Link opened.

      6. Swamp Creek is on the Orange Line (as is Ash Way, but the 201/202/512/513 are faster options).

         Do you really mean to ask whether surface parking lots are the highest and best uses of those plots of land?

         There is already some TOD next to Swamp Creek. That plot of asphalt would be a great place for more!

         Ash Way is a future light rail station construction site. Building anything there now could complicate matters. At any rate, some portion of that lot will cease to be parking in a few years. Hopefully the station gets built on the south end of that lot, enabling the end of the long side loop for east/west buses, including the Orange Line.

      7. “Do you really mean to ask whether surface parking lots are the highest and best uses of those plots of land?”

         No I’m just curious if they have significantly less use since Lynnwood Link extension opened. I’m just asking about utilization in the short term . It provides insight about what may happen elsewhere when Link garages open nearby.

      8. I’ll ask my friend in north Lynnwood about Ash Way P&R. I think she said the buses to Lynnwood Station are busy but I doubt they’re overwhelmed, but I’ll confirm that.

      9. The ST press release suggests that Ash Way and Swamp Creek lots are good alternatives for the Lynnwood City Center station. I have to wonder if these lots have significantly less usage since Link opened.

         I would think so. Swamp Creek used to have fairly frequent and direct service to downtown. If you were commuting to Seattle you might as well park there instead of Lynnwood TC. Now riders would have to take a bus from there and ride Link. Yes, it is the Orange Line, but it still takes about ten minutes.

         Folks in Ash Way are worse off as well. But I think it is getting some of the overflow from Lynnwood. I’m sure there are people who drive south after trying (unsuccessfully) to park at Lynnwood TC. But some may figure if that park and ride is full, so are the other ones that are closer. This also means they avoid traffic (by going north in the morning). Some may have experimented and found that this is the best option (for their particular commute) given all of those express buses to Lynnwood.

      10. “Folks in Ash Way are worse off as well. ”

          No, they’re better off
          They have a new Orange Line alternative, and they can take the 201 or 202. Before they could only take the 512 to Northgate, and get stuck in the congestion spots between Lynnwood and Northgate, and northbound they’d just miss the 512 and have to wait 15 minutes for the next one. My friend says on the best days her travel time from 148th-ish to Capitol Hill is cut in half with Lynnwood Link. Ignoring the initial half-mike walk, 119+bus+Link can get down to an hour, whereas before it took 90+ minutes.

      11. > “Folks in Ash Way are worse off as well. ”

          > No, they’re better off

          The cancelation of CT’s 400-series routes in the September service change eliminated Ash Way’s direct connection to downtown Seattle. The commuter service for most of the (former) commuters from Ash Way was thus significantly degraded, since it’s no longer a one-seat ride. On top of that, Link is slower to downtown in the mornings and an all-around less pleasant ride than CT’s double-deckers.

2. I appreciate Metro adding more service to route 107, but I think the planners have forgotten that routes 60 and 107 are the same trunk from Beacon Hill Station to the Georgetown boarded-up district, that then branches as two long tails.

   Outside of peak, there isn’t much reason to run routes 60 and 107 more often than every 20 minutes, so long as they are timed to alternate on the 15th Ave S corridor.

   While both routes may get good ridership, partially because they are so long, they are rarely full except around morning and afternoon school bell, when they are overwhelmed in the 15th Ave S corridor. Please move the investment to when the ridership is. And, oh yeah, get rid of the Georgetown loop-de-loop on the 107, at least on weekdays. Pretty please.

   Also, please add 107 to the southbound bus bay across from Beacon Hill Station. Let the 107 drivers have their breaks in peace.

   1. Ideally we have service where it can do the most good (in terms of ridership or coverage). However, with a street grid as complicated as ours it is inevitable that there is some overlap where there shouldn’t be. This may be one of those cases.

      The two buses overlap on 15th but in both cases most of their ridership comes from outside it. Running the buses every twenty minutes (instead of every fifteen) would mean hurting the majority of riders (who don’t ride on 15th). Here are a couple alternatives:

      1) We could just send the 107 to Georgetown and end there. You would save a significant amount of service (it takes about 12 minutes to go from Georgetown to Beacon Hill Station) which could then be put into running the bus more often. Most of the riders wouldn’t care. A few would have to transfer, but not that many. But all of this assumes that there is a layover location there. There may not be.

      2) Skip Georgetown (as you suggest). This would hurt about sixty riders a day. They would either walk further or transfer to the 60. It would save about 4 minutes on the bus — not huge, but significant. A fair number of riders would probably benefit as well (by avoiding the detour).

      Either one of these approaches would be an improvement in my opinion. I also agree that if the buses continue to share the 15th corridor that they should be timed to provide better combined headways. That is true for every shared corridor (and even routes that share destinations like the 65 and 75 which go from Lake City to the UW using different pathways).

      1. You have somewhat of a point about reducing frequency north of Beacon Hill Station making a significant chunk of riders have to wait a little longer. There is a case for splitting route 60 at Beacon Hill Station, bumping the northern route to 10-minute all-day headway, and dropping the south to 20-minute all-day headway. Most of the southbound riders on the south portion board at BHStation.

         Terminating route 107 at Georgetown is a non-starter, as are terminating at the more useful stops at Cleveland High and the VA. Getting all the way to a light rail station was the consolation prize for losing the 1-seat ride downtown. It should have come with increased frequency. But 107 west of Rainier Beach Station gets the axe in the Long-Range Plan. 20-minute headway is quite spacious for this route except just outside of bell times.

         20-minute headway is also comfortably spacious on the south portion of the 60, except just outside of bell times.

         Students getting passed up in the afternoon is a lesson in patience, and to walk one stop in the wrong direction to grab a seat or the available standing room in the right direction. Students getting passed up in the morning is a rather different lesson in civic politics.

         I would like to see 8-minute peak headway on routes 60 and 107, hopefully timed with each other and with the trains. While many companies have left downtown, the schools are still right where they have been, and have increased population and the incentive of youth fare freedom to ride the bus to and from school.

      2. There is a case for splitting route 60 at Beacon Hill Station, bumping the northern route to 10-minute all-day headway, and dropping the south to 20-minute all-day headway.

         Not by looking at the ridership their isn’t. To be clear, I would like to split the 60 at Beacon Hill Station and combine the northern half with the 49. I would also make this new 49 straighter. It should be synchronized with the streetcar. Hopefully both would run every 12 minutes all-day long for 6 minute combined headways along Broadway.

         But the rest of the route is fine. It is like the 107. I think you are assuming everyone is riding it to Beacon Hill Station and since it isn’t that crowded along 15th it must not have that many riders. But that isn’t it at all. More than half the riders never ride the bus north of Georgetown (either direction). I’m not saying that truncating the bus at Georgetown is the best option but I’m saying that most of the riders of the 107 (almost 2/3 of them) wouldn’t even notice.

         The 60 is a little more complicated. I think it is easiest to think of it in sections again. Start with everything south of the station. Also think of a northbound bus. The vast majority of riders board before the bus crosses the Duwamish, let along gets to Beacon Hill. But alighting is split roughly 50/50. About half the people get off the bus before Beacon Hill and half get off the bus on Beacon Hill (especially by the station). Thus if you boarded on 15th (northbound) you might think ridership is fairly low to the south but that is only because about half the riders have already completed their trip.

         But then ridership picks up again. There is high ridership on the north end of Beacon Hill and First Hill (as you would expect). I could definitely see that section having higher frequency but I wouldn’t dismiss the section to the south.

         I think with routes like these we assume everyone is heading downtown or to Link. But that really isn’t the case.

   2. Brent is correct; the Route 107 Georgetown deviation violates service guideline five and has been fully mitigated by the Route 60 improvements. The deviation slows south Beacon riders oriented to Cleveland and Link. Both routes 60 and 107 have the bulk of their minutes away from 15th Avenue South.

      It is generous of the STM to buy trips on Route 107; it also serves Skyway and Renton.

3. Metro has posted signs showing a new route path for eastbound 255 buses through Montlake. Eastbound 255 buses will stay on NE Pacific St. (like the 48/271) and not follow the NE Pacific Pl. path (like the 44).

   Also, no signs that the Montlake transfer station on top of 520 is ready to open yet.

   1. I was going to mention the lack of mention on it for 255/271/542.

      Do we know what the hold up is? All I can see is WSDOT seems to be parking construction vehicles there still.

      Will we have to wait until August or until the full 2 line opens and they change around the 545/544/542?

   2. I hope that is the case. Eastbound, Route 255 has been a unicorn; all the other eastbound SR-520 routes serve NE Pacific Street. As the Route 255 southbound buses have to wait for a break in traffic to shift to the inside lane, they sometimes delay Route 44 trips that stay in the outside lane and turn right to westbound NE Pacific Street. (Metro should not be getting in its own way). The Route 255 pathway was odd and delayed; it was implemented in March 2020 after a few years of fuss; routes 545, 252, 257, 268, and 424 are only being changed with East Link; that is a long wait after U Link in March 2016.

4. According to the preview schedule of the 107, it’ll now have hourly trips all night, but only on Saturday and Sunday nights. The weeknight schedule still has a 4 hour overnight gap. This is strange — are there any other routes in the system that have 24 hour service only on weekends?

   1. The new 107 schedules look real, and make sense for the two nights they exist. But I fear they will fail to draw destinational ridership, until people can travel that route 7 late nights a week.

      If I knew my favorite route has bike racks two days a week, I would not bother to bring a bike 2/7 of the time.

   2. The 107 will also have 15-minute evening frequency until 10pm weekends but only 7pm weekdays.

      The 107 has long been the poor brother of the 106, less frequent and a more winding coverage route. My friend lives on it in Rainier View, so I told him about the frequency boost. That may convince him to take the 107 to Link more. He was a “Save Our Valley” type and a late adopter to Link, but now he rides it whenever he goes to the stadiums, downtown, or Capitol Hill. Otherwise he drives everywhere.

      So it’s surprising to see that the 107 got 15-minute weekday frequency when I wasn’t looking, and will now get 15-minute weekend frequency — until 10pm even — and weekend night owl service.

      I don’t understand why the 107 in particular is getting so much. It will still take 25 minutes to get from Rainier Beach station to downtown Renton, compared to 16 minutes on the 106. And why weekend evenings and nights? Rainer Valley and Renton don’t have a lot of nightlife. Nightlife activity is mostly on Friday and Saturday, not Saturday and Sunday. Some cities have night owls Friday and Saturday for this reason; I saw this in Dusseldorf.

      There may have been rare cases before with higher frequency weekends, but this is the first time I’ve seen weekend-only overnight service.

      1. Does your friend know about the Rainier Beach / Skyway Metro Flex? It will get him to a lot of places in the neighborhood that are nowhere near fixed-route bus stops.

      2. Yeah. I don’t know the area the 107 serves well – maybe there’s good reason for it – but all this extra weekend evening and overnight service definitely looks like a case where the service hours had to be allocated somewhere regardless of need.

      3. I don’t understand why the 107 in particular is getting so much.

         It has performed reasonably well in the past and it seems to have seen an increase in ridership the last six months or so. In general Metro seems to favor converting a half hour bus to every fifteen minutes instead of moving from fifteen to ten. There is something to be said for that, especially if you consider a particular region. With this change you can now say that a huge swath of Rainier Valley has a decent level of service (fifteen minutes of better most times). I feel the same way about the 28 in Ballard. It would be nice to see it run every fifteen minutes even though it doesn’t perform that well. That would plug a gap in the greater Ballard. There may be an equity focus as well.

         Personally I would have made the change along with a restructure. Now it will be more difficult to make changes (e. g. skip Georgetown or just end at Georgetown).

         It will still take 25 minutes to get from Rainier Beach station to downtown Renton, compared to 16 minutes on the 106.

         Yeah, but that is not what the bus is about. It is designed to serve all the other areas along the way.

         And why weekend evenings and nights?

         My guess is they did some sort of study and found a fair number of workers lived along the route. It does seem odd that they did that with the 107 and not the 106 though. Even if speed isn’t an issue (late at night) the gets a lot more riders at night.

      4. ” where the service hours had to be allocated somewhere regardless of need.”

         What? Capitol Hill would like it’s 15-minute service back. Other routes like the 5 should have 15-minute weekend and evening service again. It’s unimaginable to think SDOT doesn’t realize frequency has been slashed across a wide range of routes. There’s also restoring the 15 if SDOT can’t think of anything else.

         This must be equity, and possibly other justifying factors we don’t know.

5. when will routes 931 and 251, and 256 be activated?

6. and how much longer until 257 gets axed?

   1. Presumably when East Link opens across the lake, which last I heard will be the end of this year.

   2. There will be an article Thursday on the final East Link bus restructure. Routes 251 and 256 will be created, 931 modified, and 257 deleted when the full 2 Line opens. Metro says “Fall 2025”, but last I heard ST said the earliest was December 2025, and it may slip into 2026. I hope it doesn’t take that long. I could use it, and the restructured and more frequent 226.

      1. Glad for the heads-up that the restructure has been finalized. Turns out the agenda/materials packet for the Feb 18 meeting of King County Council’s Transportation, Economy, and Environment Committee contains a rather interesting Metro document called “East Link Connections Equity Impact Review and Recommendation Development Report” (heads-up, the packet is a 786-page PDF file; the report starts on page 476):

         https://aqua.kingcounty.gov/council/agendas/TrEE/20250218-TrEE-Packet.pdf

         Lots of analysis maps; also, Appendix B (“How the Phase 4 Network Reflects Phase 3 Feedback” — packet page 595) and Appendix C (“How the Final Proposed Network Reflected Phase 4 Feedback” — packet page 606) may be of interest to those who are familiar with Phase 3 and have been waiting for the final proposal.

         Although the East Link Connections page has been revised, with a “Public Engagement Report” included (which is also in the packet above, page 608), at least on initial examination I haven’t found a link to the “Equity Impact Review and Recommendation Development Report” on the ELC website.

      2. Can you reply with a link to the article and email it to me at baldwj3@uw.edu?]

      3. https://seattletransitblog.com/2025/03/20/east-link-connections/

7. Bring the 15x back.

   Using the D line, It takes 50 minutes to go from crown hill/ ballard to downtown.

   The 15x was 20 minutes.

   This is over 200 hours per year of extra commute time for the average ballard rider because the 15x got axed.

   1. I wish I was riding the 15X when you were. When I would take it from 70th to Seneca (2019 until it was practically axed in 2023), it was usually 25 minutes, whereas the D was usually around 35-40 minutes.

   2. It is a tough one. In the past a lot of the core routes (like the D Line) would be crowded during peak. They would run more buses but you reach a point where it isn’t really helping riders (e. g. a bus running every four minutes isn’t much better than every five). Running an express (just to deal with the crowding) would actually save the agency money (since it would complete it’s run in less time).

      I don’t think that is the case anywhere anymore. I don’t think any of the regular buses have returned to that point. The D seems to run every 7.5 minutes at most. If it is crowded then it is certainly worth considering running the 15 instead of running more D buses. But taking service away from the D to run the 15 would be tough on riders of the D. You could run the bus every ten minutes (which is what it runs during peak) and then run the 15 every fifteen minutes. That would still cost money though and some riders would lose out. There would be people who end up still catching the D and now having to wait longer.

      Of course you could just run the 15 without changing the D but that costs money (that the agency doesn’t have). Prior to the pandemic the 15 seemed to perform really well*. It had the best ridership per service hour of any of the express overlay buses. The travel time was also more than 20% faster than the alternative** which means that the overall time saved per dollar spent (i. e. time saved per rider times the overall number of riders divided by the cost to run the buses) was highest as well. I think you could make a case for getting rid of the 303/322 and resurrecting the 15.

      *Page 29 of this: https://kingcounty.gov/~/media/depts/metro/accountability/pdf/2019/system-evaluation.pdf

      ** Page 34 of the same document

8. Really whittling bus service down to the bone in northern West Seattle. Alki (56, RIP to route 37) to downtown now has just 3 options: 5:53am, 7:12, 8:08am. And Genesee Hill (57) has just a 1-hour span: 6:44, 7:21, 7:47. The two routes at least combine along hilltop Admiral for 6 runs toward downtown, but that’s much fewer than a few years ago especially after the demise of the 55.

   No midday or weekend service, aside from the circuitous Route 50 over to Delridge and Sodo. I’m not sure how to quantify it but I think there’s a strong argument that northern WS is the most poorly transit-served cluster of residents in the city.

   1. Are you suggesting the West Seattle Water Taxi be scrapped in favor of better overland bus service between the Admiral District and downtown?

      1. Fair enough. I keep forgetting that exists ever since I switched to paying my own fares rather than an employer full ORCA pass, because it’s so dang expensive (and barely faster than biking) that I never consider using it. But I suppose the water taxi + its shuttle buses are meant to be Alki and Admiral’s access to downtown.

   2. West Seattle is a land of transit extremes. It has two RapidRide routes. While not what I would call BRT they are fairly frequent and fast. But it also has huge swaths with no coverage at all. These areas are lower density but not really low. Most of the census blocks are between 5,000 and 10,000 people per square mile (https://maps.geo.census.gov/ddmv/map.html). That kind of density is relatively common in Seattle. It is just unusual (in Seattle) to have that much of it. This is the type of density that is difficult to serve. Like a really low-density area, it costs a lot and you don’t get that many riders. But unlike a really low-density area there are a lot of people effected. (By very definition the lower the density the fewer the people.)

      There aren’t a lot of great options. Brent mentioned one (get rid of the water taxi and shift service to the buses). The water taxi costs a lot of money per rider — if it was a bus it would have been cancelled a long time ago. But for the same reason it is hard to get rid of the streetcar it may be difficult to get rid of it.

      Another alternative would be to force more transfers to the RapidRide. The 21 and 125 could become local buses (never leaving the peninsula). But you would need to somehow backfill service on First Avenue South. I suppose you could shift the 131/132. Fourth (where the buses go right now) is close to the SoDo Busway (which is essentially Fifth). This isn’t as easy as it sounds as various streets don’t go through, making for long walks (https://maps.app.goo.gl/qEuNF1btrwP6mNQd8). Even still I could see it working. That might give you some extra service in West Seattle but I would imagine a fair number of people would complain about losing their one-seat ride (the RapidRide is not that frequent).

      The other alternative would be to turn the 21 into RapidRide or at the very least run it more often and just have the 125 stay in West Seattle. Unfortunately truncating the 125 wouldn’t save much. It doesn’t run that often and it doesn’t spend that much time downtown (it spends hardly any time getting to downtown).

      West Seattle doesn’t strike me as a place where Metro is throwing away money on the wrong routes (other than the water taxi). I think the only way West Seattle transit will improve is if they spend more money or find other savings elsewhere.

   3. I wasn’t trying to be serious about getting rid of the water taxi. But there are bills in Olympia for creating a mosquito fleet of passenger ferries in time for the World Cup, to deal with the shrinking car ferry fleet while the state begs for a shipbuilder to build electric car ferries.

      There are some huge holes in the logic behind the bills. Namely, the bottleneck is for getting cars, not people, across the Sound. The mosquito fleet is for getting riders who can afford them across the Sound faster.

      Lower the cost of walking onto a car ferry, and the passenger decks might fill up better, and free up space for the richer denizens of Kitsap County to have more space on the fast ferries.

      At any rate, Kitsap County might be willing to pay top dollar to borrow the West Seattle fleet.

   4. ” would need to somehow backfill service on First Avenue South. I suppose you could shift the 131/132.”

      Nooo! That would eliminate my last-mile to Costco route, and the other mainly lower-income shoppers who carry hand loads or wagon loads of groceries from there. It’s a 20-minute walk to SODO station, or longer and barely feasible when my leg is acting up. It’s 8 minutes to the 124, but the southbound stop is not exactly close to Industrial Way, and the northbound stop requires running across an unsignaled highway intersection and hoping you don’t get hit by a car, and that’s even less feasible when you’re carrying heavy groceries.

      1. I was one of the advocates for moving 131/132 to 4th Ave, mostly to connect to SODO Station. I don’t see anything on 1st Ave worth breaking that connection.

         However, if I lose the the 132, I’ll just take the 60 to Beacon Hill Station.

      2. The fullest part of the 131/132 is between Costco and SODO station. 4th Ave S runs through the middle of the industrial district so it’s geographically favorable. People get on/off at practically every stop on 4th Ave S all day.

9. Also you can add to the King County Metro grab bag. Dart Route 930 will start having hourly service on the weekends from 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m..

10. “At that time, RapidRide B Line will be revised to remain on 156th Ave NE between NE 24th St and NE 31st St, no longer serving Overlake Village Station. The route will continue to serve Redmond Technology Station.”

    The B Line preview map doesn’t seem to straighten the route between NE 31st St and NE 24th. Am I looking at the wrong preview map?

    1. Michael noted that too while the article was being edited. Since the text has long said through several proposals that it would be moved, we think it’s an oversight in the map, or the schedule will be revised when the change occurs. Metro may have decided RapidRide has so many riders and is used in promoting transit to new people, that it would be too confusing to have two different versions of the streets and stops on it. Of course, the downtown Redmond changes are there, so it’s unclear why the Overlake changes aren’t.

11. Route 106 needs to add 30 more trips for 8 minutes to 13 minutes in the afternoon and at night for 15 and 25 minutes it takes too long and Route 40 is flawed by 15th Ave N like the zig-zag. Obviously, Route 61 is too short to Lake City That isn’t why Route 20 is still eliminated in 2024.

    1. Hey Metro, how about another little, essentially free improvement! Transferring from Link at Mount Baker to try to go to the near north, one can take either than 8 or the 48 to destinations such as 23rd and Jackson or eastern parts of Capitol Hill.
       While the 8 and the 48 usually have decent frequency, often they depart the Mount Baker Transit center at the same times, instead of staggering their departures, which would effectively increase the frequency for those trying to make the move that I am, and would reduce congestion at the boarding area. Why is this simple improvement not implemented?

       1. Now is a great time for those questions as the Great Conjunction route restructure approaches. I hope you will keep bringing this up on open threads, or turn it into a guest post.

       2. I would add that Route 8 is getting a reroute to go by Judkins Park Station. It’s a good time to stagger the departures since they both will use the same Judkins Park stop too.

       3. Why is this simple improvement not implemented?

          Good question. This would be a fairly simple fix as I don’t think there are any other dependencies. I wonder if someone in Metro is in charge of synchronizing schedules. This often gets fairly complicated as one change leads to another. Sometimes you have to choose where you want to synchronize. For example the 65 and 75 both run from Lake City to the U-Village and then through campus and the U-District before becoming other buses. Do you synchronize them from Lake City or through campus? There is also another bus (the 372) which also runs through campus. Since those all run every fifteen minutes it would be nice to have them all run every five minutes through campus. Something is bound to give. Likewise it can’t be ideal if one bus is more frequent than the other. But it doesn’t have to be perfect — it just shouldn’t be really bad (which is what you are saying it is).

          In this case both buses run every fifteen minutes most of the time and there is no other dependency. It does seem like they could be synchronized quite well.

       4. It’s a good time to stagger the departures since they both will use the same Judkins Park stop too.

          Yes, they will share a lot more than what they share now. Right now they share the stop inside the Mount Baker transit center and one bus stop between Jackson and Yesler on 23rd. With the restructure the 8 will overlap the 48 between Massachusetts until Yesler — three extra bus stops (including the one at Judkins Park Station). They will take different pathways but it takes about the same amount of time to get there so they could be synchronized quite well (both directions).

       5. Ditto for the 61 and the 45 where they share stops along 85th St. Both are routes that get you to Link (Northgate or Roosevelt), and I’ve generally found it fastest to just take the bus that comes first when going to Link, regardless of which one it is. Problem is, they usually come one right after another (within a minute or so), losing the benefits of the increased frequency.

       6. Ditto for the 61 and the 45

          Yes. One of the key selling points of the 61 is that would double up service along 85th. It would also give riders eastbound two ways to get to Link. Time it right and folks would have 7.5 minute headways to Link from Greenwood or along much of the corridor. But you have to time it right.

          From what I can tell they didn’t time it right (at least according to the schedules) but then again it isn’t that bad.

          61: 12:01
          45: 12:10
          61: 12:16
          45: 12:25
          etc.

          This is assuming it takes a minute to get from the scheduled stop of the 61 (at NW 85th St & 1st Ave NW) to the scheduled stop a block away for the 45 (at N 85th St & Greenwood Ave N). Even with that there is a 6/9 pattern (not a 7/8 pattern). It is worth noting that the 61 does a live loop while the 45 is coming from Loyal Heights. If the 45 is running on time but the 61 got delayed a bit just getting to Greenwood (from Northgate) before turning around then they would be in sync fairly well. In general if you are seeing back to back buses it probably has more to do with schedule irregularity or it is a different time of day.

          The 61 is a consistent bidirectional fifteen minute bus all day long. The 45 has plenty of extra service during peak. There really isn’t much they can do about that.

          I think during the times when they are supposed to be (more or less) in sync they just aren’t. I texted the bus stop and Metro replied with buses fairly close together (in the short term) and just fine (in the long term). In other words the schedule is fine (if not ideal) but one of the buses is just late.

          This is a known problem. 85th should have BAT lanes from Wallingford Avenue to 15th (at least).

12. Can you reply with a link to the article and email it to me at baldwj3@uw.edu?]

Comments are closed.