King County Metro announced today that the bus stops on the Montlake lid over SR 520, which are the last element of the Montlake interchange and lid to be completed, will open on Saturday, April 12th.
Prior to 2019, when it was permanently closed for construction of the lid, there had always been a freeway stop on SR 520 at Montlake Blvd. Every bus that took SR 520 through Montlake without exiting stopped at a pair of stops on SR 520 at the outer edges of the freeway. Of the routes that exited SR 520 to serve UW, they served the area in the eastbound direction only with a bus stop on Montlake upstairs. Speaking of stairs, the old stop in the eastbound direction was not ADA accessible, requiring passengers to be able to use stairs.
The new stops are quite different from the original Montlake flyer stops. For one, these stops are not on the outer edge of the freeway anymore. Rather, they are on the HOV3+ restricted on and off-ramps of SR 520.
Consequently, buses that cross Montlake on 520 will not stop here, as only buses that enter or exit the freeway at Montlake are able to access these stops. Routes accessing SR 520 that will use these stops are 255, 271, ST 542, and ST 556. Routes that stay on Montlake Blvd that use these stops (which includes the southbound stop at Roanoke St) are 43 and 48. While routes that cross Montlake without exiting don’t serve these stops, there are a lot fewer of these routes remaining, as most were either suspended during the pandemic, or deleted with the opening of Northgate Link. In the case of route 255, the service was moved from downtown Seattle to UW after the closure of the Montlake flyer stop, so it once again has access to Montlake at SR 520. This leaves ST route 545 as the only major service on 520 that skips Montlake. As I understand it, the original intention was for the stop to be able to be served by buses crossing Montlake as well. This would have presumably been done by adding special signal phases allowing buses to move between the HOV ramps on the east side of montlake and the ramps on the west, but (probably in large part due to the lack of bus service crossing under Montlake Blvd) this was not implemented and there are no plans to do so.
Coincidentally, just hours before the official announcement, I was on the Montlake lid checking out progress and getting some photos of the yet-to-be-opened bus stops. Here is the state of these stops, the week before they are set to be served by transit:
Will the wire for the 43 be put back up?
Is it needed? If route 43 is just route 44 buses deadheading to/from the base, route 44 already has wire, and the trolley buses all have batteries with 20 miles of range, it seems route 43 could just run this section off the batteries.
People were talking pre-Covid about electifying the 48; is that still in the plans or did the battery buses forestall that?
44 trolleys could also deadhead via the 70 route and then we could just put the 43 out of its misery
it was talked about briefly in https://seattletransitblog.com/2025/01/24/king-county-metros-projects-2025-and-beyond/
The “Montlake Trolley Overhead Replacement”
> This project is to replace approximately 27 trolley poles and associated overhead catenary system (OCS) at the Montlake Blvd E North Approach, between the bascule bridge and SR520 interchange, and the South Approach between 24th Ave E and Montlake Ave NE. These assets provide power distribution to serve Metro’s route 48, and will allow for simplified future route electrification.
I amazed putting the wire back up wasn’t a responsibility of the 520 project since they tore it down for construction. Why is this burden on Metro to re-install it?
The 424 absolutely did serve the old Montlake Freeway Station; I remember CT was advertising it as a connection to UW. Now, they’re telling people to transfer at Evergreen Point.
Ah, thanks for confirming that.
The 424 is a mess. You travel at one of two times per day, you get a red carpet all the way to to downtown Seattle; at other times, the only way in/out of Monroe by bus is to take CT 271 to Everett which takes 45 minutes, then transfer to the 512, then transfer again to Link.
A more sensible way to serve the area would be for one STRIDE trip per hour from Shoreline to Woodinville to extend to Monroe. But, Monroe is outside the ST tax area, so there exists no entity willing to pay for such bus service that crosses the county line.
This is also, of course, a problem not treated with any particular urgency, since it is assumed that everyone living there has a car, and can access whatever transit they want by driving to a park and ride in King County. The three people out there who are carless can put up with the 2.5 hour trip to Seattle because beggars cannot be choosers.
Maybe SVT will add back midday service to Duvall from Monroe someday. Looks like it’s now a peak only service.
But there is a mechanism: Community Transit could pay Sound Transit for that extension, just like Pierce Transit does for the 595 running to Gig Harbor and Intercity Transit used to when the 592 ran to Olympia.
I’d certainly support that. Monroe is, indeed, in dire need of better connections.
But then, Community Transit still can’t find the money to extend the Green Line to Bothell, so I assume Monroe-Bothell is somewhere behind that on their priority list…
“Community Transit still can’t find the money to extend the Green Line to Bothell,”
I thought that was funded and scheduled.
The Swift Green line extension project page says it will be constructed in tandem with the Bothell Way Multimodal Project, and is expected to open between 2028 and 2031.
It’s possible, but not likely. From CT’s perspective, Monroe is only big enough to justify one bus per hour serving it, so they can’t do both SR-522 and US 2, only one or the other. US2 has the advantage of being an established route and adding coverage to Snohomish, which they need anyway, so that route takes priority.
Meanwhile, I could see ST objecting to an extension of select Shoreline->Woodinville trips as compromising service reliability, even if CT were to pay for it. The 595 extension to Gig Harbor isn’t such a problem because it’s a peak only route, and, it being so long, every trip of it is probably operated by a separate bus anyway, so any delay around Gig Harbor can only impact one trip. But, do that on a bus that runs all day, delays can accumulate throughout the day. From ST’s perspective, reliability within the ST tax area is more important than service to outside the area.
And, yes, CT has limited funds, and extending Swift Green to Bothell is and should be higher on the priority list.
Monroe is fairly small and spread out. There are communities along the way but they aren’t within walking distance of the highway. There is a park and ride lot in Monroe, but none along the highway. Thus a bus has to travel a long ways without picking up anyone (this is expensive). Arguably the worst part is the lack of HOV lanes. There is a lot of traffic peak-direction and a bus is stuck in it like everyone else. This cuts down on potential peak ridership which in turn lowers all-day ridership. If a peak-only bus is busy then it can lead to the agency running the occasional midday bus (attracting commuters who work a half day as well as other riders). But peak-only ridership is bound to be low, even though traffic is terrible. My guess is the people who commute by transit to Bellevue or Seattle just drive to Woodinville and park there.
The Bothell-Woodinville transit center will become a major hub once S2 & S3 are operation. For Monroe, I would just run a route that terminates at this TC*. Riders traveling onwards to Seattle or Bellevue will transfer to Stride. Given Monroe is outside of the ST service area, I would run this as a standalone CT route, not as ST branded service. It will probably work best as a peak oriented express route with infrequent all-day service.
*I couldn’t find more current info, but per the article below the TC will include a bus loop, so operationally will work well as a terminus for a bus coming from SR522.
https://seattletransitblog.com/2020/07/23/bothell-transit-hub-will-connect-sr-522-i-405-brt/
Yes, Route 424 did serve the former Montlake freeway stops. The Metro old one-way peak-only routes 250, 252, 257, 260, 265, 268, 311, etc. tended to attract about 10 percent of their boardings and alightings at those stops.
CT joins ST and Metro in their overly cautious approach to network management.
Plus my understanding (is this right?) is that the 545 is going to be nixed anyway once the 2 Line connects to Seattle next winter. So really, the only remaining service will be the new peak-only 544 – hardly worth doing light timing work for the marginal benefit of increased frequencies on the Evergreen Point – Montlake segment
While it is true that it is hard to justify westward HOV ramps with planned service, I still think it is a big missed opportunity. Once the new Portage Bay bridges are complete, the HOV 3+ lanes will continue to I-5 (and onto the express lanes in the peak direction), which could have provided a new, fast connection between Montlake and Downtown that would be especially useful during Link disruptions. An additional center freeway station at the Roanoke Lid would have also significantly improved mobility in the area. Regardless, I have reached out to ST asking them to make the 544 an all day route between Redmond Technology and Westlake (maps I’ve seen have it missing a good connection there). The 545/544 is a faster way to get between Redmond Tech and Westlake/SLU/West Capitol Hill than East Link or transferring at UW from the 542 in all but the worst traffic, and with HOV lanes in Portage Bay it will probably always be significantly faster.
I think there are a lot of factors. It is likely that most of the buses that run express to Downtown from the East Side (via 520) also have a corresponding bus that runs to the UW. For example every stop on the 545 is also served by the 542. Thus riders can always just take the other bus if they want to use that stop.
I suppose if someone is headed to the UW and misses the 542 they can catch the 545 and walk, but that is a long walk for most riders. Furthermore, with plenty of buses going to the UW from the East Side they could always transfer at Evergreen Point Freeway Station. The new 270 will stop there (unlike the existing 271) which make that transfer less painful.
I think they looked at it and figure a bus like that would only get a few riders a day and most of them would have a good alternative. That wasn’t the case in the past.
It will be the 544 (assuming Sound Transit restores it as expected) and KCM route 256. If it magically opened instantly in 2019 I’d say it’s essential, but things are a lot different now.
East Link was predicated on deleting the 550 and 545. That was in the East Link Connections proposals up to last year. Some of the 545’s hours would be shifted to the 542. But this year ST removed all ST Express routes from the East Link and South Link restructures, and said it would instead consider them in its 2026 operating plan. See my comment in the April 9 open thread for that.
We’re assuming ST will stick to its earlier proposals in 2024. Metro’s restructure is now final and assumes those. That may happen simultaneously with the full 2 Line (which may open the last week of December, but don’t hold your breath).
However, ST hinted it might delay the restructure until after the World Cup, so September 2026. In that case the routes would continue as is for the first several months. That will be bad for Issaquah-Bellevue. (No promised all-day express, and losing the 271. The 556 is peak only.) Redmond would be able to continue taking the 545. I don’t know what the 544 is.
ELC Routes 256 and 544; both weak but coming your way.
Kind of unfortunate there’s not a better southbound 43/48 stop here for an easy convenient transfer from the Eastside buses. Granted there’s not a lot you could do with this design as Montlake is a traffic sewer and this station is at-grade on one side.
Northbound 43/48 transfer is very good.
It’s especially unfortunate because northbound transfers don’t matter at all – all routes serving Montlake lid terminate at U District. (Really 255 -> 48 is the only NB transfer that might make sense for some people, those two termini are about 0.6 miles apart uphill. )
That’s not quite true. Central District to Kirkland, for example.
Oh, you’re right, I forgot about east-south transfers.
Having used to have a Capitol Hill to Bellevue commute, the placement of the southbound stop bothers me a lot. The placement of the stop on the old bridge and freeway station was actually pretty good, just getting to it was tricky. Either cross Montlake along 3 sides of the square since there was no crosswalk on the bridge, or go down a flight of stairs to the freeway station underpass, then up a flight if stairs. If coming from the westbound station, that’s up then down then up to get to the 48 stop.
One positive about moving it to Roanoke st is it’s only 2 street crossings instead of 3, but they really should just have a crosswalk and southbound bus stop on the bridge over 520.
You can thank the traffic engineers for that one. They moved the stop out of the way where buses wouldn’t obstruct (as much) their precious car traffic.
That said, Capitol Hill to downtown Bellevue will very soon be a one seat ride on Link, eliminating the need to make that transfer in the first place.
That does look bad: https://maps.app.goo.gl/43TnKTgFXFm2kcVG9. That seems like quite a walk for a simple transfer. I think the reason they don’t have a stop closer is that they didn’t want the bus to be stuck with the turning traffic. The bus can get in the middle lane fairly early and avoid everyone heading for the freeway. That middle lane should be a bus lane, but there are a lot of improvements that should be made for the 48.
Curious if ST 542 might be considered as a Stride BRT line as it already functions like BRT with the vast majority of its route in HOV/Bus lanes?
The 542 serves as a good east-west route that manages to complement with a little redundancy but not really compete with the new 2 line between UW and Redmond.
That would require ST to run the route at better frequency, something they don’t want to pay for.
ST hasn’t speculated on any Stride lines beyond the first three. Its long-range plan (page 14) revision in 2014 has potential “high-capacity transit” (HCT) in the Redmond-Montlake corridor. HCT is a catchall term for BRT, sub-BRT (better than ST Express), light rail, or heavy rail (EMU/DMU). Specific potential BRT corridors are: Aurora Avenue (Seattle-Everett), highway 167 (Renton – Puyallup/Fredrickson), Issaquah-Bellevue, and Federal Way-Dupont. I’m not saying the lines would necessarily terminate at the 520 Montlake exit or Bellevue TC, but that’s all I can trace from the dotted yellow lines. ST may intend Redmond-UW, but the map doesn’t quite say. There may be a more detailed report of the corridors somewhere.
ST3 may include studies for some of these. That would give them a head start in ST4 and put them at the default front of the line. I don’t know if any of these corridors have that though. The ST1/2/3 tax streams are maxed out until ST3 construction ends and the bonds are substantially paid down, so that would be the 2050s at the earliest. An earlier ST4 would have to be an additional tax on top of those. Many people think the ST1/2/3 tax streams are already high and a fourth stream is unlikely. (By “1/2/3” I mean that ST3 reuses the 1 and 2 streams for itself once their bonds are paid down. That’s why ST3 construction won’t substantially start until ST2 is finished.)
Like a lot of “BRT” projects the Stride designation is fairly arbitrary. I assume it will have off-board payment, so there is that. The other big difference is that the buses will be battery electric. Other than that they will be quite similar to any bus. They will get stuck in traffic in some places and run in the HOV lanes in others.
Stride has a lot of capital projects built into it, analagous to RapidRide. In-line freeway stations are being built, Renton is getting a new transit center, the NE 85th Street interchange is getting an overhaul, and there’s a Stride-to-Stride transfer station in Bothell.
The biggest advantage of Stride is frequency. That will make those corridors more usable off peak and on Sundays.
(The 535 still has no Sunday service. I met a woman at the Bellevue Transit Center one Sunday evening wondering how to get to Bothell. I didn’t know the local routes beyond downtown Kirkland and I thought it would be an hour’s travel time, so I said the only way I know was to take the 550 to Seattle and the 522 to Bothell. (This was before Northgate Link.) She said that’s what she was thinking of.)
At the terminus of the westbound HOV off-ramp to Montlake Boulevard, there is an odd wedge-shaped red bus lane (it’s too new to see in google streetview, othewise I’d include a link here). It’s not actually wide enough for a bus to use it and be separated from general purpose traffic. Does anyone know its purpose?
Buses and trucks need a lot more space to turn right. I’m guessing that section is reserved space for buses to give them more space to turn right, since regular cars don’t need the space.
I do also remember that in the early days, people were trying to turn left from this ramp, and this might also be one of the measures to help dissuade drivers from doing this.
Technically buses can continue west onto the westbound sr 520 ramp (well it would need a signal change). That was in the original montlake lid design.
A hypothetical bus from kirkland to montlake lid to south lake union might use that extra lane.
these bus stops are laughable have we given up on riding the bus. not a single covered place to sit and what is the point of having a continuous covered awning if it’s not possible to walk under it. I would expect at least a shelter for the stop on montlake blvd