Another Link reduction comes this weekend, to repair a section of rail that was identified in an inspection. The section is near Westlake station on the 1 Line.
On Saturday and Sunday, June 21-22, trains will run from Lynnwood to Capitol Hill every 15 minutes approximately, and from SODO to Angle Lake every 15 minutes. Between Capitol Hill and SODO, a shuttle bus will run every 30-60 minutes. The link above lists where the shuttle stops are, usually next to the station or within a block.
This is the lowest frequency a replacement shuttle has ever had! It makes Link in the central core essentially unusable.
[UPDATE 6/21 1:30pm: Ryan Packer said this morning that ST intends to run the shuttle closer to every 10 minutes rather than every 30-60 minutes as previously reported. He saw shuttles every 5 minutes at Capitol Hill station. (Ryan is a reporter at The Urbanist, not affiliated with STB.)]
Sound Transit has a chart of bus alternatives between each station pair. Most of these are King County Metro bus routes. We’ve put together our own route suggestions below.
Between the North, Midtown, and Chinatown
If you’re coming from the north to Midtown (Westlake Center, 3rd & Pine, or Pike Place Market), you can transfer to route 49 at Capitol Hill station, at Broadway & Denny southbound, every 20 minutes until 10pm, 30 minutes most of the night. Or route 11 at John & Broadway westbound, every 20 minutes until 6pm, 30 minutes until 1am. If you walk three blocks south to Pine & Broadway, you can take any of the 10, 12, or 49, which all run every 20 minutes.
From Midtown to Chinatown/International District, there are a dozen bus routes on 3rd Avenue, with one coming every few minutes at most stops. Routes to look for are D, E, 7, 14, 36, 40, 62, 70, 124, 131, and 132. Avoid the C, H, other West Seattle buses, or the 2, 3, 4, or 27, because they don’t go to Chinatown. You can ask the driver if the bus goes to Jackson Street, and where to get off.
From the north to Chinatown/International District, your best bet is to take the First Hill Streetcar or route 60 at Capitol Hill station to 12th & Jackson, and any Jackson Street bus west (1, 7, 14, 36, 106). The 60 runs every 15 minutes until 7pm, 30 minutes until 1am. The streetcar runs every 15 minutes Saturday until 10:30pm, 18-25 minutes Sunday until 8pm. The Jackson Street buses come every few minutes.
All of these are reciprocal northbound.
Between the South, Chinatown, and Midtown
Southbound you can take the 101 or 150 from 2nd & Union to the SODO Busway & Lander, which is next to SODO station. The 150 runs every 15 minutes until 7pm, 30 minutes until 11pm, hourly until 2am. The 101 runs every 30 minutes until 7pm, hourly until midnight.
Northbound the stop on the busway at SODO station has both the 101, 150, and a few ST Express routes, and you can take any of them.
A second option is routes 131 and 132. These combined run every 15 minutes from 3rd & Pine southbound (the south of Pike stop) to 4th Ave S and S Lander Street (a block west of SODO station).
Between the North and South
Between the north and south there are four alternatives: (A) transfer buses at Midtown, (B) route 48 from U-District station to Mt Baker station, (C) route 60 from Capitol Hill station to Beacon Hill station, or (D) a bus-only option below.
Route 48 runs every 15 minutes until 9pm, 30 minutes until 11:30pm, hourly overnight. The U-District stop is at 15th & 43rd (a block east of the station). The Mt Baker stop is at Mt Baker transit center (across Rainier Avenue, slightly northeast of the station).
Route 60 runs every 15 minutes until 7pm, 30 minutes until midnight. The Capitol Hill stop is at Broadway & Denny in front of Capitol Hill station’s southwest entrance. The Beacon Hill stop is in front of the station entrance.
Buses, Not Trains
The only bus route from north Seattle to SODO station is the 28 on 8th Ave NW, which is interlined with the 132 (above). It runs every 30 minutes until 7pm, hourly until midnight.
Several routes go from north Seattle to Midtown and Chinatown. These include the D and 40 in Ballard, the 28 on 8th Ave NW, the E on Aurora, the 62 serving Fremont and Roosevelt station, and the 70 in the U-District.
We also seem to have twice daily service interruptions because of power failures, one of which is conveniently timed to when Mariners games are letting out.
Sure glad that a trip from Kirkland to Seattle that used to take 15-20 minutes on the 255 now can be made by taking 15-20 minutes to UW, waiting for Link running every 15 minutes to go one stop and then transferring to a shuttle bus. Such convenience.
Dow focused on more important things, like directing staff to give Board more information so that they can interfere and micromanage staff decisions.
Keep in mind that if the old 255 were in effect, a trip between Kirkland and the U-district under these conditions would take over an hour vs. 15-20 minutes on the current bus. You can’t please everybody.
However, for Kirkland->downtown, you do have other options besides waiting for Sound Transit’s hourly Link shuttle. You can switch to the 545 at Yarrow Point or Evergreen Point. You can switch to the 70 at Campus Parkway. You can take Link to Capitol Hill, then switch the a KCM bus, rather than the Link shuttle. Driving to South Bellevue P&R to catch the 550 is also an option.
For heading to the airport, you can go through Bellevue and take the 560, avoiding downtown Seattle altogether.
Of course, any trip isolation is usually faster on a one-seat bus ride, but a one seat bus ride cannot go everywhere, so when you argue for that, what you’re really saying is that your trip is more important than other people’s trip, so the network should be restructured to make their trips slower to make yours faster. Which isn’t particularly fair.
Great way to put it. Exactly what I was thinking.
@asdf2… as a former Kirkland resident, Metro utterly f#@ked the 255 and its riders. Yes, there was a gain in efficiency from truncating it at UW. But it was at the cost of rider experience and made it un-marketable to new riders.
So you are saying it would be fine if the bus only ran every half-hour (all-day long) as long as it skipped the UW and went downtown?
And hourly evenings.
Is it that tough for 255 riders to transfer to 545 anyways? It’s pretty high frequency. Otherwise they’d have to slug through the UW, or we skip the UW which would lose a lot of ridership. The 542 is not as frequent or reliable to transfer to. Or they should have an entirely new route altogether.
The 255 truncation came just a couple weeks before the pandemic lockdowns, and then in the recovery the driver shortage hit. Metro couldn’t have foreseen those when it planned the 255 truncation. If it hadn’t truncated it, frequency would be lower like it was before the truncation. The “gain in efficiency” was higher frequency, so it’s not like it just lowered Metro’s costs and passengers didn’t get anything.
I still think the Kirkland transit riders have a solid point and we should reconsider the 255 truncation to uw. And potentially have 255 head back to downtown
If route 255 were to be rerouted back downtown, the bus stops would be on surface streets this time,
What would replace Kirkland – UW service?
There was no Kirkland-UW service except the short-lived 540. When the 520 freeway stops reopen, that would replicate the old Kirkland-UW service.
I think sending the 255 to downtown would make sense after the East Link restructure. Kirkland-UW would be served via a transfer at Evergreen Point to the 270 or 542.
Right now the transfer is pretty painful since the 255 doesn’t run often enough in the evenings. I think 15 minutes is barely good enough, and 10 minutes would be ideal. 30 minutes (the current frequency past 7 PM) is way too long.
Transferring to UW would also be a pain but downtown is still by far the largest destination in Seattle
I think sending the 255 to downtown would make sense after the East Link restructure.
…
Right now the transfer is pretty painful since the 255 doesn’t run often enough in the evenings. I think 15 minutes is barely good enough, and 10 minutes would be ideal. 30 minutes (the current frequency past 7 PM) is way too long.
Those ideas are contradictory. If the 255 runs to downtown it takes a lot longer to operate. That in turn would mean it would *less* often. If the 255 ran downtown it is quite likely it would run every half-hour most of the day.
The pain felt by 255 riders is not unique. It just happened to occur at the same time as county-wide cutbacks. So instead of the 255 being truncated but running a lot more often it is just truncated. But without that truncation you would probably be looking at much worse frequency on that bus.
Another discussion about something that will never happen? The route 255 will never go to downtown Seattle again. Why are you all discussing and debating it like it’s a possibility?
A little math here since we are obviously doing a lot of hand waving. The 542 and 545 both serve the Evergreen Point Freeway Station and in both cases it is listed on their schedule. To go downtown takes an extra 10 minutes. The 255 takes 49 minutes to make a complete run. So it would take 59 minutes instead. The 255 makes 72 trips a day. If my math is correct it would take 60 instead. So the bus would go from making 72 trips a day to making 60 trips or a loss of 12 trips.
There are a number of different ways this could be done. Midday you could go from running every fifteen minutes to every twenty. That would save you about 10 trips. You would still have to eliminate some additional trips. It is worth noting that about a third of the riders never leave Kirkland. They would be worse off.
Frequency would need to be reduced but so would the transfer overhead for riders headed to downtown. There are also a lot of micro-issues with the transfer at UW station that add to quite a long transfer time
Riders to UW or within Kirkland would certainly lose out, but the demand to go downtown is just much higher than the demand to go to UW or demand within Kirkland. Look at the ridership differential between the 542 and the 545; obviously the 545 runs more often, but it runs more often because it needs to match demand on the corridor.
Also once the East Link restructure goes through, the best transfer for the 255 (to the 545 via the freeway station) goes away.
My thought is basically: if the 255 can be frequent enough (IMO 15m minimum until 9PM), running to UW is fine and maybe better due to transfer opportunities. If it can’t be run that often, then a less frequent bus to downtown is more useful.
Another option would be to split the 255 and take frequency from somewhere else to run the Kirkland TC-UW portion more often.
Why not just have a few additional 255 run to downtown (skipping UW, but still serving the Montlake freeway station for transfers) during peak hours only? Like the 102 or 111 for example. The regular 255 between Kirkland and UW should be frequent because it provides a fast connection to UW across the 520 bridge from the future 4 Line and future K Line. Shorter trips like that should remain frequent and available. Downtown is a tougher trip to make and should be done with a ST Express or peak hours route, with reliable transfers available for people making the trip outside of peak hours.
The most common complaint I’ve heard about the 255 is its poor frequency at night. Just by looking at the schedule I’m struck by how often it runs during peak and how rarely it runs at night. It is possible the bus is full during peak and they need to run it that often. Otherwise it might be a good idea to shift things a bit. An inbound bus (towards the UW) could run every fifteen minutes from 4:30 am to 9:00 pm. Then it would shift to running every half hour until midnight. This would not cost any more but provide extra service in the evening. It still isn’t great (and it is worse for peak travelers) but it seems better overall.
I’ve rode the 255 before. It gets pretty full during peak hours. Lots of students. The 271 is not quite as full but can be at times. The frequency is definitely justified.
I think your idea of inbound/outbound might be worth considering. Definitely one direction dominates.
I think the 5 is also thru-routed with the 21, creating another North Seattle->SODO bus option.
The 21 goes to 1st Ave S, so it’s 5 blocks from SODO station and across a railroad overpass.
If Link turned around at Stadium instead of SODO, more bus routes would be accessible. The 21 would be on 4th there, one block away. And the Chinatown bus routes would be 9 blocks away.
Apparently Sound Transit doesn’t want to, or is unable to, run a railway.
Sure would be nice to be able to design our city around Link, but that depends on Link actually reliably running.
What even is the use case for a 30-60 minute shuttle? It’s not scheduled, so you can’t plan to catch it, it doesn’t appear to be timed with the train, and using as a connector would make any trip on the light rail spine ludicrously time inefficient, even if you *only* had to wait 15 or so minutes in addition to the 10 or so minutes for two transfers.
Is it planned just for the sake of saying ‘hey we tried’ or fulfill some legislated requirement for service along the corridor?
Agreed. It does seem largely symbolic. For a lot of the trips it probably isn’t necessary. But a bus running frequently from SoDo to Capitol Hill Station would definitely add value.
All the alternative bus service will only be as useful as the signs, audio announcements, and staffing in Japanese and Italiano to tell our 20k visitors where to go, and on which buses.
It would be nice to have a regional transit agency that’s as interested in operating as it is in building (and spurring real estate development). There are echoes here of the original streetcar lines built all over the country by developers who lost interest in maintaining them once their properties sold.
The governance would need to change to make operations a priority. It’s not the priority of the local officials who sit on the board now.
Absurd. Why did they wait until literally the heaviest usage of the year. When will seattle grow up and become a REAL CITY?
The crack was found during inspection last week. This isn’t ideal but it’s not like it’s intentional or malicious. I would rather they fix it to be safe than run trains to meet the event demand and have an accident or derailment.
Why is ST running a 30-60 minute bus bridge? Is it just that it can’t find enough drivers at short notice for 10-15 minutes? Does it think Link is so unimportant that hourly weekend service is fine? It has been reducing weekend service to 15 minutes for much of the past three months with one reduction or another.
Would Dow Constantine please go to Capitol Hill or SODO station during the reduction and see how it affects passengers to learn that they just missed a shuttle bus and the next one won’t come for half an hour or an hour? Especially those that don’t know about the other bus options. Julie Timm went to CID station when both north and south trains were truncated there and everybody had to transfer. She even talked with passengers on the platform to hear their concerns and reactions.
If ST can’t run a bus bridge more than every 30 minutes, why have a bridge at all?
If it’s that infrequent, they should at least have the brains to schedule it so people can take the right train. But nope.
The point of rapid transit is: (1) to run so often you don’t need a schedule but can show up anytime, (2) to have a simple network map that visitors can use to easily find stations and transfers and feel confident they won’t get lost, (3) to be faster than regular buses.
Inevitably there will be occasional maintenance reductions or unexpected contingencies, but not all the time. When they occur, the bus bridge should be at least as frequent as the subway, because it’s replacing a subway and it needs to fulfill #1 and #2.
As ST moves to a more operational focus (as it indicated it will, and we understand it takes several months for bureaucratic changes), it should take this into account.
Link is almost none of the three you just stated. Buses perform better than it outside of downtown. We need better rapid transit options otherwise people simply won’t ride transit and take their car instead.
This is during WSDOT’s Revive I-5 closures this weekend: https://wsdot.wa.gov/construction-planning/search-projects/i-5-yesler-way-northgate-vic-pavement-deck-joints-and-drainage
Northbound I-5 lane weekend-long lane closures June 20-23
The two left lanes of northbound I-5 from Mercer Street to Northeast 45th Street will be closed 24 hours a day from 9:30 p.m. Friday, June 20, to 5 a.m. Monday, June 23, for construction. The express lanes will operate northbound only 24 hours a day during the closure.
In addition, northbound I-5 will be closed at SR 520 from 1 to 3 a.m. Saturday, June 21, and 12:01 to 2 a.m. Monday, June 23, as part of this project. During these closures, people who do not use the express lanes will detour via SR 520, Montlake Avenue and Harvard Avenue.
My goodness. What a freaking clown show.
This will coincide with one of the Club World Cup Matches, June 21, Inter Milan vs Urawa Red Diamonds.
I was at the Uruwa vs, River Plate match today. Most of the 12K attendees were the fans of the two visiting clubs. I expect Inter Milan will bring a somewhat larger crowd, but nowhere near Sunday’s Botafogo vs Sounders’ 30K.
I wonder if detour wayfinding in Japanese and Italian is in the works, including staffers who speak these languages.
Thankfully, the Mariners will be out of town.
The press release indicates that the problem is between Westlake and Capitol Hill stations. That would be a U-Link segment opened in 2016 (just 9 years ago).
These problems are occurring too frequently, especially for such new trackage. The service disruptions are scheduled to last too long. The replacement service is lousy. Those of us who have lived for many years around other systems can see how abnormal these extended disruptions are. Something feels very wrong.
This is why I wish ST would shift its focus to hiring senior and middle management who have worked operating rail systems elsewhere. These odd disruptions should make it even more apparent that seasoned operations staff with experience elsewhere is needed at ST. They need someone who can do things like this:
1. Technically understand the problem and assess what the risk actually is. Is staff living in an echo chamber? Were recent installation mistakes made?
2. Technically understand the proposed repair and have a good idea how long it takes, pushing back on the proposed repair schedule when needed.
3. Have the credibility to “tell it like it is” and point some fingers at why these extended disruptions are occurring. The public deserves a better explanation beyond a “Little Suzy Cream Cheese” (movie reference) press release.
Given the almost bi-weekly major service disruptions occurring on tracks in use under 10 years, one has to wonder if the system will even make it another 15 years.
When it comes to new light rail system reliability, I have to quote Jane Lynch (but add an apostrophe):
“You are the weakest, Link!”
PS. Building DSTT2 will not ease the disruption as the problem is north of Westlake. In contrast, much less than the billions being spent on the new tunnel could probably be instead spent on making the original tunnel more resilient during disruptions.
The press release says “near Westlake”. It doesn’t indicate whether it’s between Westlake and Capitol Hill or Westlake and Symphony.
It’s a piece of embedded track so in the old dstt section.
The service disruptions do not take “too long”, They take the time they take.
I would rather the fix take less time than announced, and regular service be able to return earlier than expected , over being over optimistic, and having to extend the disruption.
What are the financial implications of these disruptions? How much lost revenue occurs? How much extra cost to have replacement service is added? What’s the long-term cost to the unreliability?
It’s appropriate to be frustrated about the inconvenience. But it’s also appropriate to be concerned about the cost to the public.
I was thinking it’s been two weeks since the last shut down, time for another one!
Less than that here on the Eastside. I was planning to take East Link last week… but oops, it wasn’t running!
I’m going to remember this next time Metro or Sound Transit suggests truncating bus routes at Link.
Link is unreliable, and Sound Transit is loudly signaling here that they’ll just shrug and leave us riders to hourly shuttles. Given that, I don’t want truncations; I want all my bus routes paralleling Link to stay in place because Link isn’t actually going to be there.
This is a real shame. I’ve been commenting here for years pushing for a better transit network. But, Sound Transit is proving this week they’re incapable of running a spine that can hold up that better network. So, until Sound Transit is replaced by someone actually willing and able to run that spine – until then, Metro should ignore the loudly-trumpeted Link that isn’t actually going to be there when the going gets tough.
Yeah, it truly is a shame. For now let’s keep the buses do what they do best until we get real engineers who can create high frequency, fully automated, high speed rail options in our state, with minimal defects.
Sound Transit is a pure joke. They don’t even operate their own express buses and use Metro drivers to do it. Then what does Sound Transit actually do? The Link is a total mess on top of that and frequently faces significant delays. I heard the trains returning from the UW commencement were delayed over half an hour due to track issues near SODO. This type of issue happens regularly and people need to get to work on time. They simply won’t take the train because it’s unreliable. I used to P&R at Link stations to get to Downtown until I realized it’s actually even faster to do so at a bus station. That is extremely embarrassing and unacceptable! I don’t expect anything better from Dow Constantine’s leadership. In fact it will get even worse going forward.
On top of that you can’t even feel safe on the trains. The stations and cars themselves have homeless, drug addicts, and mentally ill loonies. It’s less frequent now compared to last year (I’m guessing thanks to fare enforcement), but it’s still going on. People won’t ride transit if they don’t feel safe. I can suck it up, but can’t say the same for many others. It is a complete shame we can’t enforce basic security and standards. The trains are not clean and stations smell..why? We are supposed to be a civilized country. I’ve visited poor countries and their metros are cleaner and safer than ours.
I understand the identified deficiencies need to br repaired but the current inspection regimen seems to miss them until rhe last minute when it’s a near emergency. But I’m also one of those who really misses the ease of the 255 before it was truncated at both ends so what do I know? St seems to continually fail on both the construction and operations side 9f things so is there anything they are actually doing well? I’m genuinely interested in hearing if there are folks who think they do a good job at anything besides collecting taxes…
Part of the urgency is probably the upcoming FIFA World Cup soccer games/
Yes, Link gets closed down on a weekend when a football match will draw maybe 20k fans from Milan and Buenos Aires, and a few thousand from around here.
Ergo, Link should not have been built.
(Check’s schedule) Er, Milan and Japan.
I am somewhat relieved this is not yet another disruption for tie in workwjich is almost a compliment.
We are also in the peak of cruise season, and there is higher demand for transit between the airport and downtown. Running a half hourly shuttle connector is a joke, and I wonder what is the reason behind it. They can’t call up as many operators given the shorter notice for the urgent repairs? What I would do is use what drivers you can get to come in on short notice to beef up the 48 or the 60, and promote those routes as well as the 101, 150, etc. between SoDo and downtown and the 70 between U District and downtown as your official “shuttle” connectors. Hopefully Sound Transit will adjust things based on the feedback.
Most of the cruise lines bundle private shuttle service to all tour destinations and the airport into the vacation package.
Nor is it easy to get to public transit from the cruise terminals without hiring a cab/rideshare.
Ten to fifteen years ago, Metro was hidebound and broke and all the urbanist dreamers thought Sound Transit would lead us into our great orgastic railway future, without all the baggage of the past. “People don’t cut rail.” High SES rail passengers would guarantee that politicians had to care about service quality. These arguments were made daily, as a reason to not care about existing transit services.
Honk your car horn if you remember!
I don’t remember this at all.
Even Lazarus says Metro service is important. I don’t remember any of the commentariat saying Metro bus service should go away. I do remember many debates on merger, but none for eliminating all bus service.
I object to the word orgastic and thought about moderating it or the comment, but it was such a small issue I let it go. Please don’t use it again; it’s not appropriate for the enthusiasm toward some transit project or another.
A search for the word led me immediately to The Great Gatsby:
Gatsby believed in the green light, the ******** future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter—tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther. . . . And then one fine morning— So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
It seems appropriate for Bruce to use the word in that context just like F. Scott Fitzgerald did in his classic novel. But I can see how folks would take the word too literally and find offense.
This would explain the slowdown for southbound trains approaching Westlake Station.
Does anyone know why they aren’t single tracking around the repair?
Since we don’t know what the track problem is, we can’t guess whether ST could single-track or not. Since it has been single-tracking in the last few outages immediately before this, it would arguably single-track now if it could.
To this point and all the planning for ST3, light rail is and should be very simple technology. We need to refrain from overcomplicating its design and operation. We have a tendency in the US for all large projects, and especially transit projects, to over design, over engineer and over build, which adds cost, time and ongoing maintenance and operating costs.
If this were a highway, they’d be working crews around the clock to minimize the impact to the public. But, that costs money, and when it’s transit, the added cost of night shift workers isn’t worth it, so the disruption has bigger impact during the day.
Do they really only perform maintenance during the day? That’s crazy.
ST does most of its maintenance and inspections at night. It’s not reasonable to conflate highway maintenance and railway maintenance.
Sound Transit:
Please, oh please, prepare announcements and signage at all stations, in Italian and Japanese, directing our visitors to the bus options to get from SODO and Capitol Hill Stations to Lumen Field.
That in itself shows the problem. The only easy way to get from Capitol Hill station to Lumen Field is Link or the streetcar. Only transit fans or regular riders can be expected to piece together something like the 60+106 or 49+3rd Avenue bus at short notice with little resources.
Well, now we know what the streetcar is good for. Sound Transit, make a sign in English, Japanese, and Italian telling people to use the First Hill streetcar and where the station is.
Indeed, it really shows how useful a certain streetcar project along 1st avenue would be during Link outages. Finish the damn streetcar!
” it really shows how useful a certain streetcar project along 1st avenue would be during Link outages.”
A 1st Avenue streetcar has nothing to do with Link. There’s a bus mall on 3rd Avenue with buses every few minutes between Belltown, Midtown, and CID. That’s your “streetcar”. It’s bus-only now south of Stewart Street, no cars.
The Culture Connector vision is to connect the two existing streetcar lines: that would primarily add east-west service between Pike Place Market and SLU/MOHAI, and L-shaped service between Pike Place Market and Little Saigon. Those aren’t Link corridors: they run perpendicular to Link.
The Capitol Hill-SODO route should be pretty fast since most of it is on dedicated bus lanes. I think roughly 15-20 minutes one way. Meaning it’s just a single shuttle running back and forth?
I wonder if it would be better to just get Metro to run additional service during outages.
You have too much faith in the Pike-Pine bus lanes. They’re incomplete, and buses still get slowed down by the periodic line of cars on Pine turning right between 6th and 1st. Also, it takes a bus two light cycles to go one block from north of Bellevue Ave to south of it. When the light turns green, half the light cycle is taken by cars starting to move, and the other half is sometimes taken by one or two cars turning left from Bellevue to Pine in front of the bus, making the bus miss the cycle. All the Pike/Pine buses have gotten unreliable; they’re pretty much always 2-10 minutes late now.
Metro could run additional service, but it would have to create a new route, because none of the routes from Broadway turn from Pine to 3rd anymore. (The 3 on Summit is 6 blocks short and down a steep hill from Broadway.) Metro operates the Link shuttle (it has a 700-something route number), so it’s one half dozen to the other whether it’s ST branded or Metro branded.
I was thinking just increasing the frequency of routes along the corridor rather than creating a new route for the shuttle. For example something like running the 70/49/36/60 more often.
I wonder if it would be better to just get Metro to run additional service during outages.
That was my original thought but I don’t think it works for every trip. The worst is if you just want to keep going on Link (e. g. UW to SeaTac). The 60 works but it weaves back and forth on First Hill. It also makes plenty of stops (as it should). So I think you need to run a shuttle but I don’t think the shuttle buses needs to serve all the existing stops. They could probably get by with a frequent shuttle between the two end points (SoDo and CHS) like so: https://maps.app.goo.gl/DSWRMVgLjjLeqR5QA. Since there are only two points to serve the bus could use whatever route is fastest at that time.
A new alert gives more details on the repair work: “During the closure, crews will remove and replace 30 feet of embedded rail at Westlake Station to fix a crack in the southbound track.”
“1 Line shuttle buses will operate between Capitol Hill and SODO”. It says NOTHING about the shuttle frequency, either in the email or on the linked page linked page.
Maybe ST has silently increased the shuttle frequency to 15 minutes, but we wouldn’t know. Maybe it hasn’t.
The linked page has a section “Trying to get to FIFA Club World Cup 2026?” It mentions the First Hill Streetcar. (Yaay! That was my suggestion; did ST follow it?) Otherwise it just says “Alternate bus service” with a link to its general chart, and the N and S lines (Sounder). That could only be the Sounder specials, since Sounder doesn’t normally operate weekends.
The alert says “This repair will require the full closure of [5 stations].” It doesn’t explain the discrepancy between repairing one track and closing both tracks. Of course, it’s possible the repair machine or crew must encroach the other track.
(Sic: The section title is indeed 2026, which is the main World Cup events but not this weekend’s disruption.)
Yikes! I just got the text alert and that was the first thing I noticed – their page about the disruption says nothing about shuttle frequency, leading a reasonable reader to assume it will be timed with train arrivals…
Why would frequencies in the unaffected part of Link be down to 15 minutes?
It may be due to the logistics of splitting the line, the number of trains available for each half, and the overhead of additional turnarounds. ST has never explained it, but split service has always been 15 minutes or less from from what I remember. I don’t know whether ST could do 10-minute service but chooses not to or what.
When Metro has two routes that meet downtown, it needs more buses than if it through-routes them into one route, because there are twice as many layovers. That has been one of the arguments for through-routing the 28/132, 5/21, 1/14, etc.
Third alert at 6pm. This one says the shuttle will run every 30 minutes approximately. It also has specific bus route suggestions:
“””
-First Hill Streetcar: Connects International District Station to Capitol Hill Station through the First Hill Neighborhood
-Route 49: Connects International District Station, Westlake Station, Capitol Hill Station, and University District Station. Arrives every 20 minutes during peak hours.
-Routes 101, 102, 150, & 594: Serving all of the Downtown Seattle Stations from SODO Station to Westlake Station
-Routes 21, 131, & 132: Serving all of the Downtown Seattle Stations from International District Station to Westlake Station
-Route 124: Connects Tukwila International Station to the Downtown Seattle Stations between Stadium Station and Westlake Station
“””
One other problem (and this is on Metro):
The wayfinding downtown is a confused hash of buses moved to different stops (due to construction) where there is no signage confirming one is at the correct stop.
I took route 132 home from different stops this week and both were messed up on the wayfinding.
The first time, I went to 3rd & Pike, as per the stop listing on the web page. I could not find 132 on the signage there, and watched my 132 speed by. The stop was actually down closer to Union. In this case, the webpage was misleading but the signage was correct.
The next time, I went to 3rd & Cherry. Alert signage said that stop was closed, and to go to 3rd & Columbia. At the Columbia stop, there was no mention of the 132. There was no Alert signage. I then saw a southbound RapidRide bus stop and pick up passengers at Cherry. Thankfully, the 132 came along and stopped at Columbia before I could head back to Cherry.
A lot of the soccer fans in town for just a few days will be dazed and confused by the misleading wayfinding even if they can fully understand the numbers and street names.
Many of the mentioned alternatives are rerouted ib pioneer Square, at least southbound.
21
131
132
124
These are all rerouted around rhe ongoing closure of 3rd Ave s/ s main street until at least August 1. Northbound seems unaffected right now.
These four routes have a stealth stop on 3rd Ave southbound just north of Columbia. However the Metro info post at that stop does not mention them.
Someone left some grafitti on the info board asking “Where’s my damn bus?”
These four routes also appear to have a stealth stop on 2nd Ave S Ext just north of Jackson. The 132s I rode most recently served that stop.
When they do bus bridge for Link and mention frequency like 15 minutes or 30-60 minutes this time, do they mean 15 minutes every 4 buses (to coincide with light rail capacity) or 15 minutes per bus?
It’s frequency, not travel time. 30 minutes is two buses per hour; 60 minutes is one bus per hour.
I understand it is not travel time. I was wondering if Link shuttle has multiple buses leaving at the same time to match light rail capacity.
I’ve noticed that last time when Link Shuttle was running in downtown and they said they would operate in 15-min frequency, the frequency I observed was less than 5 minutes. I think today’s situation is similar. There are definitely more than 2 buses leaving within 30 minutes, so I think the 30-minute headway is like 2+ buses every 30 minutes so they have enough capacity to carry everyone from light rail, but I don’t know if ST or KCM every clarified how exactly Link Shuttle works in the past.
Meanwhile, it turns out East Link is completely shut down too!
Sound Transit Link: They’ll get you nowhere. Because they won’t ever show up.
I saw on ST’s website that the entire 2 Line was down all day until now. The service just came back. I also noticed there was no mention of a bus bridge while the line was down.
Thanks for letting me know it came back up twelve minutes after my comment! Did Sound Transit read it and get galvanized into action? :D
Disappointed there wasn’t a mention of the bus bridge in Sound Transit’s alert, but there was one in the Seattle Times story.
TriMet operetes its own classes on how to do thermite repair of broken rails:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PyXvP-soSBo
I had to travel from airport back home yesterday. I decided to transfer 124 at TIBS so I don’t have to transfer twice in Downtown. When 124 passed SODO Stadium area, I definitely saw Link Shuttle run more frequent than 30 minutes headway, just like the previous closure when the alert said 15 minutes frequency but I saw Link Shuttle run every 2-5 minutes.
It took me 50 minutes from SEATAC to Westlake eventually, so I’d say if you have to make a bizarre detour to avoid Link closure, maybe just don’t avoid it and take Link Shuttle.
need one more reason why we need a second tunnel for the expansion? look no further than the entire system shutting down like this. what a mess.
The root of the is the lack of crossovers inside the tunnel not about a second tunnel
I agree, WL.
In fact, the early track diagrams don’t make it possible to switch between the new tunnels, even in the SODO segment. There are no connecting tracks planned north of Stadium Station and maybe even north of the OMF from what I’ve seen online.
So can a rider change trains? Well the transfers proposed are quite the trek underground. The easiest is at SODO, but even there ST wants to force two level changes for same direction transfers. it’s like these people making decisions just don’t get that they are literally clogging the throbbing aortas of the Link system.
Al, the line between SODO and DSTT2 will not stop at Stadium Station, so there’s no expectation of crossover north of Stadium. All the switching would happen around SODO.
I don’t think ST understands how bad it will look when North Seattle and the Eastside get easy access to the Stadiums via Stadium/CID stations, while South Seattle and beyond get kicked to the new “South CID” station with an even longer walk to the stadiums.
@Paul — In this case it wouldn’t help. At best you would put people on a bus shuttle to get downtown, then expect them to ride Link to SoDo and then transfer to the other train. Might as well just run the shuttle the whole way.
In general it won’t help. It is quite likely it will make things worse. The bigger your system the more problems you are bound to have (mo’ track, mo’ problems). If ridership keeps pace with each project (or goes up faster) we would be in good shape. The agency takes in more money to spend on maintenance. But it is unlikely that will happen. Our system is not geared to maximizing ridership or ridership-per-mile. It is designed to be very long, thus creating the very problem that we are having. We can’t spend as much money (per mile of track) on maintenance because we won’t have as many riders (per mile of track).
Nor is it designed for redundancy. The trains can not switch between tracks. The transfers between trains won’t be easy. They only connect in a couple places and the distance between those places is relatively small. If they built the “Metro 8” subway (a new line which would connect at Mount Baker and Capitol Hill Stations) then it would be different. In this case riders would have to transfer twice if they wanted to go from say, the UW to SeaTac (instead of three times with the new tunnel).
As strategic as the Metro 8 looks on a map, I would expect that the stations to be such 3D mazes that the transfer stations will be expensive, circuitous and inconvenient. ST designs for system diagrams and not rider convenience.
The most effective reliability investments appear to be direct investments like adding crossovers and adding third tracks. They are expensive and complex to add underground. They don’t add coverage. But that’s what works.
There’s a different dimension to the reliability problem too: time. ST insists on lengthy repair periods for things that should not take so long. There’s nothing wrong with taking the time to do it right. But I think ST seems to treat it all as if it’s normal and should be fixed with normal work schedules. I would rather get ST to think of each disruption as a forest fire — and instead assign repair staff and techniques in ways to extinguish the problem as fast as possible.
Of course, I am befuddled how such a new system can have such many disruptive repair issues so soon after opening. The rest of the country has rail lines decades older than Link without a history of such disruptions.
To me, it suggests some sort of systemic agency culture that has created and is affecting most of these problems. The problems seem to have been getting worse the newer the station or track. This is not normal for a light rail system. It’s very concerning.
I can only say these things as a bystander. It takes someone who has the operations experience and credibility both at ST and at other major light rail systems to investigate and report on problems and solutions. But like an admitting alcoholism, the first step is for ST to actually admit that there’s a worsening cultural problem. We need a “mechanic” now; not a “new car salesman”.
It’s been 9 years since the U-Link escalator meltdown. That was the canary that there’s some sort of cultural problem and it did get investigated. (The obvious solution — redundancy in escalators and elevators when building a station — was however mostly avoided although several newer stations do seem to have better redundancy.) The notable thing here is that the culture at ST increasingly treats these many recent disruptions as no big deal unlike the escalator crisis of 2017.
STB is seeing a real uptick in awful trip testimonies. That’s a pretty loud canary! Outsiders even complain that STB posts are overly harsh on ST. But the testimonies appearing on the blog are just warnings that there’s an internal dysfunction.
As strategic as the Metro 8 looks on a map, I would expect that the stations to be such 3D mazes that the transfer stations will be expensive, circuitous and inconvenient.
Maybe, but it would definitely add redundancy. If it existed you would have a fairly easy approach you could tell everyone: transfer to the other line if you are continuing on Link. It might be cumbersome but it would work. It is far enough and fast enough to be worth it even if the transfer is awkward. At that point you really don’t need a shuttle. For trips to downtown you just transfer to Metro buses (or the streetcar).
In contrast the new line won’t add much in the way of redundancy even if the transfers were perfect. In this particular outage you still have to get downtown which would mean a four-seat ride. Realistically it means you are still running the shuttle.
Of course there could be an outage that involves a section that is just downtown. But even then it wouldn’t help much. This gets into the quality of the transfer issue. For example assume that the trains ended at IDS and Westlake. If the transfer was easy then Link would be the best option. But since it won’t be *and* there is a transit “spine” along Third Avenue you might as well take the bus. Thus the new tunnel adds redundancy where we already have it (in the short section where buses run every few seconds and in their own busway). From a redundancy standpoint the new tunnel adds next to nothing just like it adds next to nothing from a coverage standpoint (even though it is freakin’ downtown!). It really only helps with capacity — an issue it isn’t clear we will ever have and an issue we definitely wouldn’t have if it weren’t for the poorly thought out idea of West Seattle Link.
It is easy to think “well, this is all too much money but at least it will be better”. It won’t be. Thousands of riders from the south end will suddenly find them selves with awkward transfers to the UW and very poor stations downtown. It is all too much money and it will be worse.
I think there is a much cheaper and faster bigger picture solution to consider rather than Metro 8. It adds capacity and frequency and reliability, and I think is worthy of study. That is to tie together the First Hill Streetcar with the South Lake Union Streetcar with streetcar tracks running one-way each on Pike and Pine Streets (converting both streets to one way traffic as well all the way to Broadway). Remove parking and other things as needed.
Half the trains (one streetcar route) could connect to run north to Capitol Hill Station, with the other half (a second streetcar route) connecting to run south on the current tracks to First Hill and the CID.
Then add a new branch to the west to Seattle Center or Belltown (branching location based on further study). The two branches at each end would create a very powerfully frequent two-line trunk.
Finally, get rid of those tiny streetcar vehicles in favor of longer ones that can haul more people.
With the right signal priority for a more frequent streetcar, someone could get from Denny and Westlake to Capitol Hill Station and not need to ride Route 8 at all.
Areas east of the Capitol Hill Station walkshed are not particularly high density and are mostly residential (assuming Kaiser on 15th is walkable from CHS). RR-G serves those areas too.
That also gives the added bonus of reaching more of Capitol Hill and First Hill directly from SLU and Belltown. Plus it puts a streetcar in front of the WSCC for tourists.
My completely speculative cost would be a few billion $ and done within 10 years, as opposed to a $20+ billion Metro 8 that would be in development for about 25 years or more.