Fall 2025 Service Change

81 Replies to “Fall 2025 Service Change”

1. I know ST is taking its time on bus restructures around the Federal Way and cross-lake Link extensions, in fealty to six matches of the World Cup.

   Does the CEO have the power to introduce a stop at Federal Way Station for the routes passing by it (ST Expresses 590, 592, 594, and 595)?

   Can the Board at least get rid of ST Express 586 once Federal Way Link is open, since the 586 bypasses downtown Seattle, and so plays no role in supporting capacity during the World Cup?

   1. Adding Federal Way stops sounds like a significant change that would require board approval.

      The gap between Federal Way Link opening the ST Express restructure is less than a year, so there will be little appetite for fiddling with tiny parts of it like the 586. And the 586 does affect World Cup capacity, because people on it aren’t on the 1 Line at the airport or south Seattle or central Seattle.

   2. The 586 goes to UW and is kept going in part of funding from UW itself as its primarily an employee and student shuttle for the university as most riders on that route likely have a husky pass which pays for their ride. If UW is happy to pay for the cost, so be it.

      1. Zach, could you provide a record showing that UW pays for any portion of 586 operating expenses?

      2. The U Pass funds lots of bus service on several routes that would otherwise be less frequent or not exist, although I don’t know specifics.

      3. No doubt U-Pass holders ride the 586 (along with many other services), but I have never seen any record showing the busline is explicitly supported through third-party funding.

         It isn’t mentioned here as ST staff seriously contemplated its deletion:

         https://www.soundtransit.org/sites/default/files/documents/2021-service-plan.pdf

   3. I doubt the lack of work on bus restructures has anything to do with the World Cup. There is really no good reason to delay work on the restructures.

      As for the World Cup it is just an event. We have big events from time to time and we adjust accordingly. We run extra buses and Sounder Trains. If anything it would make sense to modify the routes with the opening of Federal Way Link in anticipation of the games. By waiting you create a system that is less capable of handling those events. For example, imagine if ST planners took a very conservative approach:

      1) Truncate the 574 at Federal Way when Link is running.
      2) Have the 590 stop at Federal Way on its trip from Tacoma to Seattle.
      3) Run the two buses opposite each other (for fifteen minutes service from Tacoma to Federal Way).

      This saves service hours which means you have more buses to running express to a game. It means that riders who miss the 590 can take the 574 and transfer to Link to get to a game. This is a very conservative change and yet ST won’t even do that. No one knows why. Maybe there is a big disagreement within management and they don’t want to advance ideas until there is a consensus. Maybe they just got busy with other things. No matter what though, it isn’t ideal.

2. I know this is probably due to nimbys, but it’s absurd there isn’t a bus that serves the cougar mtn/lakemont neighborhood better.

   1. I’m in your boat. They removed 246 and now more parts of Somerset are no longer covered.

      1. If rail actually comes in 2040 w stations in Eastgate and lakemont, we’ll be blessed with increased home values and new connecting routes 😀. So maybe this temporary suffering to somerset and lakemont will end up working out.

3. I think these are generally good changes. It’s too bad Snoqualmie River Rd still isn’t fixed; that detour around Bellevue College is pretty bad.

   I wonder if there’s a better way to serve the South Bellevue-Factoria-Eastgate corridor. Right now it’s kind of a mish-mash of un-timed routes.

   1. What’s the timeline for Snoqualmie River Road. I’ll be on the 226 the first day to see how good the South Bellevue-Lake Hills segment is, which goes through that area. I hadn’t thought the Bellevue College situation could ever be improved, so when might it be done?

      1. Bellevue has plans to upgrade it for bus service but it’s been slow going

         https://bellevuewa.gov/city-government/departments/transportation/projects/transportation-capital-projects/bellevue-college-connection

      2. They’re saying that the project depends on federal grant money awarded during the Biden administration, so I would not count on that money actually materializing until a new president takes office.

   2. Thinking about it a bit:

      For the Factoria-Eastgate corridor, I would figure out a layover area near Factoria Blvd/Coal Creek Pkwy, then time to 223/226 to run opposite each other through Factoria. That would be extended to Newport Hills P+R if Stride S1 ends up with a stop there (it should). That would be a 10-15 minute combined corridor.

      For Factoria-South Bellevue, I would send the 240 straight there instead of detouring to Eastgate, and time it opposite the 203 off-peak. That would be 15 minutes off-peak, and a max of 20 minutes during peak

      Eastgate-South Bellevue can rely on the future 554.

      1. Why delete 257/311? What do Kirkland residents even use anymore? Seems like a joke.

      2. A handful of riders near Brickyard lose their one-seat ride, but in general the 256 should serve riders better than the 257/311

      3. Kirkland has totally gotten the shaft. Unless you want to go to SLU, the 256 isn’t a good replacement for 252/257/311 – it’s going to be a crawl through the Mercer/Fairview interchange. The 257/311 deletion – not highlighted – also makes switching from the 255 to the 257/311/545 at the Eastside freeway stations (which more than a few riders do) less frequent at peak. And that option will go away altogether when ST deletes the 545

         Kirkland lost reasonable off-peak downtown service with the 255 truncation. It’s becoming a transit desert for service to downtown Seattle – especially whenever there is an event at Husky stadium or the Montlake Bridge isn’t available or there is one of many Link maintenance disruptions.

      4. To make things worse they are deleting 545 as well, Former 255 Rider.

         The people on this blog don’t understand that these bus routes serve plenty of people. They only want their cities to be served and want everything to connect to bogus Link. Our lives are centered on these routes, bringing us to our destination in under 45 mins. Now our commutes will cross one hour, forcing us to park and ride… Or even worse give up and take our car everywhere.

         Link is great for some people, but thousands of people rely on peak hour express routes or all day one seat ride service.

         Reducing service is never the answer. Add service but why take away what we already had? Unless nobody rides it but obviously the data does not show for the routes they are deleting or modifying.

      5. The people on this blog don’t understand that these bus routes serve plenty of people.

         Bullshit. I can tell you exactly how many people ride the bus (on average). I can even tell how many ride at each bus stop.

         You are missing the point. Every route has trade-offs. If you run a bus to one place, you can’t run it to another. If you run one bus a lot, you can’t run another bus as often. The 545 gets plenty of riders. But its most popular stop (by far) is next to an East Link station. It is worth duplicating so much of East Link? Hard to say. But Sound Transit (not Metro) has focused their East Side efforts elsewhere. It isn’t like Redmond is getting nothing out of the deal. They will have Link *and* they will have frequent bus service to the UW.

4. “will serve Spring District station, Clyde Hill, Medina, downtown Bellevue station, and South Bellevue station.”

   Modified DART 249 starting running tomorrow won’t serve Clyde Hill and Medina. I believe it will remain on Bellevue Way for now until 270 is added next year.

   1. It looks like you’re right.

      1. You still don’t seem to understand. The 270 will add 5-10 mins extra time between Bellevue TC and UW. The current Medina route isn’t “slogging” it is literally a shortcut that keeps moving without too many stops. The new route will be far slower and stuck in more traffic.

         The 520 freeway entrance from Bellevue Way requires nearly a mile of extra driving as well as wasted time at freeway stops and city stops. It is very difficult to cut to the freeway stops from that entrance too…. It makes no sense. A city downtown like Bellevue requires short distance high frequency connecting service, not random routes to a distant college. The 271 was already an appropriate service that received high ridership, and these changes will not help. That’s why they’re reducing the frequency from what it is currently.

         Secondly, anyone who took the 271 from Lake Hills apartments and communities now have 15+ mins added to the trip due to a forced transfer and reduced frequency.

         That time lost at expense for giving transfers from a deleted bus route extra options, according to Ross’ logic??

      2. The 270 will add 5-10 mins extra time between Bellevue TC and UW.

         No it won’t. Google basically calls it a wash: https://maps.app.goo.gl/cdZ41YdGtDmjWJhA8. You either stay on the freeway longer or run on more surface streets. Furthermore, since it is a bus, staying on the freeway longer means that it can stay in the HOV lanes longer. In contrast the “backway” is well known. Anyone who has ever worked in Bellevue and driven 520 is quite familiar with that route. But with lots of people going that way, it is just as slow as any other option. That is the nature of traffic. There are no “secret backways” (if there ever was). The only way you can get there faster is if you travel in the HOV lanes and there are more HOV lanes on 520.

         A city downtown like Bellevue requires short distance high frequency connecting service, not random routes to a distant college.

         It is not a random route. It is a straightforward path that also runs by a lot of density. In contrast the current route is mismatch. It is basically a coverage route in the middle of one of the strongest bus routes in the system. Nor is the UW a distant college (that is absurd). The route is quite sensible and the type of thing they should have had a long time ago. It is bizarre that you think going from the north end of Bellevue to the UW is “distant” and yet you are freaking out that the route doesn’t go to Eastgate (even though that is farther away). That just doesn’t make sense.

         That time lost at expense for giving transfers from a deleted bus route extra options, according to Ross’ logic??

         What the hell are you talking about? My logic is pretty damn simple. Going via Bellevue Way kills two birds with one stone. Riders in Bellevue Way get a fast trip to both the UW and Downtown Bellevue. Sure, you can just run on the freeway the entire way but then you need to run some other bus on Bellevue Way. That ultimately means that buses run less often. That would be a bad idea given how terrible the frequency as well as the lack of coverage service.

         Meanwhile, extending the route has merit. I’ve already said that. I’m not sure sending it to Eastgate is the best possible option but it is certainly a good one. I think it would probably be better if it went back to Bellevue Way and then out to Issaquah via the freeway (stopping at the Eastgate freeway station). My guess is there are more people along Bellevue Way then Lake Hills Connector. But since Sound Transit is taking over that route, combining it with the 220 seems like the easiest option.

      3. Alright let’s see

         Right now U District to Bellevue TC ranges anywhere from 20-25.

         The stadium light rail station area to TC is 15-20 mins.

         Come back next year and I’ll bet you it’s going to take 30 mins to get to the U district on average, and lateness will increase. 😁

         If this bus route is so amazing, why isn’t it being run at 5-10 min headways at peak? The current 271 runs with a 7 min headway in some morning/afternoon runs.

         King County knows this route is BS and that’s why they’re making it only 15 min peak, and cutting evening/late service. They just can’t afford to keep the service hours going and need more “operators” on light rail which should have been automated long back.

      4. Even though 220/270 are separately numbered, I’m hopeful they will be run joint

         There are other routes in the county operated like this. Despite advertised as different routes, they run combined. And the similar service hours and frequency does seem promising for that to happen.

      5. I’ve driven in many places and see the buses are almost always empty outside of peak. Especially in South King County as well as parts in the East with lower populations. Why are they even being run? They should be DART instead of wasting service hours on these places.

         Meanwhile high frequency lines of travel and peak expresses are being shafted at the expense of these places.

      6. Deleting the 556 is also a complete embarrassment. “Taking away routes people rely on” should be Metro’s new motto

      7. 556 is SoundTransit, rather than Metro.

   2. After cancelling route 246, once Metro 270 replaces the 271 there won’t be any service in Clyde Hill and Medina at all – nothing west of Bellevue Way other than the SR-520 freeway stations – and they are due to lose direct Seattle service when ST discontinues the ST 545.

      Removing the 271 will eliminate Park & Hide spots along its route.

      1. Medina and Clyde Hill will be served by the 249: https://cdn.kingcounty.gov/-/media/king-county/depts/metro/documents/projects/east-link-connections/routes/249.pdf (from https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/metro/programs-and-projects/east-link-connections).

         Meanwhile, the freeway stations will continue to serve Seattle (mostly the UW). They will actually be better. Right now the 271 skips the freeway stations. The 270 won’t.

      2. The point about the 249 also raises another issue. Detouring the 249th to 84th not only lengthens the route, but looking at the map, I think it actually serves fewer homes than just staying on 92nd. Considering that 84th has a golf course on one side and a fence on the other (which makes it awkward for residents on the other side of the fence to actually reach 84th), the only walkshed you really gain by running the bus down 84th is the area right next to the 84th/12th intersection…which has very little there except for a few houses. By contrast, staying on 92nd is also mostly just houses, but it seems like a lot more houses, plus a couple of schools. Definitely not huge ridership potential by any means, but still more than what you’d get on 84th, plus it makes for a route that’s shorter and straighter.

         The counter argument is that the city of Medina might object because it would just leave them out with nothing, but if the objective is to serve the most homes, rather than the most local government jurisdictions, 92nd is still the better move. I suppose, one could imagine a microtransit service connecting its residents to downtown Bellevue and Evergreen Point station, but considering just how wealthy Medina is, along with the fact that it’s not “on the way” to anything, I think just leaving them with Uber and their private chauffeurs is good enough. Even Clyde Hill only really justifies bus service because the marginal service cost of having the 249 serve it vs. taking Bellevue Way is so low.

      3. Detouring the 249 to 84th not only lengthens the route, but looking at the map, I think it actually serves fewer homes than just staying on 92nd.

         Yeah, good point. If anything it should go all the way out to Evergreen Point Road. In terms of coverage the main value you add with the detour is getting to and from 84th. The bus will go along NE 1st Street (until it becomes NE 12th). It will also go along NE 24th between 92nd and 84th. Many of the riders that are served by stops along 84th could instead head north or south to those bus stops (this instead of this). It seems like a flawed routing either way. It neither maximizes coverage (by going further west) nor does it compromise speed and coverage by just going straight on 92nd.

         My guess is Metro punted on this one. They didn’t want to upset existing riders so they came up with a plan that is similar to the old routing. Riders retain their bus stops on 84th even though they no longer make sense. Riders in the area see an increase in coverage (albeit minimal) and figure it is good enough. Metro doesn’t want to spend a lot of effort on a bus that likely won’t get many riders no matter what they do. It would not surprise me if the area loses service in the future as the route performs very poorly.

      4. RossB: there seem to be stages for Route 249; there will be another post Route 270. Route 270 will serve Evergreen Point station but not the one at 92nd Avenue NE. It will use the general-purpose ramps at Bellevue Way NE and weave over. Pre-Link there was an issue with Route 271 not serving the freeway stations, but post-Link, downtown Bellevue is well-connected with Overlake and Redmond by East Link.

      5. There seem to be stages for Route 249; there will be another post Route 270.

         Fair enough. I think “Former 255 rider” was complaining about the situation after the 270 replaces the 271. That is the info I’m using.

         Pre-Link there was an issue with Route 271 not serving the freeway stations, but post-Link, downtown Bellevue is well-connected with Overlake and Redmond by East Link.

         Yeah, and on top of that there will be very few buses going from 520 to downtown as well. Imagine trying to get from Redmond TC to the UW. You try and catch the 542 but just miss it. Here comes a 545 heading to downtown. Ideally you would catch that to a freeway station and then transfer to the 271. Except the 271 doesn’t stop by the freeway. You are screwed. We manged to finally have the 270 serve freeway stations right when it really doesn’t matter any more.

         Route 270 will serve Evergreen Point station but not the one at 92nd Avenue NE. It will use the general-purpose ramps at Bellevue Way NE and weave over.

         That makes sense. There is no good way to access the HOV lanes there. Maybe during heavy traffic it is worth it to loop around using 108th (https://maps.app.goo.gl/Fp2CiyQrxsyAzV4z9). Either way it wouldn’t stop at the freeway stop (it only needs to stop at one).

      6. Taking a holistic view of the 249, the Clyde Hill/Medina area is really the only part of the route that, I think, has any justification from a coverage standpoint, so if that area doesn’t get enough ridership to justify service, then the entire route should probably disappear, and its service hours reassigned to bolster frequency on other routes. For example, the nearby 270 could really use some extra frequency on evenings and weekends, and axing the 249 could be an option to pay for it. But, if the route is important enough to run, some effort should be put into maximizing the number of homes that it can serve with a reasonably-shaped route. And a 5-minute look at the map says detouring to 84th is not how you go about doing that.

      7. “Detouring the 249th to 84th not only lengthens the route, but looking at the map, I think it actually serves fewer homes than just staying on 92nd. ”

         You could be right. I think the point of detouring to 84th Ave is to mitigate potential pushback from Medina for losing 271. No matter how few riders boarding 271 along 84th Ave, there is a frequent route there today. If 271 was replaced with nothing, it is likely to generate more complaints than 92nd not getting a 30-min service does.
         On days I ride 271, there are always someone board/deboard at NE 12th St @ 84th Ave NE. Stop at that junction may justify the entire detour although north of it the golf course make stop accessibility along 84th terrible.

         I think it is fair KCM wants to use DART 249 as a replacement for 271 in Medina. If it turns out nobody is interested in taking DART 249, then it will be a good time to decide not to make that detour.

      8. Yes, give Medina a DART flexible area on the 249 when it replaces the 271 there. That would address the needs on Evergreen Point Road, 84th, and 92nd regardless of which street has the default fixed routing. That may require an additional bus on the 249, but it should be more cost-efficient than a second route or a Metro Flex area.

      9. Ross, you don’t need the 271 for transferring at the freeway stations. The 255 already does that. And there is the 556 during peak as well. If you miss the 542, just get the next one? Why are we wasting everyone else’s time for someone who couldn’t get to a bus stop on time? Besides, the 542 runs all day and every 30 mins… And the 545 is getting deleted anyways. This is an absurd scenario and doesn’t justify changing the 271.

         The 271 should be modified to combine 220+270 in one ride, but ideally 270 keeps the Medina routing with the Bellevue Mall stops. Put a new bus along Bellevue Way that offers a freeway station transfer to 255/542/556 and South Bellevue station terminus… Or even just extend the already absurdly long 240 to the freeway stations.

         The 271 will not need to continue to anywhere beyond Eastgate since the 203 + 2 Line transfer does the job better. But a 220+270 combo is just atrocious. We lose a seat ride to the mall and the UW, and take slower routing through freeway stations that are becoming useless with the loss of buses serving those stations.

      10. There are two reasons for the 270: a faster trip from downtown Bellevue to UW (two regional centers), and to serve the apartments along north Bellevue Way (the densest part of northwest Bellevue) that have been neglected for way too long. Having the 271 go through Medina to UW at the last freeway entrance to the bridge is like the tail wagging the dog.

          No, it’s not good enough for the 270/271 to simply go to a freeway station and require a transfer to the U-District. Downtown Bellevue is the second-largest regional center in the region, and the U-District is one of three in Seattle and probably among the top five regionally and has a first-level university that people from everywhere go to at one time or another. So downtown Bellevue and the U-District need a frequent direct connection to each other, via the highest-density path. Not slogging through Medina. Medina can have a coverage route. Although I wish that route went to a freeway station so Medinaites could transfer to UW.

      11. Ross, you don’t need the 271 for transferring at the freeway stations. The 255 already does that.

          But that is only one bus. Look, the main value of the freeway stations are transfers. Someone taking a bus headed to downtown can transfer to a bus headed to the UW (or vice versa). This offered the most value when there were lots of buses going to downtown and the UW.

          Why are we wasting everyone else’s time for someone who couldn’t get to a bus stop on time?

          What??? You are saying frequency doesn’t matter? Sorry, but that is absurd. This runs counter to every study out there as well as just common sense. This is just basic stuff. Seriously, Jarrett Walker literally calls it “Basics” (https://humantransit.org/basics/the-transit-ridership-recipe). Read the section on frequency. Obviously it is important.

          Besides, the 542 runs all day and every 30 mins

          Exactly! It is not frequent. You obviously aren’t a shift worker. Imagine your shift ends at 5:00 pm. You walk to the bus stop and have to wait 25 minutes for the next bus. Do you get it now? At this point you look for alternatives. The 542 comes along. Out of desperation you take it. Now you are at a freeway station. Again you wait. How many buses serve it? Just two. The bus you’ve already given up on and the 255. That’s it. Having another relatively frequent bus (the 270) would make a huge difference.

          Having the freeway stations allows for better effective frequency. Having more buses serve the freeway stations allows for better effective frequency. Of course it would be ideal if we just run the buses more often but stopping along the way is much cheaper than running extra buses. This is common — and common sense — routing.

          The point is, the 271 would add a lot of value if it stopped at the freeway stations *now*. But once the next restructure goes in, it won’t add much at all. There won’t be many buses heading downtown. I suppose there will be the peak-only routes so it does add something. But it is ironic that just when the bus from Bellevue to Downtown finally serves the freeway station it really isn’t needed.

      12. The 271 should be modified to combine 220+270 in one ride, but ideally 270 keeps the Medina routing with the Bellevue Mall stops.

          Those are two different things. The Medina routing is poor. Very few people use the stops in Medina/Clyde Hill. A few use the stops close to the Bellevue Mall but way more will use the stops on Bellevue Way.

          220 + 270 adds value. But the main value of that route is diminished once East Link gets here. If you are going from the UW to Eastgate it may very well be faster to take Link to Mercer Island and then a bus to Eastgate. A lot depends on the frequency of those buses. That being said, it is still a natural extension. I’m not sure why Metro didn’t combine the routes. The only explanation I can come up with is they want to run the 270 more often. There isn’t much difference in terms of the scheduling now, but that could change. I could see the 270 — being more of a core route — getting more frequency. The UW and Downtown Bellevue are the second and third biggest destinations in the region. The bus between them should run more often.

          If anything there is a good case for a true express. The bus could very easily skip Bellevue Way and just stick to the freeway the entire way. The freeway routing is not ideal as there are no HOV lanes connecting the pathway but it would still be considerably faster than the current 270 or future 271. But that would require Metro add extra service on Bellevue Way. Bellevue Way riders would also have to backtrack to get to the UW (unless they ran a bus to the freeway station somehow). Given the service shortage it makes sense that Metro wanted to also serve the area north of Downtown Bellevue. Given that, serving Bellevue Way was the right choice (it should have been done years ago).

          By the way, the same type of choice was made for the 550. There is an even stronger case for an express there. The 550 could very easily just stay on the freeway from Downtown Seattle to Downtown Bellevue. As it turns out, there are HOV ramps connecting those two freeways. The bus could then continue (as it does now) to serve the north end of downtown. But it is a similar trade-off. You have to backfill service south of downtown (and live with the fact that some riders have to backtrack). Ideally you would have the money to run both a “local” (running like the 550 does now) and an “express” (which sticks to the freeways) but that would cost a bundle.

   3. The 270 shouldn’t even the exist. 249 is a good route to serve Bellevue Way. The 271 should continue it’s existing routing from Eastgate P&R.

      UW students deserve faster access to Bellevue TC (a major transfer point), Bellevue Square Mall, and Bellevue College. It is absurd we are slowing down the route to save a downtown apartment person a 5 min walk, but adding 15+ mins to the commute of others who are traveling from farther.

5. I have mixed feelings about the East Link restructure because it completely eliminates service along many streets. Unlike Seattle, where it might be reasonable to walk a few blocks to another nearby bus line (in the case of the deleted 20, e.g.), the street grid in Bellevue is not complete enough to make that really feasible there. One example is the section of the 246 that goes through Woodridge. When I’ve taken the 246 to go between Factoria and Bellevue, I’ve seen the bus full of high school students from I’m guessing Newport High. The trip is 15 minutes. Now, to go to school, the fastest way is to walk 45 minutes. The bus “option” is to walk 20 minutes to Eastgate Way, the take the 240 to South Bellevue station (which is going the wrong way!) and transfer. Even if Newport High provided a school bus (do local high schools do that here?), the kids will lose their freedom to walk around Factoria in the afternoon or have more trouble staying after school for sports and clubs.

   1. Back in the day there was the contracted 206/207/208 from Newport HS to Somerset and that general area, so perhaps they’ll contract with Metro to run a service similar to that. In a perfect world the 246 would still be around but it is what it is.

      1. When I attended Newport, the school contracted a special longer coach 246 that starts from Newport and terminates at Eastgate. Now that the bus has been eliminated, there’s no replacement.

      2. When is 251 supposed to get service?

   2. Bellevue School District provides school buses for elementary and middle schools, but not high schools.

   3. I’m not sure I understand what you’re talking about with regard to taking the 240 and transferring. The 240 stops right by Newport High School, but it doesn’t look like any bus goes to Woodridge. What would you be transferring to?

6. I like the new route 203, and was hoping to ride it to the Big Tree Ridge trailhead leading to Cougar Mountain. However, according to OneBusAway, there is no stop there – the bus just passes right by the trailhead without stopping. The nearest stop looks at least a half mile away. Can a stop be added? A local bus is supposed to be making regular stops; we already have the 554 for people that want faster express service.

   1. That’s wild the stop is so far away from park. That reminds me of the slightly less long walk (but still aggravating) I took along lake hills connector yesterday because there wasn’t a bus stop where the powerline trail meets the road.

   2. I’m seeing a lot “missing stops” like this in the new routes. The 222 doesn’t have a southbound stop next to Overlake Village Station (it was originally supposed to terminate there!), and doesn’t have any stops on 180th Avenue. There doesn’t seem to be any good reason for this.

   3. The 203 is actually detoured off that section of Newport Way until January due to construction.

      It uses I-90 from Issaquah TC to Lakemont Blvd. Metro hasn’t installed the bus stop signs on that section of the route yet.

      I agree that location should have a bus stop!

7. The new route 203 to South Bellevue station from Newport Way/Factoria is good (although we already had that with the 241 so not sure how that’s an improvement) however by eliminating the 246, service is cut off for all who live up the hill on Highland Drive and Somerset. So now we have no way to access the new service routes unless we hoof it. Going down the long hill is one thing but coming back up that hill, especially with a load of groceries is asking too much of us older folks and probably everyone. So now we have been cut off from bus service. I do not see any improvement in service, in fact a definite decline.

   1. U guys had it spoiled compared to lakemont residents, we’ve never had a local route go through lakemont blvd despite having an entire shopping plaza. Now we’re in the same boat lol

   2. It’s a great route. Of all the horrible East Link updates Metro is doing, this is the only one I like. Fairly fast, useful destinations, doesn’t alienate any riders.

      I hope Metro adds more routes like this to more places. The issue is the 520 bridge service is being completely crippled in the name of East Link when Link uses the I-90 bridge. We should not even be touching the current routes.

      1. My only qualm is they removed the Costco HQ stops. Why? It is a major employment center. They’re willing to waste 10-20 mins of people’s time on other route, but want to save 2 mins? They make no sense.

8. Smith used the Metro ELC diction. See Route 2XX will provide service between X, Y, and Z. It might be more clear to use order and write Route 2XX will provide service between A and B via X, Y, and Z.

   For Metro and ELC2, Per Buckley above, there will be upset over foregone service coverage.
   Route 246 served Woodridge and Somerset; there will be significant hikes to alternative service. Route 240 is being taken from Richards Road. Could they have Metro Flex rather that have it duplicate areas with fixed route service? They may be very low ridership areas.
   Route 226 served east of 164th Avenue NE; there is a significant hill and some multifamily housing in the part no longer served.
   There may be upset over the loopy pathway of the revised Route 240; inbound, it will connect Factoria and BTC via Eastgate and South Bellevue. How can it be asserted that Route 240 replaces Route 241 when it goes between Factoria and South Bellevue via Eastgate?
   Route 256 is replacing routes 237, 252, 257, and 311. It is the opposite of Link integration; it avoids Link. Current riders will find the pathway slow and the headways long.
   Route 203 does not serve Eastgate; it covers the Route 241 pathway. In the next phase, when Route 271 is deleted, there will be little service crossing I-90 at Eastgate (only Route 240?).
   Why is Route 249 being converted to DART? Note that 108th Avenue SE would be a good fixed route pathway between Bellevue Way and SE 34th Street. DART has poor reliability as a feature and not a bug.

   1. Yeah with the 246 deletion and future 271 deletion, it’s gonna be a lot harder to reach Bellevue College for those of use who live in lakemont/cougar mtn, somerset, and even Eastgate.

   2. We need to bring back 237 and maybe move Houghton station inwards on 405.

   3. How is 256 replacing 237? The only commonalities is everything from Woodinville to Totem Lake. Then it goes to Medina and Seattle instead of Bellevue.

      1. The only commonalities is everything from Woodinville to Totem Lake.

         I think that is the point. Back in the day, the 237 did that. Now the 256 will do that. The main difference is that the 256 will go to Downtown Seattle (not Downtown Bellevue). Riders will be able to transfer to the 535 to get to Downtown Bellevue. Eventually ST plans on running express buses from Woodinville to Downtown Bellevue. This is actually part of the Stride 3 plan (https://www.theurbanist.org/2020/08/14/cut-from-522-brt-plans-woodinville-will-get-a-new-express-bus-instead/).

9. Route 226 first day report.

   A year ago in my In my 2 Line Trip Report article I compared my 1-2 times per month trip from downtown Seattle to Lake Hills before, during, and after the 2 Line Starter Line period.

   Before, it took 1.5 to 2 hours each way, eastbound on 550+226+10 minutes walk, and westbound on 13 minute walk + 226 or 245 + B + 550. The eastbound 226 segment was from Bellevue TC via Bel-Red and the Northup Way detour to 164th & NE 8th, and then walk south on 164th to NE 1st. That was a long 40 minute frustrating slog. Going back I just took the 226 eight blocks on 156th from NE 1st to NE 8th, to the closest RapidRide B stop.

   With the 2LSL, my travel time went down to 1.5 hours. At first I did 550+2 Line+221. The 221 segment was from Overlake Village station to 164th & NE 1st. But the Overlake Village bus stop is a 5 minute walk uphill from the Link station, there’s no bench or shelter so you have to stand on the sidewalk the whole time, and the bus was often late.

   So I ditched that and switched to 550+2 Line+245. Redmond Tech has a much better transfer experience at a RapidRide station just 2 minutes from the platform. The tradeoff is the closest bus stop at the end is at 156th & NE 1st, so I had to walk up to 162nd uphill. When I was younger that would have been no big deal, but now it’s a 15-20 minute ordeal that’s moderately painful and tires out my legs.

   Asdf2 suggested another choice, 545+245. I started doing that eastbound. The 545 can get from downtown to Redmond Tech in a blazing 15 minutes midday. But it takes another half hour to wait for the 15-minute 245 and crawl through Crossroads on 156th. So on the best days I could get to my destination in an hour, and on the worst days 1.25 – 1.5 hours. Westbound I didn’t take the 545, both because the Redmond Tech bus stop is on the other side of 520, and to avoid the 520/I-5 congestion in Seattle.

   Today the 226 was extended to South Bellevue station, serves all of 164th, and eliminated the Northup Way detour. So I tried 550+226 via South Bellevue station. I left at 1:30pm. Eastbound I had a lucky transfer, just a 3 minute wait. The total travel time was 53 minutes!!! And it goes directly to 164th & NE 1st!!! That’s better than any of the above trips!!!

   The 550 segment took 30 minutes from 5th & Union to South Bellevue. The 226 segment took 20 minutes from South Bellevue to 164th & NE 1st. The tradeoff is the 226 is half-hourly, and drops to hourly at 5pm weekends. So I may have to wait half an hour at South Bellevue, but there’s a bench and shelter there, and Mercer Slough is adjacent it I want to walk in the woods while I wait.

   Eastgate P&R was much busier than I expected. Some six people got on the bus both directions. Eastgate Way is closed between Richards Road and 142nd, so the buses detoured on the south side of I-90.

   I discovered a large wooded canyon park on the east side of 168th between SE 14th & SE 24th, Weowna Park. The 226 stops there, so I’ll have to explore the park someday.

   I returned westbound at 4:52pm. The 226 experience was the same. At South Bellevue station, a Trailhead Direct bus going to Seattle was right there so I took it. Total travel time was 51 minutes, almost the same as eastbound. The van was busy enough I had to share a seat. I got off at Madison & Boren, which was near my destination.

   The former Northup detour is where I grew up, so I have mixed feelings about it losing fixed-route service. I’m glad it had fixed-route service then and I didn’t have to deal with Metro Flex, and the 226 then was on NE 8th Street so it went straight to downtown Bellevue and downtown Seattle. So it wasn’t as much of a detour as it was in its last iteration, where the detour added a whole ten minutes to the trip somehow.

10. I live in the Brettonwood neighborhood, and the removal of Route 226’s deviation to Northup Way and NE 8th has real consequences. I use a power wheelchair, and while I can reach 164th Ave NE, my caregiver usually cannot. Metro Flex Overlake is offered as a replacement, but the limited number of accessible vehicles makes it unreliable. A fixed-route bus with a schedule is far more dependable.

    I’ve also seen many high school students use the stop near my home, and they too lose out when service is cut back. Flex is not a realistic substitute for them either.

    Metro may have gained efficiency by removing the deviation, but in doing so it shifted the burden onto disabled riders and students. Fixed-route access matters, and I hope Metro weighs those impacts more carefully in future restructures.

    1. The thing about route deviations, it’s not just about Metro’s internal efficiency, it’s also about the time and comfort of every other passenger on the bus. It’s a lot to ask people to endure longer commutes for every single trip in or out of their home for the sake of a disabled rider who likely isn’t even riding on their particular trip.

       Ultimately, if you want good bus service, you need to live somewhere that Metro can serve you reasonably efficiently, which being either in a place with decent population density, or on the way, along a direct route, between places that are more dense.

    2. Bretton Wood was between my house and the bus stop when I grew up there in the 70s and early 80s. In 2023 I rode through there on my monthly trip to Lake Hills, and I saw some fifteen people get on at Interlake High School (total of two stops), and half of them got off on Northup Way. I would have been one of them if I’d gone to Interlake. The big apartment building at Northup & 8th was built when I was in junior high. The rest of Northup Way between 8th and 156th may be mostly apartments and institutions now (?).

       So it is a worthwhile coverage area. At the same time, people chose to live there knowing it was residential-only, unwalkable, and low-density — and affluent people who do that tend to use transit less than in other areas. And it’s not “on the way” to anywhere, so that makes it hard to serve. And the 226’s detour from 164th back to 164th was significantly time-consuming to those riding through — as I was after October 2022.

       I think the problem is the Northup Way segment needs to be attached to an east-west route. The 226 I grew up with was predominently east-west. The post-2011 incarnations have been an L-shaped route, so it’s primarily north-south between NE 24th and Eastgate P&R. That’s how the detour became noticeable, because it’s a deviation in a north-south segment. Another issue is that the primary retail center for this area is Overlake Village, and now people want to go to Overlake Village station, but the closest 226 stop is a 20-minute walk away from it. (I timed the walk to see if I could use it.)

       So what would really be ideal is a route — not the current 226 — that went from Overlake Village station east on 24th to 164th (Interlake HS), did the 164th-Northup-8th zigzag, then went west somewhere. I can’t see it overlapping with the B on 8th, but here’s another idea:

       When the B is split into east-west and north-south lines, extend the east-west B east to Northup Way. That would address the hill between 156th and Northup that’s hard to serve any other way. It may be low density and there may be no layover opportunity there, but it would be grid-correct and address a mobility gap.

       That in itself wouldn’t address the gap between Interlake HS and 8th. And none of these address Northup between 156th and 164th (which has never had bus service that I remember). But it’s an idea. And the “second 226 route” is also an idea. If either of these can be fleshed out and implemented, it would eliminate the need for the Metro Flex area, and the route go further than the Metro Flex boundaries to other destinations.

11. Since the discussion with some of you here about 240’s awkward routing at Eastgate after service change, I’ve been thinking instead of dropping Eastgate, maybe 240 should drop South Bellevue.

    Maybe future 111 can take more role on connecting Southeast side of Lk Washington to light rail at South Bellevue so 240 doesn’t have to stop at South Bellevue.

    It was pointed out to me there are needs to go from Renton/Newcastle/Factoria to Bellevue College as well as Bellevue Downtown, so Eastgate cannot be dropped. In the meantime, one-seat ride from Downtown Renton to South Bellevue might be less meaningful because most of those commuting from Downtown Renton Downtown Seattle won’t take 240. Whoever transferring 2 Line to downtown Seattle probably are from some part of Renton Highlands as well as Newcastle, and Newport-Factoria area. Although 111 doesn’t cover any local streets there, I would think most of those who choose to commute from Newport and Newcastle by bus because of travel time rather than lack of access to cars, so maybe after 2 Line opens and 111 gets frequency bump, New Port Hill P&R will be a lot better utilized.
    It would be interesting to know the boardings of Renton-bound 240 at South Bellevue next year.

    Another reason I think 240 better off not serving Bellevue Way is that its previous route between Bellevue and Eastgate happens to avoid some congestions. Richlands Rd might not get 240 more riders, but it is more reliable route than Bellevue Way during peak hours.

    1. The 240 really should go to South Bellevue to avoid cutting up Newcastle from regional transit. If the 240 goes to Eastgate, then a trip to Seattle starts to take a really long time, unless you are able to drive to Link in a car. The problem is, how to do that without giving up the connection between Factoria itself and Eastgate. We’re talking two places only a mile apart, so requiring an out-of-the-way transfer at South Bellevue P&R would be very annoying, plus you need coverage for the buildings between them.

       There are solutions, but they all have drawbacks. For instance, the old 245’s Factoria tail solves this, but costs service hours, which impacts the frequency of other routes. It’s also not that useful because Eastgate P&R isn’t really anybody’s destination, so you most real trips require transferring at Eastgate to an infrequent bus. Another solution is to send the 203 to Eastgate, which has the same problem as the 240 – the people along the 203’s route really need a bus to Link more than a bus to Eastgate.

       My feeling is that the best compromise solution is to detour the 240, but have it serve the Eastgate Freeway Station, rather than the Eastgate bus bays itself. That makes the detour much shorter in travel time, while allowing the same connections as before, and a shorter walk to Bellevue College, compared to previous route 240 service. (If the bus is unable to move over lanes fast enough to get from Eastgate Freeway Station to the Bellevue Way exit ramp, then the 240 should remain on I-90 a little bit further and serve Mercer Island station instead).

       Of course, this approach requires thinking about side the box and realizing that there’s no law that says only long-distance express routes are allowed to use the Eastgate freeway station.

       1. Also, Eastgate to South Bellevue is quite an easy trip if you don’t use the express lanes. That’s what was being used before the recent construction.

          South Bellevue must be served as it’s a junction between getting to Seattle/Redmond. Bellevue TC isn’t necessary but might as well if people don’t want to get off the bus for a shorter distance.

       2. South Bellevue must be served as it’s a junction between getting to Seattle/Redmond.

          Yes, but fewer buses would serve it if the HOV lanes of 405 and I-90 were connected. Right now the plan is to run a lot of buses from Issaquah and Eastgate to Link. A bunch of them will go to Mercer Island and a bunch of them go to Downtown Bellevue. The buses that go to Downtown Bellevue of course serve South Bellevue. They pretty much have to. If they could connect the 405/I-90 HOV lanes they wouldn’t. If you are headed to Seattle you take the express bus to Mercer Island. If you are headed to Downtown Bellevue you take the express there. In both cases it is faster than going to South Bellevue. You would still need to serve some of the local areas (e. g. Eastgate Way needs some level of service) but not as much.

    2. The 240 should skip Eastgate, especially now we have the 203 if you need to go to Issaquah.

       Unless there is ridership that goes to Eastgate, can think about a peak hour conversion.

       1. 240 riders should have access to Eastgate. Eastgate connects to Issaquah and Bellevue College. The new 240 should be updated to serve the back entrance of Bellevue College like before, then head down the hill to the P&R

          I don’t know why Metro doesn’t do this more, but just add some converted trips to Bellevue directly (skipping Eastgate) where ridership is present, especially during peak… Name it 241 or something. Really I think we should have kept the naming like 240X. The rest can go to Eastgate and terminate at South Bellevue station (or Bellevue TC is fine too). Eventually we’ll have the 4 Line which will simplify things but that is quite far out.

          The 111 should NOT take responsibility to pick up local areas outside of Renton Highlands. It is an express route for Renton Highlands to connect to light rail, not a local route for Newcastle. The 240 does that already and should remain that way.

       2. It is perfect because during these converted 240 trips, you just enter 405 at exit 10, quickly make exit 11 onto I-90 and then exit 9 into Bellevue Way. It will be fast and save commuters a ton of time.

          But you also don’t lose that access to Eastgate and Factoria on all the trips by only converting some of them (especially during peak).

       3. Eastgate contains Bellevue College. That is the main attraction. Folks in Factoria (and places south) want to go the college. There are also some businesses there and a park and ride, but those are secondary. It is all about the college.

          Unfortunately, the area is a mess. You can’t run a bus through the college. It has to go around. Fortunately, they are fixing that but it will be a while.

          There are other issues. The freeway station is great. It is a bit of a schlep up to the college but the service savings are huge. If they don’t want to walk, they can always transfer.

          But you can’t run express from the freeway station to Downtown Bellevue. Once you get on the HOV lanes (westbound) the bus is too far west to connect to 405. The buses from Eastgate tend to take two different pathways. Sometimes they get right back on the freeway and run express to Mercer Island. For someone trying to get from Issaquah or Eastgate to Seattle this is ideal. The buses headed to Downtown Bellevue (like the 240) end up running on Eastgate Way and then going by the South Bellevue Station before heading up to Downtown Bellevue. Sometimes they just end at South Bellevue and you have to transfer.

          Making matters even messier is the way a bus gets from the freeway station (the 142nd Place overpass) to Eastgate Way. It doesn’t just turn. It has to loop around. To be fair, this also gets riders closer to the college. Thus a rider on the 240 (coming from Factoria or farther south) gets a better connection to the college. Since the bus already makes that loop it often makes an additional loop inside the parking garage. In my opinion this is a big waste of time. They should just add some bus stops nearby and save some time. This would be the easiest way to speed up the buses (although it wouldn’t save a huge amount of time).

          In the long run they should connect the 405 and I-90 HOV lanes. Then you can have express buses from the freeway ramp head to Downtown Bellevue and Mercer Island. At that point I would take a very different approach when it comes to serving the area. Right now, Metro is trying to have every bus connect to Link. This is a laudable goal, but it makes for an awkward network. The other issues I mentioned also make things more difficult. With the freeway HOV lane changes, I would take a different approach. I would run buses from Highlands and central Issaquah to the Eastgate freeway station. One set would run express to Downtown Bellevue, the other express to Mercer Island. Don’t send the 240 to Downtown Bellevue. Instead, send it through the college and out the other side. It could then branch (like the 223 and 226) or be one route (if there is sufficient demand to the northeast). Riders from the 240 headed to Downtown Bellevue would transfer to an express bus that would be there very quickly and run often. Extend the 203 to Downtown Bellevue. If the route can’t justify frequent service then run a shortened version from Downtown Bellevue to Factoria every half hour. It can do a live loop in Factoria. That way Factoria riders would have a bus every fifteen minutes to Downtown Bellevue (and Link) as well as a bus every fifteen minutes to Bellevue College. There would have to be some additional juggling around, but that is the basic idea. You would still have a bus on Eastgate Way, but not as many.

          This means that some riders would have to transfer twice to get to East Link. I can live with that. The farther south you are on the 240, the more likely it is that taking the 101 is a better option. It isn’t hard to imagine more express buses from Eastgate (to both Bellevue and Mercer Island). During peak these are likely to occur naturally (as folks from Issaquah head to Seattle and Downtown Bellevue). Outside of peak I could see the 245 being extended to Mercer Island. Even without all that, you have a better overall network. Not everyone on the East Side is heading to Seattle.

       4. @South King — Yeah, it makes sense to recognize that ridership during peak is significantly different than outside of peak. Colleges don’t have a huge peak demand. But downtown business centers do (especially for suburban riders). Thus having a peak-overlay for the 240 that is oriented towards getting riders to Link (so that they can get to Downtown Bellevue or Downtown Seattle) makes a lot of sense.

          The hard part is paying for it. We have pretty much killed off the express overlays. Even buses like the 15, which would likely outperform most routes in our system remains suspended. When things get tough (and crowding isn’t a big issue) express overlays are the first to go and the last to be returned. We need to spend a lot more money on buses (especially the East Side).

       5. “This means that some riders would have to transfer twice to get to East Link. I can live with that”

          Oh please, that is absurd especially when I gave a solution that works much better. Two transfers just to get to a nearby link station is dumb. If I was a Newcastle resident, I would want a one seat ride to Link.

          Run the 240 to Eastgate in some runs, and directly to South Bellevue / Bellevue TC in peak hours (skipping the main portion of Factoria). It solves every problem you listed. And access is very easy if you jump onto 405 from the Factoria exit 10. Within minutes you’ll be on Bellevue Way

          The 203 already serves Factoria so we don’t need that duplicated service. The only service we need is to get to Eastgate.

       6. Also you don’t have to go around to get to the college. Not sure why current routes do this but there is an entrance to Bellevue College from behind, quite accessible from the freeway station and P&R. Students don’t have to walk terribly far from the current stop that the 240 uses.

       7. Agree with you on the peak vs. off peak demand. Just unsure of why King County dislikes this strategy.

          It makes perfect sense to me and it doesn’t cost much more. Just replace some service hours on the existing route especially earlier in the morning.

          For example, students tend to commute to college much later than people go to work in Seattle/Bellevue in the mornings. So it is reasonable to convert earlier trips to go directly to Bellevue. It would be really convenient for Newcastle and Newport Hills residents.

       8. The 240 could also use reduced night time frequency or even be truncated at this time.

          I highly doubt Bellevue or Newcastle residents are roaming about at this time.

          My guess is it’s running because the ridership comes from Renton. So we can save those service hours and put them towards the express idea…

12. When is 251 supposed to get service?

13. Maybe Metro saw my complaints about the 102 because wow… It’s doing much better recently.

    More 60 foot buses instead of the usual 35-40 foot that keeps getting jam packed.

    The new drivers are getting to Renton/Fairwood 10-15 minutes early instead of 15-20 minutes late now.

    Overall much better experience. Hopefully this continues.

Comments are closed.