Fixing Stride 3

64 Replies to “Fixing Stride 3”

1. Is the project described correctly in the post?
   A September 2023 ST piece has this summary in part:
   “2.3 Current design and design refinements
   S3 Line in Lake Forest Park include:
   • Stations at NE 153rd Street, NE 165th Street, and Lake Forest Park Town Center.
   • Widening the road to include an eastbound Business Access and Transit (BAT) lane.
   • Retaining walls on the SR 522 corridor.
   • Continuous sidewalks on the east side of the corridor.
   • Removing the turn lanes at various places to reduce widening.”

   This implies that only one, an outbound, BAT lane is being added and that turn lanes are already being taken.

   My ST3 reset suggestion for Stride3 is about service. Its outer terminal should be Woodinville and not the new transfer point beneath I-405. (The first ST3 plan had the I-405 as one line; the I-405 lines will be appropriately split for reliability and operational concerns; it also learned that the transfer between Strides 2 and 3 was difficult. Much of the ST3 plan was questionable). It had one half the Stride3 trips extended to Woodinville and half turned back at UWB/CCC. After analysis, ST asserted that would lead to a reliability issue. So, their solution was to turnback all trips at a made up terminal in the North Creek wetland under I-405. A better solution to the issue they created would have been to extend all trips to Woodinville. Woodinville is in the ST district. It is a real place with a street grid, multifamily housing, and local routes with which to connect.

   ST3 would have to shift its charging infrastructure, if any, to Woodinville from North Creek. It would have to add a few more buses due to the longer running time. It would be worthwhile. Stride3 should be the Northshore trunk line connecting Woodinville, Bothell, Kenmore, and LFP with Link and one another.

   The East Link Connections (ELC) network will have routes 931, 231, 251, and 256. I hope Route 222 is extended to Woodinville. (I expect Route 256 to be a failure).

   Route 522 was formed in fall 2002 in a great cooperative project between ST and Metro. Kenmore Mayor Jack Crawford was on the ST board and his wife’s experience as a transit rider helped the process and Board decision making. Route 307 was deleted; routes 41 and 372 improved; connections were coordinated in Lake City. There was a two-stage public process to pick the alignment. Since 2002, the network service design was shifted. ST added peak period peak direction trips; ST actually cut evening service. Metro reduced service to North Creek that was served by former Route 307 and later Route 372. With U Link, 2016, Route 372 was truncated at UWB/CCC and Route 238 extended to Woodinville. With the North Eastside project, 2020, Route 238 was deleted and North Creek has no service. With North Link, 2021, Route 522 was truncated at Roosevelt, but not provided a consistent short headway; ST attempted to use peak Route 322 despite its poor reliability.

   This would be too much for ST, but the transfer between Strides 2 and 3 is so difficult, that the network might be better off with the Sound Move solution. What will the transfer be like? Under Sound Move, Route 535 serves Bothell; Route 532 does not. So, in ST3, Stride2 would skip Bothell and Stride2.5 would deviate into the UWB/CCC. So, use more service hours.

   Also note the diminishment of Route 372. Under the first Metro Connects (that did not have much budget constraint) it would have been elevated to RapidRide. It may have been dropped from the update. Under Lynnwood Link, Route 372 would be deleted and replaced by Route 72 extended to South Shoreline Link. Both Stride3 and Route 72 would serve NE 145th Street, a congested arterial that feeds a full I-5 interchange. The Lake City nexus of the 2002 network will be deleted. Link will be key, but Lynnwood Link only serves the Pinehurst station with Route 77 and it will miss the Lake City hub stops.

   1. The summary is consistent with this post. This:

      “Widening the road to include an eastbound Business Access and Transit (BAT) lane.
      Removing the turn lanes at various places to reduce widening.”

      is basically the same thing as this:

      “One of the goals for Stride 3 is to provide bus lanes both directions along SR-522”
      “they plan on eliminating many of the center-turn lanes, they will still retain quite a few”

      The only significant difference is that I explicitly mentioned the two general purpose lanes (but forgot to mention the existing BAT lane. But otherwise it is the same idea.

      I’m basically proposing that they get rid of *all* of the left turn lanes (at least much of the way) so that you don’t need to do *any* widening.

   2. My ST3 reset suggestion for Stride3 is about service. Its outer terminal should be Woodinville and not the new transfer point beneath I-405.

      My understanding is that there were big concerns about cost (of service) as well as reliability. My concern on this post is the capital cost as well as delays. There is also the real potential that they will cave and not add the BAT lanes for at least part of Bothell Way (in Lake Forest Park).

      1. I do not share the ST concern about service cost; service is very important; it is why the capital is spent. Some are concerned that ST has too much focus on capital. The ST3 reset is an opportunity to correct that.

   3. Also note the diminishment of Route 372.

      From a routing standpoint, the future Stride Line is flawed. By itself it seems OK, but it creates tough choices from a network standpoint. Sending the Stride line to 148th means three bad choices for the 372:

      1) End in Lake City (by the Fred Meyer). This means it does not connect to the BRT line, nor does it connect to a north-end Link station.

      2) Go to the 148th Station. This means that you would have an additional bus going on 145th.

      3) Overlap on SR-522 until the Lake Forest Park Town Center. This is the first realistic option for a turnaround/layover. Yet it is quite a ways from Lake City and there are very few riders along the corridor once you leave the city.

      4) Overlap until Kenmore. It is very difficult to justify two frequent buses on the corridor for so long (especially if one or both are considered “BRT”).

      At first glance, the best option appears to be the second one. Sending the 72 up to 145th seems quite reasonable, even if it overlaps with Stride. Except there are other buses in the same boat. If the 65 does not head west (towards the Pinehurst Station) then it faces the same dilemma. That would mean three buses along 145th, which is clearly wasteful. Or you are back to the same flaws (overlapping on Bothell Way or forcing extra transfers).

      Then you have buses like the 61 and 75. They will no longer connect to the 522. This again means three-seat rides for simple trips (Sand Point to Kenmore) or a lot of overlapping. It is just flawed routing from a network standpoint.

      In contrast, the current routing is better. It still connects to a Link station. It could also be extended to the UW. This would likely increase ridership per service hour. Unfortunately, we are pretty much stuck with this poor routing, given the “BRT” nature of this project (and the fact that they are a different agency).

   4. “Under Sound Move, Route 535 serves Bothell; Route 532 does not.”

      Are these the right numbers or were they not Redmond routes then? I can’t see a route going from Seattle to Redmond and then V’ing up to Bothell.

      1. The 532 and 535, not the 542 and 545. The 532 and 535 (in their current forms) go from Everett or Lynnwood, respectively, to Bellevue, making them the forerunner to the north 405 Stride line and making Bothell easily on the way.

      2. Morgan, not easily; it is difficult to get ether buses or intending riders to/from the middle of I-405.

      3. It will be easy once the two Stride stations in Bothell are open.

   5. We should also have it continue past Shoreline station to highway 99 and connect to E-Line.

      1. Having S3 layover at Shoreline South/148th Station has certain transfer benefits that can’t be replicated by having it continue past the station and layover somewhere on Aurora. And remember, the goal here is primarily to support Link and Link/S3 transfers.

         That said, better transfers between RR-E and Link are definitely needed. A good start would be to have RR-E extend past Aurora Village Transit Center and basically follow the route of Swift Blue to Shoreline North/185th Station.

         That route is working very well for Community Transit, and it would work even better for RR-E since RR-E could make additional stops along Meridian that Swift Blue can’t realistically make.

         Do I think Metro will do it? Nope, but that is a whole different problem.

      2. Having S3 layover at Shoreline South/148th Station has certain transfer benefits that can’t be replicated by having it continue past the station and layover somewhere on Aurora.

         That is simply not true. If you serve the station and keep going you have the same transfer benefits at the station. If you order pie à la mode you still get pie.

         remember, the goal here is primarily to support Link and Link/S3 transfers.

         Right, but that is the problem. The goal should be to create a better transit system not focus on only one aspect of it.

      3. We should also have it continue past Shoreline station to highway 99 and connect to E-Line.

         Yes, others have mentioned that as well. If you are going to go across on 145th the bus should continue west and end at Shoreline Community College.

         But I also think turning at 145th is a design flaw. It causes too many awkward transfers. The current routing is better. It would be even better to extend the current bus to the U-District. The buses should go across 145th but that can be done via the 65, 72 (or both). That is, assuming both are sent north to 148th Station. This is just routing 101. In general you don’t stop in the middle of the corridor. Buses going east-west should continue until they reach an easterly or westerly terminus (or until they turn north or south). The only buses that should terminate at 148th Station are those heading more north-south. Right now that would be a bus on Meridian (like the 346).

         Of course you can’t always do that. Sometimes there are no good places to turn around or layover. If the 5 were to turn on 155th and head towards the station it would either have to then head back south (to Lake City) or just end at the station. The latter would probably be better. But that is an argument against turning the 5 at 155th. It would be much better to turn it at 130th (and then layover in Lake City with the 61).

2. I think it’s important to reflect on the likely motivations of Stride 3 in 2016:

   1. East King had a small pot of money not being spent.
   2. Cities in the SR 522 corridor felt left out.
   3. Those living near SR 522 wanted improvements to 145th, which has been a long-hated stretch of road — but knew that there were no other obvious ways to get funds for improvements.
   4. Perhaps there were some who disliked the kinds of people that rode the bus with them in Lake City.

   In other words, the project is more politically motivated and defined as opposed to developed in response to transit operations needs. For example, had it been designed for good transit operations it likely would extend to Aurora or further to connect to enable RapidRide transfers.

   Trying to explain or justify the S3 design through a transit operations planning lens is always going to be difficult — especially because both end points are not even minor destinations. Instead the focus is on making more minor or cosmetic design refinements because those are the only decisions that can be put out for public discussion.

   1. Northshore was more eager for transit than the rest of the Eastside. It has some similarities with the Ballard and 45th corridor’s push for Link to Ballard that accelerated ST3. Northshore helped ST3 pass on the Eastside.

      Re terminating at Shoreline South, I’ve only heard it from ST’s side, but it said what Northshore wanted was the fastest way to downtown Seattle. The vast majority of them weren’t interested in going to Lake City, Bitter Lake, or Shoreline CC; they wanted to go to downtown and the U-District and the airport etc. Shoreline South station is, if not objectively faster than transferring at Pinehurst or Roosevelt station, perceived to be faster because it’s a longer Link segment and shorter bus segment.

      I heard nothing about people complaining about “Lake City riders”. Just that it wasn’t a priority for them to go to the Lake City Fred Meyer, teriyaki shop, car dealerships, or apartments.

      1. I have no doubt that the Northshore residents thought that Shoreline South was the fastest transfer station in order to get to Downtown Seattle. But there was never any study to verify that. It was always “opinion”. Just like not giving a care about to connecting to other places in far North Seattle or Shoreline is an “opinion”. I looked at travel times from Link stations to 145th and LCW a few weeks ago and it was not significantly faster had money been spent to make LCW faster for S3 buses.

         Add to that the time of day issue. The route (and most of Stride, frankly) is very heavily focused on peak hour commutes. It’s hugely cheaper than light rail (often driven by this peak hour commute focus) but it still isn’t set up for day-long ridership like it could be. For example, there are many college students who live on the Aurora corridor who could use Stride 3 to reach UW Bothell — but the route doesn’t go that far on the west and the terminal station near the campus isn’t very convenient.

         Or the project could have connected to Shoreline Community College or even Ballard Link. But going further would have required that North King contribute to it. The North King delegation knew it wasn’t important to them so they didn’t push for a connection.

         I think it’s reasonable to say that the S3 project was included in ST3 primarily to get Northshore endorsements and votes. It wasn’t included to be that valuable to transit riders and operations like it could have been.

      2. I agree with your assessment Mike, and it shows a clear flaw in the planning process. Northshore riders (or those representing them) focused on one goal to the detriment of others. This is not only bad for the region as a whole but it even bad for many Northshore riders. There are plenty of people that travel between Lake City and places north (on the 522 and 372). Now that will be a lot more difficult.

         Speaking of which, it is quite possible that many of those who argued for the 145th alignment weren’t aware they would lose the 372. It is quite reasonable to assume that even if the 522 couldn’t get them to Lake City, the 372 would. It is also quite likely that they were never told about the possibility of going directly to the U-District. It is quite possible that if Northshore riders knew of the full ramifications of this change they might have preferred the 522 go to the U-District instead.

      3. “is quite possible that many of those who argued for the 145th alignment weren’t aware they would lose the 372.”

         The 372 was a Rapid ride candidate in Metro Connects 2016, so they were expecting it to be upgraded.

      4. The 372 was a Rapid ride candidate in Metro Connects 2016, so they were expecting it to be upgraded.

         Very few people read Metro Connects. The transit experts who read it understood that the maps were meaningless. They were thrown together very quickly with no real analysis. Thus you had a relatively small group of people thinking it somehow reflected a future plan: folks interested enough in transit to read the document but unaware that the map was meaningless.

         My guess is the vast majority of people just assumed the current routing would continue. It is like service in Tangletown. For a long time there was the 26. My guess is very few people thought the route would change when Link got to Northgate. But it was replaced with the 20. When Link got to Lynnwood they probably assumed nothing would change with that route. But some knew that Metro had been trying to rearrange things in the area since Northgate Link. Thus they were very surprised when Metro proposed replacing the 61 with the 20 (which meant no more service on Latona). Only a handful of people remember that Metro had tried to serve Latona by sending the 62 there (via 56th). Had they been aware of that project (and the possibility of losing full Latona service) they might have pushed harder for that change. Even now there seems to be no one in Tangletown pushing for that change, even though it would serve the area quite nicely (and go through the neighborhood faster).

         People assume that routes will keep going the same way they are currently running. But routes can *and should* change. This is why a route change (like the 522) should not be considered in isolation. It needs to be considered as part of a larger restructure. Of course that makes things a lot trickier. It is much easier to ask riders “Would you rather the bus go to 145th Station, Roosevelt or the U-District?” than it is to have them understand a network. I supposed you could have attached a clause (e. g. “Assuming the 372 does not go north of 145th, would you rather the 522 go to 145th Station, Roosevelt or the U-District?”). But again, that is more complicated.

         Ultimately it shouldn’t come down to such polling. The transit agencies should figure out the best network. Sending the 372 up to Kenmore (or Bothell) when the 522 runs often is simply not worth it. The best thing from a network standpoint is to send the 522 to the U-District. That is what they should have done.

   2. No matter where they went though, the same issues would exist. I would have sent it to the U-District. Others would have sent it to Pinehurst and then continued to Bitter Lake. Still others would keep the current routing and then run to Shoreline Community College. No matter what though, you still have traffic on Bothell Way. This is the focus of this post. This is just one of many areas where Sound Transit has major financial problems. But in this case there is a compromise that would enable the right-of-way that transit advocates want while retaining two general purpose lanes both directions.

   3. He is right. It was politically motivated. Shoreline desperately wanted 145th improved, and having the light rail station near it and getting a BRT line on it was their way to get there. Initially, 155th, a street with existing bicycle lanes and a small parking lot for a park on the west side of I-5 was seen as the likely – and midway – point between the 185th St. station and the future 130th station, and it is. There was also talk of 175th as a potential north Shoreline station, as the Shoreline City Hall is on 175th to the west. The latter was easily dismissed by the politicians having Ronald Bog to the west, but for 155th the state and local politicians professed a universal message of dismissing it as “a quiet neighborhood street,” knowing that the decision makers wouldn’t perform due diligence to find that it had the identical cross-section as 185th Street did (and still does), a higher traffic volume, and less of a tree canopy, along with the previously mentioned bicycle lanes and parking lot. I overheard a high-ranking city official tell another that (145th getting picked) “was the only way to get that street (145th) fixed.” One former ST board member admitted, after the decision was made, that he hadn’t even walked the street nor checked the narrow cross-section there, not realizing that it was so narrow (60 ft ROW in places), telephone poles in the middle of sidewalks, no sidewalks etc….and that’s what the local politicians were counting on. Meanwhile, there were planners who were also regular transit riders calling for Stride to continue to at least 125th so as to serve Lake City and swing over to the 130th or Northgate station, the latter even further down. They were drowned out as well. The result: a BRT line forced through a narrow cross-section of pullouts on a street that’s been backed up from I-5 to 15th NE for the past 45 years during morning rush hour. Parochial decision-making is the way of life in. Sound Transit’s world.

      1. Yeah, a station on 155th makes a lot more sense. It is like having the station at 185th instead of 175th. It is just … better.

         There was flawed reasoning supporting the 145th station. Along with what you mentioned there was this feeling that 145th was closer. They didn’t want to backtrack and head to 155th. But then ultimately they end going that way anyway! Buses from the east will turn on 145th and then head up north. But instead of turning on 15th and 155th they will turn on 5th. This is worse for several reasons. You end up serving fewer places along the way. 15th has more development now and more potential for development in the future. Transfers are trickier. A southbound 348 to eastbound Stride trip could involve a same-stop transfer. Now it won’t. As it is, Metro is sending too many buses on 145th and not enough on 155th. Even when the finally “fix” 145th it will be way too slow to get from the station to Shoreline Community College. The old 330 had better routing. It was not only faster but it served two stops on Aurora (not one).

         These poor decisions go together. The only geographic advantage to a station close to 145th is if you are sending a bus from Kenmore there. But the bus from Kenmore should be sent to the U-District (via Lake City Way and the Roosevelt Station). The decision to build the station at 148th was as bad as the decision to send the Stride 3 bus there and they go hand in hand.

3. I live in the area and have a few thoughts on this. WSDOT has vetoed any ideas about converting a general lane into a BAT lane on 522. WSDOT has also vetoed the idea of removing the left turn lane from southbound 522 onto 153rd street. Right now there’s no sidewalks at all between ~155th and LFP Town Center. The original plan was to have sidewalks on both sides for the full length of 522, but ST compromised with sidewalks only on the east side to minimize road widening. As for left turns, if you look at the maps at https://www.soundtransit.org/get-to-know-us/documents-reports/stride-s3-preliminary-design-may-2025-lake-forest-park, ST is planning to remove the center left-turn lane between 153rd and 165th, which is the narrowest section of the highway. Left turns will remain everywhere except between 153rd and 165th.

   As for route 372, there was a broad expectation that the 372 would continue to exist. Metro Connect’s long term vision treated the current 372 corridor (UW-Seattle – UW-Bothell) as a future RapidRide. While Metro Connects isn’t a plan per se, it’s still a jarring shift to go from “1 frequent bus between UW / U Village and the Northshore” and “2 frequent buses between Lake City and the Northshore” to “no buses at all”

   The Lake City Fred Meyer is closing next month. While this is of course too recent an announcement to played any role in 372/Stride planning, it will be interesting to see how the loss of this major destination impacts ridership between Lake City and the Northshore.

   I’ve commented about this before, but in my mind, 1 of the biggest signs that Metro and ST aren’t coordinating well is that there won’t be a convenient transfer between the new 522(S3) and 372(72) routes at their natural intersection at 145th/LCW. So any future 2 seat riders between Northshore and Lake City / U Village will also have to add an ugly transfer onto their travel time.

   1. ST is planning to remove the center left-turn lane between 153rd and 165th. … Left turns will remain everywhere except between 153rd and 165th.

      Thanks for the link to the roll plots. I originally planned on linking to them and digging into the details but most people don’t have the patience to read them. I’m not a civil engineer and in some cases I find them hard to read. So this is to the best of my understanding. First some terminology.

      For sake of argument I will refer to “northbound” as heading towards Kenmore and “southbound” as heading to Seattle (even when not actually going north or south). There are center left-turn lanes which allow cars to turn left from either direction. These are sometimes referred to as Two Way Left Turn Lanes (or TWLTL). I’ll use that term. There are also dedicated left turn lanes (like this one). I will use that term.

      There are four sections on the roll plots:

      145th to 153rd: This area has no existing TWLTLs. It would be crazy to add them. They are retaining the left turn lanes. This will require widening the road in places but it is not controversial or particularly expensive as they are largely taking parking lots.

      153rd to 39th: They are retaining left turn lanes while getting rid of the TWLTLs. To widen the street is expensive because of the creek.

      39th to 41st: It appears to follow this same pattern. They are getting rid of TWLTLs and replacing it with a center median. It is a bit confusing because the center median seems needlessly wide north of 165th. I understand why the median is wide as it nears a new left turn lane but it appears wider than need be all the way to 41st. But it also doesn’t look wide enough for TWLTLs.

      41st to SR-104: Not much work needs to be done here because it already has BAT lanes both directions through there.

      So, back to your points:

      WSDOT has vetoed any ideas about converting a general lane into a BAT lane on 522. WSDOT has also vetoed the idea of removing the left turn lane from southbound 522 onto 153rd street.

      It seems that the problem is with WSDOT then. To be clear I’m not suggesting they convert a general lane into a BAT late. But removing left turn lanes seems quite reasonable. If they feel this might lead to more accidents then lower the speed limit. But ST — which has on its board the head of WSDOT — needs to stop pretending that we need to widen the road in very expensive areas. Your comments about the routing is a separate matter and will be in a different comment.

   2. The Lake City Fred Meyer is closing next month. While this is of course too recent an announcement to played any role in 372/Stride planning, it will be interesting to see how the loss of this major destination impacts ridership between Lake City and the Northshore.

      From a transportation standpoint I don’t think it will be noticeable. The loss will really hurt people who walk to Fred Meyer. The employment impact will be unfortunate as well. But Lake City will remain a large retail center with lots of social service offices and plenty of people. For a northbound 522 bus, more people board close to 125th than 130th (even though the Fred Meyer is closer to 130th). The same is true for the 372. In general ridership headed to the northern suburbs is fairly spread out around Lake City.

      As for route 372, there was a broad expectation that the 372 would continue to exist.

      Yes, and as I wrote up above, this was a mistake. I don’t know the history, but I’m pretty sure that the 372 predates the 522. As the 522 has become more frequent, it is essentially replacing aspects of the 372. Note that the 372 ends in Lake City on the weekends. This is unusual. It is neither a peak-oriented express bus (we got rid of those a while ago) nor is it a normal, all-day bus. The 372 is clearly aimed at serving UW students. It goes from one UW campus to the other. Now riders will use the 522 for that. The lack of weekend service for the 372 should have been a hint to casual observers that the 372 might not go to Kenmore with the next restructure.

      The 372 gets a small portion of its riders from north of Seattle. That number would likely go down as the 522 runs more frequently. Thus it is quite likely that the weekend version of the 72 is simply more cost effective than the full version (every day of the week). Thus from a ridership standpoint it doesn’t make sense to keep following the corridor. Nor does it make sense from a coverage standpoint. That part of Lake City Way will have buses. If you count 30th (an adjacent street) it will have two buses. There are clear issues with connectivity but those are due to the routing of the 522. You just can’t expect Metro to run a bus that is largely redundant just because the planners at Sound Transit sent the bus on 145th. Not when buses like the 44 are only running every 15 minutes and various East Side apartment complexes have no service at all (https://maps.app.goo.gl/F4dJSer6VH7rTQQs9).

      one of the biggest signs that Metro and ST aren’t coordinating well is that there won’t be a convenient transfer between the new 522(S3) and 372(72) routes at their natural intersection at 145th/LCW.

      It is worth noting that Metro has often failed to provide good transfers to other Metro buses (e. g. RapidRide G and the 48) so it shouldn’t be too surprising this is an awkward transfer. But part of the problem is the general routing. You have two turning buses. This makes the transfer challenging. Nor is this a unique problem. For example consider someone heading south from Pinehurst to Roosevelt . The 348 turns from southbound Roosevelt Way to westbound Northgate Way. The 67 turns from eastbound Northgate Way to southbound Roosevelt. The stop for the 348 isn’t too bad — it is on Northgate Way, not too far from Roosevelt. The stop for the 67 is quite a ways south. Thus it is much longer than it should be (https://maps.app.goo.gl/W9EE7qs2xYugwWR18). Going the other way it is longer (https://maps.app.goo.gl/e4UrCGJygcbvirQbA). Of course a rider can just sit on the bus longer but that increases the chance they will miss their connection.

      The same sort of thing will happen with the Stride bus and the 72. But it is difficult to get it right. The flaw is the overall routing, not the choice of bus stops. If the Stride Line just followed the current pathway then riders could make a same-stop transfer. The buses would overlap on Lake City Way but only for a small section (and a section of roadway that has a lot of potential riders). You were bound to get a lot of awkward transfers the day Sound Transit decided to send the 522 to 145th (instead of the UW).

      1. “is quite possible that many of those who argued for the 145th alignment weren’t aware they would lose the 372.”

         I don’t think so. I think there was no transit on 25th in the 80s: the a route 68 on the 90s and 00s from the U-District to Northgate. If I recall the 72 was deleted in the 2014 cuts and the 372 replaced it and the 68.

      2. It must have been in the U-Link restructure in 2016 when the 372 replaced the 68 and 72.

      3. Route 522 was implemented in fall 2002; it was a joint project between the two transit agencies. Route 307 was deleted; routes 41 and 372 improved. Route 372 had a two-way Woodinville variant and a one-way peak-only Kenmore variant. The transfers at Lake City were coordinated.

      4. Oh that’s right, the 372 was limited-stop on 25th because the 68 handled the local stops. When the 68 was deleted, the 372 added some stops and others were closed.

4. One good thing about center running transit is that if you get to a narrow obstacle, such as this bridge over Bsche’tla Creek. Eugene’s EmX and similar could switch to a single dedicated transit lane in the center of the bridge, requiring less space for this short distance while maintaining dedicated lane/track space.

   Though it appears there’s already 6 lanes on the bridge: two traffic in each direction plus a left turn lane plus a BAT lane.

   Maybe this could be reconfigured to provide a BAT lane in each direction, and make left turns happen from the right lane, as done with “jug handle” configuration such as done here?:
   https://maps.app.goo.gl/XuYuMXb95sy3R3gR7?g_st=ic

   1. Yes, center running buses can end up using the same amount of space as curb-side buses for small sections. The problem in this case is that there is no room for that (let alone center running buses). Not unless we widen the street (which is extremely expensive) or change some of the assumptions guiding the project.

      At the risk of explaining everything all over again, here is the situation: You want four general purpose lanes (two each direction) and two BAT lanes. That makes six lanes — exactly as wide as the road is now. At that point you have no extra room for a dedicated turn lane (unless you widen the street). It doesn’t matter if that lane is on the right or left side of the street. There is no room.

      An alternative is to have drivers turn left from one of the two general purpose lanes (as they do on parts of Lake City Way). Another alternative is to eliminate some left turns and require drivers to make that turn before or after they currently do.

      1. Reduce the general-purpose lanes to two and this whole problem goes away. This enormous expense is not really for transit, it’s for cars.

      2. This enormous expense is not really for transit, it’s for cars.

         Yes. My point is that you don’t need to take a general purpose lane (like they are doing in Seattle). All you need to so is take a dedicated left turn lane. I fail to see why a southbound driver turning left on NE 153rd can’t be similar to a northbound driver turning left on Roosevelt or 15th NE. If you simply get rid of the dedicated left turn lanes (but still allow people to turn left) you still retain two general purpose lanes both directions *and* the BAT lanes both directions.

   2. Only recently I noticed that LTD even has center stops at northeast end of the line where traffic doesn’t seem heavy and there is no bus lane.

5. They should run route 522 past Shoreline station to highway 99 to connect to the E Line. Please help me campaign for this. I mentioned this to ST. They claimed they don’t have money for that. This is a weak argument because they would get more riders from this and enough revenue for it today pay for itself.

   1. Even if the bus did extend west, the inevitable detour into the 148th St. station bus bays would make for slow service that would make this extension unattractive.

      1. The extra loop would be annoying but otherwise it would be fine. The bus would go across on 155th which is the better routing. (The station should be on 155th but it is too late for that.) The bus would go past Aurora and end at Shoreline Community College.

         If the Stride 3 doesn’t do that then the 72 or 65 should eventually do that. They could replace that part of the 333. Ending at the Shoreline South Station is just bad routing for an east-west bus. It is fine for a bus like the 346 that runs north-south.

6. Maybe i have this wrong but here is what I understood. I care because my dentist is on 25th:
   –
   The only bus on 25th today is the 372
   – as part OF LLE the 372 was bring replaced with a new 72 to run from shoreline soth to u district station
   – this new 72 would become the only bus on 25th

   – this change has still not happened and is a leftover piece of metros Lynnwood Link Extension changes.- its unclear if or when this is still happening

   Apologies if I got any of this wrong. I’ve tried to pay close attention due to rhe location of my medical appointments

   1. It’s probably waiting for S3.

      1. King County Metro notes in its page that these changes will be implemented when 2 Line fully open although I am not sure what’s the relevance and if that’s still the plan.

      2. Oh that’s right, the 522 is will move Shoreline South when the full 2 Line opens, before S3 starts. That’s what the Metro routes are waiting for. The full 2 Line was supposed to open before Lynnwood Link but it’s happening afterward. ST was afraid that with only the 1 Line operating to Lynnwood, it might get overcrowded, and moving the 522 to Shoreline North then might exacerbate it. There’s a 515 Lynnwood-downtown relief route, but nothing comparable at Shoreline South.

         This logic always seemed dubious to me, because the biggest crowding bottleneck is between Westlake and Capitol Hill or Westlake and UW. And for that it doesn’t matter whether the 522 terminates at Roosevelt or Shoreline South, because it will be the same. Unless ST thinks the 522’s ridership will increase dramatically when it moves to Shoreline North. But how can it think that? The increase if any will come when S3 is more frequent and faster. And the 522 will lose half its riders when it abandons Lake City according to Ross’s estimates. Or at least, those still on it transferring between Northshore and Lake City will be off it before it reaches the Link station.

      3. This logic always seemed dubious to me

         That is because it was never the logic given. ST never said why they were waiting to move the 522. People have just made guesses. Some assumed it was crowding. A more plausible explanation (at least to me) is one given more recently (in the comments). It will be better for riders.

         When Link goes across the lake the trains will run twice as often. Sending the 522 to Shoreline has some advantages and some disadvantages. Riders will be able to connect to Link more often. But riders will lose a lot of other connections. Thus you are basically trading everything else for a Link connection. The better Link is, the better that trade. They are waiting for Link to get better.

      4. “ST never said why they were waiting to move the 522”

         Yes it did. I didn’t keep a quote but I remember ST saying that.

      5. @Mike — I don’t think that is the case. Here is the 2024 plan. It is clear that they won’t send the 522 to Shoreline until Link goes across the water. But there is no explanation given as to why. Now consider the news coverage on The Urbanist. This was written by Stephen Fesler (Senior reporter). There is no hint that this is being done for capacity reasons. In fact it is the opposite:

         Route 522 currently terminates at Roosevelt Station, providing Lake City, Lake Forest Park, Kenmore, and Bothell a direct connection to Link. The agency had planned to reroute the southern tail to serve Shoreline South/148th Station four miles to the north, but that was predicated upon connecting to a station with much higher levels of train service from both the 1 and 2 Lines. Without both lines serving the station and the benefit of substantive local bus service, running Route 522 to the station could result in a poor rider experience.

         This is more consistent with the other argument. ST doesn’t want to move the buses until Link can give the riders (as Stephen put it) much higher levels of train service. So not only is this line of reasoning more sound, it appears to be what ST was thinking — at least when that was written. It is also possible it is both. Maybe some people are focused on user experience while others fear crowding. The latter seems dubious (for the reasons you mentioned).

      6. It is more cost-efficient to bundle bunch of service change together if it is not urgent.
         Maybe ST didn’t think they were ready to change 522 when Lynnwood extension opens, so they arbitrarily bundle this with next service change in their mind only they didn’t realize two years ago that that 2 Line full open wouldn’t be the next service change.

7. Just do 7 lanes and kick the bus off the bus lane when it’s impossible to widen past 5 or 6 lanes. The best way to do this is probably using a queue jump at the most congested traffic signal prior to this area that can’t be widened.

   Based on where traffic tends to be… Usually it’s only on one side as each peak hour tends to affect different intersections (sometimes there is overlap though), so you could remove the bus lane only on one side where congestion isn’t a known problem, or take advantage of queue jumps. This requires simple observation…

   1. Stride should also ensure traffic signal priority.

      Buses are slower due to their bus stops. But if they don’t have to wait at signals… That makes up for that time, and therefore buses compete with cars.

      If people notice the bus is faster, they might even consider taking it instead of waiting in traffic. That would reduce traffic along SR 522 overall, at least during work commute hours. Weekends can still get congested for the shopping rush.

   2. But there is no need to force the bus back into traffic. Not when there are two general purpose lanes to work with. There is no reason to have a dedicated left turn lane for a southbound driver turning onto NE 153rd when there is no dedicated lane for a northbound driver turning left onto Roosevelt or 15th NE.

      I’m guessing signal priority is part of this project but it different than the issue at hand.

      1. Buses can afford going back into regular traffic with a queue jump. There would be a solid gap.

         I’m only suggesting this for areas where widening is impossible, such as the bridge mentioned. A BAT lane is obviously preferred.

      2. If forcing a bus into regular traffic is no big deal for cars then getting rid of a left-turn lane is no big deal. In many ways it would be better.

         For a queue jump to be successful you have to stop traffic in one of the two lanes and allow the bus to get in front of the cars. You can’t just stop one lane. Otherwise drivers will use the other lane, notice the gap and then change lanes. You could isolate the lanes (with a barrier) or you block off both lanes. At best there is no traffic in the section where the bus runs with regular traffic. The cars either have to stop for a little bit or they manage to get in the left lane and it is isolated from the merge.

         Now consider what happens if you get rid of left turn lanes. Drivers who want to avoid a delay move into the right lane. Those in the left lane occasionally have to wait while someone else (turning left) waits for the left-turn arrow. It is remarkably similar for cars. But it is clearly better for buses. It doesn’t matter how badly traffic is backed up. The buses avoid it all.

         Why then would we choose a queue jump over just getting rid of the left-turn lanes?

         Queue jumps make sense when you just don’t have the room. The eastern part of Madison (and the RapidRide G) is a great example. To the west it is five lanes wide. This allows room for a center platform along with a couple bus lanes and a couple general purpose lanes. But to the east the street narrows. You can’t have center platforms unless you widen the street. That would be really expensive. So they run on the sides. Before they run on the side there is a queue jump.

         But none of that is necessary for this part of SR-522. You don’t need queue jumps. You don’t need to widen the street. You just need to get rid of a handful of dedicated left turn lanes.

8. Are you sure you can turn left on 80th or 15th? I don’t think there are any lefts without a turn lane on 522

   Some left turns can also be replaced with a U turn at the next intersection

   1. Good point. I checked just now on Google Maps. If it’s to be trusted, you can turn left headed northbound (but not southbound) onto 15th, and not onto 80th in either direction.

   2. Are you sure you can turn left on 80th or 15th? I don’t think there are any lefts without a turn lane on 522

      I am absolutely, 100% sure you can turn left from Lake City Way to both of those streets. I personally have turned from northbound Lake City way to northbound 15th hundreds of times*. I have also been stuck behind cars turning left onto 80th. There is no left turn lane for people taking a left at either intersection.

      This creates a weird situation if you are exiting the freeway. Typically the right lane has a lot of cars (12th merges with Lake City Way there). Thus if you are driving on Lake City Way headed to Lake City you may choose the left lane (to get ahead of a lot of drivers). But then you may find yourself stuck behind someone turning left at 80th. Again, that has happened to me many times. I would call that a “rookie move” but sometimes it works (and it is always damn tempting). But cars manage. For those headed to Lake City it means a slight delay. Once they get through that intersection it is smooth sailing (for a while). The same thing would be true if they took the same approach on Bothell Way in Lake Forest Park. Furthermore, there is no way it will be as bad as it is on Lake City Way. There are just way more cars in that part of Seattle.

      William is partially correct — you can not turn left from southbound Lake City Way to 15th. But Google is incorrect in that you turn left onto 80th. What you can’t do is turn left onto 14th. That is what the sign says in the street-view picture. It may be hard to read. It is quite possible that Google saw that picture and its tiny AI brain figured you can’t take a left onto 80th. But you can also clearly see a left turn arrow at both intersections. Those arrows wouldn’t exist if you can’t turn left.

      But at both intersections you don’t have to wait for the arrow. Nor does the arrow always turn. It is more common during peak hours. This in turn causes backups southbound. If you’ve ever wondered why a bus like the 522 is stuck in congestion heading towards Roosevelt, this is why. A lot of time is spent favoring cars (like mine) that got off the freeway at Lake City Way and now want to head north.

      Personally I think the intersections should be redone. I would ban left turns in both cases. But that would be the case whether there was a dedicated left turn lane there or not. For northbound drivers (including me) it is a bit annoying, but no big deal. Even if am heading to Lake City it is a minor delay. The problem is southbound drivers (and bus riders) who are delayed because of those left turn arrows. If you get rid of left turns entirely then you can have better traffic flow. But doing so there would push traffic onto 80th (https://maps.app.goo.gl/pJk2p3akZUipLauK7) which might be problematic. SDOT has much bigger fish to fry.

      *I like to hike and when I come back from the mountains I usually exit at Lake City Way and take a left on 15th.

9. I saw someone brought it up in the comment and I’ve wondering the same thing.

   I always wonder what’s the logic behind SR 522 Park and Ride in the center of the interchange.

   In the perfect world, ST would want to spend money building a transit center that has either something to walk or spaces for day parking. Bothell-Woodinville TC has neither. It is not even a very strategic transfer location.

   They probably think it makes sense to build a transit station there because it could be a transfer point between S2 and S3 so that they won’t need to run S3 to Woodinville P&R which is a better terminal station in different ways. However, I don’t think this station is even a good transfer station because there might not be a lot of need for S2-S3 transfer especially after S3 won’t go to Woodinville TC. It could be a good transfer location for people who would transfer there are probably working in Bellevue Downtown and going home somewhere along S3 or the other way. I am not so familiar what’s the demand on that end. People from Seattle to anywhere along S2 probably won’t find their commute involving taking S3 transferring S2.

   This transit station only has drop-off and pick-up parking, so for those who drive themselves from low density suburbs along SR 522 to take bus, they have to go to Brickyard or Canyon Park to park rather than going there. That leave stations useful for fewer locals who have someone to pick-up or drop-off them there.

   In terms of walking distance from S2 to S3 stop, the walking won’t be so bad. It is less than 1,000 ft. Certain direction of transfer involves crossing the future ETL Direct-access ramp which will be four lanes.

   1. There’s also demand to head to UW Bothell, though many students will just walk from the interchange rather than transferring

      I think it’s just a logical terminus for the line, plus WSDOT was already going to rebuild that interchange anyway due to the HOT work.

      Maybe 195th would have worked better? That is a longer walk from UWB though

      1. Yeah I agree that S2 transferring S3 to UW Bothell could be a logical use case. So is S2 transferring S3 to Bothell Downtown and Kenmore.
         I am not sure if it will be an easy walk from station to UW Bothell in the future. It just seems easier for people to wait few minutes and catch S3 to stops that is more walkable to the campus. NE 195ht would have worked better.
         Where SR 522 intersecting I-405 is an important junction for highway network, but the junction for transit system is actually at I-405 at NE 195th. In the future, SWIFT Green Line will also be extended to Beardslee TC in the vicinity.

      2. I think 195th is a longer walk, though not significantly longer. My very rough estimate would put it at 10-15 minutes from 522 and 15-20 minutes from 195th.

         I can think of a few reasons why 522 was chosen instead of 195th:
         – Easier to build a layover facility on state-owned land than to find a location elsewhere. Laying over at the last stop also saves on operations cost
         – WSDOT already wanted to rebuild the interchange to accommodate a second HOT lane
         – It’s a transfer point to Woodinville express routes, or other routes down the 522 corridor (Monroe, Duvall, etc)

         195th looks like it would have been good as well though. The 195th-120th corridor seems to be redeveloping, and it’s a pretty logical route between Woodinville and Bothell.

      3. fair enough. Before you guys pointed out, I didn’t realize there was plan to provide trail connection to the transit center at SR 522 ahd how close the location is to the southern edge of UW Bothell campus.

   2. Yeah, it is both a transfer point but also the S2 stop for the college. Right now the 535 leaves the freeway in order to serve UW Bothell. This detour is justified but still a significant delay for through-riders. It also costs the agency money. The expectation is that riders will be able to walk from there to the college which doesn’t sound crazy.

      In terms of S2/S3 transfers, the lack of S3 service for Woodinville doesn’t really matter. Woodinville will have peak express service to Downtown Bellevue. The bus will stop at the 522/405 hub (for trips like Woodinville to Kenmore). It also works for getting to Seattle but they will run express buses to Seattle that will be faster.
      Outside of peak, they will run buses from Woodinville to the 522/405 hub. From there riders will be able to get to Bellevue very quickly. They can also transfer for trips along the 522 corridor or to Seattle. The hub is very important for riders from Kenmore and Bothell headed to Downtown Bellevue. That is where they would get the most riders (even if the bus was extended to Woodinville).

   3. > I always wonder what’s the logic behind SR 522 Park and Ride in the center of the interchange.

      just to clarify it’s just the transfer point and terminal station, there’s no parking there.

      it does connect to the existing parking lots in kenmore and the other’s along i405

   4. UW Bothell gondola would be a sweet. Or a shuttle that runs really frequently and times with S2.

      Relying on S3 can lead to annoying waits up to 10 mins…

   5. I live close to downtown Bothell and S3 to S2 to Link potentially opens up a much faster commute to Bellevue and Redmond. I used to bike commute (2005-2020) to Redmond because it is reliably faster than buses. Now for a combination of health and scheduling reasons I usually drive (but only about 1-2 times a week). I’d rather not.

      UW Bothell is not a good place to get to the bus network because it’s about 1.6 miles rather than under a mile from my house to the 522/future S3. The Canyon Park stop is over 3 miles away. A branched implementation of Stride off 405 with one branch through Bothell would have worked even better than the S2/S3 connection. Especially if the connection is nearly 1,000 feet (not sure why they are going to the trouble if the bays aren’t close to adjacent). But having some kind of relatively easy transfer between the lines is key. Bothell has been very friendly to downtown development and urbanism in general so it has decent transit demand that this will serve (characterizing the corridor as all low density is not correct). And there is demand for better transit to Bellevue and Redmond all along the S3 corridor at least as far west as Lake Forest Park.

      1. The toughest problem Bothell (and to a lesser extent Kenmore) has in terms of ridership is not the density, it is proximity. Basically it isn’t close to other places people want to go. The corridor in Snohomish County is not bad but if you look at the ridership (of either the 522 or 372) it is striking. Not that many people are using the buses to travel from say, Bothell to Kenmore. Way more people get on and off the bus in Seattle. Folks in the northern suburbs want to get to various places in Seattle and Bellevue and it takes a while to get there. This suppresses ridership.

         A branched implementation of Stride off 405 with one branch through Bothell would have worked even better than the S2/S3 connection.

         That is an interesting idea. I can definitely see merit. I don’t have recent numbers for the 535. But in the past, UW Bothell and Bothell Park & Ride to Bellevue contributed about a third of the ridership to Bellevue. A bus that went farther — into the heart of Bothell — could be quite popular. There are more connections that was as well. Speaking of which, this puts pressure on the agencies to end their buses at the transit center. It is a bit awkward.

         That being said, there is always a price with a branch. Frequency would be halved to the north. A lot of people from Lynnwood are headed to Bellevue on the bus and their bus would run half is often. Sometimes it is better to just force a transfer.

      2. Interesting point, in that case a selection of S3 trips through run to Bellevue probably will help you. And it actually solves the problem that S2 is not serving Beardslee Blvd as well as UW Bothell campus from north like 535 does today.
         This kind of thing can be implemented without infrastructure change, so I think it makes sense for ST to monitor the demand for a year or two and make the decision to reconfigure the network to serve more people with one-seat ride.

Comments are closed.