ST Express: How 10 minutes could expand your travel options

67 Replies to “ST Express: How 10 minutes could expand your travel options”

1. I would keep at least one bus going straight to Seattle, and time the transfers. Forcing people to transfer to Link at Federal Way will be a major hindrance. Link is not at all a commuter line and it’s embarrassingly slow for that purpose. It only can even come close during peak traffic.

   As for the 545 changes, I do think the 542 to Link concept is viable, but during certain hours I would keep a few 545 buses that run directly into Seattle. A 544 restoration may not be necessary either, since the 256 is available into SLU. We can increase 256 frequency instead.

   1. The great thing about this plan is that it still sends buses to Seattle. 590/594/595 wouldn’t end at Federal Way, they would just stop there and continue to Seattle. So for routes that do end there (like 578 would), the transfer could be timed to meet a 594 shortly before departing, or riders could choose to take Link instead.

      1. The plan to add the stop at Federal Way and delete ST Express 577 bears looking into ridership. The peak buses might already be close to capacity. The off-peak 594 probably has room for Federal Way riders.

         A central outcome out of this exercise ought to be a bus every 10 minutes off-peak, timed to Federal Way train arrivals, heading south to Tacoma. Alternating 594s and 574s, each running 20-minute headway, would serve fit the bill. Anything resulting in something goofy like 15-minute headway should be avoided.

         Failure to implement 10-minute headway on all-day bus service between Federal Way and Tacoma would be a huge waste of the new stations, and a disservice to riders in south Seattle, south King County, and Tacoma.

         The off-peak service improvements that are being jettisoned ought to be considered separately from the peak service.

      2. Brent, that is a good consideration. I don’t have much of an idea of what ridership is on route 594. That is something Sound Transit would have to consider if they decide to study any of these proposals.

         Great point about 15 vs 10/20 minute frequency. In this particular configuration, since one route continues to Seattle, they could time them intentionally so that the Bellevue route times well to connect with Link, and the Seattle route doesn’t. This would also help sort ridership better between the two routes.

         It’s also interesting to think about making the 594 every 20 minutes and dropping the Bellevue route (594 would still go to Seattle). Perhaps the short 578 could also be every 20 minutes and meet every 594 (and both would meet every other train). It’s not clear without digging deeper whether this would be revenue neutral.

      3. If the 578 only ran from Puyallup to Federal Way then a southbound 578 could be timed with a southbound 594. It would basically wait until the other bus arrives and then leave as soon as it does. Going the other direction would be much harder. Do you force the 594 to wait until the 578 arrives? I don’t think that makes sense. A lot depends on how often the 594 runs. If it is running every half hour then you try and time it while also allowing a lot of float. The nice thing is that the actual transfer (the walk between buses) could be minimized at the transit station. This means that the variance would be minimal. You would have to look at the range of the 578. How often is it late and how late. For example, assume that it is rarely over five minutes late (that only occurs 5% of the time). Then schedule a northbound 578 so that it arrives five minutes before the scheduled 594. Make sure the 594 doesn’t leave early. If the drivers communicate then the bus could wait a minute (if the 578 is unusually late).

         Timing it with Link is more difficult. You have to account for the range of travel times from platform to bus stop (as well as the variance in buses). The train won’t wait. With ten minute headways (and 7.5 minute during peak) it really isn’t worth timing beyond the obvious (you don’t want the bus arriving at the same moment as the train) but otherwise you just live with it. Not everyone is trying to get on Link.

         On the other hand, running every 20 minutes is a reasonable thing to do for such long distances. It is still a big improvement over 30 but significantly cheaper then running every 15.

      4. I doubt any of the buses are close to capacity but I get your point (especially with the 177 going away). But it is also quite possible that you will see a peak-time shift from the 577 to Link. Initially I expect a big shift. Then, over time, people typically drift back to using the express bus (as they find it is faster). But during peak it may not be faster to take the bus from Federal Way — it depends on (HOV-lane) traffic.

         In contrast, if you are starting from a different city (Tacoma, Auburn, Puyallup, etc.) then you have to transfer. During peak they also have Sounder. This explains why ST rarely runs the 578 during peak. They figure riders from Auburn (etc.) aren’t likely to use it to get downtown (not when they have Sounder). It is basically just a way to get them to Federal Way.

         Tacoma is different. Sounder is not especially fast. The bus has a better chance of beating it (again, depending on traffic). Either way though, Link (plus a bus ride to Federal Way) is slower than Sounder from Tacoma. It will take 55 minutes via Sounder to Seattle. It takes 45 minutes from Federal Way to CID via Link. A bus can’t get from Tacoma to Federal Way in 10 minutes.

         But I can see how a combination of a 577 and 590 might get too full during peak. But there is also the 592 which could carry some of the load. But even with both buses making stops along the way it might not be enough. Peak is the only time I see running independent 577s. It is also the only time I see a bus like the 590 or 592 skipping Federal Way (for the same reason).

         But this begs the question: Do the 590 and 592 violate the ten-minute rule? Isn’t Sounder just about as fast? In general it is. I think the strongest argument for these (peak-only) buses is that they avoid a transfer (to Downtown Tacoma and Dupont). But otherwise it is hard to see them being worth it. Shuttles to Sounder (both directions) would appear to be a better value. To a certain extent this is covered in Downtown Tacoma. There are several buses (and the streetcar) connecting downtown with the Tacoma Dome. So you would only need a bus connecting Dupont with Lakewood Station. This could easily be an occasional extension of the future 574 (from Lakewood to Federal Way).

         So that leads to running the 577 and the (truncated) 574 during peak while running the 594 and (truncated) 578 off-peak. This is a huge amount of savings.

   2. “Forcing people to transfer to Link at Federal Way will be a major hindrance.”

      They wouldn’t have to transfer: they could stay on the 590, 592, or 594 to downtown Seattle. It would just give people more access to a Federal Way express at more times from both directions.

      The 23-mile/35-minute distance between downtown Seattle and Federal Way, and 11 miles from Federal Way to Tacoma Dome, is enough to justify a stop on the Tacoma expresses. It’s not just for people going to the Commons mall or living in Federal Way: it’s a strategic transfer point for Auburn and the Link network.

   3. I live in Redmond and ride 542 and 545 regularly. I’ll be curious to see what the travel times are from Downtown Redmond station to Westlake, and Downtown Redmond to Husky Stadium, are on the light rail 2 line versus ST express bus. I suspect that during peak commuting times, the light rail will be faster, and that at off-peak times, the bus will be faster. That said, a train ride is generally a more pleasant experience than a bus ride and I might prefer a 38-minute train ride to a 30-minute bus ride.

      1. 542/Link might be the fastest if 545 is slower due to traffic.

         The 2 Line takes too many deviations.

      2. The Link/542 combo would be a much better option if Sound Transit ran the 542 more often. The problem is, those service hours needed to run the 542 more often are being spend on 545. This gets especially bad during evening hours when the 542 and 545 are each running half hourly, or even hourly, leading to situations where, including wait time, the 545 is slower than than the 2-line, unless you happen to get lucky.

      3. Downtown Redmond-Westlake will likely be 42 minutes on 2 line (was on one of the sound transit fact sheets). My door to door would reliably be 60 mins on the future 2 line against a 45 minute door to door on a 545 (albeit timed to the bus with a 2 minute buffer) about 90-95% of the times to my destination.

         I have done the Westlake-UW-542 route in peak few times during the revive I5 mess. I missed the Link, I then missed a 542 waiting to cross the long intersection across Montlake making the eastbound door to door 75 minutes instead of the typical 45-55 minute commute on 545. Getting to Seattle on 542 was comparable to just missing the 545 and then taking the next 545 (~55-60 minutes).

         Anything north of Westlake towards SLU and the 545 is significantly better. I also typically see a lot of folks (~5-10 per direction/day) both peak and off peak transfer into the 545 from the freeway stops indicating the usefulness for Kirkland. If people vote with their feet and keep the 545 ridership high after 2 lines full opening, it may very well survive the next restructure.

         I however would gladly trade the 545 for a 542 and a Kirkland-Seattle bus (previous 255?) or an all day 256. The UW and Westlake stations are just too deep and with the walk to Westlake, adds way more than 10 minutes one way

2. There is a classic tradeoff between travel time and frequency/ headway involved here. Is it better to not keep running every route through Downtown but at half the frequency or stop a route miles away from Downtown but run at twice that frequency?

   Another contributing factor is realtime transfer coordination. It doesn’t take much to tank an HOV travel speed, especially if that bus route is traveling well over 10 miles before arriving. If the transfer mode is something high-frequency (10 minutes or less) it’s less of an issue. But having two express runs meet in realtime if they’re only running every 20 or 30 minutes starts to become quite the challenge to offer reliable timed transfers.

   In terms of aggregate reliable travel time, there is a point at which a rider would gladly choose a trip taking extra time just to get much better frequency and reliability. It appears that ST has set that point at 10 minutes for now.

   One component of travel time that easily gets overlooked is the time to get between a rail platform and a nearby bus stop. I think it’s a bigger factor than planners seem to admit. The one benefit of express buses meeting is that they can both stop almost at the same spot. A 4 minute wait at the same stop is the same as a 4 minute trek inside a station — with much less physical effort.

   Finally, I think riders ultimately vote with their feet. The upcoming Link extension openings and ST Express changes are pretty major. Rather than try to adjust what ST has proposed, perhaps just accepting the initially planned ST structure for several months is the best — with tweaking to come in 2027. I think ST would do everyone a favor by shading this service plan in this context. By not saying this, ST implies that the Express service is going to not change much for at least a decade — and it’s rather unfortunate that I think it ends up with too much theoretical speculation about the service rather than merely adjusting things based on the actual results on the street. It’s like debating a runner’s potential speed by their physiology rather than their actual performance in the field.

   1. “A 4 minute wait at the same stop is the same as a 4 minute trek inside a station — with much less physical effort.”

      But it has the opposite psychological effect. People get bored waiting much faster than they do when moving the equivalent time on a bus/train or walking to transfer. That’s why frequency is so critical: it often makes the difference in a good vs bad transit experience, or whether some people are willing to use transit for that trip.

      1. I understand your point. However that perception changes if you have mobility challenges or are carrying heavy or bulky things. It’s not universally shared. Even slight arthritis in the knees can make someone dread changing levels.

      2. I’m one of those who has been dreading stairs since 2023. I now use the elevator if there’s no down escalator, and get out the front door if there’s likely to be a large elevation gap or distance gap at the back door or I’m carrying heavy things. But I’m still extremely impatient with waits of more than 5 minutes. There’s little correlation with transfer distance and stairs on the one hand vs frequency on the other hand. Link usually runs every 8-10 minutes. Bus routes run whenever they do, usually every 15-60 minutes depending on the route and time.

3. One other option to keep peak Tacoma-Seattle bus riders happy is to stop pricing them off of Sounder. Sure, ST would lose some fare revenue by going to a flat $3 fare, but the savings on running less peak bus service would probably be several times larger than the fare revenue reduction.

   Ending distance-based fares could also enable a reduction in the price of an ORCA card. The card has to cost at least $2.50 right now because it can go into up to $2.50 negative balance on e-purse on Sounder rides. (I tested my card and was able to do this the last time I rode Sounder.)

   The benefits would accrue to all bus riders across the system as change fumbling dwindles further.

   1. You can get to at least -$2.75 because you can tap onto Link with $0.25. but I disagree with your prior statement: I believe you can charge as little as $1 for an orca card if you require putting >$10 of usable travel value on it at the start. It’s quite the effort to get a new card every week just to take advantage of the $2.75 you can to into the red.

      Or, give an orca card for free once a year to everybody who can show an ID. That ID then can’t be used for the next year. Any orca card not acquired with id costs $3 (or more, I think it’s currently $5?)

      Or, a hybrid approach: cards cost $3 but if you put at least $25 on it when you load it then you get $2 off / $2 more of value on the card.

      1. Requiring e-purse reloads to be large amounts could increase change fumbling.

         Metro keeps floating the dream of cashlessness, but it seems like ST Express would be an easier option for trying out cashlessness. Regardless, I don’t think there is anywhere close to 10 minutes of dwell-time delay for fare collection on any bus line in the ORCA Pod. The major dwell-time reductions that could be enacted have been.

         I hope the Pod can roll out Apple Wallet ORCA accounts well before the World Cup. Maybe debit and credit card transactions with ORCA readers, too, though those can’t do passes, unless someone invents a clever way to do that.

4. This seems to tie in a bit with the 167 BRT discussion.

   Right now the 59X and 578 provide Sounder shadow service. Forcing a transfer from the 578 means degrading transit service for Puyallup/Sumner/Auburn-Seattle. Timed transfers may be difficult, considering the transfer is in the middle of two routes. Having the 59X stop in Federal Way is also a downgrade for Lakewood/Tacoma-Seattle service, though it provides much better transfer opportunities, most notably to SeaTac.

   If I’m understanding the ST proposal correctly, they are suggesting:
   – 574 Lakewood-Tacoma-Federal Way (4 buses per hour)
   – 57X Puyallup-Sumner-Auburn-Federal Way-Seattle (2 buses per hour)
   – 59X Lakewood-Tacoma-Seattle (2 buses per hour)

   1. ST needs to decide whether it will provide service every 10 minutes or 20 minutes or 30 minutes wherever an ST Express route’s main ridership is connecting to Link Light Rail. 15-minute headway when the train is running every 10 minutes is awfully wasteful and awful service.

      That goes for routes 556 and 574. 15-minute headway may fit a typical local route, but makes no sense on these routes.

      May I also suggest that Metro routes 60 and 107 be dropped to 20-minute headway off-peak, and retool their schedules to alternate service along 15th Ave S between Beacon Hill Station and Georgetown? That would be major service improvement on that corridor, while freeing up more operators for the opening of the full 2 Line. SDoT should have refrained from cutting in front of ST by buying extra service on a low-ridership line when the operators were needed by ST, and then wastefully making the 107 15-minute headway on a route mainly connecting to the southern portion of the 1 Line. That’s on Mayor Harrell, btw.

5. Let’s look at the time inconvenience of not having well-timed buses picking up at Federal Way Station to head to Tacoma.

   If there is just a half-hourly 574 picking up there, average wait time is 15 minutes. If there are well-timed buses picking up from each train, and a supervisor there to make sure each bus waits for the train riders, average wait time would be 0-2 minutes.

6. Timetables, southbound at noon. Centered on CID, except for the 574 which is centered on Federal Way:

   Sounder
   CID 0
   Auburn 27
   Sumner 37
   Puyallup 42
   Tacoma 55

   Link
   Westlake -5
   CID 0
   SODO 5
   SeaTac 33
   Federal Way 45 (estimated)

   578
   Westlake -8
   CID 0
   Federal Way 30
   Auburn 48
   Sumner 69
   Puyallup 79

   59X
   Westlake -8
   CID 0
   Tacoma 48

   574
   SeaTac -26
   Federal Way 0
   Tacoma 27

   1. Thanks for those times.

      The Route 578 taking 49 minutes between Federal Way and Puyallup makes that trip look pretty useless. Once the 167 extends to I-5 a nonstop bus probably could get from Puyallup to Federal Way Link in about 20 minutes if not faster.

      1. If you are running express from Puyallup to Federal Way it is about the same. The delay has more to do with serving Auburn and Sumner. But without serving Auburn and Sumner you have a tough time justifying service.

         Now Tacoma is a different story. I could see an express to Tacoma from Puyallup. Unfortunately, Pierce Transit doesn’t have the money.

7. I think there are a lot of things you can do with the time savings. I’m not sure an express to Bellevue would get that many riders from Tacoma. Would you detour to Puyallup, Sumner, Auburn and Kent? If so then it doesn’t seem much faster than just taking an express to Downtown Seattle and Link to Bellevue. If not then you might not get enough riders. Maybe you can finesse the difference by skipping Puyallup and Sumner. Have those riders take the 578 and transfer in Auburn. I could see it.

   At the same time I think it would be worthwhile to run a “Sounder Bus”. The two could work together. Run a bus from Seattle to Kent/Auburn/Sumner and Puyallup. That way riders from Auburn/Sumner and Puyallup retain their one-seat ride to Seattle. The Tacoma-Bellevue bus becomes as much about connecting Kent/Auburn/Tacoma as much as it does connecting Tacoma and Bellevue.

8. I like this proposal-especially the connection to Bellevue. However, running on 167 is somewhat duplicative to Sounder. Instead, 566 could stop at Tukwila Station, then run down I-5 to Federal way and Tacoma. Also, route 595 and 592 should be transformed from their current state-depressing commuter buses- to useful all day service. This could be justified by regional connectivity and enabling trips that weren’t possible before.

   1. I love Sounder, but it really doesn’t operate frequently enough, with cost per passenger mile still 50% more than ST Express buses. So maybe duplicating Sounder is not such a bad thing.

      1. Sounder may be expensive to run, but the marginal cost of carrying one passenger on a train that’s running anyway is essentially zero. Thus, a system that channeled people to Sounder would theoretically be more cost-efficient, as more people on Sounder would reduce Sounder’s cost per passenger figure.

         The flip side is that having a Tacoma->Bellevue bus stop at Tukwila Station makes for a lousy experience for everyone. This bus would not be reliable enough, nor Sounder frequent enough for the connection to be dependably quick. And for people not making the connection, accessing Tukwila Station from the freeway requires a lot of turns and a lot of stoplights, making for significant delay. Ultimately, I don’t think such a connection would be worth it.

9. Cutting back the 574 will have some severe problems especially during the early AM. 574 is the only route that actually operates in the early AM, mainly to service Airport workers that need to get to work between 3:30-5AM. Link does not operate that early to make that transfer. So, 574 would have to operate to the airport in the wee hours to serve that market (another solution would be the proposed night owl service that ST proposes. The Pierce County Night owl could serve the airport on the way to/from Seattle, though more frequency will be needed between Pierce County and the Airport, vs to Seattle, though the 574 does make extra stops along the way).

   1. I wouldn’t be surprised if the 574 ends up doing what the 150 does and has special runs to the airport for such a situation. The 150 goes to a specific warehouse area in Kent during the morning and evening rush.

   2. I think that is what the night owl bus will do. This makes sense given the existing scheduling and ridership patterns. At that hour, Link shuts down. The A Line runs early in the morning but infrequently (every hour). In contrast the 574 runs more often between 2:00 am and 4:00 am than the rest of the day. It is also when the bus is most crowded. Some sort of night owl service will be required.

10. We figured that ST would get rid of the 545 and beef up the 542 instead. Instead they left the 545 alone (though I can see ST maybe reducing some trips on the 545 in the future. So, Redmond gets two (one seat) routes between Downtown Seattle, while Issaquah riders gets stuck with a transfer (no one seat rides to downtown, though I heard that King County Metro will maintain some direct Seattle-Issaquah service during the peak. I expect Route 218 to get hit bad, with the 554 going away.) Just think of the Issaquah situation similar to Everett, with the 510 providing peak service, while 512 provides all day service with connections to LINK. The 218 provides the peak service, while the 556 provides all day service with connections to LINK. BUT ISSAQUAH is going to call foul, since Redmond gets two one seat routes (all day) while Issaquah gets none (the 218 does not count, since it is under KCM and not ST).

    1. ST Express 510 to Seattle was going to be just until the cross-lake connection opened. Then, it was extended to after the (Men’s) World Cup (of Nations). So, now, it will become a long-term reminder that nobody cares about ST’s long-term debt.

       I was hoping that the 510 would be replaced by all-day two-way express service (i.e. skipping Ash Way P&R) between Everett and Lynnwood Station, since CT route 201/202 provides ample frequent service to Ash Way.

       That would be a wonderful service and connectivity improvement that saves a lot of money, and might even help get Link to Everett just a little bit faster.

       1. ST Express O&M is <5% of the ST spend between now and 2050. ST spends almost as much on escalators ($60MM/year) as it does on STX. A single route is irrelevant to ST's long term financial outlook.

       2. The 510 doesn’t bother me. I think ultimately it should be replace North Sounder (which is a much worse value). I would also add an all-day, frequent express bus from Edmonds to 185th Station (the 909 is too slow and infrequent). Mukilteo already has an express that is timed with the ferry (unlike Edmonds, Mukilteo itself has very little). At that point getting rid of North Sounder would be practically painless.

          Having the 512 serve Ash Way does bother me. The inconsistency is crazy. ST runs buses from Seattle to Tacoma but they don’t bother to stop at Federal Way even though Federal Way has HOV-ramps both directions and a Link connection. Meanwhile, the 512 stops at Ash Way even though it means slogging through traffic and the only thing there is a park and ride that Community transit also serves both directions (and more elegantly). ST planners are just afraid of change. It is like they have one tool in their toolbox — truncation. Even then they sometimes don’t use it. For example the 566 will continue to duplicate East Link from Downtown Bellevue to Redmond Tech Station. Keep in mind, it won’t serve any other bus stops on the East Side — just link stations. Why are they still running it? Don’t they realize East Link has been open for over a year now?

       3. If the O&M of a single bus route is insignificant in ST’s budget, then the fare revenue from Sounder is even more insignificant.

          Making the N-Line fare just $3 ought to alleviate whatever need is seen in making ST Express 510 skip Lynnwood and head express to downtown Seattle.

          Serving Ash Way on ST Express 512 all day saves maybe 4 minutes in average wait time for Ash Way riders, while making the trip about 5-10 minutes longer for Lynnwood-Everett riders. I’m pretty sure the Everett-Lynnwood riders outnumber the Ash Way riders.

          For peak service between Lynnwood and Ash Way, there would still be CT 201/202 and hopefully-soon-to-be two-way ST Express 513.

       4. “ST Express 510 to Seattle was going to be just until the cross-lake connection opened.”

          That’s the 515. The 515 is a temporary downtown-Lynnwood express to provide peak capacity in case the 1 Line gets overcrowded before the 2 Line starts. The proposal deletes it.

          The 510, the downtown-Everett super-express, is one of the original Snohomish routes. It has always remained for travel-time reasons I guess.

       5. Making the N-Line fare just $3 ought to alleviate whatever need is seen in making ST Express 510 skip Lynnwood and head express to downtown Seattle.

          It is hard to say whether the fare makes any difference at all.

          Regardless, that is backwards. It costs way more money to run Sounder than to run the 510. Keep the 510 and cancel North Sounder.

          I was hoping that the 510 would be replaced by all-day two-way express service (i.e. skipping Ash Way P&R) between Everett and Lynnwood Station

          That is called the 512. The problem is the 512 stops at Ash Way. It shouldn’t. The 510 is a completely different matter. It is an express to Seattle. Maybe it is justified, maybe it isn’t. But North Sounder is definitely not worth it.

       6. The N-Line isn’t going away. It provides unique service to two ferry docks.

          The 510’s continuation after next September is like Metro route 62. Some VIP must be riding it. I wouldn’t mind its continuation if it just added a stop at Lynnwood Station.

       7. The N-Line isn’t going away. It provides unique service to two ferry docks.

          So what? Ridership is terrible. The subsidy per rider is terrible. In the case of Clinton/Mukilteo they have an express bus that is timed with each and every ferry. For Kingston to Seattle riders can now take a passenger ferry right to Downtown Seattle. They just need to provide better bus service to Edmonds. Not because of the ferry but because of Edmonds itself. There are plenty of people who live in apartments in Edmonds and plenty of shops in Edmonds itself worth visiting (or working at). The connection to the ferry would be a bonus (but a welcome one). (The 909 is both slow and infrequent.)

          The 510’s continuation after next September is like Metro route 62. Some VIP must be riding it.

          What? That is a terrible example. The 62 performs really well. It isn’t even an express. In contrast the 510 is just one of a long list of express buses to Seattle. It has historically performed very well. It is the 513 that has struggled. Of course you can just live without the 510 but that would be significantly slower for riders. Like all express buses it is a judgement call. But the 510 gets plenty of riders and there are only so many (good) options for ST Express service to Snohomish County.

          I wouldn’t mind its continuation if it just added a stop at Lynnwood Station.

          There is no point. The bus already stops at the freeway station in Mountlake Terrace. This allows riders (who happen to catch the 510 instead of the 512) to connect to Link. A detour to the Lynnwood Station wouldn’t get you much. Riders who are not trying to get to Link (but some other destination via the Lynnwood Transit Center) still have the 512 as well as 201/202. So you basically just duplicate the 515. That would save those riders a little bit of time, but not a lot. The savings on buses like the 510 are due in part to avoiding the transfer and the detour. (The 515 was a poorly designed route that is easy to eliminate. It would have made way more sense to run from somewhere in Lynnwood *not* close to the station (e. g. Swamp Creek.)

          South Sound and Pierce County is a much different story. The express buses save riders a lot more time but you also have obvious needs (e. g. an all-day express from Seattle to Kent/Auburn) that would likely perform much better than something similar in Snohomish County.

       8. “The 510’s continuation after next September is like Metro route 62. Some VIP must be riding it.”

          Did you mean a different route? The 62 is a north-south powerhouse in Fremont, an east-west powerhouse at Roosevelt, a connecting powerhouse between them, and addresses NE 65th street service all the way to Roosevelt on the west and Magnuson Park on the east, which the former route 71 didn’t do, and which the area had been crying out for for over a decade.

          It may be arbitrary to connect the north-south downtown-Fremont-Greenlake service to the 65th Greenlake-Roosevelt-Sand Point service rather than continuing north (to Northgate?) or turning east on another street, but it fulfills a transit need between Roosevelt/Greenlake and Fremont/SLU, Sand Point to Fremont, Sand Point/Roosevelt to Ballard via Greenlake, etc.

          It’s one of Metro’s highest-performing routes.

    2. I heard that King County Metro will maintain some direct Seattle-Issaquah service during the peak.

       I don’t think so. I’m pretty sure Issaquah will get lots of buses going to Mercer Island and plenty of buses going to Downtown Bellevue.

       I think the situation is a bit different for Issaquah. Think of a bus from Issaquah and a train from Bellevue both heading to Seattle. They both stop at Mercer Island at the same time. Which one gets to Downtown Seattle first? The train, by a comfortable margin. It gets to the south end of downtown first which means it gets to the north end first. Put it another way: Would anyone catch the bus from Mercer Island to Downtown once Link is in place? I doubt it. In contrast there were a fair number of people who rode the 515.

       Now do the same test from Redmond Tech. You can catch the bus or the train — which one is faster? It depends on which end of downtown you are headed to (and traffic). But if traffic is light, getting to the north end of downtown is significantly faster via a bus.

       I’m not say I agree with their choices. I think they erred on the side of the status quo a bit too much. But I get their reasoning.

    3. “King County Metro will maintain some direct Seattle-Issaquah service during the peak. I expect Route 218 to get hit bad, with the 554 going away.”

       Metro’s restructure is already final, and is being implemented in phases. The 215, 218, and 269 will run express from the Issaquah Highlands P&R to Mercer Island station, not to downtown Seattle. The 215 and 269 will run half-hourly all day. The 218 will be peak only, probably for capacity relief. The 269 will continue north to Sammamish. Every third 215 will continue to North Bend (90-minute frequency).

       None of these routes will serve central Issaquah. Only the 556 will, running every 15 minutes from the Highlands P&R to City Hall, the Sunset/Gilman local stops currently served by the 208, the TC, I-90 stops, South Bellevue station, Bellevue Way, and Bellevue TC.

       So Issquah will have more frequent and consistent all-day service. The 556 will be the slower express to Bellevue, with a Link opportunity at South Bellevue station. The other three will be the super-expresses from the Highlands to Mercer Island, and indirectly faster to downtown Seattle. They may even be faster transferring at Mercer Island and backrtacking to Bellevue Downtown station than the one-seat 554 will be. Only the Highlands will get that, not central Issaquah.

       The 203 is another part of the restructure, and was implemented in August. It’s a local route from the Highlands P&R to northwest Issaquah, Newport Way, Factoria, and South Bellevue station, running every 30 minutes.
       https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/metro/routes-and-service/schedules-and-maps/203#route-map

       Here’s our article on the final restructure with route details.

11. ” It would also allow Sound Transit to delete route 574, as the Federal Way stop would make the 574 redundant with both buses and Link, and shortening it is already determined to be acceptable.”

    I’m not sure I follow. What would the frequency of buses from Tacoma to Federal Way be, if you cancelled the 574? 30 minutes is not okay.

    1. No it would not, because under this proposal, there would be two routes from Lakewood to Tacoma and Federal Way, each every 30 minutes, but combined every 15 minutes (one would continue to Seattle and one would continue to Bellevue). If the Bellevue route doesn’t happen there would definitely be another service that would make Tacoma – FW at least every 15 minutes.

       One key way this differs from the current ST proposal is that the ST proposal has the 594 unchanged, with a shortened 574 every 15 minutes. This has two bus routes with different purposes paralleling each other, with the only advantage of the 594 being that it skips Federal Way. The premise of the proposal is that it’s worth it to have a stop at Federal Way, so at that point it doesn’t make sense to run 574 as an entirely independent route with its subtle differences (no downtown Tacoma, Lakewood TC without the Sounder station, etc) and instead have a 574 that combines with 594 to provide frequent service, or have a different route that does that.

       1. Gotcha. Yeah, I could see a Tacoma to Kent Valley/Sounder express shadow being somewhat useful. Bellevue, I very much doubt would get very much ridership.

          Tacoma to West Seattle with a stop in FW on the 509, when completed, might hold more promise than Bellevue.

       2. I say this, because in the the over 5 years I’ve lived in Tacoma, I’ve never talked to anyone who either worked or lived in Bellevue. Not once. But maybe I just run in the wrong crowds. It does seem like very different worlds though.

          In contrast, I know a bunch of people who actually live in West Seattle, Ballard, and downtown Seattle who work here. And lament that there is no easy way to take transit down here.

       3. Once 2 Line is running. It will be easy and frequent to get to Downtown Bellevue, Microsoft or Downtown Redmond on Link. The same is more true for UW and other places with both 1 and 2 Line service. So a high frequency connection (if it doesn’t hit slow speeds) to Downtown Seattle seems the best way to go.

          To put it in travel time terms, an average wait of Link train will be 4 or 5 minutes with no schedule coordination (2-2.5 minutes where both lines stop). A 30 minutes STX bus average wait is 15 minutes — especially one that’s already traveled well over a dozen miles since the start of the route (since reliability is hard to keep).

          So it probably is best to not spread STX too thin just to offer express service to more places in the core with great Link service. ST would seem to be better to achieve higher frequencies on fewer routes instead in general — and let Link be a distribution mode for riders on those routes.

          It’s kind of similar to the high-frequency grid approach with fewer direct routes but less waiting.

       4. The only time I see a Tacoma to Bellevue working out is during peak. It would be similar to the 532. Tacoma and Everett have about the same number of people working in Bellevue (as of the last census). Other than that, I don’t see it. If you go through Federal Way then what? Do you run express (Federal Way to Bellevue)? That would be fast but Federal Way has even fewer people headed to Bellevue for work. I don’t see that getting enough riders outside of peak. Do you stop at places like Auburn and Kent along the way? Then riders from Tacoma (and Federal Way) would be better off just taking the express to Seattle and then Link. Meanwhile, even during peak some riders will prefer taking Sounder to Seattle followed by a trip on Link to Bellevue. Sounder from Tacoma isn’t really fast but it is pretty damn comfortable. Once they get to Seattle they have a fast ride to the East Side (Link serves more than just Downtown Bellevue).

          In terms of employment, Cam is right — way more people commute from Seattle to Tacoma than Tacoma to Bellevue. Only a handful commute from Bellevue to Tacoma. It would make more sense to just start with running a 594 every fifteen minutes (which was actually the plan before the driver shortage). It should definitely stop at Federal Way. Then truncate the 578 at Federal Way. Then the 574 is no longer needed (other than the night-owl version). The 577 is only necessary at peak and this is if there is too much crowding.

          That might be too expensive. There are ways of saving money. For example the 594 doesn’t need to go to Lakewood every fifteen minutes. You could turn back half the buses in Tacoma. Another alternative would be to run the buses every twenty minutes (Lakewood to Seattle).

          I think there is a widespread feeling amongst a lot of people that the 594 should stop at Federal Way between Tacoma and Seattle. That would save a lot of money. What to do with the savings though is much trickier.

       5. “Do you stop at places like Auburn and Kent along the way?”

          No, it would run nonstop from Tacoma Dome to Bellevue TC. The entire reason for this express is to get from Tacoma to the Eastside without it taking over an hour. Otherwise they could just take Link or the 594 and 550 or something involving the 560. But that can’t get to Bellevue in a reasonable amount of time. So you put in a nonstop express that gets as close to 30 minute travel time as possible. That means it can’t stop in Auburn, Kent, or Renton, because that would push it way over the target time — the reason for the Pierce-Bellevue express in the first place.

       6. Even going 90 and 2am you couldn’t do it in 30 minutes.

       7. Seattle to Tacoma is 30 minutes without traffic, so why wouldn’t Tacoma Dome to Bellevue if a lot of it has HOV/HOT lanes like Ross says?

       8. No, it would run nonstop from Tacoma Dome to Bellevue TC.

          That’s fair. It becomes like a scaled down version of the 532. It runs express between the two cities about a dozen times a day (only during peak). Unlike the 532 it would only stop at freeway stations along the way (if that). This would definitely be affordable. But it probably wouldn’t pick up that many riders. We don’t know the current ridership per stop for the 532. Back in the day it got about 500 riders (round trip) via Everett (most of the riders were from Ash Way, Canyon Park and Totem Lake). There are about half as many riders now. So my guess it gets about 250 riders from Downtown Everett and the Everett Park and Ride. It seems like Tacoma would be similar (you would get some riders from the freeway station they are building in Kent). So about a dozen trips a day with about a dozen riders (on average) per bus. That’s fine.

          But I seriously doubt that bus would run in the middle of the day. That is a really long distance. Picking up a couple riders here and there just isn’t worth it. There just isn’t that much demand.

          It is worth noting that you are suggesting something different than Alex. Alex suggested the bus from Tacoma to Bellevue stop in Federal Way. I think that could work too. That makes it more like the 532 (it would increase the ridership). It changes the math a little bit. You are basically only paying for Federal Way to Bellevue (not Tacoma to Bellevue). But you still won’t get that many riders. It is worth noting that the 532 and 535 get a lot of their riders from the destinations along the way. Not just Lynnwood but Canyon Park, UW Bothell and Totem Lake. These will all be served by the Stride Line while the bus stay in the HOV lanes. This means a long walk for people headed to campus but students tend to be a hardy lot. Canyon Park is mostly just a park and ride anyway while people in Totem Lake are used to the walk (I guess). In any event, there is no equivalent for Federal Way to Bellevue. The only thing that a bus would serve after Federal Way would be the future freeway station at 44th in Renton (which is just a park and ride). Hard to see that getting many riders.

          Note: A previous version of this comment suggested the bus could serve the TIBS freeway stop along the way. That was stupid. TIBS is too far west.

          There is also a traffic issue (see Cam’s comment below). It probably isn’t the biggest issue (the 532 has worse issues serving Ash Way and then getting over to 405) but is still less than ideal. Again, I could see this operating during peak but it seems like this should be a lower priority than just running buses more frequently from Tacoma to Seattle (and Kent/Auburn to Seattle) in the middle of the day.

       9. The I-405N HOV feeds from 518, not I-5. There is a bit of a slowdown there, but it’s much worse near Renton/167. The South Center exit right before that actually back up worse.

    2. Yeah, i guess. Ive never done either in less than 40, and I have a lead foot.

12. At least Sound Transit is considering what the ridership data is telling them. ST545 carries far more riders than ST542, and ST doesn’t want to lose them. ST545 serves the Amazon campus in a way that Link cannot. You even have MT255 riders transferring to ST545 at the SR520 freeway stations rather than to Link at UW. Maybe they have also seen the data that MT255 carries half as many riders as it did before it was truncated.

    1. “ST545 carries far more riders than ST542, and ST doesn’t want to lose them.”

       A lot of them will be better off with the full 2 Line, and will switch as soon as it starts. While the 545 may be faster for the specific trips of downtown Redmond-Redmond Tech and its intermediate stops to Westlake station or the stops north of it, that advantage may be lost if your ultimate destination is another Link station or transfer point (like Capitol Hill or south Seattle), and it will be lost when the 545 is half-hourly weekends and evenings. Then the 545 might perform worse than Link.

    2. “Maybe they have also seen the data that MT255 carries half as many riders as it did before it was truncated.”

       Redmond’s situation is in no way comparable to the 255. Kirkland has no Link alternative. Downtown Kirkland has no express route to either Seattle or downtown Bellevue. The UW station transfer was immediately plagued with the pandemic and reducing Link to 30 minutes, years of 520 construction that periodically closed the bridge, and the driver shortage since 2022 that reduced frequency and reliability but is gradually recovering, and Link’s many breakdowns that ST is hopefully making headway on.

    3. I agree that 545 still makes much more sense for riders North of Westlake. Perhaps it could be truncated at Westlake?

       1. Yeah, a lot of people have suggested something like that.

       2. This is similar to the 544 proposal that would go through South Lake Union instead of going downtown. I think it would make the most sense to just convert the existing 545 into that (still running to downtown Redmond) and let Link handle downtown.

    4. ST545 carries far more riders than ST542

       Yeah, and the 550 carried a lot of riders, too. Are you saying we should keep that bus as well?

       There is nothing wrong with express buses. You can find them everywhere. New York has the best subway system in North America and they run express buses from Queens into Manhattan. Riders can take the subway but the bus is faster. Of course those express buses cost extra.

       What is weird about the plans for the 545 is that it will run *more often* than the 542 and cost the same as riding the subway. This seems backwards. Running an express bus that largely duplicates your subway line (with only a small time savings) is fine. But running it more often than a core route (that saves riders way more time than the train) is another matter. Reverse the frequencies and you have a decent system. Riders can try and time the 545 for an express ride to the north end of downtown. But when they want to get from Redmond to the UW they wouldn’t have to debate whether to take the infrequent bus or the extremely long train ride all the way around. The 542 should be frequent. The 545 should not.

    5. Maybe they have also seen the data that MT255 carries half as many riders as it did before it was truncated.

       That has as way more to do with the pandemic than anything else. Sounder ridership, Issaquah Link ridership — pretty much all the suburban ridership is way down. This includes the 545.

13. Why doesn’t 522 terminate at the wineries?

    1. The 522 routing in Woodinville seems flawed. Others have pointed this out. It would be easier to just cut over to 175th and go through the middle of Woodinville. I also would go NE 195th Street and 120th Avenue NE. This would pick up some of the new development along the latter. To be fair, a lot of this development is new.

       In any event, the 522 will eventually be replaced by Stride 3. They probably won’t mess with it until then (other than sending it to 148th Station). Stride 3 won’t serve Woodinville. Instead there will be a local bus that either runs to Bellevue (during peak) or connects to both Stride 2 and 3 via the 405/522 transit station. What stops will be served in Woodinville with that bus are to be determined. That would be a good time to advocate for the routing you think is best.

14. 522 should follow route 256 ( formerly 311) to 132nd St Freeway Station instead of going down Woodinville -Snohonish Road.

    1. Yes, although I would cross the highway there instead of following it. So basically this: https://maps.app.goo.gl/JRk225A7EtoJ1zpd8. It is crazy that it skips big apartment buildings on 120th just so that it can serve freeway stations (that only a handful of people use).

       But again, that is all going away anyway. Stride 3 will replace the 522. It won’t go to Woodinville. They will build a big transit hub at the SR 522/405 interchange. Buses from Woodinville will definitely serve it, making serving 120th more challenging. My guess is all those folks are basically out of luck.

Comments are closed.