The history of Gasworks Park. (Fourth Place) Even if you’ve heard some of the history you probably don’t know all of it.
From downtown Portland to Mt Hood by MAX and bus routes. (Climate and Transit)
I made a similar trip to Grouse Mountain in British Columbia in the 90s. From downtown Vancouver I took the SeaBus to Lonsdale Key, a local bus to a transfer stop in a residential area, a second local bus to the Grouse Mountain parking lot, and the ski lift to the resort. It was summer so there was no skiing, just an outdoor space similar to Gasworks Park where people picnic and a building with a documentary movie. The Grouse Mountain website says bus #236 now goes all the way from Lonsdale Quay to Grouse Mountain (a 25-minute ride), and in the winter there’s a shuttle bus from downtown Vancouver to Grouse Mountain.
This is an open thread.
Will the 8 be switching its routing to Massachusetts St. on March 28? Or did that idea get the rejection it deserves? Particularly during peak times, the traffic lights on Massachusetts St. at 23rd and MLK both get backed up and require multiple cycles to clear the traffic backups.
Better options for the 8:
(a) continue on 23rd to Rainier and overlay the 48 pathway south of Jackson to Mt. Baker Station
(b) stay on MLK and improve the pedestrian pathway through Jimi Hendrix Park to Judkins Park Station
The L8 doesn’t need another time sucking pinch point on its map.
It’s still being adjusted in March
The Route 8 rerouting to Judkins Park Station was officially finalized a few years ago. I don’t see Metro being summarily dismissive of that decision.
The heaviest backup at 23rd and Massachusetts that I’ve noticed is eastbound Massachusetts in the afternoons. Route 8 doesn’t run on that intersection approach.
Plus it’s not overly congested other times of day.
Of course, Metro will soon have real-time ridership and bus travel time data to use if they want to readjust routing, stops or schedules. It could involve coordinating better signal timing with SDOT. But the Route 8 path will almost certainly be moved first.
The L8? More like I H8 the 8. It’s so unreliable, that when I’m going to Seattle Center I’d rather walk along Denny than use that… Idk disgrace of a route.
It’s OK, the 48 and 7 are there at Judkins Park station. The only reason you’d need to take the 8 is if you’re going to the 8’s unique area. If you’re going to Broadway, you might as well stay on Link. If you’re going to Seattle Center or SLU, you might as well stay on Link to Westlake and take one of the many buses or monorail the rest of the way. Taking the 8 from Judkins Park to Capitol Hill or Seattle Center is the long, slow way around. It will be better with the Denny Way bus lanes, but that’s a way’s off, and that won’t help with the travel time between Judkins Park and Denny Way. The 8 is really two routes in one: an east-west route, and a north-south route. It’s only useful as an L-shaped route when there’s no better way.
The Route 8 change is simply moving the southern street jog back from 23rd at Massachusetts rather than Jackson. The overall route distance barely changes. Outside of possible localized congestion it seemingly won’t add more time.
Yes, but the point is the jog shouldn’t happen at all. Or if it does happen the bus should just continue down 23rd (south of Judkins Park) until Rainier. Going back and forth is a huge waste of time, for a section that is dragging down the rest of the route.
Yeah, the 8 is a bit of a mess and about to get messier. Just recently, Charles Mudede wrote about the 8 in The Stranger. It isn’t often anyone mentions transit in that publication so it was interesting that the writer focused on just that one route. He makes the case that the service area is too large. There is something to that, but it really gets down to this:
1) There is a huge ridership mismatch between the northern part of the route (Madison to Uptown) and the southern part (Madison to Mount Baker). The northern part gets a huge number of riders. The southern part does not.
2) Similarly, the northern part is an essential part of the transit network. It provides east-west service for a huge part of greater downtown. Yet the southern section is basically a coverage route that doesn’t really provide much of that either (since it is so close to the 48).
3) Putting these two pieces together is not the least bit intuitive from a geographic standpoint. It is basically a 90 degree turn (although it requires a hairpin turn). This sharp turn reduces potential ridership. There are trip pairs that just don’t make sense. Now there are new trips pairs also won’t make sense (e. g. Judkins Park to Capitol Hill). It is not just Link related trips, either. There are also buses (and even bus pairs) that compete well with the 8 (e. g. riding the 2 from Madrona to Uptown). You just don’t add that much value by running the 8 south of Madison.
4) The southern part is also long. Tacking on a short coverage section to a core route is fine. A classic example is the 7. Even if the bus ran frequently on Waters it wouldn’t impact the rest of the route that much. But in the case of the 8, a lot of time is spent on the southern section. At noon it takes 25 minutes to get from Uptown to Madison Valley. It takes 19 minutes to get from Madison Valley to Mount Baker. So almost half the service is on a section that is basically coverage by nature. It is a really bad combination.
There are a lot of solutions and they have been discussed a lot on the blog. But you raise a very good point that applies either way. I agree, both of the options you suggested would be better. If the bus just continued on 23rd you would lose some coverage, but not a lot. As it is, with this change you lose a lot of coverage (on MLK between Jackson and Massachusetts). This would only be a bit more. Or you could go with the other option. You really don’t need to improve that walk across the park (https://maps.app.goo.gl/2LaWPNht2hxqnubR6). That is basically doubling down on what the southern section of the 8 actually provides: coverage.
“ As it is, with this change you lose a lot of coverage (on MLK between Jackson and Massachusetts). ”
Although more infrequent, Route 4 comes close to replacing the lost coverage in that area . It’s too bad that it doesn’t go all the way to Mt Baker Transit Center.
That Route 4 redundancy down to Walker Street suggests to me that Route 8 would just remain on 23rd to Rainier if a change is made — and use the new bus only lanes there!
Still, the Route 8 routing decision has been finalized — and we are only able to monitor the consequences when that happens.
“the 8 is a bit of a mess and about to get messier.”
No, it’s getting less messy. The short 3-block detour to 23rd is ridiculous: a longer detour would make it feel less like a weird open wound. And it will serve Judkins Park station, an important point. It doesn’t eliminate all the messiness but it makes it a bit more rational.
Of course it should remain on 23rd south of Massachussetts street. I have no idea why Metro would make it jog back to MLK there; there’s little there. Maybe it’s so that it can approach the Mt Baker transit center from the east, which is a less-congested turn.
The east-west segment is really propping up the north-south segment, which otherwise wouldn’t have service. It also gives people along MLK access to Broadway, Capitol Hill, SLU, and Uptown — since the 48 doesn’t go there. Again forcing a transfer at MLK & Madison in the middle of nowhere is questionable when the total trip distance and segment distances are so short, similar to the Rainier-Broadway issue. And Metro sees MLK as an equity area it must prioritize service to to make up for past neglect. Although Jack has said MLK service is so close to 23rd service it violates Metro’s service metrics. But the leadership and politicians are big on equity now.
My (c) option would have been to fix the situation at Mt. Baker Station and continue Route 4 to MBS and increase its frequency to every 15 minutes. Then turn the 8 back somewhere in the vicinity of Garfield HS. But until Metro fixes MBS, that’s a fantasy.
Thanks for the info. I must have been out of the country when Metro was seeking input on that change. I would have been a loud and hard NO.
Where were you when that happened? I’ve never really been out of the USA. In fact I’ve never been out of this state, I’ve always been in Washington State, but I move to Tokyo, Japan in the future.
Well, Mr. Doo, I highly encourage you to do some traveling as you grow. Try taking a short trip to Portland and using TriMet to see the city. If you are under 19 years old, you can ride Amtrak for free to Vancouver WA and buy a ticket for the last leg from VAW to PDX. Or go to the Bay Area and wander around on BART and Muni. Great experiences.
There’s a bit more on the Amtrak student discount here:
https://www.amtrak.com/student-discounts
Aside of Mt Hood, you can also get to Cannon Beach and the Columbia Gorge without driving (Cannon Beach by Amtrak reservation, Columbia Gorge by several different bus operations).
We’ll be looking forward to firsthand information about the transit experience in Japan, housing costs, whether you can really walk or take transit to anywhere in Japan or Tokyo no matter the address, etc. And anything you hear about nearby countries or if you visit them.
The Route 8 reroute was part of the East Link Connections restructure. There were several rounds of proposals and hearings. all with STB articles giving information and feedback recommendations.
Phases 1-3 proposals were in 2021-2022. Then there was an unanticipated delay because East Link was delayed. So there was an extra round of review in 2024 to see if any assumptions/preferences had changed from earlier, but that request for feedback went only to “stakeholders” (cities, etc) rather than to the public like the earlier rounds. Then the King County Council (which oversees Metro) made the final decision in Spring 2025.
The restructure is being implemented in four phases, corresponding to the different openings of the 2LSL, Crosslake, and Metro deciding to go ahead with routes like the 203 and 226. The first two phases have already been implemented. Route 8 is in the third phase in March. The last phase will be in September. All this had to go around the uncertainty of when the 2LSL and the full 2 Line would open, and ST making opening decisions on short notice. Metro can’t modify its service changes that quickly: it has to prepare them months in advance.
I noticed numbered posts in the Roosevelt Station last night. The posts align with the end of the 3rd train from the driver, so I imagine they are being installed in preparation for the mixed 3- and 4-car service that will be required when the 2 Line simulated service starts.
I didn’t have time to get a photo, but they’re tall with a triangular, orange sign with a black “2” in the middle. It’s sort of like an orange, triangular version of the round “4” signs at the very ends of the platform. I don’t think they’re for the drivers since they’re 3 cars away from where the driver has to stop, and the signs do not seem particularly self-explanatory for passengers, which is a shame since getting this signage right is seems important for reducing dwell times with 3-car trains.
One thing they did right with the PDXbus phone app is make it so you can view vehicle numbers associated with a trip. This means for MAX you can see if it’s a one or two car train.
It doesn’t look like this is available on OneBusAway yet.
Yeah, expect a post about the return of 3 and 4 car trains (west of Bellevue).
The existing round lollipop “2” and “4” signs were installed to tell drivers where the front of 2-, 3-, and 4- car trains should stop. That also tells wheelchair riders where the doors will be.
These new “2” signs are strange: if they’re for the same purpose, why are they in a different style? Maybe it’s simply that ST couldn’t get lollipops soon enough so it made something makeshift in the shop. The flimsy poles support that theory, since they may be a temporary expediency until proper lollipops can be installed or full 4-car service can be achieved. With full 4-car trains depending on future OMFs and the ST3 budget serverely strained, my guess is the lollipops would come before full 4-car service does.
With the existing lollipops, 2- and 3-car trains stop at the “2” sign, so there’s no need for a “3” sign, and the space in front of the first car is vacant in both cases. That may be the reason for the number “2” even though ST has mentioned only mixed 3- and 4-car service, never 2-car. And it’s unimaginable ST would have 2-car service ever again when ridership demand is so high in central/north Seattle, and ballgames and other large events occur almost daily in the summer and at least weekly throughout most of the year.
I assume the 2 stands for 2-Line and the pole is the approximate stopping point for the 3-car trains.
The 2 stands for 2-car train. On every station on the 2 line there is a post with a 4 and a post with a 2.
3 and 4 car trains stop at the same place on the platform. Only 2 car trains stop in the middle of the platform, so that the ADA landing zones always have a car in front of them. (Those are the textured black areas near the middle of the platform.) It’s also just easier for people to go one car length to get to the 2 car train rather than 2 car lengths if it pulled to the front of the platform.
OK, maybe 3-car trains stopped at the “4” and I forgot. It’s been years since we has 3-car trains.
But then why the “2”? If ST can do mixed 3- and 4-car trains peak hours, when would it ever do 2-car trains? The 2-car trains on the Starter Line now are just because they’re turning back at South Bellevue and that pattern doesn’t need 3-car capacity. But that rationale will go away once simulated service starts, because central/north Seattle need more cars, especially around ballgames and events.
I think that simulated service will still have 2 car 2 line trains. There isn’t really the ridership justification on the eastside to run 2 car trains midday, and with the 5 minute frequencies off peak it won’t be super crowded on the platforms in Seattle either.
I do not know if the rush hour gap trains will be 4 cars or not. I assume that there will be some switching around of things to ensure capacity needs are met.
The odd part is that the two-car stopping markers are being installed south of CID where the 2 Line won’t run. It implies ST is planning possible two-car operations on the whole 1 Line as well. Or a lazy procurement?
(Check back tomorrow for a an article with photos)
Isn’t tomorrow going to be about Wednesday’s Super Bowl Parade?
There might also be a post about the Super Bowl parade.
If ST can do mixed 3- and 4-car trains peak hours, when would it ever do 2-car trains?
This would allow them extra time to do maintenance on the train cars (I’m guessing).
The 1 line north of DT will have all of the capacity of the line south plus the bonus frequency of the 2 line trains. I highly doubt the 2 line will be at capacity even during rush hour with 2 car trains. I believe OMF East is still short it’s full contingent of light rail cars and it needs to ramp up regular maintenance considerably once cross lake travel begins; increased frequency, longer hours and each train will take twice as long to complete a cycle which means twice the number of trains running at any one time.
Since lollipops are round, we can call the triangular signs “dental instruments”.
I think look more like reflex hammers!
The GTFS update Sound Transit posted two days ago does not seem to include any of the extra service you’d expect during simulated service period. The only real change before March 28 is that they seem to be ending the late-night single-tracking at Shoreline South on 2/14 instead of 2/16. That’s the same date simulated service is rumored to start; I wonder if that’s a coincidence.
I guess they’ll have to put out another GTFS update before they start simulated service.
My guess is that simulated service start dates aren’t confirmed yet and any announcement or confirmation will come out shortly before it begins.
My guess is similar. I could see ST running trains without riders just to verify things at first. However, those trains will still need to pick up 2 Line riders on the Eastside.
And don’t forget that along with the simulation, ST should be running later 2 Line Eastside trains.
Dow and ST lost the race by less than 2 months to have the Cross-Lake Connection ready for the Super Bowl Parade.
Keys to maxing out transit for the parade:
1. All 4-car trains, including on the eastside. This might mean reducing frequency on the eastside, but probably not.
2. Only move trains across the lake to put them where needed most.
3. Add short runs based on where pass-ups are occurring. Throw the schedule out the window.
4. Prioritize adding more trains with available operators qualified to sub in.
5. Cut a deal with BNSF for more Sounder runs sooner rather than later.
5. Figure out a plan to not get buses stuck downtown.
6. Keep careful counts on ferry passengers, but also borrow rafts and life jackets from dry-docked ferries to increase passenger limit. If weight is an issue, limit the cars. Then run more frequently, off schedule. Perhaps even move some ferries for the Coleman runs.
FTA does not require a spares inventory for special event service. You only need spares as a backup for regular service.
So, they should be able to have a lot more LRVs running than normal.