Fall 2026 Service Change: Pierce County and South King County

67 Replies to “Fall 2026 Service Change: Pierce County and South King County”

1. Hopped on a 574 at Tacoma Dome yesterday, a couple minutes before a 594 arrived. I tracked the 594. It arrived at CID about the time I arrived in Tukwila, after a pretty smooth transfer to Link in Federal Way. I arrived in the CID 27 minutes after the 594.

   Link is the wrong mode.

   1. Link is the correct mode for many trips; it is not a strong mode for long intercity trips; the Link spine is faith based by the ST board. In fall 2027, I hope ST changes its south bus network to serve Federal Way station with a consolidated service via South 317th Street. The waits could be shorter both directions: South to Tacoma and north to Seattle (bus) or the several markets served by Link. With the fall 2026 network, waits are longer southbound. The Link travel time between IDS and TDS will be more than 70 minutes.

      1. Link is the correct mode for many trips; it is not a strong mode for long intercity trips

         For sure. Link is basically a metro. For a metro, you want lots of ridership per mile. You want every segment to have a lot of riders. This is clearly the case in the city. Think of the section between Northgate and Rainier Beach. Every trip combination is plausible and quite likely has hundreds if not thousands of riders. An express bus might be faster, but not a lot faster. Quite often Link is faster — at noon.

         Now think of the section between 148th and Lynnwood. There aren’t that many people taking trips involving any of these combinations. Many of the trips are faster with an express bus. This is about half the length of the section within Seattle yet it just doesn’t work the same way.

         Things get worse the farther out you go. Consider the section between 148th and Everett. Sure, there are some riders making trips between the stations, but not a lot. Again, a lot of the trips are considerably faster via an express bus.

         This is why most metro lines around the world aren’t that big. They concentrate on the urban areas where there is a lot of point-to-point demand and travel is slow. For longer trips they use regional rail (on old tracks built decades ago) or they run express buses (on freeways that serve the suburbs well). This is the way most mass transit systems are built because it is the way most cities are built. One exception is L. A. — a gigantic, sprawling and surprisingly dense city. Anaheim and Long Beach are over 20 miles from Downtown L. A. and they aren’t alone. There is plenty of density in Long Beach, Anaheim and just about everywhere. This makes building a mass transit system a huge challenge. Link is being built as if we are L. A. — we aren’t.

      2. ” The Link travel time between IDS and TDS will be more than 70 minutes.”

         It was nearly that from Federal Way to IDS. It will be closer to 90 between IDS and TDS. Twice what it takes the 594. I have no idea what ST was thinking.

         1. The schefuled runtime from FWDS to IDS is 50 minutes. If you took the bus it is about 40 minutes. A 10 minute difference is not half the time like you claim.

            With traffic it can easily be even worse on the bus. The train is consistent and mostly grade separate. If a future duwamish bypass is constructed, and or the train is sped up to 65mph on the freeway and grade separate segments it is easily competitive with the bus.

         2. You are right. I was thinking I left FW at 11, arriving in IDS at 12:10. But that’s when I left TDS. My bad.

            It still took 27 minutes longer by train, but midday Sunday is pretty ideal for the 594 on I-5.

         3. Pierce county execs were thinking “trips to the airport”

            No one on the board (now or then) cares about seattle – tacoma run times.

            Electeds are boosters. Airports matter to boosters.

         4. I don’t think this is true at all.

            It actually seems like it’s the opposite, talking to advocates and electeds. The board seems over-fixated on only commute trips from Pierce to Seattle, as if that’s the only role of transit in Pierce County. I’ve explicitly heard them say they need to get out of that mindset, with the growth of telecommuting.

   2. No one in positions of power seem to care that Link travel times are bad once someone gets more than 15 miles outside of Downtown Seattle. And Downtown Everett and Tacoma Dome will be an extra degree of bad. But it looks good on a line diagram, which seems to be what the Board members care about most.

      And let’s not get into how the train lines will run half of their routes mostly empty yet with crowding in central Seattle.

      1. No one in positions of power seem to care that Link travel times are bad once someone gets more than 15 miles outside of Downtown Seattle.

         The average speed outside of Seattle is quite fast. That isn’t the problem. The problem is that the train largely mimics the freeway and not that many people are taking a trip that doesn’t involve Seattle. I’m sure there will be people going to SeaTac from Fife. There will be people taking the train from Lynnwood to the SW Everett Industrial Center. But a lot of people — enough to justify an expensive rail line? Of course not.

         1. 20 mph is not fast

         2. It is for a metro. Put it this way: The day that Link got to the UW there was a quote from someone who took the train from the UW to Capitol Hill:

            “Wow, that was fast!”

            Apparently they never looked at a map. Their concept of time was based on walking, biking, taking a bus or a car. They didn’t realize that if the train just moves at a pretty good clip (and doesn’t stop for traffic, crossing traffic or any of that) then it would get them there fairly quickly. It would be … fast.

            In contrast, consider how people get from Federal Way to Downtown Seattle. They don’t walk or take a bike. They take an express bus or they just drive on the freeway. Thus no one views the train as fast even though the train is moving at about the same rate — if not faster. It is all relative. For trips inside the city the train seems fast. For trips into the city it seems slow. But the reality is actually the opposite.

      2. It’s bad 5 miles outside of Seattle..

         1. It’s good 15 miles to Lynnwood and in the future 30 miles to Everett, if it weren’t for that Paine Field detour. It’s just not as good in the south end because the distances are longer to comparable areas, the surface track and detour east slow it down, and there’s less in between to go to. East Link’s slowness in many different track environments is mysterious and has never been explained.

         2. “East Link’s slowness in many different track environments is mysterious and has never been explained.”

            Can you name some East Link sections where the trains go slow, and it’s not obvious (like a curve) why they are doing so?

         3. I don’t remember all the exact places or extents but approximately:

            • CID to Judkins Park
            • Somewhere between Judkins Park and South Bellevue (not on the floating bridge)
            • East Main into the downtown Bellevue tunnel and through the straight southern segment
            • Wilburton area
            • Between Bel-Red and Overlake Village (not on the surface segment)

            Slowness on the floating bridge, on surface segments, or in turns is understandable. It’s not happening on the bridge. We understand it has to be slow for level crossings and turns. But there are other grade-separated, relatively straight segments where it’s also occurring, even though comparable segments on the 1 Line don’t have these slowdowns. And it’s not just one other place for a short segment, but several other places for longer segments.

   3. I don’t think Sound Transit is expecting many people to use Route 574 + Link to travel between Tacoma and downtown Seattle. As you mentioned, that trip is best served by Route 594 (and ST is adding a few additional 594 trips this Fall). Route 574 + Link is better for trips between south King/Rainier Valley and Tacoma.

      1. Sound Transit should probably have mentioned that a decade ago then.

         My understanding was the original plan was to eliminate the 594 when Link got to Tacoma Dome. Why would they do that if they weren’t hoping people would use Link for inter-city trips?

      2. ST was going to eliminate the 57x and 59x when Link reached Federal Way. That was in all three planning scenarios in January 2016. ST never made a decision or preference on them, and we never heard anything more until last year when it released a South Link restructure proposal. Ever since 2016 there had been an ongoing public debate on whether Link’s travel time to Federal Way/Tacoma Dome was fast enough to make it reasonable to truncate the ST Express routes. There was a lot of pushback saying no. In the end the restructure proposals kept the primary 59x services and truncated only the 574. That’s what made it into the final, and will be implemented this month.

         When Tacoma Dome opens there will be this debate again. We can’t predict what ST will decide in ten or fifteen years, but by today’s precedent it’s likely to keep the 59x even then, because Link’s travel time won’t have gotten any better.

         The factors in 2016 were operational cost: ST didn’t want to spend the service hours running the 59x in parallel with Federal Way Link. Now two other factors are overriding it:

         (A) More sensitivity to the issue of Link’s travel time to Federal Way and eventually Tacoma.

         (B) A greater emphasis on equity. People who have been displaced to Pierce County because they can’t afford King County’s housing prices shouldn’t have to endure long travel times on top of that.

         The reasons Link takes so long to Federal Way and future Tacoma Dome are structural and can’t be fixed easily:
         1. Link’s maximum speed is 55 mph, vs 65 mph on I-5.
         2. Federal Way is almost as far as Everett. The longer the distance, the larger the gap between Link’s travel time and cars’.
         3. The Rainier Valley/SODO surface alignment and detour east adds 10 minutes to travel time by my estimate.

         The recent Link vehicles can go 65 mph, but the track spec was designed for 55 mph. Faster speeds would require larger curve radii and flatter inclines.

         The board in 2014-2016 mused about retrofitting the Rainier Beach-TIB segment for higher speed, but I never heard any followup to that, or any priority for it in the new extensions.

         1. I have no expertise in this sort of thing, but it seems to me that some segments on existing Link tracks are already flat and straight enough for 65 MPH, especially in the suburbs. But if only some of the vehicles are capable of this speed, that would make scheduling a lot more complicated and unreliable.

         2. Most of the Southerly link alignment is relatively flat, and there are wide sweeping curves because it followed the freeway. I was curious one day and spent a weekend creating a spreadsheet using the Design Criteria Manual and some math to figure out what would theoretically be possible for the train speeds to be if nothing except the superelevation were to be changed. Basically most of the normal track aside from the approaches to stations as the alignment jogs away from the freeway could handle 65mph with relatively little change. Even more so if the superelevation standard were raised back to 6inches instead of the 4.5 they are now. The Tukwila segment makes liberal use of 6in sections of superelevation around its curves to get to 55mph and it’s noticeable but not uncomfortable. Getting to a higher superelevation isn’t out of the ordinary and BART and other systems with higher speeds general max out around a 6 inch superelevation. UTA in Salt Lake City has looked at similar changes to their alignment as part of speed and reliability improvements. They run their s70 LRVs (basically our series 2) at 65mph where they share mainline tracks with freight (temporally separated).

         3. Not truncating most Pierce County express was not because they suddenly realized light rail is not fast enough in last minute. They probably know this all alone and planned to do it anyway. It is just like Seattle-Eastgate would experience longer travel time after this run of change, which is inevitable.

            Truncating almost everything to Federal Way and deleting routes like 595 was indicated in some form of budget documents someone shared here a while ago. I guess that probably coincided with very early draft of 2026 Service Plan they were working on.
            I heard that ST did tested the audience with the plan that would truncate everything but one 59X at some very first outreach and of course it wasn’t taken well, so they backed off.

      3. Route 574 + Link is better for trips between south King/Rainier Valley and Tacoma.

         Or trips to SeaTac of course.

         Anyway, the big problem with the future routing is that it doesn’t take advantage of Federal Way Station. The Station has HOV ramps both directions. Thus a bus could easily just exit the freeway, serve the station and then get back on the freeway. Doing so would save a huge amount of time versus the current plan. That would allow better headways from Seattle to Tacoma (20 minutes midday, maybe even 15). Or it would easily pay for better late night service to Downtown Tacoma. There is Auburn/Puyallup/Sumner to think about as well. There are all sorts of options but they went with a redundant combination.

      4. Mainly the airport.

      5. While I see that STX 57# and 59# will continue, I expect ST to whittle those back over time north of Federal Way and eventually north of Tacoma Dome once TDLE opens. It’s faster but it’s still redundant.

         By skipping many Seattle Link stations in the overnight service because Metro (through a City of Seattle subsidy) runs “duplicate” service, I expect the same logic here. Except in this case, ST operates both services and the duplication is more obvious. Add to that the SODO busway is going away and I-5 is often congested north of Spokane Street so it’s not a speedy reroute on I-5 or 4th Ave S..

         Add to that the ridership south of SeaTac will be weak and trains will be mostly empty. Many of those boarding at Federal Way today will switch to a station further south when TDLE opens like they did at Northgate when Link opened northward. ST will want to encourage Link use.

         ST likely knows that cutting them all at once is controversial. But those bus trips will drop one by one. As they drop, the ridership on the line will drop and it will intriduce a downward spiral of demand until the ST offers remaining service that is skeletal if not completely gone.

         1. 5 billion+ dollars to make getting from Tacoma to Seattle near untenable. Brilliant.

            We should throw the whole 5 billion at improving the speed, frequency and span of Sounder.

         2. 5 billion+ dollars to make getting from Tacoma to Seattle near untenable.

            Anyone who looked at the actual plans would realize that light rail from Seattle to Tacoma would be much slower than an express bus. I’m sorry folks thought otherwise.

            We should throw the whole 5 billion at improving the speed, frequency and span of Sounder.

            People have suggested that. Troy Serad had some really good ideas (e. g. https://transportationmatters.wordpress.com/2015/08/26/improving-rail-mobility-in-the-puget-sound/).

         3. getting from Tacoma to Seattle near untenable

            Sorry Ross, I’m going to side with the clueless appointed political droids on this one. I really want to take Link from my door (little bit of a walk) to DT TDome. I’m going to be a rah-rah fan supporter on this one even if it makes no sense. And no logical argument you make will change my mind.

   4. This is why the 590, 594 and 595 are not being deleted. The 574 never ran to Seattle. However, Link + a twice frequent 574 will outperform today’s 574 that gets stuck in traffic on I-5 between Federal Way and Seatac.

   5. LINK isn’t meant to replace trips to Seattle from Tacoma which is why the 590 series is being kept.. It will be much more reliable for rides to SeaTac airport and the university of Washington (which would be better to transfer to Link at CID or Westlake for trips continuing north).

2. I recently rode route 570 between Seatac and downtown Seattle. I was surprised to see fairly robust ridership. This argues for a greater span of service on Link, not more shadow buses. ST should figure out how to do more maintenance via single tracking during the late night hours.

   The time penalty of looping through Tukwila Int’l Blvd station is ridiculous. It’s like five traffic lights.

   1. The time penalty of looping through Tukwila Int’l Blvd station is ridiculous.

      My guess is they serve Tukwila International Boulevard Station (TIBS) in anticipation of the future walkway. Once that is built, the bus will make a quick stop on 405 and keep going. Otherwise it is hard to justify given that other late-night buses connect to TIBS. Both the 124 and RapidRide A connect TIBS to SeaTac while the 124 connects TIBS to downtown.

   2. I’m surprised it’s getting robust ridership, but I’m glad!

      This accentuates the need for a night owl connecting Seatac to Rainier Valley.

   3. The robustness of night owl ridership does not negate ST’s need to perform nightly track and station maintenance. But it does argue for improving the night owl service network.

3. Pierce Transit buses, including two primary routes to downtown Tacoma, a cross-county trunk to Puyallup and several local collector/distributors serve the Lakewood Transit Center. Lakewood Station buses are “regional” like, ST’s expresses and the IT express to Lacey and Olympia.

   Moving the 574 from Lakewood TC to Lakewood Station means all the riders in Steilacoom, Lakewood and JBLM will be stuck on the PT 2 and 3 milk runs to Tacoma if they want to go there or farther. Or they can walk the two circuitous miles between the two facilities. [Folks from JBLM will pass fairly close on Bridgeport, so they can get off before the TC and walk to the Station.]

   If ST wants the 574 to provide the backbone of Park-N-Ride service at the Station, it should keep the terminal at the TC and visit the Station on the way to and from Tacoma. This is a serious decrease in service to the local area.

   1. I remember a few months back that this actually was the plan, for ST to start the 574 at Lakewood TC, then have a stop at Lakewood Station, then continue onward. But from my understanding, I think Pierce Transit wants more space at the TC because they are increasing frequences on the 3.

      although I find it odd that this meant the 574 needed to move considering the TC already has 2 unused bus bays

      1. Sounds like PT wants to up the passenger counts on the 2 and 3. Nice for them when they request grants. Not so nice for the local folks headed to downtown Tacoma and beyond.

         1. It’s not a PT issue. The 2 and 3 are a different transit market from the 574. The 2 and 3 are for trips to downtown Tacoma or stops in between. The 574 is for trips to King County that don’t take two hours.

         2. Mike, I was responding to Eddie’s observation that “Pierce Transit wants more space at the TC” which is, I guess, the reason that the 574 isn’t making a button-hook up the the TC.

            It should make that button-hook, even if they hot loop and lay over at the Station, though that increases operating costs somewhat.

         3. It’s possible PT booted the 574/597 out of Lakewood Transit Center for its own route expansion, but that’s unlikely, because hurting ST Express coverage hurts PT transfers and taxpayers too. Surely PT/Lakewood could have offered ST alternate spaces just outside the TC, as Bellevue TC has always had. And announced a goal of expanding the TC. Even if it doesn’t know how to pay for it yet or how to locate it in the area, a goal is the place to start.

   2. I don’t understand at all why ST is putting the 574 and night owl at the Lakewood Sounder station instead of leaving it where Lakewood people live.

      1. Park-N-Ride brain.

         1. +100

            Plus, if it parks at The Station it proves is Our Bus!

4. Excuse me? The Federal Way Link Extension is still “future” on the map for lines 164 and 166? Metro put out a map like that? Wow.

   The “two lefts and four stoplights” routing of route 164 shows clearly why a new bus- and pedestrian/cycle bridge in the South 240th right of way is a great investment. Eventually 164/165 will become a Rapid Ride, and avoiding the mess at K-DM and PHS will be key to its reliability. See my post here (August 14, 2026 at 5:25 am) for an explanation of it.

   1. Sorry, I guess I don’t know how to reference a previous post. It is in “Midweek Roundup: ban rental junk fees” from August 12th.

      1. You can put an HTML “a” tag in the comment, and paste the URL into the “href” attribute. Or just state the date, since the articles are in publication order.

   2. The 164/166 map is an older map from the initial outreach that Metro did a year or two ago. I decided to use it because clearly shows how routes 164/166 are replacing Route 165.

5. Metrio is deleting 3 routes down there. A savifice to the link god. Its unfortunate that getting link has tended to lead to the decimation of bus service in the area

   1. It is probably a good thing to do to delete 162 and make 168 more frequent.

      1. I’ll glady trade in 16 commuter money burning trips for the increase in service the 164 is going to get. In the time it takes a driver to pull out of the base drive an empty bus to lake meridian and drive to seattle and back empty to tukwila that bus could have ran 3 trips on a non commuter route.

   2. I haven’t ever seen a decimation. The pattern is for express service to Downtown Seattle to get cut, and local service to get upgraded.

      1. Which doesn’t make sense. How do people travel to Seattle and Bellevue then?

   3. I’m curious why a couple commentators see only a loss of a few routes and think the restructure is a net loss for riders, and they don’t seem to see the frequency increase of other routes that’s a net gain for riders. Sometimes the improved routes are in the same corridor as the deleted routes and can be used for the same trips.

      Other times the issue is the loss of a peak express to downtown, or truncating the 574. If those are the specific problems you’re complaining about, please say so, and say why they’re still needed, and why they’re worth the large number of service hours required to keep them.

      1. As generally a peak time commuter from Lakewood (daily 592), the new southbound 574 route does offer better/more off peak options back down south, and to an origin point with more commuters since Lakewood Station serves Sounder, ST, PT and IC transit routes. Less the Tacoma jaunt of the 594 is a bonus. It’s a small and silly convenience, but still a convenience.

         I see the criticism of moving the 574 origin from a more residential area (LTC), but from the perspective of hitting more transit modalities AND providing additional parking for SeaTac bound riders, I do see some pluses.

6. Has PT 500 always been like hourly on weekday but half hourly on the weekend or it was something that happened during the pandemic?

   1. I was surprised when I checked the schedule this summer and found that. I don’t know what PT was thinking. I ended up taking the 502 northbound because I don’t think I’d ever taken it before. It took almost an hour to zigzag several times, so I don’t think I’ll take it again, and I wonder how Milton residents can tolerate an hourly bus that takes so long to get to Federal Way. But part of the zigzags is apparently a construction reroute.

7. Why don’t you keep Route 162 turning into all-day service and 168 needs to be replaced by 162 all day and why don’t you send the 121 to Highline College or Des Moines station

8. It will be interesting to inventory all the King County Metro routes, after the service change, that do not connect to the light rail network. It looks like about a couple dozen.

   At the same time, it is disappointing that there is no true express between Everett Station and Lynnwood Station, even during peak, while Community Transit 900-series routes provide that connection from several other cities, just not Everett Station. Maybe the proposed merger will bring sense to Everett’s regional connectivity.

   Metro and CT are doing a better job at connecting the the region to the light rail network than Sound Transit is doing. That 15-minute headway between Federal Way and Tacoma just slightly misses the mark during peak, but is a total mismatch off-peak.

   The transit lobby still has to plan short visits as parts of day trips or overnight stays in Olympia. There ought to be some sort of all-day two-way one-seat ride between Federal Way and Olympia that is not too much of a milk run. Politicians who whine about the small presence of the transit lobby in Olympia and happen to sit on the ST Board can do something about it.

   1. Intercity Transit 600 and 610 both go all the way to the Highway 512 park and ride lot. The increased frequency of the 574 should at least be of some help transferring there.

   2. If the 512 skipped Ash Way and left that to the 201/202, that’d probably do the express job best. Not sure if that makes sense ridership-wise though. Really Ash Way needs an HOV ramp to allow for a freeway flyer stop on the 512, but no idea if that’s being considered or not. Seems like half the time of the 512’s run is made up of serving Ash Way

      1. The missing bus ramp at Ash Way could not be considered, as building it would weaken the case for Link to Everett.

         1. I think it would be the opposite. You could run buses from Everett to Ash Way instead of Everett to Lynnwood. I’m not saying that is a good value, but it would save the agency some money while still being considerably faster than riding Link from Everett.

      2. If the 512 skipped Ash Way and left that to the 201/202, that’d probably do the express job best. Not sure if that makes sense ridership-wise though.

         I don’t think overall ridership would go down. There might be people who switch from ST to Community Transit but even then it would be minimal. Right now if you are headed from Everett to Lynnwood it is a wash — there is no reason to prefer taking the 512. Maybe some people would let a 201/202 go by if they know a 512 is coming. Ash Way accounts for some ridership but most of that is from Ash Way to Lynnwood and most of that is during peak. Thus ST could easily just add more 513 runs during peak to help fill the gaps during rush hour. Or they could just come up with a stub route (Ash Way to Lynnwood). Better yet, ST or CT could run a peak route from Swamp Creek to Ash Way to Lynnwood.

         Overall the agency would likely save money while improving the quality of service for most riders.

9. ST fall 2026 and Lakewood. What is their rationale for shifting the south terminal of Route 574 to the Sounder station from the Lakewood Transit Center? Why have ST and PT developed transit centers a mile apart from one another? So, the PT local routes will not be useful to reach the all-day ST service? Intercity Transit serves the Sounder station. Is this an auto-access market? Why?
   https://piercetransit.org/wp-content/uploads/System-Maps/sysmap-sw-0326.pdf?ver=1786653891

   For fall 2026, I suggested a consolidation of ST routes serving Pierce County. I have suggested it again for fall 2027. Having Route 574 become a 15-minute headway service is long overdue. But it is not sufficient. The Seattle routes (e.g., routes 590 and 594) should be folded in as well to improve the combined headway and reduce the waits. All Pierce County riders should have the option of reaching Link at Federal Way with short waits in both directions. The Link headway is eight minutes; the Route 574 headway will be 15-minutes, so there is more waiting southbound. Routes 574 and 594 serves three markets: Lakewood, downtown, and the TDS; Route 590 is peak only and does not serve Lakewood. The deviation time to serve downtown with a one-way loop using SR-705 must be substantial. Could one route serve Lakewood, TDS, Federal Way, and Seattle and another route serve downtown, TDS, and Federal Way, and Seattle. Some suggested that the ST Seattle routes deviate to the FWTC in the aughts when the Sound Move South 317th Street t-ramps opened. With Link’s connection with the airport and other markets, it is much more worthwhile.

   ST uses two pathways between downtown Seattle and I-5 South: the SODO busway (590-594-592-595) and Seneca Street (577-578). Link serves the SODO busway. What are the speed and reliability advantages of each?

   Consider the TDLE. It would spend billions to connect Federal Way station and the Tacoma Dome station and not serve downtown Tacoma and very few pedestrians at all. It would cross I-5 and the Puyallup River. It is served by PT routes 500, and 501. They have hourly headway. It does not seem to be a Link market.

10. King County Metro FWLE

    Route 121 seems to have peak direction trips only. That seems inefficient given empty deadhead trips. Before Covid, Route 121 had reverse peak direction trips serving Federal Center South on East Marginal Way South as well as a faster trip to Burien (a real place).

    Route 631 gets improved span. But Route 635, serving Angle Lake and Des Moines, attracts twice as many rides per platform hour and is not improved. Why?

    Routes 164 and 166. This is an awkward through route pairing, as the headways do not match and there is regular congestion just west of the Kent Station crossing the BNSFRR mainline. Why pass this variation on to the riders between Kent Des Moines and Burien?

    DART in Federal Way. Is it really required? Is there a pathway too narrow for a bus? DART has poor reliability as a feature not a bug.

    Auburn Flex area has Metro routes 184 and 915 already. Why set up competing service? Is this a race to the bottom? Are there not vast areas of South King County without fixed route service in which to apply Metro Flex?

    Not listed, as there is little change, is Route 193; it is retained but the terminal shifted to the Link station from the 320th P&R. Route 193 serves a string of P&R along I-5 South and a string of institutions on First Hill, so it is transfer adverse at both ends. It is not cost-effective; it has a long empty deadhead. It duplicates Link. Link serves several stations with First Hill services (e.g., IDS, PSS, Symphony, Capitol Hill). First Hill is served by routes 2, 3, 4, 27, 60, the G Line, and the FHSC.

11. My commute is coming from white center to Lakewood.

    560 to the aiport then 574 down to lakewood

    Suppose I could still take the 560, then the A-line…then the 574

    In any case glad I found this out before it went into effect as I had no idea…

12. Hey, my mother and many like her used the 574 to commute to work at SeaTac. This is bullshit, way more complicated. A great way to get more people driving their cars. Also, people in Tacoma use this route to get to and from the airport a ton. This extra step sucks. The end. Who do we the people need to talk to?

Comments are closed.