Metro Proposes Bus Restructures Around New Light Rail Stations

Buses in Downtown Seattle.
Buses in Downtown Seattle.

UPDATE:  Metro released formal alternatives on Thursday. The new information and maps have been updated throughout this post.

This week King County Metro and Sound Transit will jointly release two alternatives for bus service restructures to happen in 2016. The effort is intended to better connect riders with two new Link light rail stations opening one year from now, nine months ahead of schedule, in Capitol Hill and the University District. I’m a member of the citizen ‘sounding board’ on the project but the opinions here are my own.

The network in ‘Alternative 1’ is an aggressive strategy of consolidation, with elimination of duplicate routes in exchange for increased frequency throughout the day. It attempts to quickly connect people with the new light rail stations, which will cut down on travel time overall. The ‘Alternative 2’ network has few changes and is similar to the current bus system, but still has some key changes worth noting.

The two alternatives encompass central and northeast Seattle and represent an equal number of annual service hours. Service hours are Metro’s currency (equal to about $150 per hour) and represent the time a bus is operating. While Seattle voters have approved buying extra service hours from Metro starting in June, this restructure process is only based off the current network. After getting public feedback this month, the agencies will come back to the sounding board to craft a final proposal for the King County Council by July.

Typically, increased frequency would bring buses by stops every 10 or 15 minutes, up from every 30 or 60 minutes. ‘Peak hours’ refers to commuting times of 5-9am and 3-7pm, with peak-only routes being those that only operate during those hours. ‘Midday’ is in-between and ‘night’ is after 7pm.

Alternative 1

The following are route deletions under Alternative 1, and in parentheses are the frequency adjustments to the routes riders would use instead.

  • 11 (8 has increased peak, midday, night, and Sunday service)
  • 12 (west of Broadway, 49 has increased midday and night service; east of Broadway use 8, 10, or 38 to reach light rail)
  • 25 (255 local is unchanged, and 255X is now peak only)
  • 26X (combined with local 26)
  • 28X (combined with local 28)
  • 30 (74 is unchanged)
  • 43 (8 and 48 provide alternate service; 48 has increased midday, night, and Sunday service)
  • 68 (372X has increased all day service and new weekend service)
  • 71 (Link goes to downtown, and 16 has increased all day and weekend service)
  • 72 (Link goes to downtown, and 372 is upgraded to all day, all week service)
  • 242 (66 is make peak only, and 542 has increased service all day and all week)
  • 252 (311 has double the number of peak trips)
  • 257 (311 provides alternate service)
  • 277 (255 provides alternate service)

Other than those listed in parentheses above, the following routes would also see increased, decreased, or rerouted service:

  • 26 (routed down Aurora Avenue instead of Dexter Avenue)
  • 28 (routed down Aurora Avenue instead of Dexter Avenue)
  • 64X (one additional afternoon trip and goes through South Lake Union and First Hill)
  • 65 (increased midday and Saturday service, and serves UW station at Pacific Street)
  • 66 (made peak-only and no longer serves U-District, going down I-5 to First Hill)
  • 70 (increased peak service, and added night and Sunday service)
  • 73 (downgraded to peak only trips between Roosevelt and downtown)
  • 75 (increased midday and Saturday service)
  • 76 (additional peak trips)
  • 235 (extend north to Brickyard Park and Ride)
  • 238 (extended to Woodinville Park and Ride)
  • 255 (split into two routes, one connecting Totem Lake with Seattle Children’s hospital; a new 256 connects Kirkland with downtown Seattle during peak only)
  • 271 (split into two routes overlapping in Eastgate; western part has increased night and Saturday service, and east part is a new route 207 downgraded to only peak and midday service)
  • 311 (rerouted through U-District and terminates at Seattle Center instead of downtown)
  • 316 (added peak only trips)
  • 540 (rerouted via Houghton Park and Ride)
  • 542 (upgraded to all day, all week service and terminates at Bear Creek Park and Ride)
  • 545 (made peak only and terminates at UW station)
Alt 1 - all day AND peak only
Alternative 1 all day and peak-only networks. Click to enlarge. (King County Metro and Sound Transit)

And along with scheduling changes, a number of routes would be realigned. This includes some Metro and Sound Transit routes on the Eastside; see this map for Eastside routes. The most significant route changes in Seattle are listed below with commentary on those routes I am most familiar with:

  • The 8 is split into two routes overlapping at the Capitol Hill Link station. The southern part, a new route 38, connects Martin Luther King Jr. Way with the northern end of Broadway. The northern part still connects Uptown with Capitol Hill via Denny Way, and extends east to Madison Park to replace the deleted 11. Nicknamed the Late, sounding board members were skeptical that increased frequency on the north part will benefit anyone because of how congested Denny Way is. One option to solve this, and also give South Lake Union better east-west service, is to route the 8 via Harrison or Thomas Streets instead.
  • The 16 serves Sandpoint instead of Northgate, and takes a meandering route to downtown via the Fremont Bridge instead of Aurora Avenue. It has increased frequency across the board. The 26 fills in the gap between Green Lake and Northgate created by the 16 reroute.
  • The 48 is split into two routes that overlap in the U-District and Roosevelt neighborhoods, with both serving UW station. The northern branch is a new route 45. This makes sense, as the current 48 is one of the longest routes in Seattle and it’s unlikely many people ride the full length. However, it is proposed to move from 15th Avenue to University Way (The Ave), a much narrower street. I will go into this issue more below. There is inconsistency on whether in Alternative 2 it serves the Roosevelt corridor not.
  • The 49 accesses downtown via Madison Street instead of the Pike-Pine corridor.
  • The 66 becomes peak only between Northgate and First Hill via I-5 instead of going to the University of Washington and downtown.
  • The southern part of 67 runs on The Ave and terminates at UW station, continuing as the 48 southbound. The station connection is great, but it shouldn’t be at the loss of service for the south Roosevelt corridor, a growing commercial and residential area. Plus, SDOT is about to build curb extensions for buses here; under this proposal those improved bus stops would be wasted.
  • The northern part of the 70 terminates at the UW station instead of serving the entire western edge of the UW campus on 15th Avenue. Staff indicate this is to connect the UW Medical Center with South Lake Union. But there are already UW and private shuttles that provide the same service. Plus, many UW students live in Eastlake. The 70’s increased peak service to 10-15 minutes is great, but if should retain its current route.
  • The popular 71, 72, and 73 are significantly changed, with the first two deleted. Routes 16 and 372 connect the Wedgwood and Lake City neighborhoods that lose 71 and 72, respectively, with the university. The light rail is intended to provide the bulk of capacity on the busy U-District to downtown corridor. The 73 becomes peak only, with eight trips in the morning and ten in the afternoon, between Green Lake and downtown via The Ave and I-5 express lanes.
Alt 2 - all day AND peak only
Alternative 2 all day and peak-only networks. Click to enlarge. (King County Metro and Sound Transit)

Alternative 2

Alternative 2 would have much fewer changes and is focused more on geographic distribution, with less frequent service and greater transfer times. Some changes are made to serve destinations based on public feedback last year. General service and realignment changes are listed below.

  • The 25 is retained and split in two to serve Portage Bay and north Capitol Hill, overlapping at UW station. A new route 62 connects UW station with Laurelhurst.
  • The 30 is still deleted.
  • The 66 is deleted.
  • The 67 is deleted.
  • The 68 is retained but rerouted along 75th Street and 40th Avenue.
  • The 71 is retained but only becomes a short east-west route between Magnuson Park and Green Lake.
  • The 72 is still deleted.
  • The 73 is retained with increased service across the board, but only goes as far north as Northgate.
  • The 74 is two-way during peak.
  • The 238 is extended to Woodinville Park and Ride.
  • The 242 is still deleted.
  • The 277 is still deleted.
  • The 372 is still upgraded to frequent all day and all week service.
  • The 373 is upgraded to to all day, two-way service.
  • The new 541 would be peak only between Overlake and U-District.

The Takeaway

Alternative 1 is a great start to a higher frequency network for the people of north and central Seattle. It will require some riders to walk further to their stops, which many will probably consider worthwhile if the bus schedule is more robust. But in places with steep hills, poor or non-existent sidewalks, and other safety issues, the city should improve walking facilities. The consolidation of routes and stops could also allow unused stop shelters to be reallocated. Keep in mind that the opening of three more light rail stations only six years from now will necessitate another major network restructuring.

There are also maps available of travel times between various destinations under each alternative, factoring in the Link service. Under Alternative 1, travel times from the northeast neighborhoods to Capitol Hill will significantly improve. It’s a mixed bag in terms of travel time from those neighborhoods to downtown and South Lake Union, while there will no time advantage in getting to the University District from the north. Under Alternative 2, it’s also a mix of travel time advantages from points north to the south, with some places experiencing much slower travel times. These are very general observations, check the travel time maps on Metro’s website for details.

Alt 1 AND 2 - midday frequency
Comparison of Alternatives 1 and 2 midday frequency, perhaps the most useful way to visualize the networks. Click to enlarge. (King County Metro and Sound Transit)

I have a particular concern with routes in the core of the U-District. Because 15th Avenue has double the lanes, wider sidewalks, and no on-street parking, I believe it should continue to carry the bulk of north-south bus routes in this area. There is potential to establish bus-only lanes. It also quickly connects students, the majority of riders in the area, with the university campus. Metro funded a makeover of The Ave’s streetscape a decade ago, and so are understandably reluctant to abandon it. But what’s best for the growing community here is to retain The Ave’s special and eclectic retail character. Converting it into a pedestrian mall, is a possible game changer. Getting buses off now, or at least reducing their number, would help build momentum for such an endeavor. But a transit-pedestrian mall may also be worth studying, especially if the streetcar comes back to town.

In response to this specific issue, Metro staff provided the sounding board with travel time data comparing 15th Avenue and The Ave between Ravenna Boulevard and 41st Street. The Ave wins out by a minute most of the time and up to two minutes during peak. But this isn’t a fair comparison. The Ave has one less traffic light (41st Street) and one less bus stop (52nd Street), making it naturally faster despite parking cars, mid-block crosswalks, and bicyclists slogging uphill. Plus, the minute or two speed advantage doesn’t matter for the vast majority of riders, who are heading to or from campus, if Metro makes them walk an extra block and wait to cross 15th at a light. Metro should, in short, prioritize 15th for bus service.

Early on I was also concerned with bus-to-rail transfers through the Montlake Triangle area, which was designed for high speed car traffic. Fortunately, Metro, the city, and the UW are taking a hard look here. Bus stops on Pacific Street will be moved closer to the south intersection, beg buttons will be removed, and stops may be consolidated on Stevens Way. Bicyclists won’t have an issue making a quick connection to the new Rainier Vista or Burke Gilman trail, but pedestrians will still have to walk several hundred feet. Wayfinding, shelter, and lighting investments could improve the experience if the agencies commit to funding them.

That’s my take. Check out the maps and Metro’s website, which has much more information, and let me know what you think and which changes would better serve the citizens of Seattle. Look out for Metro’s announcement this week of the public process, which will include online components and community meetings, and for the analyses of other local blogs who can dig into deeper details.

This article is a cross-post from The Northwest Urbanist, the personal blog of Scott Bonjukian. He is a graduate student at the University of Washington’s Department of Urban Design and Planning.

We hope you loved this article. If so, please consider subscribing or donating. The Urbanist is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit that depends on donations from readers like you.

Scott Bonjukian is a car-free urban designer with a passion for sustainable and efficient cities. With degrees in architecture and urban planning, his many interests include neighborhood design, public space and street design, transit systems, pedestrian and bicycle planning, local politics, and natural resource protection. He primarily cross-posts from his blog at The Northwest Urbanist and advocates for a variety of progressive land use and transportation solutions.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The Slave of the Husband

Trying to find ahead to finding out further from you afterward!…

The Silent Shard

This may probably be really practical for a few of your positions I want to never only with my blogging site but


The Ships’s Voyages

I think know-how just causes it to be worse. Now there is a channel to never ever care, now there won’t be considered a chance for them to discover.


Souls in the Waves

Very good Morning, I just stopped in to visit your website and assumed I’d say I loved myself.


The Absent Game

Concerning me and my husband we have owned extra MP3 players over time than I can count, like Sansas, iRivers, iPods (common & touch), the Ibiza Rhapsody, etc. But, the last few ages I’ve settled down to one line of gamers.


Thorn of Girl

Very good info may be identified on this net weblog.


The Absent Game

In between me and my husband we have owned much more MP3 gamers over the years than I can count, like Sansas, iRivers, iPods (traditional & touch), the Ibiza Rhapsody, etc. But, the last few ages I’ve settled down to one line of gamers.


Wow, I just don’t get this. So many questions about the 71, 72, 73 routes.

First, are the 372 and 373 going to go directly to Husky Stadium to connect to Link, or will they still wind around on Stevens Way on campus? I don’t think a bus, walk, train commute is much of a replacement for a single bus ride to downtown.

Second, there appears to be no replacement for the 71 because the 16 goes to Green Lake rather than UW. Why? How will people in the current 71 bus shed get to UW and Link?

Third, what is the deal with deleting most of the 73 trips? Heading south, that bus has a fair number of people by the time it reaches 125th St, and is absolutely packed by the time it reaches the UW, at all hours. The few extra 373 trips will not make up for it.

Maybe Metro is just preparing people for disappointment. In six years when the 41 ends at Northgate, and people have to transfer to a train rather than stay on the bus to downtown, for no gain in time, they are going to be upset.


I assume they made a mistake with the map, and 255 is supposed to cover the same route within Laurelhurst that 25 currently covers. They can’t just cut transit to a whole neighbourhood altogether.

David Koenig

Why does the 41 still go downtown? The trip time for Link from Northgate to Downtown is faster than the 41’s best time all day, so it makes no sense as an express route. (Keep the windy portion north of the Link station.)


Because Northgate Link does not open until 2023 and these changes will happen in 2016. If you don’t have the 41 go downtown any more, what do you propose Northgate people do until Northgate Link opens?

David Koenig

Oh right. Derp.


Why the deletion of 257? 311 is not redundant. Nothing else provides a one-seat trip to Juanita.


The deletion of the 12 is not sensible; it follows its own route in 19th, leaving a long walk to either neighboring route. Same with the deletion of *all* Laurelhurst service. The rest of it seems pretty good. (Also, the 12 is a freaking trolley route, so it’s cheaper to operate than the diesel routes.)


I wouldn’t consider 4 blocks to be a long walk.

Stephen Fesler

Generally, I would concur. But 19th is downhill, and it’s a light commercial and lowrise residential area. It deserves its own standalone service.


The propose radical restructure will largely destroy the value of and ridership of the SR-520 transit investments unless there is a radical improvement of bus reliability and dedicate infrastructure, which simply isn’t happening if the existing Montlake bridge is used with no dedicated lanes. The peak period expresses are almost absurd, because that is when I-5 is a parking lot and Link might save time. Off-peak, the existing routes 255 and 545 would be downtown before a rider could even get to the Link platform, and that’s if there was no bridge opening and Montlake wasn’t congested. The southbound 255 could take 20 minutes in traffic getting from U-Village to Husky Stadium in the afternoon peak.
The 255 truncation and 545 off-peak elimination are not going to fly


There is a big discussion on the issue over at the Seattle Transit Blog. This is my take on that:


If you want to look at a long-term strategy, there are two big holes in this map: 75th and 95th. The removal of the 68 and the 71 reduce East-West transit along 75th St to virtually nothing. It would be most prudent to add an east-west route that simply runs along 75th, heads south on Roosevelt Way NE, and terminates at 65th NE St. I think it would also be prudent to add East-West service along 95th and maybe even 110th Streets that could terminate at the Northgate LINK station. We’re talking about giving more coverage in Northeast Seattle to high speed transit, but also finally make it possible for us to travel to the Northwest corner of the city within a reasonable timeframe. Right now, it’s just not possible, and I fear it’s only going to get worse. I personally want to see more focus on providing added east-west service that connects with the LINK, and makes it possible to ride transit without having to walk long distances or over steep hills to get where we’re going. In short: we need ribs to connect to this lovely spine we’ve built.

Stephen Fesler

Just for reference, you are keeping in mind that this change is really only meant to manage Light Rail 2016, not 2021, right? I agree the future should be east-west focused for the bus network, or at least realigning that way, but it’s hard to go all-in when the most north station next year is at Montlake and 520 (basically).


I don’t think replacing the 71 with something that goes to Sand Point and skips 75th entirely makes a lot of sense, when the Sand Point corridor already receives high frequency service to the University of Washington, and will provide transfer points to the LINK light rail. The effect of this change will be to make it substantially harder for high school students to commute to Roosevelt High School, and make it even harder for us to travel to Northgate effectively. I would see that maintaining bus service along 75th is a must, and neglecting to do so puts parts of Wedgwood into isolation from our transit system. 65th, and even 70th, are simply too far for some to walk.

Eldan Goldenberg

I really hope the splitting of the 8 and 48 goes ahead. I’ll lost occasional convenient direct routes from these, but I can *easily* imagine reliability improving enough to compensate for that, on two routes that have some real issues at present, and the 8N is probably necessary to compensate Madison Valley for the deletion of the 11.

Charles B

The reorg of the 26 and 16 is confusing. I like the connection being added down stone (it makes little sense to skip all of that growth) but dropping service frequency between Northgate and GreenLake (and by extension, to Wallingford) seems like a weird exchange.

Wedgewood gets some new downtown service, but on a long, winding route through Westlake, without getting a connection to the new UW station.

Green Lake/Wallingford loses the frequent transfer to the Northgate bus terminal (and the mall). If the 26 were to get boosted service or if this were post Northgate Link it would make a lot more sense…

Is there something I am not seeing here? I don’t see many winners in this particular rearrangement.

Charles B

Actually, on second inspection, I noticed that the 16 is generally only at 20-30 minute frequencies currently, so dropping to 30 is not as big of a loss as I thought.

This does create a connection between Uptown/Almost SLU for the new apartments at stone, which isn’t terrible. It would be better for them to have more of a direct connection to the UW station of course.

I expect a lot of people in Wedgewood would need to be transferring from the 16 to one of the N/S lines that gets them to the new UW station, otherwise it will be a much longer trip downtown.


With regards to your comments about 15th versus University Way (the Ave): The Ave is a lot more pleasant place to wait for a bus and a destination in itself (although not as big as the university). Crossing the Ave is no big deal, either, whereas crossing 15th is a real pain.

In a few years, Brooklyn becomes the key destination, though. It isn’t too bad to walk a couple blocks, but I don’t see any harm in slowing most of them down by making the detour. The main purpose of buses when Link gets there is to connect riders with Link, or connect them to the university district (or the university itself). It seems to me that the most common connection (by far) will be with the station. For every rider that takes the bus to school from the north or southeast (i. e. via 15th or the Ave) there will be two who get off the train and transfer. After all, the student (or faculty member) won’t ride a bus a really long ways to campus (they will take a bus to the train and then transfer). With that in mind, I think it makes sense for buses to travel down Brooklyn. The bus might be a minute slower, but the riders saves two minutes in transfer time.

It is quite possible that there will be a lot fewer buses traveling from the north to the U-District (since Link will do that). Buses like the 73, which serve Maple Leaf, may simply veer off, and serve the Roosevelt station (which is a lot closer). That would mean a two seat ride for folks headed to the U-District, but a very quick one. There will be plenty of buses from the south or west (Eastlake or Fremont). Those will be traveling on Roosevelt/12th, or be close to it. For those buses, there will be a similar trade-off (jog over to Brooklyn or keep going on Roosevelt/Brooklyn).

Of course, that is a ways from now. But for now (for this round of changes) I wouldn’t worry about it. I think turning the Ave into a bike only street, or simply making it even quieter (by removing the buses and lowering the speed limit way down) could make a lot of sense in the long run.


If we step back and consider the future of the U District, with two light rail stations, vastly increased density, and the continued innovation as catalyzed by the university, this neighborhood is primed for experimentation with the freedom that multi-modal mobility provides. The logical separation of district streets into pedestrian-, transit-, bike-, and vehicular-priority accordingly is essential to that future.

Some of us are proposing a pedestrianized Ave, a bike-priority ‘greenway’ along 12th Ave NE, transit-priority along 15th Ave NE and Brooklyn Ave NE, with vehicles along 15th Ave NE and the paired north-south one-way streets of Roosevelt and 11th Ave NE.

This hierarchy of street use matches the audience to the strengths of each avenue: 1) a vibrant, pedestrian mall experience along the Ave, 2) quick connections to the future U District light rail station from buses without commuters crossing busy NE 45th Street, 3) adjacent stops along 15th Ave NE to a campus that is considering reducing transit on campus itself, 4) a bicycle ‘freeway’ along 12th Ave NE that connects the Burke Gilman trail at the south to Ravenna Boulevard at the north, and 5) along the perimeter could be located convenient centralized parking structures for vehicular traffic to serve the district.

If you wish to help steer this outcome, consider joining the U District Mobility Working Group at

Stephen Fesler

My biggest concerns are Portage Bay, 19th Ave, and Laurelhurst losing all-day service. This doesn’t seem right.

For riders who want to comment on possible changes, we’ll have a survey and updated information online later this week, including maps and info sheets to better explain possible changes on each route. Also, is an option for sharing your perspectives.

Stephen Fesler

We’ll make sure to get those out to readers/followers.


A major overhaul for the north end following this change was always going to be problematic, for the reasons you mentioned. Getting to Husky Stadium is very difficult. The big change should (and probably will) occur when we get the U-District station. This map (which is way more appealing than anything here) assumes that:

I’m not sure if the Link change is simply being used as an excuse to build more of a grid. I am all for that, but the devil is in the details. As mentioned by others, the lack of an evening 73 or 373 is weird. Unless I’m misreading the map, someone in Pinehurst (e. g. 15th NE and NE 125th) trying to get to the U-District is supposed to walk a long ways, or make a transfer. That means a three seat ride if you are coming from Fremont.

I think in general this assumes that the Northgate Transit Center is a great destination, and that there is no traffic there. I think this is wrong. There is nothing special about Northgate, and getting there is really tedious. Moving buses off of 15th and onto Roosevelt is just fine (and probably long overdue). But sending all those buses to Northgate is a mistake. I think this is trading the old “every bus goes to downtown” model with an “every bus goes to the nearest transit center” one. This would be fine if the Northgate Transit Center wasn’t so hard to get to (the best part about it is that it easy to access from the freeway). Placing so much emphasis on a medium level destination (Northgate) really hurts any attempt to produce a workable grid.

Thanks for your participation on the sounding board and your post here. We’re working to finalize some of the draft information you have shared here and are just a few days away from posting it publicly for riders to see and begin to review. We’ll keep you posted when we have it online.


I personally want to aggressively connect people to light rail instead of maintaining their duplicated connections downtown when possible. But turning the 73 into peak-only trips doesn’t make much sense, at least without expanding the 373 to all day. The 73 and 373 would both be peak-only trips. That means there would be ZERO off-peak trips to UW/Link for most of Pinehurst, Victory Heights, Jackson Park, or Olympic Hills. This seems like a major oversight.


I was thinking the same thing. I don’t get it. I am not sure how you are supposed to get from the areas you mentioned to the UW (or Link).


100% agreed. I know that Metro thinks the 73 numbers north of Northgate Way are light, but that is the sole direct route for many people. Eliminating off-peak trips is going to be a hardship for some.


Not really. The 65th only serves NE 145th or further east into Lake City. The 372 is even further away. It can easily be a mile and a half walk or longer walk (with no sidewalks and lots of hills) to get down there. The 67 is also an option but again it can be a mile+ walk to Northgate. There is existing service along NE 15th Ave with the 73/373 which serves the four neighborhoods on each side. The new option mostly only serves the northern and southern and eastern edges who are already using those other options.

And a transfer is also an option. But 347/348 -> 67 > Link is more than I think we can expect from most people.


I think seeing a map will help a lot. The map showing frequency shows a bus going along 15th, then Pinehurst Way. But after that, it isn’t clear where it goes. If it goes to Northgate, then someone from Pinehurst (e. g. 15th and 125th) has a two seat ride to the U-District (or a very long walk). I’m all for moving the buses over to Roosevelt (that makes a lot of sense) but as I said below, the bus should just keep going (on Roosevelt or on Pinehurst to 15th). Looking at the census maps (or aerial photos) you can see that there are plenty of people north of Northgate Way (significantly more than in Maple Leaf, for example).

Again, I think the problem (assuming my assumption is correct) is that Metro thinks going to Northgate Transit Center is a great idea. You definitely have to have some buses going there, but forcing all buses from the U-District there is not going to help anyone. You are better off going at least as far as 125th (with frequent service) and a little further (with infrequent service) since the numbers actually do dwindle quite a bit after 125th.

Census Data: (zoom in to the neighborhoods).

Robert Cruickshank

Alternative 1 doesn’t seem to make very much sense. Losing service on lower Roosevelt Way is very difficult to justify given the existing and potential density, as well as the destinations on that route. Cutting off an entire neighborhood from transit service, as would happen to Laurelhurst, should be a red line planners never cross. Then there’s this quote: “The overcrowded 71, 72, and 73 are significantly changed, with the first two deleted.” Seems contradictory to me. Ultimately, Alternative 1 will not survive contact with the King County Council – Dembowski’s constituents will be hurt by it, and he is not the type of guy to go along with Metro unquestioningly. Nor will it survive contact with the campaign for District 4 of the Seattle City Council, where candidates will be facing public pressure to resist this. A restructure that winds up taking away service from people is a failure, and indicates planners need to go back to the drawing board.


Yeah, I’m afraid this gives this sort of a restructure plan a bad name.

Ryan on Summit

Also, did I miss mention of the 49’s deletion in alt 1?


The 49 is not deleted, but will continue south on Broadway before turning onto Madison to serve downtown.


It will also become more frequent in option 1.

Gordon Werner

replaces the 12 … though all service east of Broadway disappears (not good) especially for those on 19th Ave

Eldan Goldenberg

Yeah, I was struck by that. There’s enough distance + hill between Broadway and 19th that the idea of the 49 being a substitute for the 12 seems laughable. The 10 seems more credible as such, but it doesn’t seem to be on the list for any increase in frequency.


Yep. If you live on Capitol Hill east of 15th (really east of Broadway but at least 15th keeps the 10 for now) you are screwed here. Instead of two buses that go downtown (12 and 43) you now have one bus that is always late, does not come more frequently, and doesn’t even go downtown.

Stephen Fesler

If Metro does delete it, it might be saved by Prop 1 funding by Seattle.


Yeah that’s a problem. I wonder if this is all assuming the Madison BRT gets built?

Ryan on Summit

Any mention of the 47? Seems interesting that this route, recently undeleted, would still remain in this aggressive restructure. It runs 5 blocks from CH Station.

Stephen Fesler

The 47 will remain unaffected. It’s outside of the scope of the changes and serves a different transit market. This will be returned to service later this year.