Sammamish bus routes in peril
June 23, 2009
By J.B. Wogan
Stephanie Murphy wouldn’t be too worried if King County Metro cuts the 216 bus route.
She said she often uses the 218 commuter route, which runs from the Issaquah Highlands to downtown Seattle, and that route would be her backup plan if the 216 stopped running.
“I ride the 216 once in a while, but I normally ride the 218. Even if it’s a little farther away it’s worth it to drive the four miles,” she said.
Some officials fear the 216 bus route may be cut. Photo by Lauren McLaughlin
Murphy and other riders might need to make those adjustments, such as doing that extra bit of driving, to keep using local bus routes. Metro is facing a growing budget hole and is looking for ways to cut costs.
Possible bus service reductions are a moving target and nothing is final, but that hasn’t stopped Kathy Huckabay from fearing the worst.
“I’m very concerned that the express bus will go,” Huckabay said, referring to the 216 commuter bus route.
The 216 stops along 228th Avenue six times in the morning and six times in the evening, going through Redmond to downtown Seattle.
Huckabay, a member of the Sammamish City Council, is the vice chair for the King County Regional Transit Committee.
Metro Transit depends heavily on sales tax revenues, a funding source that has dried up in the last year, causing the public transit agency to plan ways to cut costs.
The exact extent and method of cuts isn’t final yet, but the proposed scenarios all involve fewer buses running on fewer routes.
Huckabay is anticipating that Metro Transit would identify the 216 route as one to cut, in part because it doesn’t have as many riders as other routes.
But Huckabay said the 216 is popular, so much so that if more buses ran along the route, it would translate into more riders.
The route’s current ridership numbers aren’t reflective of the latent demand, she explained.
As of now, Metro Transit plans to institute cuts that would be equal in proportion to the current level of service in each of the county’s three sub-areas (west, south and east).
In that scenario, 62 percent of the cuts would be in the west sub-area (including Seattle, Lake Forest Park and Shoreline), 21 percent of the cuts would be in the south sub-area and 17 percent would be in the east sub-area (including Bellevue, Redmond, Sammamish and Issaquah, as well as parts of unincorporated King County).
“I do think that they should be reduced the way the program has it — in proportion to the amount of service in the area,” said Sammamish Mayor Don Gerend, who is also the vice chair of Metro Transit’s Eastside Transportation Partnership.
Not everyone agrees.
The Municipal League of King County, a non partisan and nonprofit civic volunteer group, criticized Metro Transit’s current service reduction model in a May 27 letter to the King County Council.
“We believe this policy would lead to unacceptably drastic impacts,” the letter said.
The league also submitted a report in November 2008 suggesting that Metro Transit needed to rethink how it identifies demand and how it doles out new bus service.
Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels, who serves as the chair of Sound Transit’s Board of Directors, sent a letter to King County Executive Kurt Triplett June 11 calling for a retooling of Metro Transit’s reduction model.
“This could have devastating effects, limiting transit-dependent riders’ mobility and putting others back into their cars,” Nickels wrote.
Nickels’ letter also asked for any reductions this year to be considered “suspensions;” the nuance in rhetoric would mean that Metro Transit would restore service to pre-suspension levels before worrying about allocating new service.
Metro Transit’s current policy on allocating new bus service is a hotly contested issue that is intertwined with its cutback policy because it ultimately affects who gets service if and when Metro Transit’s budget stabilizes.
The current new bus service allocation policy favors the south and east sub-areas, giving them each 40 percent of new bus service while Seattle gets 20 percent.
For the west sub-area, this could mean that buses would be reduced now and not restored at the same rate or in the same proportion as they were reduced.
But Gerend said he thought it was a waste of time and energy to focus on changing the policy for new bus service.
“I don’t see any reason to get into an argument at this time because it’s going to be years before it gets restored,” Gerend said.
Intern Lauren McLaughlin contributed to this story.
Reporter J.B. Wogan can be reached at 392-6434, ext. 247, or jbwogan@isspress.com.
Comments
6 Responses to “Sammamish bus routes in peril”
Got something to say?
This is amazing. I used to ride the 216 more frequently BEFORE they ‘increased’ service for the 216, and I’m not the only one. Metro’s definition of what “increased” is portrayed as an improvement. But, their definition of improvement is quite a bit different from mine. My bus ride went from 40-ish minutes coming home to usually 50-ish minutes. I’m not sure how one could label that as an improvement. Also, Metro’s definition of “Express” is laughable. It stops nearly every other block on the plateau, stops in Issaquah, and stops at Eastgate, and Mercer Island, Rainier flyer too. I think the most ridiculous stop is just after the 216 coming home in the evening leaves the South Sammamish P&R, there is a bus stop just after the intersection as well. Are you kidding me? People are so lazy that they won’t get off the bus and cross the street. Express? I beg to differ.
I live up by NE 8th and drive to Issaquah or Eastgate to ride the bus. I rarely catch the 216 anymore. In addition to the ridiculous amount of stops, it used to be standing room only when it got to South Sammamish PR. I suspect it’s thinned out a bit. In the evenings coming home, the bus has no A/C. And since it takes 50~60 minutes to get back, it’s not pleasant at all. Then there is the situation that the 5:20 bus coming home is almost always late, and the previous bus 4:50 (can be early)– that’s a winning combo. Then there are all the riders that use the 216 going home to take to Mercer Island or Eastgate. There are other buses that provide the same and more frequent service (at least to eastgate).
What kind of deal with the devil did transit authorities make with M.I. They get their own multiple ramps. They can be SOV in the express lanes with everyone else required to be carpool. Ball fields and a park on the lid.
Suggestions I’ve made in the past to Metro seem to fall on deaf ears. But I’ll serve them up again for your consumption.
Reduce 216 stops on the Plateau to P&R only.
Use busses with A/C for evening trips from Seattle back to Sammamish
Move the Eastgate and M.I. Stops to 214 and 218, (i.e. split them up). If someone needs to go to Eastgate, they can catch the 218 already. And the 214 could easily absorb the M.I. Stop.
These are no-brainers yet seem to not be of choice.
I would also say, increase the 269 frequency.
I’m very concerned that 216 might be cancelled. I live by the Safeway on the Plateau and this is the only way I can get to work without driving.
I say: make it run every hour, not every 30 minutes, and less stops.
It’s amazing to me that at this time of the government saying “go green” we are talking about cutting bus service ANYWHERE. Attention Metro: increase fees if you must but never cut service. This gives the impression you’re going out of business. Are you?
I agree with most of the comments and here’s my own.
Attention: Metro and your budget crunch.
Quit moving around bus stop locations every time there’s a schedule shakeup. Quit moving around bus shelters, too. In other words, you need to make up your mind and stick to it. Bus stops and bus shelters are not moving targets. Changes like these are unnecessary and add no value, only expenses and confusion to bus riders. (Do bus bays at South Sammamish P&R really have to be changed from 2 to 3? Come on, Metro!)
To those of you who make these changes – Try riding the routes you’re changing to know whether you’re doing the right thing or not. Get out of your office and face the real world.
More thoughts – Quit printing bus schedules every shakeup. Quit tweaking run times, too. (Do changing time points by 1 or 2 minutes really matter? Give me a break!) Go green, go paperless. Riders can use the internet if they want to know. The excellent transit system in Vancouver, BC, prints no bus schedules, so why can’t Metro do the same to save money?
Instead of complaining, how about a solution…
Why not have the #218 extended and run the route up to 228th. They have the 554 route doing that after 7:00pm.
I believe that the less transfers you have to take will continue to keep the ridership #’s up. That way you can still
utilize the current P&R and not add more cars on the road.
There are probably (5) #218 bus for every (1) #216 that run, we already have to wait 30 minutes for each one as it is.
The # 550 use to or may be still currently run by both Metro and Sound Transit, so why not reduce the amount of buses on that (metro)route and let Sound Transit handle it, plus with both Metro and ST they run every 5-10 minutes. It’s unfortunate that they would consider cutting the #216 service because of lack of ridership – there are many students who participate in the Running Start program from Skyline that could just as easily take the #216 to BCC if they ran more frequently.
As the cost for gas rose so did the ridership. I noticed that most new riders jumped onto the bus
when it reach the $4 mark, and soon decreased as the prices went back down.
The 216 is awesome, we also are the most patient riders when it comes to bus delays or they don’t show up due to mechanical or driver mishaps. The City of Sammamish also did an awesome job clearing 228th during the snow storms, that made it possible to continue to ride the #216 even though it was not running regularly… for people like me who HAVE TO go to work because of the nature of my job I really appreciated Metro and the City doing their best. THANKS!
Thank you for your email of July 9, 2009, regarding the routes 216 and
218. I believe your suggestion to extend Route 218 to the South
Sammamish park-and-ride was triggered by the June 23, 2009 article in
the Sammamish Review, which indicated that Route 216 might be in
jeopardy of discontinuation due to Metro’s budget shortfall.
Contrary to the implications expressed in that article, there are no
current plans to eliminate Route 216. Although Metro faces
unprecedented revenue shortfalls and balancing the budget as required by
law will be extremely difficult to do without reducing the amount of
service on the road, it is unlikely that Route 216 will be discontinued
in its entirety. It is more likely that select trips will be eliminated
and spans of service reduced from a number of routes over the next few
years. Metro is hopeful that additional revenues will be found and cost
savings implemented that will help avoid more drastic service impacts.
Decisions regarding how and when service reductions may occur will be
made following the adoption of Metro’s biennial budget by the King
County Council in late November. Despite the uncertainty, it is likely
that trips with the lowest ridership will be targeted first for
reduction. Most trips on Route 216 have good ridership levels, thus
making it an unlikely candidate for elimination.
Thank you for your suggestion to extend some Route 218 trips to start
and end at the South Sammamish park-and-ride. In the event that the
Route 216 were to be eliminated, this concept would be considered.
Factors that would cause the Route 216 to be deleted would also make it
difficult to incur the added cost of such an extension, especially if
trips were to be extended all the way north along 228th Avenue SE.
Additionally, there are no good places to turn buses around north of the
park-and-ride, and there would be little if any savings if Route 218
simply replaced route 216 north of Issaquah-Pine Lake Road.
Thank you again for your email. If you have further questions or
comments, please contact Victor Obeso, Service Development Manager, at
206-263-3109, or via email, at victor.obeso@kingcounty.gov
.
Sincerely,
Kevin Desmond
General Manager
Metro Transit Division