Zortan

Kitsap Transit is trying to work on a new long-range plan, which includes the following: Sunday service, even if new funding is not approved Making hourly routes run every half-hour (4, 5, 9, 20, 24, 26, 221, 223, 225, 235, 237, 332, 334) Introducing three new frequent corridors with service every 10-15 minutes: SR 305, replacing route 390, SR 303, replacing route 217 (and probably also 215 and 301), and Bethel, replacing route 8 Improved on-demand RIDE service, including potential new service areas: Poulsbo East, Bay Vista, McCormick Woods, Tracyton, Newberry Hill A Bremerton - Tacoma express service, serving Bremerton TC, Tacoma Dome Station, Park & Rides within Kitsap County and other potential Pierce County destinations New coverage bus service, with the following new routes (presumably all running all-day): A Bainbridge Island loop, a route from Belfair to West Bremerton, A Kingston - Poulsbo service via Suquamish, Port Orchard - McCormick Woods, Southworth - Port Orchard using the straight Mile Hill routing certain 86 trips use currently, Southworth - Sidney Road Park & Ride via Sedgwick Road, a Silverdale Mall Circulator and a Silverdale Medical Center circulator A potential new ferry route (no further details provided) More details and a survey are available here: https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/09da1c685c8c41c7bcc660d3ec232ae3

It was the entire 36, for some reason, but none of the other routes.

210/211/214 are pick-up only leaving downtown and drop-off only entering downtown. If you're heading to East Van from downtown, you'll probably be best off taking the 4. In the evening, the 209 does make all local stops in both directions, with drop off and pick up service.

Same as why any other agency does - trying to pick a number for a new route that fits into the current numbering system most likely. Plus, if it follows a similar routing to a discontinued route with the same number, it has the added bonus of being recognizable to riders.

In this case, it seems like no news is good news though. I'm just happy not to see big cuts this service change.

I'm doing that right now, it should be updated within a few minutes.

Currently updating the wiki articles with it.

I've been told all sorts of things by operators that weren't happy with what I was doing, but I don't believe any of it is illegal, at least on public property. And I realize that some people don't want their photos on the internet, but I can't let that stop me from pursuing my passion.

I don't believe that there are any legal issues with taking photos. That being said, if you spend enough time doing it you will have operators get frustrated with you. However, you're not doing anything wrong, and there's no requirement that you delete the photo, to the best of my knowledge.

Metro has a large fleet of Gilligs, they just haven't ordered any of the battery buses, so I don't think they're unwilling to order from Gillig. I don't think it's fair to call the Low Floors "smoother" than the Xcelsiors, since that's really a matter of opinion, for example, I view the Xcelsiors as smoother. I think one of the main reasons why Metro went Xcelsior for this initial large order of battery buses is that NFI offers both 40-foot and 60-foot battery buses, while Gillig only offers the 40-foot version, which would mean needing an order for XE60s anyway to fulfill the need for artics.

It being just two blocks from 3rd Ave aside, I can see why people would generally avoid a route that ends before 4 PM and starts around 8 or 9 in the morning. Presumably not super convenient for most.

I realize, but it wouldn't be too hard to extend the wiring along Henderson

Slightly off-topic, but why hasn't the 7 been extended west to Rainier Beach station? I'd think it would be a pretty logical connection.

Agreed. In my experience, the Phibbs - Vancouver section is usually fairly low ridership, especially outside of peak hours. It would probably make sense to cut the 211 and 214's Vancouver portions, especially the 211's off-peak service downtown.

I guess we'll find out tomorrow - I'm hoping it gets pushed back some more, but maybe their time has finally come. I'm glad I got photos of a few of them today, but sadly I think my last ride on one was a month or so ago on the 75.

Drives me crazy how ungrateful people are for transit. Translink is one of the best systems out there, yet people take every opportunity to attack it. If they don't want traffic to get worse, the only real option is for better transit, but people can't seem to connect the dots.

I believe that they are inactive, since a lot of the Metro-operated Sound Transit routes are still suspended (or were deleted during the pandemic), so there isn't a need to use the entire fleet, and keeping an entire subfleet (namely, the only Gilligs operated by Metro for ST) inactive would save on maintenance costs.

You're absolutely right. I unfortunately have my hands full at the moment but if one of the other editors wants to take it on, that would be a good project.

Yikes, looks like Translink is pulling a King County Metro move here...

That makes more sense, since plenty of them seemed to be out today.

You're right about the signature, it's gotten out of hand haha, I'll go and cut it down. As for the route, in the world (or at least North America) we live in, transit funding is hard to come by. And the option in the case of the Scottsdale - White Rock route would basically just be to either have that route or keep frequencies on frequent core routes like the 319 and 321. Overall, if you just keep the frequencies, the trip for passengers will work out to be faster, since the overall total wait times will be lower. That's the beauty of Translink, in my opinion, and also in my opinion why it's been so successful compared to other systems (even just King County Metro right across the border). Most trips are made on frequent, all-day routes with easy connections. And I do realize that isn't the case in many places, like Surrey and Maple Ridge, that have far fewer FTN services, but it's still a successful model and IMO should be kept and expanded rather than just duplicating services so people don't have to spend a couple minutes waiting at an exchange.

I'm sorry, but the first one would probably just end up being a lot of route duplication, and it's not that difficult to get from Scott Road or Scottsdale to either Surrey Central or Newton Exchange to then catch the 321. Also yes, lots of routes are overcrowded, but Translink doesn't exactly have extra artics, sadly.

I feel like if service cuts are required, Translink would be better off cutting some of the lower ridership peak services, such as the 241, 354 and the 253 / 254 peak extensions to downtown, instead of hurting riders on the core frequent services, and probably discouraging many of them from riding transit at all.

The riders might not notice the frequency change very much, but they will definitely notice the capacity decrease and the resultant overcrowding.

I think I might have seen it somewhere on Instagram? Not sure where else it would've been other than here or Instagram haha