Jump to content
transit boy

Sound Transit

Recommended Posts

The Everett Mall-Bellevue expresses debuted with ST Express in September 1999.

Thank you, I was going by memory and couldn't recall exactly which shake-up ST launched.

I'd forgotten some of that early lingo ... thank goodness "Pierce/Sea-Tac Express" and "Westside Express" didn't last long... though Pierce Transit actually programmed "Pierce/Sea-Tac Express" on the early 574 destination signs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any idea about the ST route 842? I saw a ST bus showing 842 in Downtown Seattle yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ST just extended their contracts with PT and CT, each through the end of 2017. They also extended with Metro through the end of 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was out qualifying on routes this afternoon and I swore I heard them calling out for coach 9652. I believe it was running a 545 but I didn't hear the run number.

9652 was out on June 24th, on 545/13, however it was coach changed around 1:30p to Atlantic Base coach 2809 for the remainder of the run. Not sure why it was coach changed, but 9652 hasn't been back out since. None of the other Metro's ST XDE60's or XD60's other than 9652 are ready to go yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In about six years, you'll be taking the Red Line or the Blue Line:

...the Link line between Northgate and South 200th becomes the “Red Line.” Trains running between Northgate and Overlake in East King County will be the “Blue Line.”

More

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In about six years, you'll be taking the Red Line or the Blue Line:More

Why could they keep the current names? It seems to keep the lines current names to help passenger and tourist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why could they keep the current names? It seems to keep the lines current names to help passenger and tourist.

Well, the names are only meant as project identifiers. It wouldn't make sense for someone to be on a train that switches from "Central Link" to "University Link" and "Northgate Link" without leaving the corridor.

Personally, the colors would be best used as a secondary identifier, right alongside a geographic name. Red would be the line color for the "Central Line", Blue for the "Eastside Line", Purple for the "Northlake Line" (UW-Ballard proposed in ST3), Green for the "Westside Line" (Ballard-Downtown-West Seattle in ST3, following the monorail's Green Line).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the names are only meant as project identifiers. It wouldn't make sense for someone to be on a train that switches from "Central Link" to "University Link" and "Northgate Link" without leaving the corridor.

Personally, the colors would be best used as a secondary identifier, right alongside a geographic name. Red would be the line color for the "Central Line", Blue for the "Eastside Line", Purple for the "Northlake Line" (UW-Ballard proposed in ST3), Green for the "Westside Line" (Ballard-Downtown-West Seattle in ST3, following the monorail's Green Line).

Yeah, I agree that would be convincing.

I meant that Central Link, Red line, would go from Northgate Station to South 200th Station and back plus extension that Sound Transit doesn't mention and the Red Line would be called East Link from Northgate Station to Overlake Station and back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why could they keep the current names? It seems to keep the lines current names to help passenger and tourist.

The "current names" I've heard from people who wouldn't self-described as transit advocates are "the light rail" and "they should extend the light rail to (Bellevue/Redmond)"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "current names" I've heard from people who wouldn't self-described as transit advocates are "the light rail" and "they should extend the light rail to (Bellevue/Redmond)"

So, Vancouver doesn't name line on destinations and most of time people know where they are going. You just need to say the terminus of trains going a certain direction, rest of time including saying the terminus of station, say the name of the next station along the line and maps of the cities that lines service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "current names" I've heard from people who wouldn't self-described as transit advocates are "the light rail" and "they should extend the light rail to (Bellevue/Redmond)"

+1 on this.

Since everyone does it, I guess we are stuck with line colors. I don't particularly like that scheme, because I feel it artificially separates the rail system from everything else (bus, streetcar, etc). Use letters if you need to differentiate from numbered buses, but the color thing is somewhat hard to display (easier now with colored LEDs). It also makes a realignment of "thru-routes" more difficult (ST may not want the trains to run on the existing pairs out side of Downtown forever).

Oh well. Not going to lose sleep over it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just need to say the terminus of trains going a certain direction, rest of time including saying the terminus of station, say the name of the next station along the line and maps of the cities that lines service.

Or we can say things like "This is a Green Line train to Norwalk" and it jives with people who like colors and also jives with people who could care less about the color but do care about the destination.

I think announcing the terminus is a necessity regardless of what (if anything) the line is called--sometimes people end up on the wrong platform and end up going the opposite direction.

but the color thing is somewhat hard to display (easier now with colored LEDs).

Try being color blind and distinguishing a blue line from a purple line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm somewhat surprised this made through the sound transit process since people with disabilities may have a hard time distinguishing the color. I also wonder how this will be displayed on the trains, as their current signage is pathetic with sideways scrolling and station spelled out. The train will have came and gone by the time the sign goes through RED LINE TO SEA TAC AIRPORT STATION or whatever its destination is. It's interesting to note that Tacoma link is not getting a color. Personally, Route identification is something that needs to be standardized regionally, there are far too many inconsistencies in the separate systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other issue that Sound Transit faces is that King County Metro already uses letters for RapidRide lines, so they can't call this the "A Line."

I'm personally a little surprised they went "Red Line" considering for the last 5 years the regional maps have had this line shown colored as either blue to teal. Also Red is the big color scheme for RapidRide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Community Transit is considering Blue/Green for their swift lines. One reason why we need a more consistent regional route identification scheme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that regional identifications would set apart the Sound Transit LRT from the traditional color designation that many agencies use for rail.

I mentioned previously that in the old Seattle Transit days --and the early days of Metro-- routes were internally designated by name and not by route number. The public, of course, knew them by number but internally, they were referred to by a short regional description. It may have been an intermediate location/roadway or a terminus but the identifier was a location somewhere along the route. A few examples that stick in my mind:

#6 downtown to 85th and later 145th was referred to as "Greenlake"

#7 U-district and Rainier was referred to as "Eastlake"

#8 Sandpoint was referred to as "Ravenna"

#17 Loyal Heights and South Park was referred to as "Sunset"

#19 Magnolia and White Center was referred to as "Carlton Park"

#22 Northgate was referred to as "Roosevelt"

#26 East Greenlake and Empire Way was referred to as "Latona"

#30 Ballard and Laurelhurst was referred to as "Ballard-U"

etc.

Again, these designations were not used by the public but the employees knew them by route names and not necessarily numbers.

However, let's say that the public DID know them by name and not route number. Would bus riders get accustomed to saying "I've got to catch the "Eastlake" instead of saying "I've got to catch the #7" ...? It may not roll off the tongue as easily but I think they'd eventually get accustomed to it.

What if the light rail line names used a one-word geographical designation instead of the traditional color specification? ...or a Native American name such as the ferries use? Either would be more creative and unique for light rail line designations. They would also reflect a regional flair.

Perhaps the current line to SeaTac could be called "Rainier" ...because of the views of Mt. Rainier as it transverses its route. The one to Redmond could maybe be called "Sammamish" ...and so forth.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, let's say that the public DID know them by name and not route number. Would bus riders get accustomed to saying "I've got to catch the "Eastlake" instead of saying "I've got to catch the #7" ...?

SF Muni does this, but they started out as a railway (where route names make more sense) so it's probably more of a historical thing than a rider-focused thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...