On Thursday morning, I very nearly boarded an E-Tran (Elk Grove) bus 11 on 8th Street, when what I wanted was the SacRT bus 11, which came a few minutes later. It was misty with rain, and all I could clearly see was the 11 on the front display sign, and didn’t notice until stepping towards the bus that it was not a SacRT branded bus. Though SacRT distinguishes the E-Tran route as E11 on the schedule, this is not shown on the front display. There are overlapping E-Tran and SacRT route numbers with E10, E13, E15, E19, and E113. There are also overlapping route numbers with Folsom Stage F10, F20, and F30. Both Elk Grove and Folsom are now part of the SacRT system. If for no other reason that the overlapping numbers, the routes should be renumbered.

However, there are additional good reasons for renumbering, which were mentioned in Frequency on bus route signs post. The route numbering system should reflect frequency, so that people know just by the route number what the frequency of service is. Though that post suggested using the 1-99 series for different frequencies, it has become obvious that the flexibility to easily renumber if frequency changes should be retained. Routes 1-99 would be 15 minutes or better, routes 100-199 would be 30 minutes or better, routes 200-299 would be 60 minutes or better, 300-399 would be commuter routes, and 400-499 would be school routes (if necessary to distinguish them from commuter routes, which is probably not necessary). If route 125 changed from 30 minute frequency to 15 minute frequency, the route number would change from 125 to 25, so that people still recognized the route, but also saw the better frequency.

• SacRT