Recomended New Rapid lines

[Mac]

Any suggestions on any new rapids lines that you think are vital? I would like more lines in SGV.

[joequality]

733 (33/333) Venice Blvd.

currently they are packed during rush hour. And there are no Westside rapids south of the 10.

I actually sent an email to inquire about a possible Venice Rapid. Reply:

Mr. Walcek,

Thank you for your interest in the Metro Rapid Program. Your request
to
have a Metro Rapid service on Venice Boulevard is not the first we have
received. While it does have many characteristics of existing Metro
Rapid
lines, there was a limit to how many lines could be implemented during
what
we refer to as "Phase II Implementation", as approved by our Board of
Directors in 2002. Venice Boulevard just happens to be the next line
for
implementation in out year phases. However, should one planned line
not be
implemented in the next few years, Venice Boulevard could certainly
move up
in the ranking order for implementation.

I myself live one block from Venice Boulevard at Cattaraugus (a current
limited stop). I can assure you I personally will be looking out for
this
line to be implemented with a Metro Rapid service at the first
available
moment. Again, thank you for your interest in Metro, and your request
will
be keep for future reference.

Thanks,

R. Scott Page

213-922-2287
Mail Stop 99-23-1
1 Gateway Plaza
LA, CA 90012

[wad]

mac said:

Any suggestions on any new rapids lines that you think are vital? I would like more lines in SGV.

San Gabriel Valley is Foothill Transit's territory. Metro's lines east of El Monte don't warrant Rapid service.

I don't know of any other plans besides the Silver Streak to implement bus rapid transit in the SGV. Lines 68 and 70 will get Rapid Line 770, where Garvey Av. will see Rapids between the El Monte Bus Station and Atlantic Bl., then south on Atlantic to Cesar Chavez Av., then into downtown L.A.

[Tony Fernandez]

Can Valley Blvd. get a rapid already? Really, those buses get crowded and they are not frequent enough. Not only that, it would also help ridership for the San Bernardino Metrolink line because right now it takes a long time for anyone who wants to use public transportation to get around Rosemead/El Monte/San Gabriel/etc.

[wad]

phattonez said:

Can Valley Blvd. get a rapid already? Really, those buses get crowded and they are not frequent enough. Not only that, it would also help ridership for the San Bernardino Metrolink line because right now it takes a long time for anyone who wants to use public transportation to get around Rosemead/El Monte/San Gabriel/etc.

It recently had half its limited service cut and replaced by local service. That knocks its chances down a lot.

Line 76 has 15 minute service now. It should either get artics at current service levels or upped to at least 12 minutes during middays and weekends.

[Tony Fernandez]

I would like articulated and a frequency of every 12 minutes. Those buses get so crowded during rush hour, I would really like to see the ridership on it.

[wad]

phattonez said:

I would like articulated and a frequency of every 12 minutes. Those buses get so crowded during rush hour, I would really like to see the ridership on it.

It's either/or, not both.

It would be cheaper to keep the service at 15 minutes with artics than to add a few buses to run at 12.

Artics cost more to run, and there's always a loss with 1:1 substitution. There would be a minor savings with 4:5 operation.

[Tony Fernandez]

The articulated would only solve the overcrowding problem, there's still the problem of having no good service for the San Gabriel Valley. Rosemead and other important streets take too long to get to with current service. If someone takes Metrolink to El Monte and wants to get to Rosemead and Las Tunas, they have to wait 15 minutes for a Valley bus and then wait about 20 minutes for a bus to take them up Rosemead. The whole bus system for the San Gabriel Valley needs to be redone.

[JerardWright]

I use the 76 everyday and it would more cost effective to operate more frequently with the 40' buses between Downtown and Valley/Atlantic than with the Artics, simply because the ridership is mostly short distance and a few long distance riders and many of thos long distance riders simply hop on the 485 or 487 at their respective transfer points to head to Downtown.

What could be looked at is a Valley Blvd express the 476X that runs limited stops down Valley Blvd and then after Fremont proceeds to the El Monte Busway serving CSULA and LAC USC into downtown. The Artics will be an upgrade only when there's a delay in service because of the many railroad crossings and long freight trains that delay service. (That is why the Valley grade separation on Alameda Corridor East is so important.)

[Dan Wentzel]

While I consider rail on Sunset a very low priority compared to Santa Monica Blvd., I think a "702" would be helpful.

The 733 seems a glaring omission thus far.

The BBB Rapid 7 and Culver City Bus Rapid 6 and Torrance Rapids are overdue, so I am glad those are scheduled for June 2008.

What I would love to see is a 961, Super Rapid from Van Nuys Metrolink in the Valley to LAX, with very limited stops:

Metrolink
Orange Line
Ventura/Van Nuys (transfer to/from Ventura & Van Nuys Rapids)
Ventura/Sepulveda (transfer to/from Ventura & Sepulveda Rapids)
Wilshire/Westwood (transfer to/from 720/920, eventual Purple Line hopefully)
Santa Monica/Westwood (transfer to/from 704)
Pico/Westwood Pavillion (transfer to/from Rapid BBB 7 and Expo Line hopefully)
Venice (transfer to hopeful 733)
Washington (major Culver City east/west route)
Fox Hills Mall
LAX Transit Center

[zoostation]

I like the Van Nuys-LAX Super Rapid. Better yet, if the bus is branded as a way to get to the airport via Metrolink, etc., run the bus into the airport with stops at the terminals. If it catches on, run other LAX Super Rapids like this for more local traffic to complement Flyaway. All this until rail/people mover is installed.

[zoostation]

although I wonder what the travel time for that line would be end-to-end.

[Dan Wentzel]

If the stops were on Sepulveda, instead of Westwood, I imagine it wouldn't be bad.

At the moment the MTA has paltry few options for people who need to travel to/from the West Valley and the Westside.

[tonyw79sfv]

dantheman99 said:

If the stops were on Sepulveda, instead of Westwood, I imagine it wouldn't be bad.

At the moment the MTA has paltry few options for people who need to travel to/from the West Valley and the Westside.

That's true, there is only one line going through the Sepulveda Pass: 761. Although there are other commuter bus lines going through like Commuter Express 573 & 574, and routes by Santa Clarita Transit and Antelope Valley Transit Authority. Compare to the Cahuenga Pass, there is the 156 & 163, and the nicest ride of them all: The Metro Red Line!!! BTW, there is also line 218 going through Laurel Canyon over the hills. It's no wonder most people who have to commute over the Sepulveda Pass have to slug it alone in their cars: no good alternative choices! During rush hour, it can take the 761 an hour to go from UCLA to Sherman Oaks. Metro's LRTP calls for at best, an Express bus in the corridor once the north carpool lanes through the pass are completed; but like any rail project, even that one lane takes long to complete. Thank goodness I don't work in the Westside anymore.

[Dan Wentzel]

tonyw79sfv said:

dantheman99 said:

If the stops were on Sepulveda, instead of Westwood, I imagine it wouldn't be bad.

At the moment the MTA has paltry few options for people who need to travel to/from the West Valley and the Westside.

That's true, there is only one line going through the Sepulveda Pass: 761. Although there are other commuter bus lines going through like Commuter Express 573 & 574, and routes by Santa Clarita Transit and Antelope Valley Transit Authority. Compare to the Cahuenga Pass, there is the 156 & 163, and the nicest ride of them all: The Metro Red Line!!! BTW, there is also line 218 going through Laurel Canyon over the hills. It's no wonder most people who have to commute over the Sepulveda Pass have to slug it alone in their cars: no good alternative choices! During rush hour, it can take the 761 an hour to go from UCLA to Sherman Oaks. Metro's LRTP calls for at best, an Express bus in the corridor once the north carpool lanes through the pass are completed; but like any rail project, even that one lane takes long to complete. Thank goodness I don't work in the Westside anymore.

And it's even worse. Because of "turf wars" over Westwood Blvd., the 761 dumps people on Wilshire, meaning you have to catch another bus at Wilshie/Westwood to get to/from the eventual bus where your starting/ending point is, If the 761 traveled south just a little farther it would reduce the number of transfers by one.

It is as if the MTA wants to make it as hard as people to travel from the Westside to the West Valley by public transport, and then can argue that the ridership is so low the demand isn't there to do anything about it. The fact that there are turf wars on any street and that's allowed to inconvenience passengers is outrageous.

[vnc]

Well. I personally think, they should put a Rapid Bus on Victory Blvd. and / or Vanowen St. from Burbank Metrolink to Valley Circle. And even put a Rapid or even a Limited with the 230 Line and have the bus run from Universal City to Mission College or to Olive View via Laurel Cyn.

[Mac]

HMMMMMMMMMMM......... some very good suggestions. Someone might wanna give metro these suggestions.

[vnc]

Have there ever been any discussion on a possible 778 or 779 Along Huntington Drive from Arcadia to LA?

[wad]

vnc said:

Have there ever been any discussion on a possible 778 or 779 Along Huntington Drive from Arcadia to LA?

No. Not in the first class of 28 or any other time.

However, I see that huge median along Huntington Drive and think, "Hey, those would make for some nice bus lanes."

[tonyw79sfv]

wad said:

vnc said:

Have there ever been any discussion on a possible 778 or 779 Along Huntington Drive from Arcadia to LA?

No. Not in the first class of 28 or any other time.

However, I see that huge median along Huntington Drive and think, "Hey, those would make for some nice bus lanes."

Any of those large medians that were former ROWs from the LaRy and PE era would be good for bus lanes, as long as ridership demands it. Only the Chandler ROW of the Orange Line is used in that way. Other ROWs like Hawthorne Boulevard in the South Bay became a parking lot for private cars, Eagle Rock Boulevard south of York has a Metro bus layover spot for the 83/84, and Santa Monica Boulevard southwest of Wilshire was realigned for more automobile lanes, with only a short bus lane segment in Century City going East designated by the bus annunciator as "transition lane & ....." Now that was a waste on SaMo Bl; the bus should have had the whole length.

[wad]

tonyw79sfv said:

Santa Monica Boulevard southwest of Wilshire was realigned for more automobile lanes, with only a short bus lane segment in Century City going East designated by the bus annunciator as "transition lane & ....." Now that was a waste on SaMo Bl; the bus should have had the whole length.

Don't get me started on that bus-lane-like thing on Santa Monica. I first saw it after riding 728.

Know what's dumber? The bus lane pretty much forces 4 and 704 to stay on Santa Monica, when the busiest bus stop in Century City is on Avenue of the Stars and Constellation -- on the other side of the mall!

That's where you catch 16, 28, 316, 728, Santa Monica 5 and Culver City 3. The problem is that all of these lines can't be rerouted to serve the bus lane, and because 4 and 704 are long routes, Metro will not deviate them off the street.

[Dan Wentzel]

wad said:

Don't get me started on that bus-lane-like thing on Santa Monica. I first saw it after riding 728.

Know what's dumber? The bus lane pretty much forces 4 and 704 to stay on Santa Monica, when the busiest bus stop in Century City is on Avenue of the Stars and Constellation -- on the other side of the mall!

That's where you catch 16, 28, 316, 728, Santa Monica 5 and Culver City 3. The problem is that all of these lines can't be rerouted to serve the bus lane, and because 4 and 704 are long routes, Metro will not deviate them off the street.

This goes to the question of where the Century City stop should be on the Purple Line. Avenue of the Stars & Constellation makes far more sense than Santa Monica Blvd. & Avenue of the Stars. Constellation is right in the heart of Century City which more people will walk to/from and it is where most of the buses are.

The whole purpose of the bus-only lane on the northeast routing of Santa Monica Blvd. is traffic flow, to separate buses travelling on SMB from those heading into Beverly Hills on Little Santa Monica.

I cannot help but think Century City's bus routes and this lane couldn't have been designed with better coordination.

[wad]

vnc said:

Well. I personally think, they should put a Rapid Bus on Victory Blvd. and / or Vanowen St. from Burbank Metrolink to Valley Circle.

Umm ... that's the Orange Line.

Tom Rubin tried forcing Metro to stop the Orange Line and run a 764 instead.

[Mac]

wad said:

vnc said:

Well. I personally think, they should put a Rapid Bus on Victory Blvd. and / or Vanowen St. from Burbank Metrolink to Valley Circle.

Umm ... that's the Orange Line.

Tom Rubin tried forcing Metro to stop the Orange Line and run a 764 instead.

That is the Orange line, exept that the Orange line does not have a direct connection to Burbank (which is disappointing)

[ieko]

I definitly agree with 333 becoming 733, it really is a mess during rush hour. If that won't happen for awhile they need to use the 60-foot NABI's on that route ASAP.

What I'm really curious about though is, are automated stop announcement systems mandatory for rapid bus implementation? I ask this because Torrance Transit's rapid should be coming up sometime this year (right?) and none of their busses have this, oddly enough they did have it back in 1998 I believe but got rid of them before everyone else started to add them. Also with red being used to designate Metro Rapid how will Torrance Transit brand differentiate its service from the MTA's?

From talking to some of the drivers earlier this year it seems like they are looking into adding new vehicles to their fleet and also considering adding the automated voice system, but I have no realy confirmation. Just a side note they did acquire a Hybrid electric Orion VI but apparently it caught fire... so my guess is they won't be buying any Orion's soon.

[roadtrainer]

;D What is the Southeast Authority thinking of by stopping the new 715 at Firestone and Atlantic? Firestone Blvd in Downey is the pits if you ride the 115. And am I wrong to think that the 715 should go to the Metro rail Green line station in Norwalk? Well good thing the metro didn't keep the name of Rapid Transit District because there is nothing rapid that stops Short of Downey, Ca.
Sincerely The Roadtrainer

[hooligan]

Jun 22, 2008 14:47:43 GMT -8 roadtrainer said:

;D What is the Southeast Authority thinking of by stopping the new 715 at Firestone and Atlantic? Firestone Blvd in Downey is the pits if you ride the 115. And am I wrong to think that the 715 should go to the Metro rail Green line station in Norwalk? Well good thing the metro didn't keep the name of Rapid Transit District because there is nothing rapid that stops Short of Downey, Ca.
Sincerely The Roadtrainer

They could have at least made it end at stonewood mall in Downey.