Screwing our retirees is HOW WE ROLL

Screwing our retirees is HOW WE ROLL

Monday, August 1, 2011

TriMet adding new service...but not where anyone actually uses the bus!

http://www.trimet.org/alerts/service-change/index.htm

84–Kelso/Boring

To improve service beginning Monday, September 5, there will be additional trips added traveling to SE School & Fireman Way leaving Gresham Transit Center at 7:35 a.m. and at 5:20 p.m. There will also be additional trips added traveling to Gresham Transit Center from SE School Ave & Fireman Way at 7:49 a.m. and 5:36 p.m. Further improvements include new signs at 25 bus stops.
Because Line 84 serves a rural area, operators will continue to serve customers who flag the bus at non-posted locations. View the preview schedule

Meanwhile, TriMet is reducing service frequency on the 76/78 line (35 minute headways instead of 30 minute headways) despite the promise to add service due to WES?

No restoration of ANY service cuts.  No restoration of "Frequent Service".

This makes sense...HOW??  Adding service to a bus route that has virtually no ridership, while continuing to ignore riders passed up due to crush load conditions?

All I can say is...as a rider to an Operator, PLEASE do your part and call in your crush loads so that the data exists.  If you don't call it in, TriMet could care less if the customers themselves complain.

6 comments:

Al M said...

Call in these situations as a SAFETY PROBLEM!

J said...

We gotta go back and do that again!

Jason McHuff said...

continuing to ignore riders passed up due to crush load conditions

Looking at your fist link, I see a lot of "To relieve crowding, there will be a trip added". Will those and the extra time (part of the overload problem might be from running late and picking up extra passengers) going to be enough? I don't know.

As for the 76/78 change, I'm pretty sure that's to try to improve on-time performance and make it better for operators.

As for Boring, what do you think they should do, Erik? Let's say that pulling out of the area would do more harm than good financially.

And how much service on another line(s) do you think could be provided instead of the two half-hour round trips?

Overall, not having any more major service cuts is (for better or worse) an improvement. Let's hope that we have indeed hit bottom.

Erik H. said...

Looking at your fist link, I see a lot of "To relieve crowding, there will be a trip added". Will those and the extra time (part of the overload problem might be from running late and picking up extra passengers) going to be enough? I don't know.

The problem is that the trip added doesn't serve the peak time for the bus. I see a lot of 12/94 buses go by my house after I get home and rarely do they have anywhere close the ridership that earlier buses have. It's the exact same as TriMet announcing new MAX service - by adding a train at 1:30 AM.

As for the 76/78 change, I'm pretty sure that's to try to improve on-time performance and make it better for operators.

Again, NOT a service addition, and still not the promised service upgrade that TriMet pledged when WES came online (remember the 76 bus becoming a Frequent Service Line...and all we got was added Sunday service?)

As for Boring, what do you think they should do, Erik? Let's say that pulling out of the area would do more harm than good financially.

Thanks for proving that the existence of said bus route is for no other purpose than to collect the property and payroll tax revenue. 'Nuff said.

And how much service on another line(s) do you think could be provided instead of the two half-hour round trips?.

Let's see... added service on either the 4, 9, 12 or 20 buses out of Gresham TC? Extra service to Mt. Hood Community College on the 80/81 route? Extra service on the 82 route that serves quite a few apartment complexes? I'd rather have a bus that has any semblence of ridership potential, than one that doesn't - even if it means slicing the area off the taxing district - and those residents could then partner with Ride Connection or another agency to offer a real, cost-effective service at a far lower cost - or even form their own district (much like the South Clackamas RTD that serves Molalla and the area between Molalla and Oregon City).

Overall, not having any more major service cuts is (for better or worse) an improvement.

Five, minus five, plus zero, is still zero. How is that an improvement?

Michael said...

I lost track of Boring's decisions about the bus line a few months ago, when they took a vote that, IIRC, split 50/50 on the question of dropping out of TriMet. Has anybody been following it?

Also, for the record, the 84 is already TriMet's least crowded bus, with 13 percent of its seats occupied, on average, at its very busiest hours.

Jason McHuff said...

The problem is that the trip added doesn't serve the peak time for the bus.

What do you think the "peak time" is? The MAX, 35, 78 and inbound 94 trips all seem to be during what's usually defined as rush hour. Some of the others are in "shoulder" periods when there can be crowding because ridership is still higher but service may have been cut.

TriMet announcing new MAX service - by adding a train at 1:30 AM.

It seems that could help some people as there's very minimal service then. Not saying it's necessarily worth it.

Thanks for proving that the existence of said bus route is for no other purpose than to collect the property and payroll tax revenue.

I don't think I did that. I just meant that it may be a poor business move to withdraw.

added service on either the 4, 9, 12 or 20 buses out of Gresham TC?

Not even 1 full trip could be added with the Line 84 addition. And the Line 84 trip will also benefit people in Gresham--some people there only have the 84, too.

How is that an improvement?

It is an improvement over having service cuts.