Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Occupy TriMet protesters say goal of tonight's rally is celebration of transit, not disruption of rush hour

Joe Rose


Anonymous said...

Good comment from SP Red Electric (paraphrasing), "why should Forest Grove lose bus service because Milwaukie wants a light rail line when they already have a dozen bus lines, including an express bus to downtown?". The 57 needs to be twice as frequent as it is now, anything less is unacceptable.

Anonymous said...

Forest Grove is not going to loose bus service

Erik H. said...

Does the 57 still run at 15 minute headways?

Does Forest Grove still have an express bus?

Erik H. said...

You can replace "Forest Grove" with "Sherwood". TriMet proposed slashing the 94 route south of Barbur TC, and eliminating the 12 line south of Tigard TC.

You tell me: Will TriMet, after these changes, ensure that Sherwood will have the same amount and quality of service as it does now?

Or replace "Forest Grove" with "Tualatin". Or "King City". Or "Troutdale"

Anonymous said...

I thought Sherwood was going to have a new bus line serve Sherwood, which would be better because it would be on-time more.

Also, Forest Grove does still have late-night service until almost 3 AM every day of the year

Erik H. said...

"I thought Sherwood was going to have a new bus line serve Sherwood, which would be better because it would be on-time more."

Instead, north Tigard gets screwed, and the transfer at Tigard TC will never work. (Just try to transfer between the 12 and 76/78 at Tigard TC. Smart riders know you transfer at 99W/Greenburg or Main/Scoffins - NOT at Tigard TC.)

The solution is not to run the 12 from Tigard to Parkrose - because there's very little ridership that continues through Portland. Rather, one bus line should run Portland-Sherwood, and one bus line should run Portland-Parkrose-Gresham.

If TriMet could actually make timed transfers work, I'd agree to Portland-King City and Tigard-Sherwood (yes, there would be overlap), but TriMet can't time transfers worth a damn. Far too often I've seen 76/78s pull out just as a 12 is pulling in or vice-versa. I've seen people literally dart across the transit center and across Commercial to stop buses. I've seen buses having to make a courtesy stop on Commercial after pulling out of the TC. And even I have missed transfers - one of the more egregious examples was transferring from a 96 to a 76 at Mohawk P&R. My bus driver decided to go off route so as to enter the P&R northward rather than southward, and I missed the 76 by 30 seconds because the Operator went off-route for his convenience (had the Operator stayed on route, my bus would - as indicated by TriMet's Trip Planner at the time - have been directly in front of the 76 and I would only have had to walk behind my bus to transfer.) The result was having to WALK .85 miles to a post-surgery doctor's appointment (while I had an open incision and was actually on light duty at work) or wait 30 minutes for the next bus (and miss my appointment).

How is missed transfers "better service", Mr. I don't want to say my name?

Anonymous said...

I actually brought up the idea of splitting up the double routes like that once with a scheduler and was told they can't have one bus only drop off while the other picks up.

Also, I've done the 96 before and there at least were some buses that were supposed to turn around there and use the northbound stop. Do you remember if it was one of them?