Transit Advocates' open letter to OCTA: technical recommendations for route plans

The Transit Advocates of Orange County sent this letter to OCTA earlier this week, including the following recommendations for OCTA's near-finalized route plans to be presented this Monday:

Night Owl Service

We are pleased to see that service is being retained starting at 12:30am on essentially all runs in all directions (only exception is 57 south starting at 12:13).  Our position was to retain it with trips starting at 1am, but starting at 12:30 will at least preserve the most used service. We hope OCTA can be clear when discussing when a run starts as opposed to when it wraps up a the end of a route, as the differences are substantial for bus riders. If it is claimed that service is until 1, riders may feel that they can catch the bus anywhere on its route until 1 am, and this is not the case. Stating that all runs start at 12:30am assures every rider that no matter where they start, they have service until at least 12:30 am.

1.   Please look into converting deadheading buses on the 43 and 60 into additional runs. This could provide 1 am start times on the most important routes for negligible cost.

2.   There was some confusion as to when in the morning bus service will start on the former Night Owl lines. Please clarify the first runs of the morning. Any service after 4 am should be retained to allow commuters to get to early morning jobs. If not, it is a de facto span cut, as service after 4 was never considered “Owl”.

Span

3.   Please be sure there are no “accidental”, unannounced span cuts, as a result of Night Owl changes, on the restructured routes, and as has happened on previous service changes, such as with the 29 and 66.

Route 24 Elimination

4.   There will not be enough capacity on the 26 to handle the often standing room crowds during school hours. A better solution might be to extend the new 167 west to at least the Fullerton Transportation Center or Euclid.  

North County Restructuring

This concept needs further discussion as it will substantially change the service delivery model in the “far” north cities. As it will result in forced transfers, it will substantially increase travel time and is also a de facto fare increase. The increased boardings must not be counted as increased ridership. Further, the frequency reductions are severe, contributing to service that is already difficult to travel in La Habra, in particular.

5.   Please discuss thoroughly so we can understand the new impacts

6.   Clarify  if proposed span indicates start or end times

7.   Change the proposed new terminals of the following lines to follow the ridership patterns:

 29 should end at La Habra Blvd.

 47 could it end at Fullerton College?

 57 should end at CSUF

 59 should end at La Palma

8. Increase frequency on the former 29 and 43 to at least hourly 7 days a week:

South County

9.   Don’t cut both the 76 and 172 on weekends. These routes could be restructured so a combined route serves most areas at reduced cost.

10. Routes 191, 193, 693 could be restructured to retain the most important service 7 days a week at reduced cost. It would also be a more   easily understood route to use.

11. Retain 82 on Sundays at least to central Rancho Santa Margarita by combining with the 177 or 89 and reducing headways

12. Restructure routes 85, 87,187, 490 and 86 so they are more productive.

300,000 Hour Cut Scenario

13. Route 42 – To cut any more on this route will be devastating as it has already sustained severe cuts.

14. Route 26 - To cut midday service on this, particularly with the loss of Route 24, is extreme.

 Routes with Pass Bys

15. We would like to have statistics on this to make sure that routes already sustaining passbys aren’t further impacted.