UPDATE: Metro officials said Friday that the service changes were suspended because a few of the changes needed to be analyzed to determine their impacts on low-income people and minorities. This is required under federal Civil Rights guidelines. Due to staffing and equipment issues, Metro decided Friday that it would be best to implement all of the service changes at once and, therefore, decided to delay them until the analysis of some of the changes was completed.
Here is the news release:
Various bus service changes scheduled to go into place on Sunday, Dec. 11, 2011 have been suspended. All service changes and modification to Metro bus service announced in a Metro news release issued yesterday (Dec. 8, 2011), have been suspended until further notice.
Metro staff apologizes for any inconvenience and confusion cause by the suspension of the proposed changes. Staff over the next several months will conduct further analysis on the proposed changes to determine if and when the service modifications will be implemented.
For complete route and schedule information visit metro.net.
Categories: Service Alerts
why is the 305 being eliminated? it’s the only bus that goes to rimpau terminal from where i live instead of dropping off on crenshaw and pico and taking another bus! 🙁
So Metro took down the bus stop signs for the 550 and 305 (at least on San Vicente), put up temporary paper signs and the rain took those down. Will the 550 and 305 signs be replaced until they lines really do change? Right now the signage is utterly deceptive. What a mess!
“Many of us travel from Wishire/SanVicente to Gaffey Street in San Pedro.”
Again, Metro has no way of knowing this because without a tap-out process, they have no clue on the statistics of how many people got on at a certain bus stop will get off at another.
Why cancel a line that is heavily used everyday? It’s like saying the 720 will be cancelled.
It is regarding the bus line 550. Many of us travel from Wishire/SanVicente to Gaffey Street in San Pedro. I wonder how many buses we have to change and how much time it will take for us if this route is changed. Now we catch the bus at Wilshire by travelling earlier from other bus.Bus 550 also covers many hospitals so it will be very inconvenient for the patients if this route is changed. Now without changing we reach our destination in 75 minutes. If we have to take 3 buses we have to spend 1/2 day in reaching the place and 1/2 day in returning. Where is the time to work?
“On the first 305 North run, about 15 people debark at UCLA stops who boarded south of Vernon. From Crenshaw and Jefferson, the bus is about 80% seated by people whose destinations are in Beverly Hills and further west….at least provide us with some of the data that justifies it”
Unfortunately, there is no way for LA Metro to gather this data because we lack a tap-out system. There is no data gathering that occurs at the moment where people get off the bus or train, therefore the data is at best, all hypothetical.
I am totally in favor of the trains, but, it is unclear how the Expo Line should effect 305 or 550 service. The 550 has a segment that briefly duplicates train service, but the 305 doesn’t. I understand not wanting to duplicate service, but forcing us to take an additional conveyance (bus/train) to complete our trips is not an improvement.
Some people have stated that cancelling the 550 will disrupt their trips from West Hollywood to USC. The 305 cancellation will disrupt our trips from South LA to UCLA. On the first 305 North run, about 15 people debark at UCLA stops who boarded south of Vernon. From Crenshaw and Jefferson, the bus is about 80% seated by people whose destinations are in Beverly Hills and further west. It is very hard to see how the Expo Line will impact this.
If you’re trying to justify cancelling the line, at least provide us with some of the data that justifies it. It would also be helpful to provide us with alternatives that are tailored to the people who ride. How am I supposed to use the Expo Line to get to UCLA from Florence and Western?
Giving people cars or scooters too get around is not the answer, remember not everyone can drive, some depend on buses to get them around. M.T.A needs to stop putting money into the subways and more on the buses. If the top people would get out of there offices at M.T.A and get on a bus, and I mean a heavy line bus and see how we our getting around on the crowded buses. waiting for a bus to come and only to be passed up, because there is no ROOM for us. To me it sounds like poor managment at M.T.A since the new C.E.O took over.
In many ways I agree with you. The way things are going in LA, it’ll probably be better off to use our tax money to give every poor people a restricted “scooter only” drivers license and gift them a 125 cc scooter for Christmas. They cost $2000 max and they get around 75-100 mph which for most people when converted to gas costs for commuting, ends up much cheaper than a monthly pass and people get to go when they want when they want without being restricted to unreliable bus service.
It’s sad that when it comes to lines like 620 in a short time that the line has almost been eliminated since it serves two high hospitals and senior centers. Why eliminate something that is needed.
With this it is abundantly clear that this public transit agency must be shutdown and the funds used to help low income riders acquire their own vehicles. METRO ONCE AGAIN HAS PROVED THAT IT CANNOT BE TRUSTED TO GET THE PUBLIC TO WHERE THEY NEED TO GO IN THE SHORTEST PERIOD OF TIME.
The only way out of poverty is to stop depending on the government to meet their transportation needs
What happened is that the Metro Service Change will be in January 2012? I can’t believe it.
No date has been set yet for the service changes to take effect. They are being delayed while Metro conducts some additional review of the impacts of some of the changes.
Editor, The Source
Our tax money at work.. The people need to know that this mta planners are people making Six figure salaries a year and that they had most likely ever being in a bus or waiting,for one while raining so they,really don care to,follow any federal guidelines for as long as they make their monthly income off our taxes. So is ok for them to just eliminate line such as the 108, 305 or 730. At the end of the day it has no impact to their lifestyle the drive luxurious cars or MTA units..
[…] Friday, Metro abruptly announced that it would be suspending changes and cuts to its bus service originally planned to go into effect yesterday until further notice. The about-face on the most recent round of proposed cuts and other changes […]
Why does it take more than half an hour for a northbound 105 bus to arrive at La Cienega/ Wilshire during evening rush hour? During that time there are 2 or 3 705 rapids that show up, but they don’t go north of Santa Monica Blvd. One driver said it was because of the freight trains. Well doesn’t the 705 have to wait for them to also pass through? The 705 should end at Sunset/San Vicente like the 105 does.
Oh well I guest the new bus schedules has been suspened until next month, it’ll have to wait for January 2012.
Unorganized / Organization!
Well I guess this is the reason the MTA
shake ~ up was delayed . If so any idea for how long.
I don’t like it when the Metro Service Changes got suspended that’s not very nice of them What I like about Metro Service Changes is The new Line 217 going to extend the route from Hollywood/Vine Red Line Station to Culver City Transit Center but one thing about 439 going the same way like the new Line 217 they should extend 439 from Downtown LA/Union Station to Venice Circle (Windward and Pacific) in Venice from Culver City Transit Center Jefferson Blvd in Culver City and Playa Vista to Lincoln Blvd to Washington Blvd and Pacific Ave/Windward Ave Terminal. Line 102 extend from South Gate or Huntington Park on Palm and Seville to LAX Transit Center along King Blvd to Leimert Blvd to 43rd St to Stocker Ave to La Brea Ave to Slauson Ave to La Cienega to La Tijera Blvd to Manchester Ave to Sepulveda Blvd to 96th St to Jenny Ave to LAX Transit Center to replace Line 42 because Line 42 dosen’t go to Downtown LA/Union Station anymore they should cancel Line 42 and renumber as Line 102, Line 30 and the new Line 330 extend from Indiana Gold Line Station to West Hollywood. But Change is good about the Expo Line Station in Culver City on Venice/Robertson they should be a terminal like they should extend Lines 35, 37, 38, the new Line 107, 220, 534, Big Blue Bus Lines 4 and 12 and Culver City Bus Lines 2 and 7 to the Venice/Robertson Expo Line Station. So what about La Cienega/Jefferson Expo Line Station Terminal Maybe Lines 38, 105, 217, 439 and 705 should be a shortline terminal. Another thing Line 105 should extend from West Hollywood to Cudahy on Atlantic Blvd and Cecilia Ave but that was a good idea about the service change. One thing that been bothering about Line 4 Santa Monica Blvd to Santa Monica at 6:58 pm I didn’t like that change but they should extend Line 4 to Santa Monica arrives at 6:00 pm and leaves from 2nd St and Santa Monica Blvd at 6:17 pm the first route to Downtown LA/Broadway and Venice Blvd and one more thing also they should put the new Line 22 Wilshire Blvd from Santa Monica to Downtown LA/Union Station along Wilshire Blvd to Alvarado St to Sunset Blvd/Cesar E Chavez to Union Station because the Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line 2 Wilshire Blvd comes only every 20 minutes Monday-Friday and Weekends every 30 minutes because it only goes from UCLA to Main St and Ocean Park Blvd and Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Line 2 Wilshire Blvd it’s never been crowd it because nobody takes Line 2 from Santa Monica Big Blue Bus but the new Line 22 Wilshire Blvd from Santa Monica to Downtown LA/Union Station but we want the new Line 22 every 5-10 minutes Monday-Friday, every 10 minutes on Sataurdays and every 15 minutes on Sunday but please do it for the seniors and the old people from the Wilshire Neighborhood that wants to use the Metro Bus.
I hope the Service Changes will be in January of 2012 when they open the new Metro Expo Rail Line. I promise that I will wait very patient for the new schedules.
As a bus Operator working for METRO this is a total lack of concern for their employees as well as a total waste of hard earned tax money that no one pays attention to.A few empty heads in high places can ruin a community’s future by just throwing taxpayer money to the waste basket.
The 1% screwing up the 99%. This is WRONG. Some heads should start rolling just to make up to the public and to show that managing the public’s money is priority # 1 for the elected officials that were trusted with the position they are in.
I am very confused. I along with a lot more people were waiting for the 79, 268 and 264 today friday Night in arcadia . No bus passed after 9 pm! What is this?! Is this the new schedule? Eliminating completely those lines after late night.
I was looking forward to having the 217 run to Fox Hills Mall – that was a major improvement, although I do like the 439. Of course, the reason I like the 439 is because the line is never crowded, and I totally understand why MTA would cancel it, esp. with the new Expo Line opening in Culver City, because you can’t have a rush hour commuter line that only serves a small number of passengers.
I mapped out random trips involving Metro lines for trips on or after 11 December (anytime during those days) but shows me as if these changes will have been implemented, but they won’t; I mean I don’t know how to edit the google transit at all and they have to fix it….
I’ll let our tech people know about this. And our apologies for any inconvenience this has caused.
Editor, The Source
I agree, this was ham handed and Metro owes riders an explanation. Although some of the changes were Expo related, a lot of them, like Line 68 extension, Line 201 extension, and Line 217 to Culver City, were not. You already have signs on the roads and people expecting a bus that won’t show up now.
Jason Leung Dear Metro, please kindly clarify whether the suspension also includes suspending the set of timetables (buses & rails) dated Dec 11, 2011 already posted on Metro’s website.
Here it is:
That page is not opening for me. To clarify: buses will be following the existing timetables. No changes on Sunday for any line.
Editor, The Source
I thought the Mayor pushed the Board in July or August to do this? Did someone drop the ball? I thought it was weird learning about service changes when I thought there were to be none in December this year.
Am I missing something?
Hi Dude Abides;
The Mayor’s motion from past summer applies to future service changes. The ones that were scheduled – and now suspended — for Sunday were approved as part of the Metro budget this past spring.
Editor, The Source
This reeks of poor planning. One would think (and hope) that all these changes would have already been analyzed. Does this mean, for example, that the 217 extension to the Culver City transit center will NOT take place? And what might be the ETA for all this to get squared away?
When I read that, I thought that those schedule changes could only go into effect when the Expo Line enters revenue service… as it makes little sense when Expo is only in the testing phase.