Questions from riders about recent service changes

Since Metro’s latest round of bus and rail service changes went into effect earlier this month, riders have asked Metro some questions on a variety of issues. Here are some examples of questions we’ve been hearing and our answers:

•Why did Metro get rid of most of the rapid bus lines? This is a frequently heard question in recent weeks. There are several answers:

—Consolidating most of our rapid lines with local lines results in more consistent bus service along each line throughout the day. 

—Buses now stop frequently at every bus stop along each line. Waiting times are the same no matter which stop a rider uses.

—The Metro bus system is easier to use for riders and helps us keep buses running on schedule. That means that riders spend less time waiting for their buses.

—We’ve also consolidated bus stops on some bus lines. Buses stop a few more times than a rapid bus did and stop a few less times than a local line.

—Overall, we believe this has resulted in more frequent trips for more riders every day — with many riders now enjoying faster overall trips and more convenient access to bus stops.

How can I comment to Metro about the changes? Please contact our  Customer Care department either via the online comment form or by calling 213.922.6235 or 800.464.2111.

Why were bus stops on Line 2 consolidated near UCLA? As with other bus stop consolidations, improving bus speeds was one issue — the more a bus stops, the slower the bus is. In the case of Sunset Boulevard near UCLA, pedestrian safety was also an issue. Metro and the city of L.A. worked to preserve the safest location possible.

•With the new service changes, what’s the fastest way to take transit between Compton and L.A. County/USC Medical Center? It depends on where your trip is beginning in Compton, and we recommend using the Transit app to plan your trip.

That said, there are generally two basic choices:

—From Compton, take the A (Blue) Line to Pico Station and transfer to the J (Silver) Line bus. The J Line’s USC Medical Center Station is about a .3-mile walk to the medical complex.

—Take the A (Blue) Line to 7th/Metro in downtown L.A., transfer to the B/D (Red/Purple) Line to Union Station and then transfer to the Metro 106 Bus, which stops at Marengo and Cummings right in front of the medical complex.

—It’s worth noting that Metro Micro — our new on-demand shuttle service — serves the Compton and Watts area and can be used to travel to and from the A Line Compton Station. Metro Micro fares are $1 and do not include a transfer to Metro buses and trains.

28 replies

  1. Is Metro aware of how much cleanliness on buses and trains has deteriorated from 2019-present (and especially in 2021 as pandemic restrictions have lifted)? What’s the plan to get Metro to at-or-above where it was before?

  2. How can we get more bus-only lanes?
    How can we get public restrooms at all train stations and the busiest bus stops?
    How can we get more bus stops with (at the very least) seating and shelter?

    • Eric Bruins, transportation director for Los Angeles City Councilman Bonin who sits on the Metro Board and Chairs the council Transportation Committee, would be the best person to make contact about expanding bus lanes — eric.bruins@lacity.org

      Meanwhile a bill to put some teeth in enforcement of bus only lanes, AB-917, sits on the Governor’s desk awaiting a decision on whether to sign it. If you want to leave Governor Newsom a message urging he sign the bill call (916) 445-2841.

      My best suggestion on bathrooms is contact the transportation deputy for current Metro Board Chair Hilda Solis, Martin Reyes:
      mreyes@bos.lacounty.gov

      The NextGen program includes hubs at key bus stops, so emphasize a desire these include public bathrooms. Below I note another avenue to communicate in support of such facilities.

      The city of Los Angeles is in the midst of a new contract for shelters. which may include automated restrooms. You can give feedback online :

      https://streetsla.lacity.org/coordinated-street-furniture-program-feedback

      Good luck!

      • I don’t know how bus lanes would improve travel time on local routes. Taking 4 for example, local stops except in Santa Monica area are NEVER get consolidated, how would that helps improve travel when a bus needs to stop at every single block? I think a bicycle or scooter is even fastet than the bus that stops at every block.

        • For local service bus lanes mean not having to deal with pulling into traffic when leaving stops. That alone is a benefit.

          I have consistently noted that as the bus lane network emerges to derive the benefit will require express style service to be reintroduced.

  3. “Buses now stop frequently at every bus stop along each line. Waiting times are the same no matter which stop a rider uses.”

    – And that’s the problem!!! Why do I need to hop on a bus that stops on every stop and wait for others to get on and off until I get to the other side of town for? In what world does that make sense?

    – Also, something tells me that Metro is sugarcoating this and there must have been quite the amount of “constructive” feedback as a result of having to post this.

    “The Metro bus system is easier to use for riders and helps us keep buses running on schedule. That means that riders spend less time waiting for their buses.”

    – Congrats on lying to yourself again Metro. There is still bus bunching and as a result there are times where there is, a 20 min wait between buses and then all 3 or 4 will show up at the same time. Also, to add to that, instead of having the locals run old school Rapid style “just come and go,” all these buses are still stuck to a schedule which mean all 4 of these buses gotta stay in line and one cannot outrun the other. I figured if “hey, one of these gotta be skipping an actual few stops,” but nope to my dismay, all 3 other buses gotta follow the one that is behind schedule.

    “We’ve also consolidated bus stops on some bus lines. Buses stop a few more times than a rapid bus did and stop a few less times than a local line.”

    – Not entirely true, Im still seeing stops on route that I now formally used and still see stops that were originally supposed to be cut.

    Overall if I have to take a while guess, this is probably the start of the damage control as a result of the 704 and 733 getting cut. They were some of the busiest Lines in the system, so I am honestly not surprised by this post.

    Metro and LADOT could’ve easily implemented Bus Only Lanes from Crenshaw to Lincoln, which in turn, with a few bus stop removal for the 733, would’ve expected to be faster than it was beforehand, but instead all we’re getting is an uncertain promise out of this.

    • It was a desire for more frequent service in the heavily traveled corridors but being revenue neutral which drove the choice to shift service hours to the local lines and (in theory) undertake to make them faster.

      As my articles in Streetsblog make clear I see this as an interim measure while the network of bus lanes on key arterials is implemented. And this is happening! LA Brea is next after Alvarado. To get the full benefit of lanes some version of expresses will have to be reintroduced.

      • Keyword “ in theory” but in practice it’s clearly not making them faster or coming more frequently if you gotta wait 20 min when 4 of them suddenly show up and one bus can’t overtake the other buses that are late.

        “ As my articles in Streetsblog make clear I see this as an interim measure while the network of bus lanes on key arterials is implemented”

        And why would Metro need to remove existing infrastructure (Metro Rapid), just to implement another one (Bus Lanes, that aren’t even 12 hours), just to implement another infrastructure again (Another form of Express Service).

        Metro just recently admitted that Broadway was perfect candidate for BRT yet took the only bus line that operates similar to BRT in the process. What kind of backwards, slap in the face stunt is that?

        Maybe let’s stop theorizing, Metro didn’t have to volunteer themselves to be part of a beta test that was obviously going to have bad results even before lifting a finger.

        • Changes like this have been successful elsewhere. It takes time for such a radical change to shake out. The status quo was leaking riders. Doing nothing wasn’t an option.

          • “Changes like this have been successful elsewhere.”

            – Like where? Places that either actually have a rail system as their backbone for public transport (SF, Chicago, Boston, DC or NY), or cities that are smaller in states where traffic is still tolerable (Texas, Georgia, South Florida, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Oregon, Arizona, etc) compared to LA or California as a whole? Cause LA does not fit in either category.

            “It takes time for such a radical change to shake out.”

            – It’s been 60 YEARS since the death of the Pacific Electric Railway and nothing “radical” has occurred since then, meanwhile, even most other cities in the US are actually building according to their population growth. Exactly how long do “radical changes” take? LA didn’t even bother preserving the ROWs of the Pacifc Electric that could have served as the backbone for a modern rail system that could have already been built by now making limited stop bus service meaningless.

            The status quo was leaking riders”

            – Not sure how long you’ve lived in LA but Metro and their action has NEVER been the status quo, they have always done the exact opposite and failed almost every time so that isn’t even a remotely legitimate reason to blame for leaking ridership. Metro has other problems outside of if its now even crappier bus service. Riding the Red Line after 8pm is one example.

            “Doing nothing wasn’t an option.”

            – Actually, doing nothing WAS probably the BEST option until the first 2 batches of Measure R projects were completed by 2026. While the previous service was far from the best option, it seems like it was probably the best for its current riders that are now justifiably upset at this changes.

            – Lastly, what’s totally radical and totally not status quo about buses still bunching during the day and rapidly dripping frequencies after 7pm? I actually thought that was the whole point of this: To still wait 10 min at worst for a bus to come at 9pm or even 10pm? If anything, the system is just as bad at best, and will continue to leak more riders at worst.

  4. I remember the westbound 70/770 used to take about 26 minutes between Atlantic Blvd, where they split, to get to Union Station. Nextgen combined the longer route of the 770 with all the stops of the 70/68 to form a new 70 that takes over 40 minutes to make the trip. 50% increase in trip time. It is more frequent on weekends though, but frequencies drop off extremely rapidly to hourly by 8:30pm, in contrast with the Nextgen plan that states that hourly Owl service starts at midnight.

    • Basically Metro implement changes based on what they want (cost effective) instead of what the riders want (faster rides). I bet all metro planners and employees don’t use the system in a regular basic at all.

  5. With Line 258 routed to Eagle Rock, Line 260 became the only bus line running directly between Alhambra and heart of Pasadena. And both Line 258 and Line 260 have to snail through the traffic jam on Fair Oaks Ave in South Pasadena in AM peak hours, when you are rushing to work place. I feel everyday in the AM peak hour Line 260 has bus bunching issue.

    Really hope Metro could re-establish service on the old 485/258 route between Cal State LA and Altadena, via Fremont/Huntington/Oak Knoll/Lake. The route to Pasadena/Altadena attracted much more riders than the current route to Eagle Rock.

    Also, PM bus frequencies for Line 76 and 260 are still low. Both lines start to run every 20 minutes or longer after 5:45PM, really inconvenient for people who get off work at 5:30PM.

    • T.Z, let’s not forget about Monterey Pass/Fremont along between Floral and I-10 Fwy which is ex-former Line 258 that use to operate back then. Since happen on December 2020 phase 1 blunder service change are affected inconvenient newly rerouted was been drafted for revised by Monday July 13, 2020 are take places. First, why the Metro of NextGen Software Plan decided to change bus stops on Floral between Monterey Pass via Mednik to Eastern that will be merged duplications with City Terrance/ELAC Bus Shuttle that operate on Floral. Second, why the Metro won’t handed over to MBL service extension changes on the Montebello Bus Line 30 (Bell Gardens – Highland Park) with take over since the LACMTA Line 176 has eliminated due to low ridership including staff shortage issues. I beg that the Metro did not go well during the pandemic of NextGen Plan and instead of change on the LACMTA Line 258 (Paramount – Altadena) what about the chance to return bus line for proposed LACMTA Line 259 that will be combined with Line 258 (7 days by Sept 2021 NextGen Results) / Line 259 (proposed all selected trips of weekday only). Extend Line 259 (Paramount Town Center – Lake Ave Station via I-210 Fwy) that will reinstate services along Monterey Pass / Fremont includes Oak Knoll / Lake. Unfortunately, the NextGen Plan results that operates Altadena on the LACMTA Line 662 is already taking over with circulator loop bus shuttles. I am not trying to make inconsiderate issues but some of your suggestions are great so I do agree with your decision is to bring back on the ex-former Line 485 was great opinions for commuters that’s way of more convenient direct bus line.

  6. make all metro bus lines in to limited stop services or regional stop services. ps in rail metro regional connector line to open on oct 31 2022 on next year halloween on monday back on buslines special line 460 limited stop express service to disneyland on 24 hours day.

  7. I am sorry but this is false claims. Only 1% of the local stops are removed, while 99% local bus stops remain for the local routes. Basically you didn’t consolidate any local stops at all, according to my observation. Even with the extensive bus lanes, if a bus stops at every single stops it won’t make any difference at all, the average speed for MTA local bus is 10MPH or less, which’s the same speed as bicycles and e scooters. Since the most recent changes, more than half of the routes experience trip cancellation every single day. You know there’s a labor shortage why would you still implement the changes with half of the trip cancellation and lie to us about better service experience??? Continue to lie and make false claim to us about changes would only result in fewer ridership in the system.

    • The NextGen Plan has complete failed everything with blunder service changes period. Everybody knows that Metro are lying to refuse whole thing for inconsiderate implementation issues that leads to protest let’s see what happens right after the NextGen Phase 3 service changes by December of this year. Everybody knows that clueless transit planners are started everything with approved horrible proposed changes are behind it since last year during the pandemic.

  8. Dave’s comment makes sense..When I contacted Metro about service changes and the elimination of rapid buses I got gobbly gook as a reply from customer service.

    Rapid buses serve a purpose especially on some long routes. The city is so spread out that it makes sense to have this in place so riders can bypass stops they do not need and get to their destination in a timely manner..Not to make a long trip even longer.

    On top of this passengers have to deal with unwashed persons who board with garbage bags and carts making this beyond an unpleasant trip. And drivers who are not allowed to restrict who can be on the bus..

    Sunset Blvd has only the local #2 and the wait times can be long..LaBrea #212 another local long ride..

    And the elimination of rapid #780 that I took on Hollywood Blvd west to Fairfax Blvd and down…or east going towards Pasadena was cruel…as it only took about 45 mins..versus now having to travel on the #180 local and it can take well over an hour and change depending traffic,etc..

    Being on the #180 towards Glendale/Galleria Mall and to Brand is about as far as I want to travel making local stops.

    The Instead Metro decides to add more local buses to schedule so 2/3 can come together (bunching) after waiting 20 mins. Why not make some local buses serve as rapid. Who comes up with this kind of plan of service?

    • Line 180 would of extended to La Cienega/Jefferson (E) Expo Line Station West of Hollywood/Vine Station they would of done but I don’t like when Line 217 helping replacing Line 780 Rapid on Fairfax Ave and Hollywood Blvd West of Hollywood/Vine Station extended to Vermont/Sunset B Red Line Station it’s duplicating Line 180 on Hollywood Blvd between Hollywood/Vine Station to Vermont Ave and it’s duplicating Line 206 also on Hollywood Blvd between Normandie Ave and Vermont Ave it’s making any sense at all this is a bad change for the Lines 180 and 217 running on Hollywood Blvd at the same time. Line 180 and 217 would of be merging and become as a single Line 180 extending from Pasadena City College to Culver City Howard Hughes Center (replacing former extended Line 217 route) and Line 180 would of added short line trips terminated at La Cienega/Jefferson (E) Expo Line Station. Line 180 needs to add more buses to make Line 180 more higher frequency to run very often (similar to Lines 60 and 251 also running very often) every 5.7 minutes Monday through Friday and every 10 to 12 minutes on the weekends due to a higher ridership that would make Line 180 a major route especially Mid-City riders who are heading to work on time in Glendale and Pasadena or doing some errands and going shopping in Glendale and Pasadena

      I demand you to extend Line 180 from Pasadena to Culver City and short line trips terminated at La Cienega/Jefferson (E) Expo Line Station for the next shake up NextGen Service Change in December 2021 for Phase 3 that’s my complaints, my inputs and my feedback I really mean it

      I hope you guys will get a lot of this issues addressed before the next shake up NextGen Service Change in December 2021 for Phase 3 I want you guys to read this Line 180 comments as soon as possible

      Thank you

      Kind Regards

  9. So many problems with (partial) implementation of the NextGen plan.

    I attended several (more than five–maybe as many as ten) of the NextGen plan’s public meetings (including at least one in every one of the five Metro regions) to request (both orally AND in writing) various improvements to the proposed plan from Metro planners who were present to talk with the public. However, despite favorable comments from planners on several of my suggestions, even some very simple ones have not been implemented.

    For example:

    1. Why not provide a short side excursion of a couple of blocks to connect the E/W route of Line 33 (operating on Venice Bl.) to the Pico A (Blue) Line station? As one planner pointed out to me, there already is a bus stop on Pico within one block of that station for each direction of travel. This simple change would avoid the necessity for passengers to take a long walk (especially late at night) through a neighborhood which is deserted–and sketchy late at night) in order to make make that.connection.

    There is precedent for such a (relatively simple) side excursion of a long bus line: After all, Metro’s Line 110 makes just such a side excursion from its regular route on Gage in order to connect with the Florence Blue-Line station.

    2. Although Metro has increased the frequency of “peak-hour” buses on many major bus routes, I have seen little or no improvement in frequency of buses after 7:00 p.m. In fact there seem to be FEWER buses on some major lines after 8:00 or 9:00 p.m.–and the buses are VERY infrequent after 10 or 11 p.m.

    Metro planners need to realize that providing such infrequent bus scheduling on major routes after 7:00 p.m. (and especially after 9:00 p.m.) simply makes it quite difficult for passengers to get home from attending an evening movie, concert, lecture, other entertainment–or even having a simple meal at a restaurant after work (say, in DTLA, Hollywood, Pasadena Old Town, downtown Long Beach, etc.). The most likely result is that such passengers who regularly commute to and from work by bus will decide instead to drive their own cars to work that morning in order to have a convenient, safe way to get home after their evening activity.

    While I applaud ten-minute headways on major routes, I would willingly sacrifice a few daytime buses (changing to, say, 12-minute headways) in order not to have to wait 40 minutes (or an hour) for a bus home later in the evening–especially since Metro’s call center closes at 9 p.m. (6 p.m. weekends). A late night cancellation can be a MAJOR problem, especially when one cannot confirm that fact with the call center.

    • Burbox: I’m in Hollywood and bus service diminishes after 6/7pm..Also take the Red Line train mainly during the day and not after 5/7 pm as it is not safe on platform and inside cars. Say this because I made the mistake coming back from Santa Monica/Expo line near 10pm and got on Red Line at 7th St Metro to my stop at Vine..As soon as I boarded realized the mistake going into that car because the passengers were all mentally ill homeless. It was a nightmare scenario. And heartbreaking as well to see that level of insanity on the train. Got off at next station and scrambled to another car that was slightly but not much better.

      My options to attend cultural events elsewhere by public transportation is non existent in evenings as it can be dangerous/long wait times and not worth travel by Metro..Whereas in NY where I’m from everyone gets around the city by bus/train/cab at all hours. It was designed for mass transit. LA was not.. Cars rule the day and that is not changing anytime so no matter how much money they throw to upgrade the system and create more ridership. Not happening..

  10. It appears that the NextGen Plan has serious causing lot of trouble for eliminated portion intersections with newly rerouted bus lines and eliminate rapid lines as well. You took away Metro for blunder implement service changes because the undertilize issues is going on during starting phase 1, 2, 2.5 of 2020-2021 which is Monterey Pass/Fremont (City Border Of Alhambra & Monterey Park) discontinued bus stop on Line 258, Lake/Oak Knoll along Pasadena & San Marino discontinued bus stop on Line 258, Alameda (City Of Carson) discontinued bus stop on Line 202 discontinued, Sierra Madre and Santa Anita along the City Of Sierra Madre and Arcadia discontinued bus stop on Line 487, Duarte (City Of Hope Station) discontinued bus stop on Line 264, Normandie (City Of West Athens & Gardena) discontinued bus stop on Line 209, eliminate local bus lines, eliminate limited bus lines and eliminate rapid lines which is completed unacceptable for NextGen results. How about this? Let’s bring reinstate back of major bus services along Monterey Pass/Fremont, Lake/Oak Knoll, Duarte, Sierra Madre/Santa Anita, Alameda & Normandie (South Bay Area) including Manhattan Beach as well so the way is more convenient lines that patrons are needed the way it was.

  11. The almost complete lack of actual stop consolidation is puzzling as that was supposed to be a core tenant of the next-gen program given that eliminating rapids was already such a significant change. To see that almost every local stop has remained and without any limited-stop service is disappointing and negates many of the potential benefits to speed in such a spread out city. On top of that, despite improved headways during the day, frequencies often drop off to 30 minute or longer headways, like on the 240 for example. This means that the Wilshire Blvd. of the valley (Ventura Blvd.) still doesn’t have frequent bus service at night despite sufficient activity and destinations along it, as well as pockets of high nearby residential density, particularly in Sherman Oaks.

    • The only way LA is ever gonna see speed is through Express Train service. And I’m talking both “Rapid” trains and “Limited Express” trains, which would require both real estate and infrastructure overhaul. A government funded agency that still prioritizes highways above everything else would care much less to even invest a penny on something like that.

  12. My experiences with MTA make it impossible to think these explanations are anything more than damage control. MTA’s justifications for eliminating most rapid buses focus on excessive passenger wait times. That’s odd because all but the most casual riders know approximately when their buses should arrive. If MTA is receiving complaints about long bus arrival waits, most of those complaints are likely due to late and missing buses.

    Whenever possible, I took the 780 between Pasadena and Glendale rather than the 180 or 181 because I seemed to reach my destination more quickly by taking the 780. It’s possible that my perception was incorrect but unlike MTA, I don’t have access to digital bus tracking data that would allow me to analyze bus speeds, on-time arrivals, etc. Unfortunately, I have no reason to think that MTA is basing their decisions on such data.

    The rationales for the 260 bus stop cancellations north of Colorado Blvd. have varied over time. The dismissive initial reply to my complaints was something like: we did it because we could. Months later, I saw an MTA online statement saying that stop cancellations are done to increase bus speeds. I suspect that “increasing bus speeds” will be an all-purpose justification for future stop cancellations and that MTA won’t classify those cancellations as service changes.

    The 260 stop cancellations in my area could not have appreciably increased bus travel speeds because ridership is relatively light, the terrain is uphill, and the road is narrow. (It should be noted that no stop cancellations seem to have been made on the former 267 route in Pasadena and Altadena.) The December 260 stop cancellations have resulted in passengers of varying ages and physical abilities walking longer distances to and from the remaining stops, sometimes with small children in tow or while carrying heavy bags uphill in the heat. Many riders are now forced to cross a busy street to reach or leave a stop.

    I don’t think complaints about slow bus travel speeds are coming from frequent riders, because we understood and accepted that municipal buses are generally much slower that private vehicles. In all the years I rode the 260 home from work, never once did I think that my 20-25 minute travel time would be significantly reduced if only MTA eliminated some stops that other passengers needed.

    Several days ago, the operator of an MTA bus I was riding stopped at a cancelled stop to pick up an elderly man who used a cane. This was a voluntary act of decency and humanity by an individual operator (and possibly against MTA regulations). The old man was fortunate on that hot afternoon because most operators ignore people waiting at cancelled stops. The outrage is that the man was placed in that uncertain situation because MTA had cancelled his stop without good reason.

    That MTA makes service changes based, not on objective data, but comments from people unlikely to ever be frequent riders, and then pretend they’re making improvement or responding to riders’ needs is offensive. MTA’s is poorly managed and in desperate need of effective oversight.

    • To be honest, I have just saw the removal bus stop which is Garvey Ave / Chandler Av City Of Monterey Park on Line 70 due to cancellation for Rapid Line 770 (Phase 2 service change) and also the removal bus stop which is Atlantic Boulevard / Norwood Place City Of Alhambra on Line 260 due to cancellation for Rapid Line 762 (Phase 1 service change) as well has unacceptable changes for moments during the NextGen Plan results. I suspected that Metro could been stayed on Rapid Line 762 without cancellation so then that way to stay remain bus stop at Atlantic Bl / Norwood Place on Line 260 including the Rapid Line 770 should be remain without cancellation so then that way to stay remain bus stop at Garvey Av / Chandler Ave on Line 70 without NextGen Plan results.

    • Whenever possible, I took the 780 between Pasadena and Glendale rather than the 180 or 181 because I seemed to reach my destination more quickly by taking the 780. It’s possible that my perception was incorrect but unlike MTA, I don’t have access to digital bus tracking data that would allow me to analyze bus speeds, on-time arrivals, etc. Unfortunately, I have no reason to think that MTA is basing their decisions on such data.”

      Funny thing is, I would actually timed how long the 780 would take from Pasadena to Los Feliz area and how long the 704 would take from Westwood to Silver Lake.

      I can tell you right now, over the years, as Metro kept crippling the Rapid service with either bus driver changes mid route or forcing all buses on a schedule regardless of traffic conditions or current time of day, these 2 routes became progressively slower and by 2018, they were becoming local routes.

      The 780 went from averaging a 60 min run time from Pasadena to Los Feliz in 2006 to 75-80 min in 2019. I’d always used the last bus of the day to time it. . . with the occasional 1pm run.

      The 704 went from a 50-60 min run time from Santa Monica to Silver Lake to about 80 min by 2018. This would be almost any bus after 9pm. Even the last 11:30pm would still take 70 min in 2019, as opposed to only 50 min in 2014 when Metro first extended the hours of the 704 at night.

      Again, I used to timed these trips with my phone just for fun and I used to be amazed that considering the constant zig-zagging the 780 had to do between Los Feliz and Glendale Galleria, and the occasional driver change, it would still hit that same 1 hour flat run time up until 2016 when I noticed the line actually getting slower over time. That 2.5 mile Stretch between Vermont and Griffith Park definitely helped.

      The 704 was prone with problems even from the start as that line had a stop every half mile at some parts. All it took was 1 phone call from some pissed off person and Metro would simply add a Rapid stop even another one would be 2 blocks away in EITHER direction.

      One Last thing I should note about the 704: there was a time I had to take the bus from LACC to Lincoln at 7am in Late 2017. The Expo Line was giving me a 75 min door to door travel time but surprisingly, the 704 gave me a 65 min door to door travel time. YES, at one point the rapids and the BBB Rapid 10 could travel faster from one end to the other than the Expo Line depending on the time of day. I don’t think Metro really liked the Fact that the Rapids were basically exposing the failures of the Expo Line even though ridership kept growing.

      As a bonus here’s the 733. Its last run at around 11:30pm went from 1 hour flat from Ocean/Santa Monica to Union Station (literally end to end) in 2014 to about 80 min in 2019 because over the years Metro again kept adding so many more stops to the line to the point the 33 actually started to catch up to the 733. The whole point of the Rapid routes was to move people from one busy point to another faster while the locals pick up the rest of the riders. Adding stops lest than 0.5 miles apart from each other isn’t “Limited Stop” service at all.