Comments on: AC Transit proposes changes to Alameda service

By: John Knox White

John Knox White — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 05:06:13 +0000

Word is that Line 631 will not only remain, but possibly be enhanced. Many of us working on the issue have asked that they have some info on the topic ready to present on Saturday, I’m not clear whether it will be.

By: Debbie Pollart

Debbie Pollart — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 03:59:55 +0000

I’ve commented on the AC Transit website, but am still not sure if the 631 ‘school bus’ that runs from Bay Farm to ultimately Encinal HS is affected by these proposed changes – Do you know?

By: AC Transit: West End Service Changes | Stop, Drop and Roll - mindfulness in the face of a challenge

Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:58:09 +0000

[...] in operations funding from sales tax collection and the State Transportatio Account (STA). A brief overview I wrote up is here. Current and proposed service [...]

By: Gesine

Gesine — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 02:15:33 +0000

Hi all,

I live on High Street and assure you that many folks are NOT middle class, on High Street in Alameda!

I’m an old hippie and don’t drive.

I take the 63 a lot, to get to Fruitvale BART and also to get around — it moving off High will affect me.

Having the O operate on High & Encinal would help.

From 1971-1993 I lived in Pasadena/Los Angeles area, and saw them run their transit system into the ground — there’s a “death spiral”, wherein you reduce service til the only folks taking the bus are poor people and stubborn hippies.

Thanks for keeping up with this!

Gesine

By: BC

BC — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:09:11 +0000

While I’m grumbling, I want to mention the loss of airport service. The 50 is very useful for getting there, and the alternative of bus-BART for one stop-bus is too much of a hassle with luggage. I’ll be driving or taking a cab if they get rid of the 50 to the airport. Incidentally, I think AC Transit undersold the airport service in Alameda. People I’ve mentioned it to were unaware of it and then used it and liked it–buses every 15 mins and only $1.75.

By: Michael Krueger

Michael Krueger — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:51:28 +0000

One more thought: Yes, losing Line 19 is a setback. Yet another small consolation, though, is that the splitting of the Line 51 into two lines is supposed to address the line’s severe reliability problems. In particular, the split line means that Alameda service will no longer suffer from delays and bunching caused by congestion on College Ave. Also, the extension of Line 51 to Fruitvale BART will make it a better substitute for the Line 19 service that is being eliminated.

By: Michael Krueger

Michael Krueger — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:29:54 +0000

One small consolation for the East End is the fact that local riders are allowed on the extended Line O, which will cover most of the old Line 63 route in the East End. This doesn’t help with getting directly to Fruitvale BART or South Shore, but it will provide all-day, every-day service to the Park St. and Webster St. business districts and the opportunity for transfers to all other Alameda lines, including those that serve BART and South Shore. Granted, this is not very convenient, but at least it provides a bare minimum of service for those in the area who cannot drive.

I agree that the cuts are outrageous, but given the budget situation, there is no alternative. Service has to be cut somewhere, so if it is not cut in the East End, where should it be cut?

By the way, if you are livid, I suggest you contact your representatives in Sacramento, since it was the State Legislature that cut off all State funding for transit operations.

By: BC

BC — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:03:31 +0000

The 19 along Buena Vista in rush hour seems to have quite a lot of ridership to and from downtown Oakland. It’s very predictable. The 51 may be a viable alternative but the service is extremely unreliable, especially in the evenings towards Alameda, plus it’s often packed. The 19 is less well used on weekends. I understand the budget problems, but might there not be a better way than cutting the well-used service completely?

By: John Knox White

John Knox White — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:53:14 +0000

The revised line 50 and the revised line 63 are proposed to interleave so that each line runs every 30 minutes from Fruitvale to Towne Centre, but they are offset so that there is 15-minute service along Park Street. At Towne Center, one head West to Webster, the other East to HB Ferry.

Eastender, I can’t argue that the loss of the 63 to Fruitvale is a problem. Faced with the budget issues, the 50 people a day that used the Line 63 between Blanding and Park Street (that’s in both directions) weren’t enough to make the cut. I was involved in getting AC Transit to run the 63 on High, losing it is disappointing. In these times, when the state legislature has cut 100% of state transit operating funds, tough choices are having to be made.

For those who can walk, there will be 15-minute service to Fruitvale BART on Park, and 10-minute service on Broadway/Blanding/Tilden. Otis will have 30-minute service to Fruitvale BART via Towne Centre. Not claiming that this is a great situation, just outlining the situation as it stands.

By: Lucy Gigli

Lucy Gigli — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:00:15 +0000

I agree with your pros and cons, except I am missing where you get the “15-minutes service from Fruitvale BART to Park St and Towne Centre on weekends” or “High frequency connection to Fruitvale BART for center of Island”.

Currently the 50 runs at 15 and the 63 at 30 minute intervals, but they are scheduled to come at the same time. I hope this means that the arrival times for Southshore will be offset, so there might be 15 minute service between Fruitvale and ATC.

Is the expectation that Alameda to Rockridge will be faster that it currently is on the Line 51?