Riders Plead Case To City Council -- Don't Cut 52, 53
Below is a letter writen by Maria Jaya, one of the riders coordinating efforts to maintain service one routes 52 and 53. This letter was sub...
https://www.elkgrovenews.net/2009/08/riider-plead-cast-to-city-council.html
Below is a letter writen by Maria Jaya, one of the riders coordinating efforts to maintain service one routes 52 and 53. This letter was submitted prior to last Wednesday's city council meeeting.
In trying to understand why Route 53 is being cut, I started reviewing the ridership data that I received on 8/26 from Ms. Chavarria (Tiffani’s assistant). At first it was confusing as the pdf file contains all routes information. I have attached an example of the pdf file. As a basis of comparison, I chose the commuter Route 58 who has a total of 6 routes, same as Route 53. I have attached the excel analysis performed.
For the month of June 2009, Route 58 has 13% less ridership than Route 53. Keeping this in mind, Route 58 did not have ANY service adjustments, while Route 53 has the proposal of eliminating 2 out of the 6 routes (33% service reduction) starting in September 1st, 2009.
.jpg)
Click to enlarge
The ridership reported for the morning Route 53 are lower than what we have been experiencing. After hearing what was said during the City Council meeting, we need the bus driver to be aware and really be engaged on these activities. It looks like both the bus drivers and affected riders are left behind from the process.
PLEASE KEEP ALL 6 ROUTES OF 53. If you are leaving Route 58 as is, please give us a simple explanation as to why Route 53 which has 13% more ridership ended up on the chopping block. If these ridership data were monitored daily, what does “monitoring” entail? Someone doing a similar analysis performed above?
Thank you
Maria Jaya
In trying to understand why Route 53 is being cut, I started reviewing the ridership data that I received on 8/26 from Ms. Chavarria (Tiffani’s assistant). At first it was confusing as the pdf file contains all routes information. I have attached an example of the pdf file. As a basis of comparison, I chose the commuter Route 58 who has a total of 6 routes, same as Route 53. I have attached the excel analysis performed.
For the month of June 2009, Route 58 has 13% less ridership than Route 53. Keeping this in mind, Route 58 did not have ANY service adjustments, while Route 53 has the proposal of eliminating 2 out of the 6 routes (33% service reduction) starting in September 1st, 2009.
The ridership reported for the morning Route 53 are lower than what we have been experiencing. After hearing what was said during the City Council meeting, we need the bus driver to be aware and really be engaged on these activities. It looks like both the bus drivers and affected riders are left behind from the process.
PLEASE KEEP ALL 6 ROUTES OF 53. If you are leaving Route 58 as is, please give us a simple explanation as to why Route 53 which has 13% more ridership ended up on the chopping block. If these ridership data were monitored daily, what does “monitoring” entail? Someone doing a similar analysis performed above?
Thank you
Maria Jaya
Posts
2 comments
Peter Calthorpe designed Laguna West as a transit oriented development. In 1990 there was some expectation for light rail service down the I-5 corridor.
Today, twenty years later, Elk Grove is still twenty years away from any light rail, and if we do build it, it won't go near Laguna West. Now we are likely cutting 4 #52 and 3 #53 routes, the primary bus routes that service their residents. I assume that many of their residents understand why it was designed the way it was because there is an awful lot of e-Tran ridership emanating from that community.
Reducing service destroys the value of TOD, the only one in Elk Grove. A reduction in these routes will only mean increased single-driver car use. If the city council believes that this will add quality to living, well, they should cut the routes.
But how, pray tell, will more cars, pollution, noise, accidents, more money thrown to insurance companies, and less social interaction between neighbors improve our quality of life? This isn't a matter of a lack of money, it's a matter of the allocation of money we do (or don't) have.
Insania brings up a good point of interest here. The newly revamped Sacramento County General Plan is pushing for the transit-oriented community planning; and yet here is a perfect example of a complete lack of oversight for the projects that are approved under these planning guidelines. Many permitting requirements are waived upon presentation of such community plans,which means they get developed with less money going to the County to pay for losses of various habitats, and then..Bang! a few years later it's OH WEll that doesn't suite our needs right now or some other excuse why the agreements can't be honored anymore. It all leads to a big fat misleading of the public trust and an abuse of the system that fails to provide oversight and enforcement. We are supposed to be moving in a new and better direction, but it still comes down to the business as usual attitude and actions.
Post a Comment