Rapid 6 is on hold since Culver City is short on money and didn’t allocate any money in this year’s budget to buy new buses that will be needed to start Rapid 6. BBB only got Rapid 3 rolling because Playa Vista gave them money to buy the 10 buses required for the service level… and Rapid 7 used existing bus (repainted to dark blue).

Also, you are not the only one. I couldn’t go to the Culver City meeting yesterday about fare increases but I wrote them an email saying I support the raising the base fare to $1.00 (as proposed) if it means they can maintain service level. I also told them the 40 cent transfer idea was stupid… make it 50 cents and move on.

(I’m not sure whatever happened to the Torrance Rapid 3.)

Before expanding all of this service, new revenue and resources would need to be identified.

As someone who uses and greatly appreciates both the Big Blue Bus and Culver City Bus, I’d glad pay $1.25 a ride like Metro for expanded service, both in route and in hours. However, I’m probably a minority.

What I was implying was that you wouldn’t run a Rapid 14 only between Montana and Culver because there would be a demand to have it connect with Metro Rapid 761 in Brentwood (and in reality, that “straight line” north of Wilshire has a lot of twisting and turning on it).

I also doubt that CC would be happy with BBB extending a Rapid beyond the terminal of the underlying local in order to come into “its” territory. The municipal operators are very protective of their turf.

I agree with Wad’s objection to your CC 3 proposal, BTW.

BBB 14 goes in a straight line between Culver Blvd and Montana right now… am I missing something? The Centinella/Bundy corridor is probably the most heavily transit dependent route in LA that currently has no Rapid plans. Sepulveda would obviously get priority over Bundy but I think your dismissal of Rapid 14 is premature. Granted it will be a short Rapid line but that is why I think extension to Fox Hills Mall Transit Center makes a lot of sense for this service (i.e. Line 14 = existing route but extend to Jefferson, Rapid 14 = Montana to Fox Hills Mall).

CC 3 is a classic “local” service so yeah, it wouldn’t work as a Rapid. But I was thinking a modified route that goes up and down the Overland corridor from Fox Hills Mall to Century City with a detour to Culver Junction. It will run rush hour only and not an all-day service like a real Rapid. It should not follow the current CC 3 route but only approximate it.

Line 439 is likely to go away completely when Expo gets to Culver City (now likely to be sometime in 2011, thanks to Damien Goodmon’s meddling). Metro Line 38 is likely to be extended at least as far as the Expo terminus via Line 439’s routing, but they haven’t yet come up with a plan for the service between there and Fox Hills Mall. (I suspect that the segment between Fox Hills and Aviation will be discontinued in favor of Culver City Line 6.)

@ bzcat: “Expo paint scheme”? You want dull grey buses to match the rail cars that will be running on Expo?

And please familiarize yourself with the service warrants for Rapid service. Lines that have multiple turns on them, such as BBB 14 and CC 3, will never get a Rapid overlay. There is more to it than the number of boardings. (Number of connections to cross-direction service is also a consideration, and BBB 14 falls way short on that once you get north of Wilshire.)

[Culver Junction station] – West on Washington Blvd [Downtown Culver] City) – right on Overland Ave [Sony lot] – left on National/Westwood – [Westside Pavilion] – right on Pico Blvd – follows CC #3 route to [Century City] (via Pico/Beverly Glen/Olympic/Century Park West/Constellation) – right on Ave of The Stars [Fox] – left on Pico (follow BBB#7 route to Robertson), right on Robertson Blvd – [Robertson/Cadillac] – [Culver Junction station].

I believe this route will take about 30 minutes to complete (probably less) so a 4 bus fleet assigned to it can provide 10 minute service intervals. This should complement the “Expo Line Simulator” quite well (maybe interline it so as to provide 5 minute intervals between Culver Junction and Westside Pavilion) and encourage office workers at Sony and Century City to take the one-seat bus ride. It will also have high visibility (EXPO paint scheme) so eliminates the guess work from novice bus riders on which bus to take to connect with Expo line.

The problem I have with #3 making a detour to Culver Junction is that it will make the trip time too long. I take #3 from Century City to Fox Hills Mall quite often and it is a 40 minute ride off-peak… and almost 1 hour in traffic (the bottleneck on Motor/National is a big problem). The extra loop to Culver Junction will take another 20 minutes during rush hour. This is not practical unless Culver City implements a “Rapid” limited stop service on Overland.

Converting Line 2 to all day service is a great improvement but I don’t know if it should come at the expense of 108. Most of the people taking 108/358 is coming from South LA area to service industry jobs near Venice pier. Line 2 forces them to transfer at Fox Hills when they presently make it in one seat. Granted Line 2 in theory will provide more frequency throughout the day, but as proposed, it doesn’t go to Washington Blvd where those service jobs are located. Instead, it goes to Fisherman’s Village, which is ok for locals but useless to people commuting to work.

I have no problem with Line 7 proposals as I think making it all day service will boost ridership quit significantly. Culver Blvd is under served right now. But I think ultimately, this one is less important due to frequency on Line 1 (Washington).

The most important service changes for residents of del Rey should be extension of BBB Line 14 South to Jefferson or Fox Hills (which I think you’ll cover in part 2). But I also think a rush hour “Rapid 14″ service on Centinella/Bundy is probably warranted. The extension south to Jefferson will enable Palms/Mar Vista/del Rey residents one bus ride to Playa Vista and vice versa. And since Line 14 is the 2nd most busy BBB route in terms of boarding, it meets the requirement for “Rapid” consideration.