Back in 1985 AC Transit racked up an average of 245,000 unlinked trips (one-way riders) per weekday. By 2000 this average ridership had dropped to 225,000 riders a day. By 2019 the ridership had dropped again, this time to 182,000 riders a day. And then COVID hit. By 2021, the latest year for which the National Transit Database shows data, AC’s average ridership came in at just 65,000 one-way riders per weekday.

The AC Staff and Board of Directors have set out several times to make changes designed to attract more riders to its system. It’s now trying again, with an ambitious plan to respond to rider, and we hope also non-rider, needs.

On July 26, 2023 the Staff and its consultant reported on the status of this latest effort to the AC Board of Directors. It was an effective presentation and included several interesting revelations, followed by some very apt responses from the AC Transit Board.

Read More Here

One result of the initial survey conducted as part of the study stood out. From the data presented it sounds like a fair number of AC’s existing riders would be willing to accept somewhat longer walks to bus stops, in exchange for faster, more frequent and more reliable bus service. If this view holds up it could open up significant new opportunities to improve performance on many of AC’s bus lines. If longer walks were acceptable there could be fewer turns, straighter and more easily understood routes and the occasional elimination of an unneeded bus stop. As things stand today the excessive number of turns along a number of AC’s routes both slows down service and creates unnecessary conflicts between buses and pedestrians, bicyclists and other vehicles. Getting rid of some of these turns would result in faster, more reliable and safer service while at the same time clarifying just where the various lines go and how they get there.

Mapping:  It is critically important that AC Transit’s system of routes be mapped as effectively as possible. If riders are familiar with just a line or two, they may or may not be willing to try using other lines. The better people understand AC’s general route structure the more useful AC will be to them.

In-House Resource:  While collecting desires and opinions early in the game is not without value, riders are not necessarily the best source of information when it comes to pointing out the defects in existing transit lines. AC Transit’s own drivers and other operating experts tend to be far more aware of these defects than anyone else. Tapping into the knowledge base of AC’s own employees would likely yield big dividends.

Presenting Proposed Changes:  As indicated, while the general survey of riders was worthwhile, there is a second and more challenging round coming up. This will occur when AC begins showing and explaining its proposed changes to the communities and stakeholders who will be affected by them. At this point the better people understand the reasons for and objectives of the overall program, the more smoothly things will go.

Dividing the Study Area:  It was noted in the presentation that to focus attention and effort during the study that AC’s service area would be divided into five zones. Since many routes go through two or more zones it is not clear how this could be done without compromising the entire system in the process.

Transit Priority:  When buses bog down in heavy traffic, ridership plummets. That’s because whether we like it or not, most potential bus riders in the Bay Area have the means to get to their destinations without the stops, turns, detours and other impediments that hamper bus travel.

Along some roadways, priority must be given to transit vehicles. This will require both hard work and persistence. Affected businesses, City officials and other stakeholders will have to be consulted with and convinced. As will Caltrans in cases where State roadways are involved. The first step is to determine which parts of which routes need transit priority treatment. The second part is defining the needed treatment and getting it approved by the entities with jurisdiction. The last and most satisfying part will be in actually making the needed routing and service level changes.

One-Way Streets:  City traffic engineers tend to like one-way streets and sometimes they’re necessary. But because one-way streets result in splitting transit routes and complicating the routing in other ways, it can confuse and deter bus riders. Often the reasons for one-way streets created decades ago have long since disappeared. Oakland for instance, has a number of one-way streets that could easily be returned to two-way traffic without adverse effect. With effective communication and cooperation city officials can be persuaded to make their high-activity areas more conducive to effective transit use.

Transfers:  Transfers are another sore point. As was pointed out by one of the callers at the July 26^th AC Board meeting, when a legitimate effort is made to shorten wait times between routes and make transfers free and otherwise as convenient as possible, it helps the ridership appeal of the entire system. AC’s transfers do not measure up in this regard. A hapless transferee often waits for a substantial period of time at a not very pleasant location never knowing when, or even if, his or her bus will come. Yet without riders willing to transfer, the full potential of AC’s system is never recognized. As BATWG has pointed out before, it appears that with proper oversight and enforcement, timing the transfers between fast-moving long distance trunk lines and neighborhood feeders would not be all that difficult.

Digitally Summoned Services: Parts of the East Bay are extremely hard to adequately serve by regular transit service. In these areas a demand-responsive approach using SUV’s or small vans could both provide faster and more convenient service and cut transit operating costs. Using private contractors to provide some or all of these digitally summoned services should be given careful consideration. Anything would be better than the virtually empty 40 and 60 foot long buses that one now constantly sees lumbering through East Bay streets.

Fare Collection: Needless to add AC’s rampant fare evasion must end. People willing and able to pay for the service are not going to use it if they are forced to mingle with cheaters who have avoided fares. Moreover, it has been shown that fare evaders cause more than their share of trouble on trains and buses.

Getting to the Result: And finally, it is emphasized that while a well-crafted and carefully put together planning report is needed, it’s not the product. Until well-conceived routing and service level changes are made on the ground, no one will benefit from the effort. To get this second part done requires lots of careful field work, and much effort put into persuading the affected agencies and municipalities to help in bringing the necessary changes about. Needless to add, continuous and productive interaction with affected neighborhoods and business districts, rider groups and other stake holders will continue to remain an important aspect of the study.