03-16-2015, 02:29 PM
So I've got a couple of thoughts. They're not about good customer service, but they may make sense to regional transit planners.
1. No interim stops (like at Union) means reducing the extra time penalty, which means less service hours. Any Weber stop is not going to reasonably serve GRH anyway, and the GRH stop is pretty low-traffic anyway compared to other stops.
2. This service detour is for the next year and a half (though who knows: the 200 iXpress changes might well last until ION goes live.) That's enough time for the temporary route to generate its own ridership. Seems to me that if you enable trips to/from Weber on a route that won't persist after 2017, you're creating a headache for yourself.
1. No interim stops (like at Union) means reducing the extra time penalty, which means less service hours. Any Weber stop is not going to reasonably serve GRH anyway, and the GRH stop is pretty low-traffic anyway compared to other stops.
2. This service detour is for the next year and a half (though who knows: the 200 iXpress changes might well last until ION goes live.) That's enough time for the temporary route to generate its own ridership. Seems to me that if you enable trips to/from Weber on a route that won't persist after 2017, you're creating a headache for yourself.