Buses/Routes at Archer Garage

[artthouwill]

Let us suppose that the state somehow comes up with a funding solution that makes fare increases and service buts unncessary. Do you think the CTA should move forward with closing Archer garage?

Yes. It is a 100 yr plus old facility which is in dire need of repair. You can eliminate a layer of management, saving a lot of money, the property can be sold. It could show the State that the agency is looking for ways to cut costs in addition to state funding. At some point this facility needs to be totally rebuilt and/or replaced, so why not do it now? Why risk something bad happening (roof cave in) that could cause damage to the fleet that it houses?

OR

No. Any cost savings by closing this garage would be negated by excessive deadheading increasing fuel usage and increasing wear and tear on the vehicles, let alone hours paid to drivers for the increased travel time. This would also put an unnecessary strain on other garages affecting the overall quality of service.

What do you think?

[BusHunter]

But not X20 or X54. At the moment, X20 has 9 buses on BusTracker, X54 has 11.

As I mentioned in connection with 74th, some people are forgetting that part of the cutback is eliminating the X routes (except X28 and X98), although you implied that you hadn't. Also, canning X80 may mean something moves from C to FG.

If they junk the 6000s, they can't unless they miraculously get the money for the hybrid bus contract that either exists or doesn't. And then you would need a garage to house them.

I'm sure the fare increases and surcharges are permanent, unless some entirely new scheme for collecting fares emerges.

If all this does happen in February, something they should do is think about housing the #6000's at Archer. This way you can cover your butt if service gets restored. I don't know how a new hybrid bus contract would work with no #6000's. They can't replace #6400's yet. As far as the garage moves, Kedzie would have to lose some routes having no X service. They wouldn't have the capacity for half of Archer too.

[Busjack]

I don't know how a new hybrid bus contract would work with no #6000's. They can't replace #6400's yet....

That's why I said "the contract that either exists or doesn't." The latest theory being bantered around various message boards is that the board gave conditional approval, but then management never signed the contract. If one believes New Flyer's press releases, that would be news, but whatever....

More to your point, my reading of the budget is that they are not going to replace anything until the Novas are due for replacement, which would be near the end of the five year capital plan. Of course the surmise is what would happen if through some great miracle, the $300 million would suddenly materialize and the proposed cuts were canceled. As I mentioned before art's post, but anticipating it, somehow CTA would have to come up with the buses and places to store them, but if we assumed that the buses would be new ones, rather than dragging the 6000s out of limbo* (and the expense that would be incurred in maintaining them), the money needed to fund that "contract" would also have to materialize. However, the inference from various statements that CTA wants to be authorized to divert state capital funds to operating indicates that it doesn't think it needs the base order of 140. We have thus gone full circle.

__________

* Limbo might be Archer garage, as you suggest, but that probably makes too much sense for the CTA.

[BusHunter]

That's why I said "the contract that either exists or doesn't." The latest theory being bantered around various message boards is that the board gave conditional approval, but then management never signed the contract. If one believes New Flyer's press releases, that would be news, but whatever....

More to your point, my reading of the budget is that they are not going to replace anything until the Novas are due for replacement, which would be near the end of the five year capital plan. Of course the surmise is what would happen if through some great miracle, the $300 million would suddenly materialize and the proposed cuts were canceled. As I mentioned before art's post, but anticipating it, somehow CTA would have to come up with the buses and places to store them, but if we assumed that the buses would be new ones, rather than dragging the 6000s out of limbo* (and the expense that would be incurred in maintaining them), the money needed to fund that "contract" would also have to materialize. However, the inference from various statements that CTA wants to be authorized to divert state capital funds to operating indicates that it doesn't think it needs the base order of 140. We have thus gone full circle.

__________

* Limbo might be Archer garage, as you suggest, but that probably makes too much sense for the CTA.

Most likely, management is waiting to see how Feb. plays out. If the #6000's stay, we proceed in ordering some more artics. If they get mothballed the contract is dead.

[pudgym29]

OK - Here is my guess at what will occur when Archer Garage is closed.

I can't see Chicago Garage losing the #53 Pulaski. That would create another instance of a route not being served by the garage which it passes.

But I can see the #54 Cicero, and #57 Laramie, going to Forest Glen Garage. Perhaps even #65 Grand could be reassigned there. (It's close to downtown. Buses can get to Navy Pier via Milwaukee Ave.)

Forest Glen needs 60-foot articulated buses for #152 Addison (weekdays, & days | nights of b**eball games) and #77 Belmont (for most runs ~ that is, if its headways are lengthened). As someone who is quite familiar with catching a WB #77 bus after midnight at Sheffield - a 40-footer is already at capacity.

I concur that #8 Halsted should wind up at 79th St. Garage.

A question for which I would like more information before essaying an answer is: What will happen to the 35-foot Optima buses at Forest Glen? Will they be sent to 103rd St. Garage? Are the routes to which they are usually assigned going to be redeployed with 40-footers on a longer headway?

[Busjack]

A question for which I would like more information before essaying an answer is: What will happen to the 35-foot Optima buses at Forest Glen? Will they be sent to 103rd St. Garage? Are the routes to which they are usually assigned going to be redeployed with 40-footers on a longer headway?

I don't have an answer, but what I consider is that some of the routes northwest of Jefferson Park have productivity numbers in Pace's range (and I don't mean 270 or 290), and Pace is running 30 foot buses on the similar routes (such as 423 overlapping 90N). Unless the frequency is reduced to the level that the passengers are packed like sardines, I don't see a need to move them from FG. On the south side, the only routes that seem to need them or could use them are the U of C routes (which have been cut back), 39, 43, and 55A/N, and thus the only question is which garage gets Archer's work for those routes.

Also, assuming that Quinn doesn't have another rabbit in his hat to also avert the service cuts.

[Guest]

OK - Here is my guess at what will occur when Archer Garage is closed.

I can't see Chicago Garage losing the #53 Pulaski. That would create another instance of a route not being served by the garage which it passes.

But I can see the #54 Cicero, and #57 Laramie, going to Forest Glen Garage. Perhaps even #65 Grand could be reassigned there. (It's close to downtown. Buses can get to Navy Pier via Milwaukee Ave.)

Forest Glen needs 60-foot articulated buses for #152 Addison (weekdays, & days | nights of b**eball games) and #77 Belmont (for most runs ~ that is, if its headways are lengthened). As someone who is quite familiar with catching a WB #77 bus after midnight at Sheffield - a 40-footer is already at capacity.

I concur that #8 Halsted should wind up at 79th St. Garage.

A question for which I would like more information before essaying an answer is: What will happen to the 35-foot Optima buses at Forest Glen? Will they be sent to 103rd St. Garage? Are the routes to which they are usually assigned going to be redeployed with 40-footers on a longer headway?

54 Cicero!, 57 Laramie!, 65 Grand! to Forest Glen??? You gotta be kidding!!!

These three routes are no where near FG. And one more thing, where would drivers make their reliefs? When North Ave garage closed in 1986, #54 Cicero went to Lawndale and Routes #57 and 65 were reassigned to Kedzie Garage. So heres a much simpler idea! These three routes are in much closer proximity and best accessible by bus drivers to Chicago ave Garage. So why cant they go there? If the closure of Archer ave. occurs, this would require assigned route changes that would have to include the remaining 7 bus garages.

[qwantae]

74th is already giving up X9, 52AL and X55. How many more buses would it need to give up? Probably none.

[/quote

Since X55 is going to be cut, then then CTA needs to regain #174 back for Hyde Park Workers and students to the "L"s. Its going to be get more crowded worser during School days on regular 55-Garfield with all those rowdy kids/ passengers coming in and out between Cottage and Western.

[Busjack]

Since X55 is going to be cut, then then CTA needs to regain #174 back for Hyde Park Workers and students to the "L"s. Its going to be get more crowded worser [note: my father says this isn't a word, but uses it] during School days on regular 55-Garfield with all those rowdy kids/ passengers coming in and out between Cottage and Western.

It is up to the U of C whether it wants to pay for something that basically parallels route 55 (also given that people associated with the U of C probably still prefer the Metra Electric), especially if you say that the justification is CPS students, not members of the U of C community.

What is unanswered is whether 55 and 80 will go back to their schedules prior to when CTA decided a couple of months ago to shift resources from the local to the express. I doubt that either would be left on a 15 minute headway, but with the CTA, no one ever knows.

[jajuan]

It is up to the U of C whether it wants to pay for something that basically parallels route 55 (also given that people associated with the U of C probably still prefer the Metra Electric), especially if you say that the justification is CPS students, not members of the U of C community.

What is unanswered is whether 55 and 80 will go back to their schedules prior to when CTA decided a couple of months ago to shift resources from the local to the express. I doubt that either would be left on a 15 minute headway, but with the CTA, no one ever knows.

Didn't the locals on 9 and 49 also get dropped to a 15 min headway in favor of the express service on those corridors as well?

[Busjack]

Didn't the locals on 9 and 49 also get dropped to a 15 min headway in favor of the express service on those corridors as well?

12 minutes on Ashland, 15 on Western. Somehow that didn't quite ring the bell with me that the other two did.

[BusHunter]

What is unanswered is whether 55 and 80 will go back to their schedules prior to when CTA decided a couple of months ago to shift resources from the local to the express. I doubt that either would be left on a 15 minute headway, but with the CTA, no one ever knows.

That's a good question. If we follow what has been said about the cuts that service levels will go from 12 to 20 minute headways and some less frequent service like #54A or #81W will go to a half hour, I would say #80 and the others go to 10 minutes and if they enforce the cuts 15 or 20. Sounds like they want to cut every third bus on a line. I don't really see how the #80 would work on 15 or 20 minute headways with no express. There's going to massive overcrowding on those routes. I think this less frequency and 10:30 P.M. last bus times will really end up hurting them. Quinn's plan should have restored that and let them just cut the expresses. It would at least make the cuts more livable.

[Busjack]

I had the impression, from what Rodriguez has said, that most of the frequency reductions would be during the off hours. Generally, a reduction in the fleet only has an impact on the rush hour (in that that is when the garages are nearly empty), and if we assume that they are taking out 287 buses out of a total capacity of say 2100-2200 (I'm assuming, capacity wise, an artic. counts as 1-1/2), that's about a 13-15% decrease, not 33%. However, if we assume about 10 buses per X route cut (and without assuming that some resources would be put back into the locals) that accounts for about 90 buses. That would indicate that taking another 190 buses out of the system would result in some loss of rush hour frequency. Also, Rodriguez said he was taking 18% out of the bus system.

Hence, on the surface, Rodriguez is talking in circles, and I'm sure only his planners know what they have up their collective sleeves.

A more interesting question is how they take 9% out of the L system. If we assume that one doesn't cut the Blue or Red Lines, except in off hours, since they run pretty full, does that put the Green and Pink lines on what could be called Pace frequencies? While the could print timetables, I'll bet that the buses are not timed to feed the L. Would someone really want to wait over a half hour on the platform at, say, 63rd and Halsted?

[BusHunter]

I had the impression, from what Rodriguez has said, that most of the frequency reductions would be during the off hours. Generally, a reduction in the fleet only has an impact on the rush hour (in that that is when the garages are nearly empty), and if we assume that they are taking out 287 buses out of a total capacity of say 2100-2200 (I'm assuming, capacity wise, an artic. counts as 1-1/2), that's about a 13-15% decrease, not 33%. However, if we assume about 10 buses per X route cut (and without assuming that some resources would be put back into the locals) that accounts for about 90 buses. That would indicate that taking another 190 buses out of the system would result in some loss of rush hour frequency.

Hence, on the surface, Rodriguez is talking in circles, and I'm sure only his planners know what they have up their collective sleeves.

I heard the same thing about them not touching the rush hour service levels, but like you say I find it hard to believe 287 buses only cover the x routes. (Roughly that translates to 40 less buses per garage before shifting of routes.) In the off peak any losses could be covered by what's in the yard. Besides some of the FG routes would be put to major extremes. For instance the #81W on weekends and late evenings run on half hour headways. Would they really cut that to 45 minutes. Or #77's and #56's to 20 minutes. Even in the off peak that's extreme for those routes. There's going to be alot of complaints and overcrowding. But you never know. This could be a bluff attempt to get more work for less money. That's the way things seem to be nowadays. When election time comes maybe more money will fall from the sky!! :huh:

[cta_44499_FG]

Union spoke the other day. Word is that regardless of what happens come 2/7/2010....Archer Garage will close regardless. When is a question to ponder...

[cta_44499_FG]

54 Cicero!, 57 Laramie!, 65 Grand! to Forest Glen??? You gotta be kidding!!!

These three routes are no where near FG. And one more thing, where would drivers make their reliefs? When North Ave garage closed in 1986, #54 Cicero went to Lawndale and Routes #57 and 65 were reassigned to Kedzie Garage. So heres a much simpler idea! These three routes are in much closer proximity and best accessible by bus drivers to Chicago ave Garage. So why cant they go there? If the closure of Archer ave. occurs, this would require assigned route changes that would have to include the remaining 7 bus garages.

Unless they were to somehow make these runs all pullout/in...I don't see this likely.

54 Cicero may not be too impossible...but this would require a more lengthy travel allowance (we are already in a budget crunch...more free money is not an option). 65 Grand and 57 Laramie would only work if A- again, pullout/pullin B- lengthy relief travel (again not an option) C- Certain 65 trips terminate at Grand/Latrobe terminal and thus become 57s (but why do this when the 57/73 are interlined now, and I assume the 73 would remain at Chicago.

All sounds ambitious...but very unlikely.

[Guest]

Union spoke the other day. Word is that regardless of what happens come 2/7/2010....Archer Garage will close regardless. When is a question to ponder...

If it is true Archer Garage closing on 2/7/2010 some of us should get together to that garage and get the last days of operations there. Treat it like the last streetcar day on 6/21/1958. What does everyone think of that idea? Good way for those of us on this site to get to know one another.

[Busjack]

...but this would require a more lengthy travel allowance (we are already in a budget crunch...

A new consideration. We previously talked about deadheads and relief points, but this indicates another cost for closing a garage, in that there basically isn't any other garage that is close to many of Archer's routes (especially 35, 39, 43, and 62).

[qwantae]

If it is true Archer Garage closing on 2/7/2010 some of us should get together to that garage and get the last days of operations there. Treat it like the last streetcar day on 6/21/1958. What does everyone think of that idea? Good way for those of us on this site to get to know one another.

I agree, I really miss the Streetcars/ Flyer D901s be coming in/out of that garage back in days also. CTA5750, maybe you should come and get the last days there to drive yours/mines favorite fleet there which are NOVAs.

[BusHunter]

A new consideration. We previously talked about deadheads and relief points, but this indicates another cost for closing a garage, in that there basically isn't any other garage that is close to many of Archer's routes (especially 35, 39, 43, and 62).

Here's an idea. How about instead of closing Archer Garage, 2 - 4 garages close just for the weekends. (Maybe 2 on saturday, 4 on Sunday/holidays) FG could close and North Park picks up the whole North side. Or Chicago and NP divides FG assignments for the weekend, based on the need for equipment. Something like that. By the time you add up all the days saved you come up with something close to Archer closing 7 days a week, but yet you don't feel as much strain.

[qwantae]

A new consideration. We previously talked about deadheads and relief points, but this indicates another cost for closing a garage, in that there basically isn't any other garage that is close to many of Archer's routes (especially 35, 39, 43, and 62).

Should it mean that Kedzie should get back 21 and 60, and then get 62, 35, 39 sence it is closer? And Kedzie should give back 125,145 to North Park. 43 can go to 74th.

[Busjack]

I agree, I really miss the Streetcars/ Flyer D901s be coming in/out of that garage back in days also. CTA5750, maybe you should come and get the last days there to drive yours/mines favorite fleet there which are NOVAs.

Do you really go back to before 1948 (by then the garage had been converted to bus according to Krambles, and hence no longer had Red Rocket streetcars) or 1955 (about the last of trolley bus routes out of there)? If so, congratulations.

Or did you mean the streetcars to which 5750 referred (Wentworth in 1958)? That still would take you back.

[bookielovescta]

Will the "X" routes be eliminated ?

[Busjack]

Will the "X" routes be eliminated ?

According to the CTA Budget (pages 26 and 27 of the pdf) they will, except for X28 and X98.

[qwantae]

According to the CTA Budget (pages 26 and 27 of the pdf) they will, except for X28 and X98.

Thank god for X28, but eliminating X49 is going to be ridiculous.