West side proposal

[Busjack]

While CTA said last week that the budget included west side improvements, the consultant's plan was just posted on the CTA site.

I'm not a west sider, and would be interested in your comments about:

• Cermak Branch [Douglas] being via the Paulina connector at all times, but some rush hour trips via the Blue line subway. Would that branch have 2 colors?
  
• Some of the overlays, such as 52/52A and 90/307 to the Green Line.
  

Doesn't appear that some of CBT's priorities, like reinstating 16 and 131, and infill stations on the Green Line made the report. (Is X20 a substitute? Appears to be so east of Western.)

As usual, this is probably subject to extensive changes before it is approved by the CTA Board.

[trainman8119]

There seems to be some real push to get the Paulina corridor moving, first with the Douglas branch and of course with the circulator proposal. The first question I have, is there a need. Yes, there is the United Center, but is that all...has there been enough of a population boom with the rebuilding of the area to support service on that leg of the L.

I contend that the color coding of the L system is not really that beneficial to start with, since the Green has 2 branches and the Blue has 2 branches. There could be as much confusion for a rider with the color system as with the original Congress, Douglas, etc. (it will always be that way to me) If colors are used, there should have been multiple colors for the Green and Blue anyway (other than reversing the print on the destination signs)

With 131 a block away from the 20, I can't see that route coming back. Perhaps the 16 should come back in some form. After all, 56 survives quite well along Milwaukee Ave, as well as 151 and a half a dozen other bus routes along the Howard and Ravenswood lines (forgive me color lovers).

I often question anything suggested by a "consultant". Seems like a big waste of money to me. After all, shouldn't the CTA, Pace, Metra be the professionals when it comes to this and making there own studies and implementations in house ????

[Busjack]

With regard to your reference to the circulator, it does bring back some of the old 58 Ogden Randolph. Also, by numbering it 127, it implies that  service is not needed from NW Station to Northerly Island (or as da Mare sez, Northerly Ireland); 14 takes care of the rest of that route.

[trainman8119]

I find it interesting that when so much is being made about a streamline 1 seat ride from point A to point B, be it on bus or L, that there is a proposal to basically eliminate the Cermak branch to O'Hare. And more importantly, the idea of having to change trains at Clark and Lake to go to O'Hare reeks of something rotton in with the elimination of transfers this would be a sneaky way to boost some extra money into the coffers without much fanfare.

I do have to say, this current board and President are out to destroy this agency yet !!!!

[Busjack]

The Clark and Lake transfer wouldn't cost anything, because you can take the elevator in the paid area of the Thompson Center.

[RIPTA42]

There seems to be some real push to get the Paulina corridor moving, first with the Douglas branch and of course with the circulator proposal. The first question I have, is there a need. Yes, there is the United Center, but is that all...has there been enough of a population boom with the rebuilding of the area to support service on that leg of the L.

There has been some development in that corridor; the real question is, can that development be sustained/expanded without service on Paulina? How much of a need for L service already existed in Albany Park in 1907?

I find it interesting that when so much is being made about a streamline 1 seat ride from point A to point B, be it on bus or L, that there is a proposal to basically eliminate the Cermak branch to O'Hare.

No, the proposal says that the Douglas branch would have service to both the Loop and O'Hare via Dearborn (which I find confusing and unnecessary). Besides, is there really a great demand for a one-seat ride from the Douglas to O'Hare? I would rather go to the Loop and have an easier transfer to get to Midway.

[trainman8119]

Why go to the Loop on the Douglas if you can take the Cicero bus to go to Midway (unless you are at 18th street or something).

Also it would only make sense to further confuse the riding public. Those in control these days make a habit of making things difficult, then wonder why they have to raise fares because the fare box does not add enough to support the subsidies.

[RIPTA42]

I see your point; even at 18th, it would make more sense to take the Ashland bus to the Orange Line than the L into the Loop. I still don't buy your assertion that the Douglas-Milwaukee connection is so vital.

I can see a couple of reasons why the CTA would want to give Douglas customers the option of going to either the Loop or the Subway. First, I assume there isn't enough capacity in the Loop to send all Douglas trains there, which could probably be corrected by through-routing Brown Line trains to Midway. Second, on the map, it would give the appearance of doubling service on the Douglas and could be a ploy to "make up" for shutting down stations for so long.

[Busjack]

The Circle Line map originally published in the Sun Times implied that the Brown line would become Ravenswood-Douglas, and also the Orange Line would become Midway-Ravenswood. Ridership statistics indicate that this would balance. There was also some talk whether the Kimball Yard could store the 60 or so additional cars that would be needed after the expansion was completed, and thus that interlining would be needed to get to the other yards. Again, both speculation.

I believe that CTA has to somehow justify the $30 million put into the Paulina Connector (other than just saying that the contractor was working on Douglas and is available), but there is nothing in this plan yet about adding the Madison/United Center station, which would be necessary to bring any additiona L service to the Near West Side.

[trainman8119]

I question that capacity in the Dearborn subway would ever be a problem with Douglas trains. There was a time that when you went into the subway during rush hour, you would always see the light of a train (be it Deaborn or State Street). Now, there are times in rush hour when you won't see that light for 10 minutes. We won't even talk about off peak times. There has been so much cutting in the past 10 or 15 years that it is often forgotten just how much better the system once was. The way I see it, once the skip stop system was scrapped, so was efficient service.

The idea of a Ravenswood-Midway line is interesting, and this is the first I have heard of it. It wouldn't take that much to make it happen, unlike the Howard-Dan Ryan marriage. I could see where storage might be a problem at Kimball. Should this happen, may it be wise to incorporate it with the proposed Midway extension to Ford City.

[Buslover88]

You mean that the Blue Line might be taken away? NOOOO!!! I need that Line and I'm used to it

[trainman8119]

It is here to stay...maybe in some type of different form, though.

No need to worry.

[Buslover88]

*Signs in relief* thank you.

[westing]

It seems to me a Ravenswood-Midway line would be good idea. Each line has about the same ridership and service patterns and could be paired well. However, the routing of such a route though the loop would be problematic.

The line would most-likely use Lake and Wabash, so as to access the Clark/Lake station to meet transfer demands. While the Douglas would provide service to the Wells and Van Buren legs along with the Purple, there would be much less service compared to Lake and Wabash. For that reason I don't see that exact routing happening.

Ravenswood-Douglas would be a better routing option though the loop since service levels would not drop and there would be extra capacity for Ravenswood cars in the Douglas yard. However, service levels are not exactly the same on each line. But, this problem could easily be fixed with some trains from Ravenswood making the loop and returning back rather than continue to 54th Cermak.

Ravenswood-Douglas would be the best routing option for housing the extra Ravenswood cars after the service increase and for keeping loop capacity.

[Busjack]

I finally found the place on Chicago-l.org with a description of the plan and followed his link to the CTA's map, both of which Graham said (as of 2002) were "highly conceptual."

As I had understood it (and the Sun Times map was clearer), the Orange Line would be on VanBuren and Wells, as current, but would continue straight to the Merchandise Mart. Both lines to Kimball would be on the inner loop. The Brown line would cross Wells at Lake without turning. This sort of balances out--the Brown and Green Lines would be on Lake and Wabash, and the Brown and Orange Lines on Van Buren and Wells (we assume that the Purple Line goes into the subway, and out Archer to Paulina).

I had thought about losing the right turn from Wells to Lake, but didn't think about ctafan86's point that the Orange line would then lose the connection to the Thompson Center. That would seem to be a defect in that concept, unless similar connectivity were established between Library/Van Buren and the two Jackson subway stations.

The concept would also hurt connections with the Green Line, but you could make a free transfer at Roosevelt.

Some other people commented on junction changes at Lake and Wells, indicating that Douglas would turn right there, and use the outer loop.

[RJL6000]

The CTA should divide the current Green line into two separate routes. As it is, the Lake portion of the line has higher ridership than the South Side portion of the line - an unbalanced situation, to be sure (though not as bad as it was just before the South Side through-routings were swapped back in 1993). My suggestion is for the CTA to terminate the Lake trains around the Loop at all times, and reduce the South Side elevated line to a shuttle terminating at Roosevelt during off-peak periods (the South Side elevated line would continue to operate around the Loop during weekday rush hours).

That would make sense, given that almost all of the rail ridership from the South Side is on the Red Line.

[Busjack]

My suggestion is for the CTA to terminate the Lake trains around the Loop at all times, and reduce the South Side elevated line to a shuttle terminating at Roosevelt during off-peak periods...

You would get all the heat from the 3rd Ward political interests again, even though the South Side Main won't develop significant ridership until the area is redeveloped (some of which is reportedly now happening). They complained when they lost the direct route to Howard, and again with the proposal at the time it was rebuilt to close some stations (said they would have to walk into another gang's territory).

This thread has departed way from the original idea of discussing the West Side plan.

[Busjack]

I often question anything suggested by a "consultant". Seems like a big waste of money to me. After all, shouldn't the CTA, Pace, Metra be the professionals when it comes to this and making there own studies and implementations in house ????  

Diverging a bit again, but it seems like CTA didn't get much from its $1.2 million contact with AECOM Consult, at least from the Board Presentations on its site. Most of it seems to be that improvements can be made only if the union agrees. It didn't deal with such matters as CTA's lack of vehicle schedule control.

Also, the recommendations about rostering and the extra board indicate, at least from an outsider's perspective, that these matters haven't changed much from the streetcar days.

[MetroShadow]

So the results of the west side board meetings came in tonight, and I stopped by UIC to gather the results. If the board approves, the changes will be implemented (under the 180-day program) to June.

Its looks like the expected Blue Line 54/cermak-Loop routing is on the docket for implementation. However, since there are complaints of 54/Cermak customers who needed to get connected at Racine and Halsted, what a spokesman told me is that the number of trips being sent out an hour (8-10), only a handful would be sent through the subway, and the rest into the loop (didn't get to the question of the loop routing). The loop will be restricted to rush hours, and the loop on a everyday basis.

Route Changes--a few were suprising, although a great deal of them I could've called those moves simply. To be blunt, look for:

• More Express Routes
  
• Northwest Side Changes (These fall right into the west side development zone) which will affect routes out of Jefferson Park
  
• A bizarre route (think circle line outline)
  
• Several minor route changes; one major route change
  
• No East-West Routes North of the Green Line will be affected. The Border is mainly Chicago-Forest Park Blue Line-26th-Halsted. So absolutely zero changes to areas surrounding Elston, Diversey, or Northwest Highway (although I'm suprised that half of the routes were even in consideration here).
  

This is the PDF version of the report

This is the HTML version

Enjoy them at your delight.

[trainman8119]

The bus route changes sound pretty good. The only flaw I see in the bus changes is that the 90 extension south of Grand ave is that it duplicates Pace service on that part of the route. Would that be a good move in light of budget constraints (now if there were transfers.....). I think the same applies with the 52-52A proposal south of the Orange line. Is there really a need for duplicate service ????

[Busjack]

• No East-West Routes North of the Green Line will be affected. The Border is mainly Chicago-Forest Park Blue Line-26th-Halsted. So absolutely zero ).
  

My understanding was that the study was always limited to that area. However, the indication that they studied beyond it is the proposal to change 86 and 91 in Gladstone Park (again, none of the scheduled hearings are in that area). At the meeting, was there anything to indicate that E-W routes north of Chicago were ever part of the study? Or shoehorned to a greater degree (as happened in the North Shore Initiative)?

[Busjack]

I think the same applies with the 52-52A proposal south of the Orange line. Is there really a need for duplicate service ????

That's a good question, but does anyone know why 52A was extended to 36th, instead of just to the Orange Line?

[MetroShadow]

My understanding was that the study was always limited to that area. However, the indication that they studied beyond it is the proposal to change 86 and 91 in Gladstone Park (again, none of the scheduled hearings are in that area). At the meeting, was there anything to indicate that E-W routes north of Chicago were ever part of the study? Or shoehorned to a greater degree (as happened in the North Shore Initiative)?

They never said anything about opening the zone further north than Chicago. I believe that the main focus was mainly between chicago and 26th and forest park. I believe that they want to call that the NW side if the zone was to extend further north. The reason why the concern is primarily around UIC, the West Loop, et al. is because there has been an increase of commutes and reverse commutes, to get downtown faster.

Also, keep in mind, that this is the zone where they deemed it "primed for increasing growth", so unless there is an argument that you can bring to them that "this neighborhood/street to downtown will bring growth", I'm certain they'll listen to it.

-----

My concern is the amount of bus-bunching at Chicago (and maybe Division).

I made the suggestion on the 37/38 combination that the 37 would intersect with the 38 at Harrison/DesPlaines instead of Congress/Wells, just in case anyone needed to transfer routes downtown.

I could only see the reason why 86 and 91 got changed is because 91 is a very heavily used route at Jefferson Park, and on any weekday, its a 15-minute wait at the Jeff, whereas trips south of Lawrence is less than 6 minutes (most of the trips would end up at Nagle). This makes it easier on the 91 trips overall (the spokeswoman said there will be some trips also on Nagle, although everything points otherwise), and 86 trips will go through the outskirts of town and link-up Taft and Steinmetz High Schools during the weekdays.

The 90 extension, I saw that coming, although my concern is having to deal with the extension with bus-bunching and horrible traffic patterns between Irving Park and Foster. It's a good idea, except for that issue, and makes the traveling much easier where you don't have to wait 20-45 minutes for the 307 at Grand, North Avenue, and the green line.

127 looks like a mess, I just don't see any neccessary point to that.

52 and 52A will get cleared up; instead of having overlap service between 36th and 63rd, its just limited to the Orange Line and 63rd.

X9, X54: Makes sense, although I would be (slightly) in favor of having 54 Local service to the Jeff as well as the express bus. X9 is just a standard route, overlapping the regular 9, and 54 covers both the North route and the South (only to Midway)

X20: Combines service on the 20, east of Western, and the return of the 131 (east of Western). Not bad, I think that route may be geared to passengers on Washington, and anyone taking the route on the far west side.

7 and 21/25: meh.

Keep in mind there are two more meetings this week: today and tomorrow night.

[Kevin]

52 and 52A will get cleared up; instead of having overlap service between 36th and 63rd, its just limited to the Orange Line and 63rd.

Currently 52 & 52A service overlaps between 36th and Orange Line during normal hours of operation. However, this is an area where overlap is clearly not needed. The 52A experiences the highest number of passengers between Orange Line and 63rd. Often 52A buses are packed during the rush hour when they depart the Orange Line heading south. Overlapping 52 and 52A between Orange and 63rd is a great idea that will help reduce overcrowding on the 52A.

[MetroShadow]

Well, its official that the changes are going to be implemented in June.