CTA Bus Rapid Transit (take two)

[MetroShadow]

While i hate giving Streestbldg and ATA the time of day.

I read the Streetbldg article for Oct 16.Between the 2 groups only 75 show up.

Which proves my point that these groups are overrated.

So much for John Greenfield wanting thousands to show up.

75 is better than nothing.

[Busjack]

75 is better than nothing.

Perhaps, but it shows that somehow they get press in an inordinate degree compared to their real influence.

Of course, Streetsblog gets picked up only because it is on the Google News Feed and has its own following. ATA manages to get into the mainstream media.

[jajuan]

Perhaps, but it shows that somehow they get press in an inordinate degree compared to their real influence.

Of course, Streetsblog gets picked up only because it is on the Google News Feed and has its own following. ATA manages to get into the mainstream media.

Agreed

[MetroShadow]

Perhaps, but it shows that somehow they get press in an inordinate degree compared to their real influence.

Of course, Streetsblog gets picked up only because it is on the Google News Feed and has its own following. ATA manages to get into the mainstream media.

Arguably that the former is a blog whereas ATA seems to be the operating lobbyist group. Correct me if I am mistaken.

[mkohut]

Arguably that the former is a blog whereas ATA seems to be the operating lobbyist group. Correct me if I am mistaken.

ATA is mostly supported by membership and sponsors.

Lobbyist is usually the afterlife after being a politician.

[MetroShadow]

ATA is mostly supported by membership and sponsors.

Lobbyist is usually the afterlife after being a politician.

Not always, but that's up to the person's discern.

[Busjack]

Not always, but that's up to the person's discern.

Definition is someone hanging out at the respective capitol or even city hall to influence legislation.

While some politicians become "lawyers" to do "Government Relations" (i.e. lobbying), revolving door legislation limits that. But municipal governments hire lobbyists, and membership groups certainly do lobbying (such as AARP).

[mkohut]

Perhaps, but it shows that somehow they get press in an inordinate degree compared to their real influence.

Of course, Streetsblog gets picked up only because it is on the Google News Feed and has its own following. ATA manages to get into the mainstream media.

I want everyone to know how bias Streetsbldg is.I type a comment to correct What John Greenfield wrote and it got deleted. .

[MetroShadow]

I want everyone to know how bias Streetsbldg is.I type a comment to correct What John Greenfield wrote and it got deleted. .

Probably should've gotten a screenshot.

[Busjack]

I want everyone to know how bias Streetsbldg is.I type a comment to correct What John Greenfield wrote and it got deleted. .

Probably should've gotten a screenshot.

Of course, anyone who writes a blog is in control of the content. Sort of similar to John Kass blasting a blogger in his Tribune column, but the blogger said she had the right to her opinion. So, unless mk has another source of media like Kass does, that's life. Bloggers have also told me "if you don't like it start your own blog," but to heck with that.

If Streetsblog Chicago is sponsored, the only thing one can do is deny them click count. But they have their First Amendment rights, too.

The only real issue is whether their 75 person turnout can overcome the numbers from the community who turned out against, resulting in Emanuel's "we're not proceeding yet" statement.

[Busjack]

Sun-Times story about a retired CDOT engineer saying what we know that the Ashland BRT won't work, and besides that the comparisons to other BRT systems are invalid.

The more interesting thing there is that CTA supposedly now says that given what we discovered about the local bus being bottled up, they are now considering "run[ning] in the same bus lane as the BRT" How is that supposed to work? They aren't local if they have to stop at the platforms, and besides that, where is CTA going to get the money for left hand door 40 foot buses or a greater number of articulated ones as planned?

I said elsewhere that the only use for the comment period was to assure that the Feds won't fund this, and this might. But, clearly, the environmental impact study seems skewed.

[jajuan]

Sun-Times story about a retired CDOT engineer saying what we know that the Ashland BRT won't work, and besides that the comparisons to other BRT systems are invalid.

The more interesting thing there is that CTA supposedly now says that given what we discovered about the local bus being bottled up, they are now considering "run[ning] in the same bus lane as the BRT" How is that supposed to work? They aren't local if they have to stop at the platforms, and besides that, where is CTA going to get the money for left hand door 40 foot buses or a greater number of articulated ones as planned?

I said elsewhere that the only use for the comment period was to assure that the Feds won't fund this, and this might. But, clearly, the environmental impact study seems skewed.

If they're thinking of running locals in the same lane as BRT, they can't be still stuck on the center lane proposal because of the money issue that you just posed. And the comparison to other systems are valid in showing that other cities knew how to compromise to get their systems in place and operating something Chicago for whatever reason still has a hard time doing given the current management.

[Busjack]

If they're thinking of running locals in the same lane as BRT, they can't be still stuck on the center lane proposal because of the money issue that you just posed. ...

But then they are stuck with the main money issue is that the reason they didn't want to eliminate parking was not so much to accommodate the merchants is that they would have to pay off the parking meter concessionaire.

[jajuan]

But then they are stuck with the main money issue is that the reason they didn't want to eliminate parking was not so much to accommodate the merchants is that they would have to pay off the parking meter concessionaire.

Perhaps but that would only be part of the story on that front given most of parking on N Ashland where CTA has service isn't controlled by LAZ. I think the pay boxes are concentrated mainly between Chicago and North Avenues. And if it's true on N Ashland, I can't see much of S Ashland having paid parking under LAZ either.

[Chicago13]

Perhaps but that would only be part of the story on that front given most of parking on N Ashland where CTA has service isn't controlled by LAZ. I think the pay boxes are concentrated mainly between Chicago and North Avenues. And if it's true on N Ashland, I can't see much of S Ashland having paid parking under LAZ either.

That's not entirely true either. Ashland quite a few pay boxes further north around Belmont and if I'm not mistaken, some around Irving as well.

[jajuan]

That's not entirely true either. Ashland quite a few pay boxes further north around Belmont and if I'm not mistaken, some around Irving as well.

In small pockets. Total coverage still doesn't go beyond 2.5 miles if that much. So my point is still the same that paying off LAZ is only a small part of the story.

[Chicago13]

In small pockets. Total coverage still doesn't go beyond 2.5 miles if that much. So my point is still the same that paying off LAZ is only a small part of the story.

I'm sure Ashland has pay boxes on the south end as well although I haven't been south on Ashland in years, so I don't know just how many.. Even still, I'm betting paying off LAZ to eliminate that many boxes won't be an attractive prospect for Little Rhammie.

[BusHunter]

Yeah, but with all these bike lanes making streets one lane of car traffic, it probably will get built. When everyone is stuck in traffic, then they'll scramble to open lanes. I don't see parking at all on ashland if they want to make this work. They can easily put diagonal parking on the nearby side streets and get half of the parking spaces back and LAZ would get something out of it. It's similar to the Milwaukee avenue four driving lanes to two lanes protected bike lane plan that everyone's upset about on the far nw side. They may be upset, but how do you stop this from happening? You don't.

[jajuan]

I just happened to reread that article from yesterday's SunTimes, and I have to agree with Busjack that they've been backed into talking out of both sides of their mouths on this by the conclusions given by this retired traffic engineer. His conclusion that the local Ashland buses being barred from using the bus lanes is one piece of evidence that the project as currently proposed is a bad idea and a transit nightmare waiting to happen for those riders who need the local route to get to a local stop. They're now scrambling to throw out ideas off the top of their heads that make no sense and in a sense they've been revealed not to have really thought this project through. There is no freaking way they can realistically consider letting the local buses share the bus lanes if they stick to the center lane configuration as the article shows them to still think they can. How are folks going to board and disembark? And for all the naysaying that the sharing of the lanes by both routes through a curbside bus lane configuration will be too much of an impediment to the BRT route, I submit the 15 Jeffery local shares the bus lanes with the J14 and the J14 still manages to make decent travel times from what I've observed. Before the point is made that J14 isn't BRT by the current federal definition, I realize that but the J14 setup gives some weight to the traffic engineer's supposition that they didn't really put any actual thought into a right or curb lane configuration as much as they claimed before unilaterally putting all their energy into the unrealistic expectation that everyone just swallow the center lane proposal as they've presented it. And even if they keep their hearts set on that configuration, as the traffic guy pointed out keeping more left turns in place while keeping a palatable travel speed on the BRT route isn't as impossible as they wish everyone to believe.

[Busjack]

...I submit the 15 Jeffery local shares the bus lanes with the J14 and the J14 still manages to make decent travel times from what I've observed. Before the point is made that J14 isn't BRT by the current federal definition, I realize that but the J14 setup gives some weight to the traffic engineer's supposition that they didn't really put any actual thought into a right or curb lane configuration as much as they claimed before unilaterally putting all their energy into the unrealistic expectation that everyone just swallow the center lane proposal as they've presented it. And even if they keep their hearts set on that configuration, as the traffic guy pointed out keeping more left turns in place while keeping a palatable travel speed on the BRT route isn't as impossible as they wish everyone to believe.

Besides both Jeffrey and the downtown one being Liveability grants, rather than under the 2012 version of section 5309, the description of the Jeffery one (according to city officials) somehow changed from BRT to "demonstrating elements of BRT." It was also made simpler by the fact that there already were parking restrictions in the rush direction. The main things CTA got for the $10 million grant were the station north of 71st, and supposedly a station at 100th and Paxton and the BusTracker signs in the buses (I suppose that Sam can tell us if the latter two were actually done).

Essentially, the issue is that the consultant can't justify blowing $2-$4 million in grant money just to come up with the obvious "reinstate X9" first. But, like with most things, Emanuel and spokesperson Brian Steele thought they could logroll the community, until, as in the Ventra case, Emanuel must have decided otherwise.

[Sam92]

Besides both Jeffrey and the downtown one being Liveability grants, rather than under the 2012 version of section 5309, the description of the Jeffery one (according to city officials) somehow changed from BRT to "demonstrating elements of BRT." It was also made simpler by the fact that there already were parking restrictions in the rush direction. The main things CTA got for the $10 million grant were the station north of 71st, and supposedly a station at 100th and Paxton and the BusTracker signs in the buses (I suppose that Sam can tell us if the latter two were actually done).

Essentially, the issue is that the consultant can't justify blowing $2-$4 million in grant money just to come up with the obvious "reinstate X9" first. But, like with most things, Emanuel and spokesperson Brian Steele thought they could logroll the community, until, as in the Ventra case, Emanuel must have decided otherwise.

I'll have to ride a little further to see if the station on 100th was actually built. Last time I rode that far (February?) I think I saw construction equipment over there. But the screens have been showing up in more 4000's. I'm guessing they ended up giving up the TSP idea (which was supposed to be done earlier last year) because we still have to stop at all the lights between 73rd and 84th. They never went beyond putting up a "Bus Signal" sign at Anthony for the planned queue jump.

[Busjack]

I'm guessing they ended up giving up the TSP idea (which was supposed to be done earlier last year) because we still have to stop at all the lights between 73rd and 84th. They never went beyond putting up a "Bus Signal" sign at Anthony for the planned queue jump.

The description on the Jump page was earlier or extended green light, as opposed to preempting the signal such as an ambulance would. I suppose that if a bus pulls up to a light that is already red, it isn't going to make much of a difference.

[jajuan]

The description on the Jump page was earlier or extended green light, as opposed to preempting the signal such as an ambulance would. I suppose that if a bus pulls up to a light that is already red, it isn't going to make much of a difference.

Yes at the intersections that fall within the bus lane area, it's supposed to be longer and/or extended green light. The intersection at Anthony is the one that would come closer to what Sam was thinking about. And having a retired city worker, who as a top level traffic engineer has the expertise to help plan a project like BRT, give a front page interview saying the BRT structure that they're proposing for Ashland is a disaster with strong potential to trigger a traffic nightmare waiting to happen isn't really a recipe for logrolling the community as Emanuel has grown so comfortable in doing to get what he wants to suit his political purposes.

[Busjack]

Sun-Times reports that the Washington-Madison project is delayed a year.

[west towns]

Ok so is anything new going on a lot of guessing but anyone hear the city doing anything?