CTA Bus Rapid Transit (take two)

[Nitro]

On 4/19/2013 at 9:19 PM, BusHunter said:

They should just bring back the x routes. Is it a realistic assumption that CTA is going to find the cash for several BRT routes? Why have rapid transit service coming in 2020 or later when they could have it now. What's wrong with building your way up? As far as Cicero, just a few years ago the CTA proposed the mid city transitway two blocks away. If they went as far as a rapid transit "L" line proposal, it's mind boggling why they wouldn't pursue a BRT corridor there. In time they probably will get one there but who knows how many years from now that will be. I mean Chicagoians have been waiting 30 years so far for some form of transportation to develop in that corridor. (going back to the crosstown expressway) We're still waiting!! http://forum.chicagobus.org/uploads/default_rolleyes.gif

Why would they support BRT? If they didn't want rapid transit they could easily go with LRT.

[artthouwill]

7 hours ago, Nitro said:

Why would they support BRT? If they didn't want rapid transit they could easily go with LRT.

It's obvious you know absolutely nothing about Chicago. I don't think you know how transit funding works in the U.S  either.  This isn't fantasyland 

[Sam92]

7 hours ago, Nitro said:

Why would they support BRT? If they didn't want rapid transit they could easily go with LRT.

Please pass the pipe

[Busjack]

8 hours ago, Nitro said:

Why would they support BRT? If they didn't want rapid transit they could easily go with LRT.

Why does MTA have SBS? By your logic, shouldn't MTA bring back the BQT Trolley?

[Nitro]

14 minutes ago, Busjack said:

Why does MTA have SBS? By your logic, shouldn't MTA bring back the BQT Trolley?

The reason why the MTA has SBS because the bus ridership is high enough to justify it. Light Rail is different because it has to have a separate ROW away from traffic like the Hudson Bergen Light Rail and the Newark City Subway in New Jersey. Trolleys also have additional capacity than buses. Buses have their corridors they should be used in lower dense areas.

[Busjack]

25 minutes ago, Nitro said:

The reason why the MTA has SBS because the bus ridership is high enough to justify it. Light Rail is different because it has to have a separate ROW away from traffic like the Hudson Bergen Light Rail and the Newark City Subway in New Jersey. Trolleys also have additional capacity than buses. Buses have their corridors they should be used in lower dense areas.

So how doesn't that apply to Chicago? Or are you schizophrenic?

Is there  separate ROW on Ashland, Western, or Cottage Grove?

[Nitro]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

So how doesn't that apply to Chicago? Or are you schizophrenic?

Is there  separate ROW on Ashland, Western, or Cottage Grove?

Ashland has enough space for BRT. Western does not. It's about how the streets are designed which ironically more lanes is induced demand.

[Busjack]

16 minutes ago, Nitro said:

Ashland has enough space for BRT. Western does not. It's about how the streets are designed which ironically more lanes is induced demand.

Ashland has BRT.  Have you reached 5000 misstatements yet?

Also, there were the consultants who sucked up about $5 million in federal money to propose a center lane BRT on Ashland, and would bar left turns on most cross-streets (not all) from Irving Park to 95th. That engendered immediate community protest and was dropped,

Again, you could have looked it up, but refused to do so.

[jajuan]

On 10/8/2023 at 12:30 PM, Busjack said:

Ashland has BRT.  Have you reached 5000 misstatements yet?

Also, there were the consultants who sucked up about $5 million in federal money to propose a center lane BRT on Ashland, and would bar left turns on most cross-streets (not all) from Irving Park to 95th. That engendered immediate community protest and was dropped,

Again, you could have looked it up, but refused to do so.

100% agreed. @Busjack hit it right on the head 

On 10/8/2023 at 1:00 AM, Nitro said:

Why would they support BRT? If they didn't want rapid transit they could easily go with LRT.

Why did you resurrect a decade old thread comment to question something that could very easily have been looked up?

[Nitro]

7 hours ago, jajuan said:

100% agreed. @Busjack hit it right on the head 

Why did you resurrect a decade old thread comment to question something that could very easily have been looked up?

I just wanted to know if BRT will be helpful to Chicago or not.

[Busjack]

4 hours ago, Nitro said:

I just wanted to know if BRT will be helpful to Chicago or not.

Well, you didn't phrase it that way.

[Sam92]

33 minutes ago, Busjack said:

Well, you didn't phrase it that way.

 

4 hours ago, Nitro said:

I just wanted to know if BRT will be helpful to Chicago or not.

To answer your question, Yes Loop Link will be useful in time square. Can make a circulator to replace the 42nd Street shuttle and free those subway trains for a longer main line route and reduce transfers ?

[Busjack]

2 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

 

To answer your question, Yes Loop Link will be useful in time square. Can make a circulator to replace the 42nd Street shuttle and free those subway trains for a longer main line route and reduce transfers ?

Unfortunately, that wasn't his question. NYC has SBS which is BRT. Apparently, though, on his brief appearance in Chicago, he didn't ride the Loop Link, X4, X9, J14, or X49, which are versions of BRT, but, as @jajuan pointed out, were covered in this necrotopic, if he had read it.

[Sam92]

8 minutes ago, Busjack said:

Unfortunately, that wasn't his question. NYC has SBS which is BRT. Apparently, though, on his brief appearance in Chicago, he didn't ride the Loop Link, X4, X9, J14, or X49, which are versions of BRT, but, as @jajuan pointed out, were covered in this necrotopic, if he had read it.

Damn guess I should've read before replying ??