West Division - Changes & Restructuring

[MetroShadow]

All this could've been avoided if #90 went south to North Riverside (No way in hell it would terminate at 63rd despite transfers to #62, 62H, #63W, and #165. What I don't understand is why #319 couldn't be more frequent and convenient. Who wants to wait 20-30 f'ing minutes for #90??? If #21 can be in Pace's territory (more than 3 miles), why can't #90 do the same???

Sounds good on paper, but we've had debates about sending 90 to the Green Line back in 2006 (when the forum was relatively young). This came at the idea of using a one seat ride between the Green and Blue Lines with the West Side Restructuring, which does conflict with the 307, but the Pace service had it's own Market (Triton or Elmwood Park south). There's not enough ridership to justify the need for more service on 319 (although extending that to Oak Park Metra would be an idea I would suggest). Sending the 90 to North Riverside doesn't do the route's productivity any justice, as again - encroaching on a different market.

I know the south portion can get as full as most seats taken, but so does the #90 in Oak Park/River Forest in the rush. They probably will have standing loads now on the #90. Maybe that will push CTA into a more frequent service, which wouldn't be bad either.

Let's hope the CTA responds in kind.

It wouldn't be bad to extend #318 to North Riverside.

No. The main destination generator is Forest Park.

[garmon757]

Given the philosophy of the Crowd Reduction Plan, I don't think CTA either beefing service or extending service in the suburbs is in the cards.

That's because CTA, Pace, and RTA don't want to work together at a universal transit agency. It's like who can kick one another ass the most.

[Busjack]

That's because CTA, Pace, and RTA don't want to work together at a universal transit agency. It's like who can kick one another ass the most.

True, and was the basis for my comment about the whole Harlem mess.

[NewFlyerMCI]

That's because CTA, Pace, and RTA don't want to work together at a universal transit agency. It's like who can kick one another ass the most.

Why was the RTA even created? What happened to self-governance? Personally, Pace and Metra should be combined and CTA stays own its own, but that's me.

[garmon757]

Sounds good on paper, but we've had debates about sending 90 to the Green Line back in 2006 (when the forum was relatively young). This came at the idea of using a one seat ride between the Green and Blue Lines with the West Side Restructuring, which does conflict with the 307, but the Pace service had it's own Market (Triton or Elmwood Park south). There's not enough ridership to justify the need for more service on 319 (although extending that to Oak Park Metra would be an idea I would suggest). Sending the 90 to North Riverside doesn't do the route's productivity any justice, as again - encroaching on a different market.

It wouldn't make any sense for #319 extending to Oak Park Metra unless it wants to be treated as a morning and evening rush hour feeder. Encroaching is appropriate to say but the scenario is that some riders have to pay an extra $1.75 just to go to the mall (if not close by Cermak) if they don't have the right pass i.e. 7-Day CTA/Pace and 30-Day passes. Now I would say that it would be cool if there was a route or shuttle route that goes to North Riverside from Forest Park Transit Center via Des Planes and Cermak but that would be a long shot.

[garmon757]

True, and was the basis for my comment about the whole Harlem mess.

I understand.

[garmon757]

Why was the RTA even created? What happened to self-governance? Personally, Pace and Metra should be combined and CTA stays own its own, but that's me.

And lose a lot of money and revenue??? I'll pass.

[andrethebusman]

Why was the RTA even created? What happened to self-governance? Personally, Pace and Metra should be combined and CTA stays own its own, but that's me.

In simple words, the RTA came about as a result of Evanston Bus and Glenview Bus shutting down, and Safeway threatening to do same. It was basically a panicked response to the fact that all the suburban bus operators in 1973 were in poor financial shape, and if something wasn't done (namely, an infusion of tax dollars) within another couple of years there wound not have been much bus service (if any) beyond the borders of Chicago. Indiana went thru the same situation at the same time, with Shore Line going under and Gary Transit really, really retrenching, but their answer was three municipal operators, not any sort of "regional" system.

As for Pace, I could see Pace split in two, with the "line service" being combined with CTA and the train feeders becoming a branch operation of Metra. The two operations really have little in common. But the main reason it can never happen is that Pace drivers are paid substantially less than CTA, and each garage has its own union local (with only a couple of exceptions), so they can't even have "system picks", much less unification of any sort.

[west towns]

Why split up pace terrible idea. PACE is more than line service and metra feeders. Look at their Vision 2020. It has community service serving the last mile which includes metra feeders. I dont think metra would be too interested in taking grandma to the store. Also the line routes are beyond what cta does. They run buses on routes pace has to deal with suburban developments markets and connections. Lets not break something that isn't broken maybe a bit dinged but not broken .. pace could do more in the burbs with more money

[MetroShadow]

In simple words, the RTA came about as a result of Evanston Bus and Glenview Bus shutting down, and Safeway threatening to do same. It was basically a panicked response to the fact that all the suburban bus operators in 1973 were in poor financial shape, and if something wasn't done (namely, an infusion of tax dollars) within another couple of years there wound not have been much bus service (if any) beyond the borders of Chicago. Indiana went thru the same situation at the same time, with Shore Line going under and Gary Transit really, really retrenching, but their answer was three municipal operators, not any sort of "regional" system.

As for Pace, I could see Pace split in two, with the "line service" being combined with CTA and the train feeders becoming a branch operation of Metra. The two operations really have little in common. But the main reason it can never happen is that Pace drivers are paid substantially less than CTA, and each garage has its own union local (with only a couple of exceptions), so they can't even have "system picks", much less unification of any sort.

The thing with Pace and CTA is that, while both serve the overall market, what Pace does a good job with is that they work with a core suburban network along with commuter and "coverage" routes. While not every route is a 250, 208, or 352, they have done a decent job looking at the bigger picture (as well as the parts of the puzzle), and at least tailor service against the demand. Metra, the TMAs, and the suburbs give a subsidy for Pace to operate the feeders; and to remove that from Pace (which Metra doesn't have the equipment to operate the buses to begin with) doesn't make sense.

[Busjack]

Anyone have any insight on this Passenger Notice that 309 won't pull into the Harlem Green Line station, and telling the riders to walk or stay on until Austin (not accessible)?

BTW, similar schedule changes on 313 (no surprise there, since the routes are alternates to 19th Ave.).

[artthouwill]

Anyone have any insight on this Passenger Notice that 309 won't pull into the Harlem Green Line station, and telling the riders to walk or stay on until Austin (not accessible)?

BTW, similar schedule changes on 313 (no surprise there, since the routes are alternates to 19th Ave.).

I always wondered why the 309 served the Green Line station and the 313 did not. My feeling was that both should serve the station, but it is clear that with the current situation, the 309 run time is longer in that it has to sit at the left turn lane from Harlem onto North Blvd. It only gets a left turn arrow, otherwise you may have to sit a good five minutes. Depending on traffic, getting back on Lake at Forest could take another few minutes. So it seems to me the idea is to keep the 309 /313 somewhat on schedule. EB 309s become WB 313s and vice versa.

The only question is whether someone will challenge this move with an ADA reason in that Austin is not an accessible station and making someone walk (or wheel) or transfer to another bus to get to the Harlem station violates any reasonalbe accomodations.

[MetroShadow]

Anyone have any insight on this Passenger Notice that 309 won't pull into the Harlem Green Line station, and telling the riders to walk or stay on until Austin (not accessible)?

BTW, similar schedule changes on 313 (no surprise there, since the routes are alternates to 19th Ave.).

I would argue running time issues. Hopefully there's a pathway (or plowed) access to the station.

[RJL6000]

Anyone have any insight on this Passenger Notice that 309 won't pull into the Harlem Green Line station, and telling the riders to walk or stay on until Austin (not accessible)?

BTW, similar schedule changes on 313 (no surprise there, since the routes are alternates to 19th Ave.).

This essentially means that Saturday service will run until 10 to 11 o'clock at night, and that Sunday service will begin about two hours earlier than it currently does.

In addition, both routes will operate on Thanksgiving and Christmas Days, leaving the #305 and the #322 as the two remaining holdouts (among those routes that are operated by Pace West on Sundays) that still doesn't operate on either Thanksgiving or Christmas.

[Busjack]

This essentially means that Saturday service will run until 10 to 11 o'clock at night, and that Sunday service will begin about two hours earlier than it currently does.

In addition, both routes will operate on Thanksgiving and Christmas Days, leaving the #305 and the #322 as the two remaining holdouts (among those routes that are operated by Pace West on Sundays) that still doesn't operate on either Thanksgiving or Christmas.

That much was obvious, while the reason for not pulling into the station was not.

[west towns]

I thought route 313. Currently stays on lake so now so will 309. So why is this an issue?

[artthouwill]

I thought route 313. Currently stays on lake so now so will 309. So why is this an issue?

One could argue that it is not in that neither 309 nor 313 go to the station WB. The question first was why only the 309 and not 313 serving the Green Line station? Like I said earlier, the only reason I can see for routing the 309 back to Lake was to keep that route closer to running on time.

[qwantae]

Is Green Line ever going to Upgrade Austin (Needs it badly), Ridgeland and Oak Park Ave Stations to become Accessible in the future?

[Busjack]

Is Green Line ever going to Upgrade Austin (Needs it badly), Ridgeland and Oak Park Ave Stations to become Accessible in the future?

Issues on those is that they never needed a rebuild sufficient to require making them accessible (cost of accessibility not more than 20% of the cost of the whole project).

I remember there was a stink about that during the Green Line project, but what wasn't pointed out was that at the time CTA threatened to close a couple of them.

There is is the similar issue about, after having made all the Red Line South stations accessible, the only one to be so made on the Blue Line as part of this project is Addison.

[andrethebusman]

Given the philosophy of the Crowd Reduction Plan, I don't think CTA either beefing service or extending service in the suburbs is in the cards.

90 has two problems that result in very irregular service especially in rush hours: 1) the narrow part of Harlem in the city (Irving Park to Grand) can get very, very congested. 2) the Metro/CP crossing at Grand has a lot of train traffic, including a substantial number of CP freights going to the Belt Ry. It is not unusual to get tied up for 10-15 minutes by a freight train, which then creates a horrendous congestion problem especially going north after the train clears. 307 has a train problem too, with BNSF at 31st which seems to be less severe as the freights tend to move faster on that route, but on the other had there are more of them.

[BusHunter]

90 has two problems that result in very irregular service especially in rush hours: 1) the narrow part of Harlem in the city (Irving Park to Grand) can get very, very congested. 2) the Metro/CP crossing at Grand has a lot of train traffic, including a substantial number of CP freights going to the Belt Ry. It is not unusual to get tied up for 10-15 minutes by a freight train, which then creates a horrendous congestion problem especially going north after the train clears. 307 has a train problem too, with BNSF at 31st which seems to be less severe as the freights tend to move faster on that route, but on the other had there are more of them.

Actually they still had that same problem when they went to Grand/Nordica but only the SB service was affected. They could always send every other bus to Grand/Nordica and decrease intervals to 15 minutes versus 20. Something I would be a fan of. They might have the perfect storm brewing anyway if CTA is looking to cut service, I'd be looking at redundant service first before removing solitary service. That could mean cutting the #90 to Grand/Nordica and with Pace doing a #307 restructuring, that leaves that portion of the route with two cuts in service.

[MetroShadow]

Rather than start a new thread, 332 is split due to trucks continuously hitting the rail bridge at York.

[Busjack]

Rather than start a new thread, 332 is split due to trucks continuously hitting the rail bridge at York.

I figured something like this had to be done, although the official traffic detour is via Touhy, instead of the bus detour via Belmont.

I still can't figure out what the bridge construction sequence problem was, except maybe IDOT didn't plan to dig out the road under the bridge until later, such as when the railroad was rerouted over the bridge.

And since the Yoirktown bus still eventually gets to Rosemont, it isn't a line cut type of split.

I also wonder what they did until today; run the Belmont route but double back to the cargo area?

[MetroShadow]

I figured something like this had to be done, although the official traffic detour is via Touhy, instead of the bus detour via Belmont.

I still can't figure out what the bridge construction sequence problem was, except maybe IDOT didn't plan to dig out the road under the bridge until later, such as when the railroad was rerouted over the bridge.

And since the Yoirktown bus still eventually gets to Rosemont, it isn't a line cut type of split.

I also wonder what they did until today; run the Belmont route but double back to the cargo area?

To answer that last question: yes. The detour originally had to go to the Cargo Centers, then back to Mannheim to Belmont.

[strictures]

Is Green Line ever going to Upgrade Austin (Needs it badly), Ridgeland and Oak Park Ave Stations to become Accessible in the future?

The CTA's part of the right of way is so narrow, it would probably require that those stations be closed for a year, because they would have to be completely reconstructed to add elevators.

Any rebuilt stations would probably end up looking like Granville, but a bit narrower.