CTA Service Adjustments

[CURRENTZ_09]

When the CTA has it's September 4th public meeting (at 6pm at CTA Headquarters on 567 W. Lake St) after the Labor Day Holiday, business at Forrest Claypools CTA will resume and 12 bus routes will be up for elimination and Rail service during Rush Periods will be beefed up except on Yellow & Pink Line Trains will be increased to decrease over-crowding. Some routes are elminated because of low levels of service (132, 56A (which runs parllel to Pace 270) a Southern segement on 11, the combination of 120 & 122 and a new Lasalle bus route 37 just to name a few).

[mkohut]

When the CTA has it's September 4th public meeting (at 6pm at CTA Headquarters on 567 W. Lake St) after the Labor Day Holiday, business at Forrest Claypools CTA will resume and 12 bus routes will be up for elimination and Rail service during Rush Periods will be beefed up except on Yellow & Pink Line Trains will be increased to decrease over-crowding. Some routes are elminated because of low levels of service (132, 56A (which runs parllel to Pace 270) a Southern segement on 11, the combination of 120 & 122 and a new Lasalle bus route 37 just to name a few).

I'm sure Route 165 will be gone.

Also,what is the safety margin between trains?The loop elevator will be real tight on space.

[BusHunter]

When the CTA has it's September 4th public meeting (at 6pm at CTA Headquarters on 567 W. Lake St) after the Labor Day Holiday, business at Forrest Claypools CTA will resume and 12 bus routes will be up for elimination and Rail service during Rush Periods will be beefed up except on Yellow & Pink Line Trains will be increased to decrease over-crowding. Some routes are elminated because of low levels of service (132, 56A (which runs parllel to Pace 270) a Southern segement on 11, the combination of 120 & 122 and a new Lasalle bus route 37 just to name a few).

I'm surprised by this, considering CTA had said a couple months ago there would be no service cuts in 2012, especially with no budget deficit as of now. The goal of the cuts is that they look like they want to get rid of the duplicate service and replace it with extra service on major routes. I don't know how smart that is, considering bus service is not so great to begin with after the cuts of 2009. The tribune press release (posted by Kevin under news) states they want to decrease the overcrowding on rail. Cutting bus service to me along rail (the #11 cut) would just put more riders on rail. I would think that cut would hurt the #11 possibly putting it to rush service only in the future. Then you have the issue with Pace about the #270 in the rush hour. They will have to run local now making even slower service. I wonder if this means the #90 will be on the chopping block south of Grand? It actually has pretty good ridership over there. Looks like there sticking it to Pace. I notice alot of people wait specially for CTA service because there fare cards/passes are not valid on Pace. They really should get a universal fare card/pass before they do this. If they wanted to better the service on the major routes, they should just bring back the X service. That is the key ingredient that they are missing. To me this doesn't seem like it's thought out all that well. This seems like a prime example of the service boards working against each other, first with incompatible transit media and now this.

[mkohut]

Adding 2 minutes on 270 isn't that bad.

Do they need 90N when 423 is duplicate service.

While some routes don't have have riders cutting 11 would make the Brown Line more pack.

I don't think adding the x routes back is the entire answer.They are still in traffic.

[Busjack]

The old question again, Do you have a link for that?

However, via the Tribune, there is one. And apparently you got it off the home page.

The article also mentioned sw's issue with the yellow line.

[jesi2282]

My predictions would be 17, 49A, 64, 69, 90N getting the axe.

The 90, south of Grand should stay. I think bringing back X9 and X49 would be a good idea until they get their BRT's., but it sounds to me they only want to beef up the locals.

[Busjack]

...Looks like there []sic][ sticking it to Pace. I notice alot of people wait specially for CTA service because there fare cards/passes are not valid on Pace. They really should get a universal fare card/pass before they do this. If they wanted to better the service on the major routes, they should just bring back the X service. That is the key ingredient that they are missing. To me this doesn't seem like it's thought out all that well. This seems like a prime example of the service boards working against each other, first with incompatible transit media and now this.

Actually, there is precedent for this, in that the 1997 cuts included such things as cutting back 49A to rush hour only because it competed with 349, CTA turning over weekend service on 204 to Pace (and then forgetting that it did it), etc. Then the argument was cutting back competition.

Pace will be getting a cut of the fares, and, for, say something like 423 has to run it anyway to the Blue Line. So, it won't be complaining. And the Auditor General said that the most efficient operator should operate in the overlap zones, and that isn't CTA.

The more interesting questions with regard to 56A/270 is that besides the rush hour expresses, Pace's posted stop policy already in effect, and plan to convert it to ART sure are going to mean that it won't stop every city block. There is also the question about the Devon-Harlem 56A trips. But I did say back in 2010 that 56A didn't make sense once they cut back the schedule so that the midday 56A and 270s didn't alternate.

Finally, Pace claims that it has IBS data to support its trip by trip cuts. I wonder if CTA has comparable Clever Devices data, since, as mentioned a couple of days ago, the Ridership Report doesn't have that fine level of detail.

[RJL6000]

According to that Tribune article, the segment of the #11 from Western to Fullerton will be eliminated because it is "redundant with the Brown Line between Western and Fullerton". This means that the south terminal of the #11 will be cut to north of the Western Brown Line station, while Lincoln Avenue between Western and Fullerton will continue to be served by existing north-south and east-west CTA bus routes such as the #9 and #77. The planned new #37 Sedgwick route, which will operate on weekdays only (day and early evening hours), will replace all #11 service south of Fullerton. (The Sedgwick segment of the old #37 route was made part of the extended #11 route back in 2007.)

[jajuan]

I agree that part of this does have a feel of haphazardly cutting for the sake of a service being near or paralleling another mode of service. This 11 cut for instance I agree doesn't seem smart. Some specifically take it to and from downtown to avoid being packed like a sardine in a Brown Line or Purple Line Express.

[CURRENTZ_09]

So basically on some parts of the CTA system your getting enhanced service to balance the infrastructure of the system while cutting out the dead weight of others and in some cases, you have overlapping of segments that run along Pace service areas that have the justified service levels to cover that segment of routing provided by unnessary additional service currently provided the CTA. This really justifies the proposed changes and puts more resources on high performance routes. Be glad that the cuts don't eliminate route segments entirely.

[CURRENTZ_09]

Also be glad that the CTA is putting public input on these changes instead of just announcing it last minute and making the changez final without public input.

[Busjack]

This means that the south terminal of the #11 will be cut to north of the Western Brown Line station, while Lincoln Avenue between Western and Fullerton will continue to be served by existing north-south and east-west CTA bus routes such as the #9 and #77. The planned new #37 Sedgwick route, which will operate on weekdays only (day and early evening hours), will replace all #11 service south of Fullerton. (The Sedgwick segment of the old #37 route was made part of the extended #11 route back in 2007.)

It looks like sw won't be happy.

As far as the decision to combine 11 and 37 back in 2007, the main justification seemed to be that 37 was assigned to NP, and the combination cut down the deadhead. Also, that seemed to be the era when CTA was combining routes with overlapping terminals (Taylor and Streeterville somewhat in the same time frame).

Taking out the segment you mentioned is much more radical than just separating 11 and 37, but is consistent with Lind's picture of the Lincoln line that it crossed the Ravenswood at numerous locations (also Paulina and Addison stations).

Also, as Pace pointed out when it cut service on 210, Lincoln doesn't run well given all the 6-way stop lights.

[Busjack]

Also be glad that the CTA is putting public input on these changes instead of just announcing it last minute and making the changez final without public input.

They have to hold a public hearing as a matter of federal law. Let's not go overboard here.

[jajuan]

So basically on some parts of the CTA system your getting enhanced service to balance the infrastructure of the system while cutting out the dead weight of others and in some cases, you have overlapping of segments that run along Pace service areas that have the justified service levels to cover that segment of routing provided by unnessary additional service currently provided the CTA. This really justifies the proposed changes and puts more resources on high performance routes. Be glad that the cuts don't eliminate route segments entirely.

That's not the whole part of that story. In or near the surburban areas some of this may make sense. But this proposal for the 11 is ludicrous. What's basically being ignored is that the 11 gets decent ridership south of the Western Brown Line station and makes a good alternative for those of us who don't want to be crammed into the Brown Line. Not to mention they would practically be just short of cutting the whole darn route in this case. So I think you were a little too quick to say be glad they're not cutting entire route segments especially when by your admission you don't live in the city. And the 37 Sedwick as stated was done before when the former 37 Sedwick/Ogden was split into the 37 Sedwick and 38 Odgen/Taylor. It got folded into the 11 as it was thought or shall I say billed as more efficient delivery of service without cutting service. The 38 later got folded into the 157 route for simliar reasons.

[Guest ctafan630]

As far as the CTA proposing to combine the #122 with the #120, wouldn't it make more sense to combine the #122 with the #123 and reroute the #123 to serve both train stations via Canal during the PM rush?

[mkohut]

When you think about it.Another thing that is adding time to the routes is all the stop signs on the main streets.Are they all needed?I say it before and I will say it again add more buses isn't the entire solution.

[Busjack]

When you think about it.Another thing that is adding time to the routes is all the stop signs on the main streets.Are they all needed?I say it before and I will say it again add more buses isn't the entire solution.

However, CTA doesn't have jurisdiction over the stop signs, and FoxNewsChicago will be out there if the bus drivers start running them.

...

Also,what is the safety margin between trains?The loop elevator will be real tight on space.

I think you forgot that they reduced train service across the system 9% in 2010. Also, I'm pretty sure that a couple of more rush hour trains to alleviate crowding on them isn't going to bring out a new horde of wheelchair passengers.

[jajuan]

When you think about it.Another thing that is adding time to the routes is all the stop signs on the main streets.Are they all needed?I say it before and I will say it again add more buses isn't the entire solution.

I don't care about the stop signs. Buses still need to follow the traffice laws even if some car drivers blow them off. I want to know I'll still have a bus from A to B and that this will be well planned out. For example if we see the 11 get everything chopped off south of Western Brown Line to a miniscule knub of a route but say 64 or 69 are left to exist, then Houston we have a problem.

[mkohut]

I don't care about the stop signs. Buses still need to follow the traffice laws even if some car drivers blow them off. I want to know I'll still have a bus from A to B and that this will be well planned out. For example if we see the 11 get everything chopped off south of Western Brown Line to a miniscule knub of a route but say 64 or 69 are left to exist, then Houston we have a problem.

I agree with you the entire 11 is needed.Route 69 can be combine with 81W.

[Busjack]

For example if we see the 11 get everything chopped off south of Western Brown Line to a miniscule knub of a route but say 64 or 69 are left to exist, then Houston we have a problem.

That brings up the issue of that this seems to be a restructuring, as opposed to the 2005 political plan of just run Sunday service 7 days a week and pooh on the large swaths of the city that would have been eliminated by that.

On the other hand, 15 years later* and still nothing has been done about the Booz Allen recommendation to replace buses with community vehicles past Midway and on the far NW side. And it was said here that aldermanic pressure even prevented the consolidation of 55A and 55N.

I see from the home page that the CTA finally posted a press release, but if it is to solicit comment on the cuts, it doesn't say what they are, and basically assumes $16 million of almost free money to plow back into the overcrowded bus routes. I suppose that a notice of hearing with more specifics will have to come out within the next week.

The more interesting tidbit in the press release is:

It would also renegotiate or discontinue 9 contracted bus routes that the CTA subsidizes on behalf of corporate or institutional entities.

132 was mentioned in the Tribune, but how many others are there? 98, 154, 169, 170, 171, 172, 192 gets you close, but one short.** And I thought that CTA just renewed its contract with the U of C.

___________

*Those cuts are almost acknowledged by the statement in the press release that this "is the first system-wide, holistic review of CTA’s bus and rail service in 15 years."

**Second thought: Someone said last week that N201 was on the chopping block, and I said that Evanston Hospital should get its own shuttle. Is that the 9th?

[mkohut]

There is one thing interesting.If your starting a new Lasalle route.Why didn't they apply for new start funds?

[jajuan]

There is one thing interesting.If your starting a new Lasalle route.Why didn't they apply for new start funds?

The other interesting thing is that Claypool gets so frustrated with how long a Brown Line train was idling at the Sedwick station with folks trying to catch and get that train over waiting for the next that he complains to the station supervisor about the situation. Yet the supervisor gets a reprimand for sending an email saying no straggling at the station and to just get the passengers in and out the train as quick as possible and keep those trains moving even if it meant a person who didn't get the platform in time had to wait for the next train, which in rush hour would only take a few mins to come. Claypool experiences first hand a train sitting longer than needed trying to let in the stragglers yet the supervisor gets a blotch on his record for trying to put in a fix after the boss complains.

[BusHunter]

Adding 2 minutes on 270 isn't that bad.

Do they need 90N when 423 is duplicate service.

While some routes don't have have riders cutting 11 would make the Brown Line more pack.

I don't think adding the x routes back is the entire answer.They are still in traffic.

While the #270 issue is more a bus stops related issue. (the bus is at least running) If they did axe #90N, then they eliminate most of the service post rush, as #423 doesn't run but every hour NB after 6PM. (and only then til 7:40PM) As far as adding service to the #77 or #79, we need to ask how many buses can they put on one route? When the buses are lined up in a pack, all that happens is the pack gets greater. Running an X service puts two different packs of buses in service together running independently, this way buses won't get trapped behind the pack. But the main issue for CTA is that this will conflict with BRT, especially if introduced on the #9 or #49. They most likely don't want to go down that road especially if they plan on asking for premium fares to ride such service as BRT.

[Busjack]

There is one thing interesting.If your starting a new Lasalle route.Why didn't they apply for new start funds?

New Start is only rail or real BRT.

You might have meant JARC, but as discussed with regard to the 31st route, needs a 50% local match.

[mkohut]

New Start is only rail or real BRT.

You might have meant JARC, but as discussed with regard to the 31st route, needs a 50% local match.

Thank You for the correction.But,still they would only be useing half of the money they are planning to use for the route.