CTA Service Adjustments

[BusHunter]

So let me get this straight, they want to cut all LSD local service to Michigan Avenue between Irving Park and Belmont except for the #146? and north of Irving to the #148? (or a bus on each corridor) Looks like they'll be massive overcrowding there now unless they run buses through there like Red line trains. (every 3 minutes) The NW side also took a major hit losing the #56A,#90N,#69 and #64. (Where are the Aldermen?) Out of those 4 the #69 would be most questionable. Alot of riders use both the Cumberland Corridor and East River Corridor in the rush. Looks like they may lose the Cumberland riders as walking that is just as far as walking to the Blue line. Well that pretty much erases all the route increases done by Kruesi in 2006. It's funny whenever they do a route restructing we always lose routes. Reminds me of gas prices. Now as far as service frequency increases, alot of them on the north side are on the east-west service, which wasn't to bad to start out (unless your on the east end) What is really gone downhill since 2009 is the north-south service especially west of Central. 20-25 minutes is not ridiculous when waiting for a bus on the #91, #86 or #90. With the interlining of the #64 and #90N with the #90 all service became 20 minutes or greater except in rush periods. I would hope that will now change, but I'm not optimistic. BTW, I was reading somewhere (I think in that Tribune article again) that the Lakeview Commerce Commission is not pleased with the axe of #11. They claimed they fought the #11 getting canned before and won. Somewhere SW is cheering!! :lol:

[Amtrak41]

< So let me get this straight, they want to cut all LSD local service to Michigan Avenue between Irving Park and Belmont except for the #146? >

Page 8 of the pdf lists bus route frequency additions, and it includes the 151. So I could see some 145's becoming additional 147's, maybe more Belmont/Halsted flavors of the 151, less Devons.

[MetroShadow]

Out of all the privately own routes i can only see the 10 and probably the 33, 132 abd 169 surviving

A sign of my obliviousness: I didn't know 33 was contracted.

So let me get this straight, they want to cut all LSD local service to Michigan Avenue between Irving Park and Belmont except for the #146?

This logic was forced upon me when I was in high school (and the restructuring happened), and I'll modify it to reflect what I think now:

If you live on Wilson, you can get to the Red or Brown lines. (or the 146 and 151 if you're that far east). If you live on Clarendon, you either have the 146 (which I never liked taking because it takes too long) or the red line (which is crowded and delayed often).

and you have the crosstown routes to get to the lakefront.

I don't see this (and the Lincoln changes) lasting long.

[mkohut]

I would like to know where are going to get the extra train cars for the Brown Line to add service during Rush Hour.

[Busjack]

I would like to know where are going to get the extra train cars for the Brown Line to add service during Rush Hour.

I guess you missed the part of the article, which BusHunter quoted and said is no longer there--that they aren't going to retire rail cars as quickly as thought as the 5000s arrive. Then CTA messes around with car shifts and everyone is happy. Comparatively speaking, 70 some cars is a lot.

And, if you take BusHunter's other previous point, 22 5000s get freed up from the Pink Line rather soon.

[Busjack]

A sign of my obliviousness: I didn't know 33 was contracted.

That (and 10) were not on my list. Metra must be paying towards it.

This logic was forced upon me when I was in high school (and the restructuring happened), and I'll modify it to reflect what I think now:

If you live on Wilson, you can get to the Red or Brown lines. (or the 146 and 151 if you're that far east). If you live on Clarendon, you either have the 146 (which I never liked taking because it takes too long) or the red line (which is crowded and delayed often).

and you have the crosstown routes to get to the lakefront.

I don't see this (and the Lincoln changes) lasting long.

As I indicated before, they haven't said yet what the alternate service will be. Someone posted on the CTA Tattler that 144 didn't have ridership.

As far as Lincoln, due to operational problems running on angle streets (and one as crowded and has as many 6 way traffic lights as Lincoln), I'll make my prediction that it will turn out as Clybourn--10 years later people are still crying that it should be reinstated, and CTA has JARC and other applications to do so, but it has not.

If CTA is going to put resources anywhere, I bet that it will be to bring some X routes back, even though faux BRT does not qualify for 5309 funding any longer.

[mkohut]

I guess you missed the part of the article, which BusHunter quoted and said is no longer there--that they aren't going to retire rail cars as quickly as thought as the 5000s arrive. Then CTA messes around with car shifts and everyone is happy. Comparatively speaking, 70 some cars is a lot.

And, if you take BusHunter's other previous point, 22 5000s get freed up from the Pink Line rather soon.

They are useing a run from Midway and 2 runs from the Purple line in Am rush.The yard can only hold 160.So again where are the extra train cars comeing from

[Busjack]

They are useing a run from Midway and 2 runs from the Purple line in Am rush.The yard can only hold 160.So again where are the extra train cars comeing from

If you mean what yard, maybe you should look at the 5000s arrive thread at the end. And think and use a spell checker before posting.

[jajuan]

That (and 10) were not on my list. Metra must be paying towards it.

As I indicated before, they haven't said yet what the alternate service will be. Someone posted on the CTA Tattler that 144 didn't have ridership.

As far as Lincoln, due to operational problems running on angle streets (and one as crowded and has as many 6 way traffic lights as Lincoln), I'll make my prediction that it will turn out as Clybourn--10 years later people are still crying that it should be reinstated, and CTA has JARC and other applications to do so, but it has not.

If CTA is going to put resources anywhere, I bet that it will be to bring some X routes back, even though faux BRT does not qualify for 5309 funding any longer.

10 is contracted by the Museum of Science and Industry. The person you mention must not be riding the same 144 route as I do because I can tell you that person is wrong. As for the 11, having ridden the route the traffic signals last no longer than on a grid street and the key difference between it and the former Clybourn route is the fact that you have all those businesses along Lincoln as opposed to Clybourn being a mostly residential street so the comparison doesn't exactly line up especially when at the time of its demise the Clybourn route ran empty during all its time of service while it's not necessarily true of the Lincoln route. Plus besides the fact pointed out that the Brown Line doesn't really parallel this route directly, the Brown Line is just a nightmare to ride because of the massive overcrowding and I don't see adding a few trains in over the course of the day changing that all that much.

[Busjack]

..difference between it and the former Clybourn route is the fact that you have all those businesses along Lincoln as opposed to Clybourn being a mostly residential street...

Since the bus was south of Belmont in later years, and the JARC application is from Logan Square, and says that the justification is "an estimated 400-600 businesses on the route" as well as a job training center, I question that conclusion.

I think it was discussed earlier in this forum that the main change was the construction of big box stores in that corridor, but because they were big boxes, bus riders probably would not be willing to walk across the parking lots.

[BusHunter]

I would like to know where are going to get the extra train cars for the Brown Line to add service during Rush Hour.

Maybe he means where are they going to stick 2 or 3 extra trains on the line. The Brown line already has excessive trains. Better yet how is Tower 18 going to handle 2 extra trains from each line? This is probably going to result in backups. That's what happens when they run 5 lines through 1 intersection. No wonder everyone takes the Red line. :lol:

[Busjack]

Maybe he means where are they going to stick 2 or 3 extra trains on the line. The Brown line already has excessive trains. Better yet how is Tower 18 going to handle 2 extra trains from each line? This is probably going to result in backups. That's what happens when they run 5 lines through 1 intersection. No wonder everyone takes the Red line.

Oh, bottlenecks.

However, prior to this, the Brown Line was running 6 car trains, and then was constrained by 3 track and the cutbacks, even though the Brown Line project was supposed to add capacity.

At the time the Brown Line project started, and the base order of 206 was announced, I said this meant that ~140 cars would replace 2200s and the other ~60 cars were needed for fleet expansion, if ~144 cars on 6 car trains then assigned to the Brown Line would need to be expanded 33% to make those trains 8 car trains. Obviously, that didn't happen, but if in fact they didn't expand capacity as a result of the project, were were sold another bill of goods.

Also, the downtown signal project was supposed to improve matters at Tower 18.

[BusHunter]

Another thing to take in consideration is if they axe the #144, #145, how many artics does that make available elsewhere. I doubt there all going to the #148. Maybe there's a stronger push to get them on the local service. The 100 artics on order will be tied up with the Dan Ryan next year, so if there looking for a quick fix that's not it. As far as all this NW side cutting and U of C cutting, I can see now why they don't need the Optimas. There's no service left suitable for them anymore. :lol:

[Busjack]

... As far as all this NW side cutting and U of C cutting, I can see now why they don't need the Optimas. There's no service left suitable for them anymore.

On most of the contractor ones, not yet clear whether this is a ploy to get more money, especially out of the U of C. But, as I indicated earlier, U of C could just as easily dump CTA.

The only NW cut that could have much relevance to this is 90N; rest is a bus here and there. Now, if they were doing cuts like threatened in 2005, and cut stuff like 54A and 85A, where the Optimas usually run, that would be something.

[BusHunter]

On most of the contractor ones, not yet clear whether this is a ploy to get more money, especially out of the U of C. But, as I indicated earlier, U of C could just as easily dump CTA.

The only NW cut that could have much relevance to this is 90N; rest is a bus here and there. Now, if they were doing cuts like threatened in 2005, and cut stuff like 54A and 85A, where the Optimas usually run, that would be something.

With the #90N and #64 being interlined with the #90, they no longer are Optima suitable anyway. But how can they run Optimas on #81W if that's going to do #69 service? #54A runs them the most now, but most of the time, that's only on half the service. #85A is too crowded for them now, but they still use 1 here and there. In hindsight I wonder how much cheaper it would have been if they had ordered buses like Pace paratransits versus these. Seems like it's working for them. These buses are going to go down as the buses retired with the least mileage on them.

[Busjack]

With the #90N and #64 being interlined with the #90, they no longer are Optima suitable anyway. But how can they run Optimas on #81W if that's going to do #69 service? #54A runs them the most now, but most of the time, that's only on half the service. #85A is too crowded for them now, but they still use 1 here and there. In hindsight I wonder how much cheaper it would have been if they had ordered buses like Pace paratransits versus these. Seems like it's working for them. These buses are going to go down as the buses retired with the least mileage on them.

You keep sending me in all sorts of directions:

• For the most part, you are confirming that CTA can't effectively use a smaller bus, even if the passenger load isn't there, because of interlining, etc.
• But I am not sure where you are going with the paratransit vehicle angle. Sure, a paratransit at about $100K is cheaper than an 30 foot bus at about $300K. But if you are saying that CTA should have bought paratransits in 2004 or thereabouts, then you have the questions that (1) if there is a disabled passenger, the driver would have to take the time to operate the lift, and (2) since most are 16 seats with 4 seats lost for each wheelchair position in use, I can't see how they would be adequate for any CTA fixed route service. Other than the anomaly of paratransits on 895, Pace uses them (other than in paratransit service) for real dinky routes like 668, 669, call and ride, and community transit. I had mentioned that the Booz-Allen recommendation for community transit hasn't been implemented 15 years later, nor that there is any indication that it will be.

[Guest]

Im not surprised by the proposed elimination of Routes #56A, 69, 90N, 49A and especially #17 Westchester. We shouldnt even have a route deep in Pace territory. I think its about time CTA cut that route. There was no need for it.

[Busjack]

Im not surprised by the proposed elimination of Routes #56A, 69, 90N, 49A and especially #17 Westchester. We shouldnt even have a route deep in Pace territory. I think its about time CTA cut that route. There was no need for it.

With regard to 49A, it was made supplementary to Pace in 1997, but apparently now isn't even needed for that.

I think 56A gets some blowback, given BusHunter's observation that 270 is supposed to run express during the rush hour, and mine that it became Posted Stops Only and is supposed to become ART. I was somewhat surprised that it was kept as supplementary to Pace during the midday, but I think that one needs more thought, or the unthinkable of CTA actually talking to Pace (see my prior comments in the discussion with RJL, starting about here).

I've said before that if the rationale for 17 was the CRT ran there 65 years ago, there isn't much more rationale for 97 being CTA rather than Pace (other than Howard being the boundary).

[jajuan]

Another thing to take in consideration is if they axe the #144, #145, how many artics does that make available elsewhere. I doubt there all going to the #148. Maybe there's a stronger push to get them on the local service. The 100 artics on order will be tied up with the Dan Ryan next year, so if there looking for a quick fix that's not it. As far as all this NW side cutting and U of C cutting, I can see now why they don't need the Optimas. There's no service left suitable for them anymore.

Well they wouldn't get any artics freed up from the 144 if that's the premise because it doesn't really use any except for maybe one or two seen every blue moon in either of the rush periods. And since the 148 doesn't use them in the AM rush what you free up from the 145 would probably be more significant in the PM rush into the evening hours. Before that what you're freeing up is whatever number Kedzie is currently using to handle the AM rush SB short trippers plus the 3 or 4 it uses to cover all of the midday period service. Either way though neither 144 or 145 truly measure as being low ridership which is part of the spin CTA is using in putting them on the chopping block.

[jajuan]

Since the bus was south of Belmont in later years, and the JARC application is from Logan Square, and says that the justification is "an estimated 400-600 businesses on the route" as well as a job training center, I question that conclusion.

I think it was discussed earlier in this forum that the main change was the construction of big box stores in that corridor, but because they were big boxes, bus riders probably would not be willing to walk across the parking lots.

Sorry was thinking of the wrong portion of that route. Was mistakenly thinking of the Elston leg. But you do bring up another big difference with that route snd the 11. The businesses on Lincoln are restaurants, specialty shops and other various business located in storefronts lining a significant portion of the street from the Lincoln Park area on up to where Lincoln cuts off at Western near the Brown Line station. Plus there's a significant number of events and festivals in that section of the current Lincoln route that draws service to the 11. Just from this route alone seeing a cut, they've already broken the premises for making their proposed changes. There are plenty of other routes that qualify as "low ridership" more than the present form of the 11, and though the Brown Line crosses this route as several spots neither are direct parallels to each other.

[Busjack]

.. The businesses on Lincoln are restaurants, specialty shops and other various business located in storefronts lining a significant portion of the street from the Lincoln Park area on up to where Lincoln cuts off at Western near the Brown Line station. .... Just from this route alone seeing a cut, they've already broken the premises for making their proposed changes. There are plenty of other routes that qualify as "low ridership" more than the present form of the 11, and though the Brown Line crosses this route as several spots neither are direct parallels to each other.

Someone posted on the CTA Tattler that the elderly contingent will be aggrieved. However, I wonder enough to flood a public hearing and whether CTA would actually listen to them.

I'm sure CTA is already set on "if we don't get the $16 million this way, then [bleep] the enhancements."Even though the rest of us could probably come up with something, but we aren't the NU Traffic Institute.

[jajuan]

Someone posted on the CTA Tattler that the elderly contingent will be aggrieved. However, I wonder enough to flood a public hearing and whether CTA would actually listen to them.

I'm sure CTA is already set on "if we don't get the $16 million this way, then [bleep] the enhancements."Even though the rest of us could probably come up with something, but we aren't the NU Traffic Institute.

Which brings me to my other thought of why is it they keep putting so much weight on the word of consultants who may not necessarily even use the system or any form of transit for that matter but input from those helping to pay half their operating costs (is it still true that 51% of their operations has to come from fares?) and experiencing the system firsthand means zilch.

[MetroShadow]

My guess.

[Busjack]

Emanuel Defends CTA Changes: Article actually has him using the word Pace. I don't believe it.

[sw4400]

If we're talking about cutting parallel bus service, why not the #9 definitely at 95th, and maybe some of the other stops nearby. The Red Line can transport the passengers to/from their destinations. What's fair is fair, Emanuel and Claypool.