CTA Service Adjustments

[jajuan]

In this case mkohut is correct.

Maybe someone ought to talk to Brian Steele about where are the schedules, as nothing was revealed here. The stuff under the Service Changes effective Dec. 16 anchor is preexisting info, except CTA acknowledges a brochure. For routes assumed by Pace, we knew that Pace had prepared a brochure. Maybe new is that on the alternate routes, CTA says "Service Changes brochure & detailed timetables are coming soon."

Yeah the generalities and platitudes are old news. No one denied that part. The point is in some spots they gave a few more specifics. Are we saying that before today it was known that southbound 148 for example would mirror that of 144 downtown? The only change they mentioned before was that they were pulling the route from Wilson and directing it instead to Marine Drive north of Lawrence. Or that the contract routes are now no longer given as a definite to be eliminated? Before today the implication was that they were all but gone yet now they are NOT listed under the Service Changes Effective Dec. 16 section giving an implication now that Claypool in all his ineptitude was maybe successful in renegotiating the subsidies. Or how about the 28 going into downtown during rush hours? First bus to head into downtown in the PM is given as 3:20PM. Current X28 does so at 1:40PM. So that amounts to a time change there. So not everything is completely old news. In fact the 'Service Changes Effective Dec. 16' section wasn't actually there before today. Only the pdf versions of the late summer presentation along with the accompanying maps of proposed changes.

[See Tea Eh]

The contract routes still have a contract, and unless that contract expired on December 16, CTA is still obligated to run them.

A news article linked from the front page, for example, mentions that the 170, 171 and 172 will be discontinued in August, so presumably that's when the U of C contract expires.

[Busjack]

The contract routes still have a contract, and unless that contract expired on December 16, CTA is still obligated to run them.

A news article linked from the front page, for example, mentions that the 170, 171 and 172 will be discontinued in August, so presumably that's when the U of C contract expires.

I had mentioned earlier that at the same August meeting whee the plan was rammed through, the CTA Board approved an ordinance approving a contract with the U of C amending the agreement so that the U of C would pay $83.07/hour, extending the term to Aug., 2013, and that:

If an agreement is not reached with the University by August 31, 2013, to increase the compensation for services provided to $106.00 per service hour, the routes will be eliminated at that time.

So, this was on the public record since September.

The only thing new is the link on the home page from The Maroon (as you noted), the U of C apparently told CTA to stick the latter.

[CURRENTZ_09]

Pacebus.com uploaded their reduction plan brochure explaining their service changes

[jesi2282]

Not sure if this was posted, but CTA has also uploaded their new schedules...

[CURRENTZ_09]

Not sure if this was posted, but CTA has also uploaded their new schedules...

Service brochures up for the 11/37 & the 148 reconfiguration so far, looks like they are also going to do a general brochure aside from these.

http://www.transitchicago.com/travel_information/service_changes/201212ptrc_timetables.aspx

Advance Scheduling is also uploaded. Rail Timetables will be Updated december 9th, December 16th will be showtime for the buses

[jajuan]

Glancing the advanced schedule for the 94, apparently that route goes completely to 74th because there are no NB trips that end at Chicago/Kedzie instead of Chicago/Troy, which are currently Chicago garage pull in trips. Also NB trips will end at 10:55 approximately instead of the current 12:15am while the SB trips will end at 11:50 approximately instead of the current 11:10 approximate last trip time.

Also noticed on the advance 28 schedule they forgot to remove the mention of addition rush hour service provided by route X28 notation on the bottom of the schedule map. And new 148 routing southbound still shown to be all on Michigan downtown when the website mentioned southbound service would operate on State Street south of Wacker.

[artthouwill]

The point made in his post is that the CTA is giving exact and solid details beyond just the vague overviews of how they're changing service. For example, the new version of the 148 will operate on State south of Wacker during the AM rush as the 144 currently does. That's something they didn't tell the public before. One other thing of note is that they now make no mention of discontinuing the contract/private routes. They only list the 48 routes that get bumped up service (though still with no details of how beyond decreasing intervals) and more specific details on the regular routes that are completely eliminated or get split into two routes and those that get rerouted to compensate partially for what's eliminated.

Based on the posted map for the new 148, this is not true. It will operate SB on Michigan in a.m. rush to Congress, and NB in p.m rush on State between Congress and Wacker.

It looks like they have scaled back the hours of operation for the downtown portion of the (X)28 Stony Island.

There are some routes that schedules have not been posted for yet, most are routes that have owl service, though the new 111 schedule is among that group.

Update. Looking at notices in rail stations, it indicates 148 will not operate on Michigan south of Wacker

[jajuan]

Based on the posted map for the new 148, this is not true. It will operate SB on Michigan in a.m. rush to Congress, and NB in p.m rush on State between Congress and Wacker.

It looks like they have scaled back the hours of operation for the downtown portion of the (X)28 Stony Island.

There are some routes that schedules have not been posted for yet, most are routes that have owl service, though the new 111 schedule is among that group.

If you read the 148 section under the "Service Changes Effective December 16th" section of the De-crowding plan page you'll see where they mentioned that the routing would be on State Street. So either they gave incorrect info on the de-crowding page or the map on the schedule is in error. And yes they have the downtown Stony Island service starting one hour, ten mins later SB and one hour, twenty minutes later NB in the PM rush.

[jajuan]

Well we won't have to worry about the 1 being misnamed anymore. The route name is changing to Bronzeville/Union Station.

[mkohut]

I'm confuse why is there a need to make a change in Route 154 .

To my knowledge Baseball Season doesn't start til April

[Busjack]

Well we won't have to worry about the 1 being misnamed anymore. The route name is changing to Bronzeville/Union Station.

At least confirms what I said the purpose of the route was, although the question is whether that purpose is valid.

Also, to pick up on a Pace point, CTA published a unified schedule for 63W/386. Two 63Ws and one 386 per half hour means every 10 minute service in the afternoon from Midway. As predicted, morning service is not affected.

[MetroShadow]

I'm confuse why is there a need to make a change in Route 154 .

To my knowledge Baseball Season doesn't start til April

School trippers during the off-season (presumably out of NP)

[renardo870]

If you read the 148 section under the "Service Changes Effective December 16th" section of the De-crowding plan page you'll see where they mentioned that the routing would be on State Street. So either they gave incorrect info on the de-crowding page or the map on the schedule is in error. And yes they have the downtown Stony Island service starting one hour, ten mins later SB and one hour, twenty minutes later NB in the PM rush.

So is the 28 Downtown ridership low between 230 and 4pm from Union Station, thus being the reason to decrease service?

[Busjack]

So is the 28 Downtown ridership low between 230 and 4pm from Union Station, thus being the reason to decrease service?

One would think so, in that I doubt there is very little reason to go from, say 93rd and Stony Island to Union Station.

Anyway, the buses pretty much now must have passenger counters (the 4 lasers at the side of the door openings) with gps capability, so the data should be there regarding the time and location of boardings and exiting if CTA knows how to crunch it.

[renardo870]

Speaking of De-Crowding, what happened to the proposed 83rd St bus route? Wasn't that a route that would have taken some of the load from 79th and 87th from the east side to at least the Red line or that Wal-mart on 85th/Holland? And I guess those X routes wouldn't be helpful, either? I mean the former X3, X4, X9, X20, X49, 53AL, X54, X55, X80 did help take the loads of the locals. I thought those routes worked pretty well.

[Busjack]

Speaking of De-Crowding, what happened to the proposed 83rd St bus route?...

One of many JARC proposals for which CTA did not come up with the matching funds.

Interestingly, one of the proposals listed on the JARC/New Freedom page is to extend the hours of 1 Indiana-Hyde Park, but instead that route was cut back.

[renardo870]

One of many JARC proposals for which CTA did not come up with the matching funds.

Interestingly, one of the proposals listed on the JARC/New Freedom page is to extend the hours of 1 Indiana-Hyde Park, but instead that route was cut back.

Yes I remember those proposals. So in saving up to $16 million without costing taxpayers money, CTA couldn't implement any of the JARC or bring back the X routes? But they cut the 1, 11 into the 11 and 37, eliminate the 17/49A/56A/64/69/90N/122/123/129/144/145, fold the X28 back into the 28 but cut about 2 hrs of the downtown service? Only smart thing that was done was letting PACE take over 17 Westchester, 49A So Western And 56A No Milwaukee and coordinating 63W/386 and 95W/381. I was looking on some of the advanced schedules and I really cant tell how services was beefed up except some earlier/later service on the 6, 14, 18, 146. *HEAD SCRATCHING*

[Busjack]

... I was looking on some of the advanced schedules and I really cant tell how services was beefed up except some earlier/later service on the 6, 14, 18, 146. *HEAD SCRATCHING*

The only thing relevant to the stated purpose of decrowding during rush hour would be the schedule entries such as "then every 3 to 7 minutes until...," which don't really disclose anything.

The other question is of the type whether 146 got more service because 144 and 145 were canceled, but that schedule isn't up yet. When it comes up, one would have to compare the intervals in the before and after schedules.

As I previously mentioned, BusAngel was proved out with respect to the later service, but I don't see how that is consistent with the stated purpose of the exercise.

[Busjack]

I'm confuse why is there a need to make a change in Route 154 .

To my knowledge Baseball Season doesn't start til April

CTA says that routes with schedules that are not changing are not listed, but that appears to be darn few of them.

Also interesting is that a preview 132 schedule is listed, so Wrigley must have paid up. 10 doesn't appear on either list, so a similar inference could be made about the Museum of Science and Industry.

[mkohut]

I don't know about any buddy else. But,I'm not impress with some of the changes.

Example first bus 6am,then next one 620 am on 148.This is a Route they claim there adding service.Then you got other Routes where all your doing is adding later trips.

[jajuan]

CTA says that routes with schedules that are not changing are not listed, but that appears to be darn few of them.

Also interesting is that a preview 132 schedule is listed, so Wrigley must have paid up. 10 doesn't appear on either list, so a similar inference could be made about the Museum of Science and Industry.

Yes from the looks of it the only privately funded routes that are confirmed to be on the way out are the 170s at the end of their contract next August. The interesting thing is that The Chicago Maroon makes no mention of the 192 going anywhere. So is it possible that U of C balked at paying more to keep the routes serving the students but the Hospital had enough clout to get them to keep 192 going? As for BusAngel's predictions this time around, I bowed out of making a comment this time because I remember when I challenged him on the change to the 48 to go to Evergreen Plaza while ending at Western Orange Line on the north end on similar grounds as he got challenged this time only to have that prediction from him bear out also.

[Busjack]

..The interesting thing is that The Chicago Maroon makes no mention of the 192 going anywhere. So is it possible that U of C balked at paying more to keep the routes serving the students but the Hospital had enough clout to get them to keep 192 going? ...

The other possibility is that since The Maroon is a student newspaper, and it is indicated that the students had some planning role with regard to the 170s, it didn't care about 192.

For that matter, (in addition to 10) 33 and X98 are not on either list. I mentioned inference before, and someone else mentioned that the contract expiration date might not have come up yet (although it is possible that the contracts had 30 day termination notice provisions). If one wants to read tea leaves, consider this from the "service cut" list: "Changes go into effect on Sunday, December 16, 2012."

Also, the advance schedule list says:

We routinely adjust schedules several times each year to help make service operate more efficiently and to account for seasonal ridership patterns. Additionally, these updates reflect new increases to service and service changes related to our Plan to Reduce Crowding.

So, maybe the additional trips added to the service span are related to some other change, but one would think that CTA would have to explain where it got the resources to do that.

[jajuan]

The other possibility is that since The Maroon is a student newspaper, and it is indicated that the students had some planning role with regard to the 170s, it didn't care about 192.

For that matter, (in addition to 10) 33 and X98 are not on either list. I mentioned inference before, and someone else mentioned that the contract expiration date might not have come up yet (although it is possible that the contracts had 30 day termination notice provisions). If one wants to read tea leaves, consider this from the "service cut" list: "Changes go into effect on Sunday, December 16, 2012."

Also, the advance schedule list says:

So, maybe the additional trips added to the service span are related to some other change, but one would think that CTA would have to explain where it got the resources to do that.

Yes you would think they'd have to explain the source of resource for perceived expansions. They do seem to have given later hours to a few routes beyond rush hour increases which would make one question if the eliminated routes and route segments was enough to do both of these. The whole adding 17 daily rail trips and beefing up resources on 48 routes on the bus side with the focus on supposedly on rush hour didn't seem to add up with what they were cutting back. Even with 144 and 145 being among the heavier used routes on the supposedly low ridership routes eliminated, because they aren't in fact low ridership, doesn't help account for it.

[Busjack]

... Even with 144 and 145 being among the heavier used routes on the supposedly low ridership routes eliminated, because they aren't in fact low ridership, doesn't help account for it.

However, in those cases, it depends on what was picked up by 146 and 148. It may come down to what was saved not operating on Wilson Ave.

What is happening in this regard may not be obvious, such as it not being evident in the early stages that the real effect of the 28/X28 changes was that the downtown hours were reduced.*

___

*Paragraph rephrased.