CTA Service Adjustments

[jajuan]

I still think it is undoing placating the elderly who were complaining about losing "half their buses" because only 146 ran south of Irving Park (or Mark Grace). The theory then must have been just relabel some 146s as 145s and increase the frequency a bit.

Getting a bit off topic, if you want to talk number creep, how about Jeffery going from 5/5A to 5/6 to 6 to 14/15? No substantive change the first time, was the last time. For that matter, 153 became "145 Local" (and I believe there was also a "146 Local") until all became full time express. Of course, part of 153 was incorporated into 151.

As far as Wilson not needing all that service, I can see that (there is no longer 156 Wilson-LaSalle), but the number of bus routes was cited as a reason for redoing Wilson station, although I think that it being an obsolete dump with an incomprehensible track pattern from when the line ended there is a sufficient reason in itself.

I think you'd have a lot of people living west of that obsolete dump who work and play downtown that would disagree. The number of folks who board at the stops on the whole Wilson leg is comparable to boardings along Clarendon and the short sprint on Irving Park.

But speaking on the number creep I always wondered how those on the board old enough to remember 5/5A, 5/6 etc and 153 and so dealt with all that. It sounds like it was a bit confusing. Just I like I understand from researching CTA service from 30 years ago and beyond that what survives as the "Pullman" portion of the current 111 used to be a apart of the 34 as one of it's many multiple branches back then before becoming the present 34, the defunct 104, the Pullman leg of the 111 that changed that route from a two direction closed loop, and the 119. Just like the CTA today has probably gone overboard with a separate and multiple route numbers for the same service, back then it seemed to get carried away with too many variations and branches under one route number.

[mkohut]

I think you'd have a lot of people living west of that obsolete dump who work and play downtown that would disagree. The number of folks who board at the stops on the whole Wilson leg is comparable to boardings along Clarendon and the short sprint on Irving Park.

Does the CTA have a back up plan to add all the service without makeing all the cuts?

[jajuan]

Does the CTA have a back up plan to add all the service without makeing all the cuts?

Doubtful when the list of routes proposed for removal or a split into separate routes already in one way or another breaks the premise of reducing service duplication or overcrowding and/or the route being low ridership.

[sw4400]

Looks like the #11 Lincoln/Sedgwick route won't be eliminated between Western and Fullerton without a fight. The Lakeview Chamber Of Commerce has launched a campaign to save the route. (Story)

[Busjack]

Does the CTA have a back up plan to add all the service without makeing all the cuts?

Basically the claim was that $16 million has to be taken out of the system to pay for $16 million of enhancements, resulting in "no cost to the taxpayers" according to Frosty the Claypool.

So, unless you are willing to kick in the $16 million.......

[Sam92]

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.

We also still have the artics from the 425 bus order that will also start coming in this year in addition to the 100 from Seattle. No doubt they will pop up on routes like the 3, 4, 79. Then possibly 49, 66, 72, 77, 87, 26, 34 and 119. I've already seen artics running the 66 this summer for events although they were North Park runs ( artics 4169 and 4170)

[Amtrak41]

Looks like the #11 Lincoln/Sedgwick route won't be eliminated between Western and Fullerton without a fight. The Lakeview Chamber Of Commerce has launched a campaign to save the route. (Story)

Well maybe the Western-Fullerton chunk of the 11 can be handled by a 20-minute interval shuttle with a couple of the little Optima buses if the loads are so bad.

Likewise, use those buses for a 36 Broadway Shuttle between Diversey and Addison post midnight until 2 or 3am on Fridays and Saturdays nites given the lively scene Boystown has always been. For the last year, there have also been a lot of stabbings/muggings along the cross streets at those times getting to LSD or Halsted for the 151 and 8. Some people do have strange shifts and have to travel at those times.

Local business community should be asked to kick in something if they want it.

[BusHunter]

I took a look at the July 2012 bus ridership report, to digest myself just how many riders are going to put where when the cuts happen. I also examined the ridership to see what cut is justified and what's not, by the numbers. In most cases, the cuts are justified on some of the lowest ridership routes, but some are not. I wonder how do they justify keeping the #55A and #55N when there total ridership (both routes) equals #56A? Also the #165 ridership is paltry at 60-70 riders a weekday. One of the lowest counts in the city. Looking at the #144 ridership, that is the weakest of the #144 - #146 ridership. But the #148 is the second weakest. Obviously the Irving Pk to Belmont corridor has got alot of ridership. I think how this may turn out is that the #148 is going to have to go locally to Belmont to make sense, because you'll have the #148 not so crowded and the #146 packed. Looking at the numbers, maybe I would've cut from Wilson/Clarendon west, because that seems like the weakest part of the route and in most cases those riders do have the Red and Brown lines to fall back on. So that's the two changes I'd make there. Now as far as the cutting of #122, #123 this could also be a mistake. The ridership on #120, #121 is going to rise by 50-60 percent which makes me think artics, but how do you drive an artic on lower wacker? It might not be bad for the navy pier crowd as they get the bus first according to the new routing, but in many cases the wacker drive crowd is going to be crowded out. So I guess we'll see what happens in December!!

[Busjack]

We also still have the artics from the 425 bus order that will also start coming in this year in addition to the 100 from Seattle.

As I indicated earlier, there seems to be a strange coincidence to getting the 100 from the Seattle options starting at the end of this year thru the middle of next and the need for 100 for the Red Line shutdown. Hence, any relief as a result of these will have to await Dec. 2013.

As discussed with sw, with the bid opening delayed on the 425 buses until October 9, the earliest the contract could be approved is the Nov. 14 board meeting, and it usually takes a year from then for deliveries to start. Not to mention that another red notice delaying the due date could be posted.

So, these are not going to afford relief in time for the Dec. 2012 restructuring, although the intent of the 200 artics was to reduce crowding.

So I guess we'll see what happens in December!!

Fair enough. I had noted earlier that using ridership report statistics doesn't mean much considering a rush hour variant such as 165. The question is whether the Clever Device shows boardings per trip.

[CURRENTZ_09]

Here is a Transit Guide giving you the proposed December 16th Changes by route detailed

CTA Service Adjustments Effective December 16th, 2012.pdf

[BusExpert32]

Most of these changes are not going to fly. I'm starting to wonder how small of a number of routes will actually be approved to change by the CTA board.

[jajuan]

I took a look at the July 2012 bus ridership report, to digest myself just how many riders are going to put where when the cuts happen. I also examined the ridership to see what cut is justified and what's not, by the numbers. In most cases, the cuts are justified on some of the lowest ridership routes, but some are not. I wonder how do they justify keeping the #55A and #55N when there total ridership (both routes) equals #56A? Also the #165 ridership is paltry at 60-70 riders a weekday. One of the lowest counts in the city. Looking at the #144 ridership, that is the weakest of the #144 - #146 ridership. But the #148 is the second weakest. Obviously the Irving Pk to Belmont corridor has got alot of ridership. I think how this may turn out is that the #148 is going to have to go locally to Belmont to make sense, because you'll have the #148 not so crowded and the #146 packed. Looking at the numbers, maybe I would've cut from Wilson/Clarendon west, because that seems like the weakest part of the route and in most cases those riders do have the Red and Brown lines to fall back on. So that's the two changes I'd make there. Now as far as the cutting of #122, #123 this could also be a mistake. The ridership on #120, #121 is going to rise by 50-60 percent which makes me think artics, but how do you drive an artic on lower wacker? It might not be bad for the navy pier crowd as they get the bus first according to the new routing, but in many cases the wacker drive crowd is going to be crowded out. So I guess we'll see what happens in December!!

But the other premise of this change is to reduce some of the crowds on the trains. So how does shifting people from one or more LSD routes that although may have the smallest riderships of the north LSD routes still have pretty decent riderships to the point of being full bus loads to packed to the gills over to the Red and Brown Lines accomplish that exactly. As I said this list just doesn't fly. You alreadly sited one flaw and how they break one or more of their justifications for the routes they chose. And not only that 144 and 148 are rush only peak direction routes so the ridership reports as Busjack points out wouldn't mean as much for routes of that nature.

Edited August 26, 2012 by jajuan

[CURRENTZ_09]

Isn't this also the start date when the Jeffery BRT begins operating? Im starting to think that this is another press release session in December about more CTA changes, just like they hinted these service changes when the Morse Station reopened.

[CURRENTZ_09]

Most of these changes are not going to fly. I'm starting to wonder how small of a number of routes will actually be approved to change by the CTA board.

I think most will pass, when you the mayor behind it, know that it's going to happen 90% intact

[Busjack]

Isn't this also the start date when the Jeffery BRT begins operating? Im starting to think that this is another press release session in December about more CTA changes, just like they hinted these service changes when the Morse Station reopened.

CTA says November, but there were newspaper articles that CDOT won't get its work done on time.

And, unless you are being paid by Molly Sullivan, I don't think the rest of us care for propaganda, I mean CTA Press Release season.

[CURRENTZ_09]

CTA says November, but there were newspaper articles that CDOT won't get its work done on time.

And, unless you are being paid by Molly Sullivan, I don't think the rest of us care for propaganda, I mean CTA Press Release season.

Well this piece of propaganda got everybody's attention, so i think when they make a statement or press release just pay close attention, because stuff like this creeps up behind you out of the blue

[Busjack]

But the other premise of this change is to reduce some of the crowds on the trains. So how does shifting people from one or more LSD routes that although may have the smallest riderships of the north LSD routes still have pretty decent riderships to the point of being full bus loads to packed to the gills over to the Red and Brown Lines accomplish that exactly. As I said this list just doesn't fly. You alreadly sited one flaw and how they break one or more of their justifications for the routes they chose. And not only that 144 and 148 are rush only peak direction routes so the ridership reports as Busjack points out wouldn't mean as much for routes of that nature.

The issue essentially is that they beefed up the routes in question apparently now to be cut because of Three Track, and because people didn't buy Kruesi's original statement "just find some other way." Then, while they put 8 car trains on the Brown Line, they apparently did not restore frequency, and then there was the 9% cut on the rapid transit system wide in 2010. Now they say they are adding trains requiring 78 more cars. So, maybe they are trying to get passengers back on the more efficient mode.

Maybe a bigger question is whether they are now undoing the North LSD restructuring. In effect, they undid about 30% of the south one by cancelling the X3 and X4 buses, and undid about 90% of the west side one by cancelling X9 (along with X49), X20, X54, and 127 Circulator. About all that's left of that one is the combining or whatever of 21 and 25 (eventually resulting in the reduction of Pace service) and extension of 90, which doesn't directly benefit anyone on the west side of Chicago.

[Busjack]

I think most will pass, when you the mayor behind it, know that it's going to happen 90% intact

Of course, because this is Chicago. But it gives lie to your previous assertion of "be thankful they are holding a public hearing first." After all, you said you attended a Red Line one and it was a farce.

OT, but let's see how much more Emanuel gives on the teachers' negotiations.

Well this piece of propaganda got everybody's attention, so i think when they make a statement or press release just pay close attention, because stuff like this creeps up behind you out of the blue

Apparently, for out of the Blue, we have leakers. Apparently none for this story.

In this case, the first source seems to be the Tribune (at least based on the Google feed on the home page), or Kevin doing a better search through transitchicago.com than the rest of us did. While you started this thread, you never said your source, and I had to find it. If you got some heads up from Brian Steele before the Tribune did, give us your source.

Basically, over the last decade, the Press Releases have been propaganda, unless they can be used as admissions against interest. The Financial Reports are worse.

[sw4400]

I looked up the blog from the Lakeview Chamber of Commerce regarding the #11 Lincoln/Sedgwick split, and they bring up very vaild points as to why this route should be saved, most notably the businesses that would be affected(mine as well, as a lot of our daily customers use the #11 to get closer to our store and walk less)

From the blog:

"The #11 Lincoln Avenue bus service is critical to the Western side of Lakeview. Economic growth and new business development abounds on Lincoln Avenue right now. Did you know that nearly 150 jobs have been added on Lincoln Avenue between Belmont and Diversey since the beginning of the year? A local logistics firm is adding 125 jobs while new restaurants and retailers are beginning to fill in some store fronts which have been vacant for years. Additionally, existing businesses are investing in their own properties with façade improvements and interior renovations.

The local work force and consumers rely on the #11 Bus to get them to this area of Lincoln Avenue. The elimination of bus service here may squash Lincoln Avenue's Renaissance.

Save The #11 Petition

The #11 Lincoln/Sedgwick bus is an important hub in this business district that would drive customers away if the split where no bus service between Fullerton and Western were to occur. One big example is my job is located less than a 1/4 block from two Lincoln stops as opposed to 4-6 blocks if the Brown Line is the only option from Irving Park and Montrose. Businesses would be heavily affected on the loss of this route between Fullerton and Western.

[wesmich]

^

This is what I use 11 for. Not to mention that it is also the starting point that matters as well. I have a 1 block walk to Lincoln but a five block walk to the brown line. Going to store 4 or 5 blocks away from a brown line stop, I just take the bus or don't go. It will make the Traders Joe's parking lot even worse.

Is there that much ridership north/west of the Western stop. I never see people along this stretch. Do people actually take the bus to get to Lincolnwood Town Center.

[jajuan]

^

This is what I use 11 for. Not to mention that it is also the starting point that matters as well. I have a 1 block walk to Lincoln but a five block walk to the brown line. Going to store 4 or 5 blocks away from a brown line stop, I just take the bus or don't go. It will make the Traders Joe's parking lot even worse.

Is there that much ridership north/west of the Western stop. I never see people along this stretch. Do people actually take the bus to get to Lincolnwood Town Center.

They do but it would be the 82, 96, 210 and 290 because those CTA and Pace routes go directly into that shopping center's lot. But you and sw bring up exactly my point though with trying to cancel bus service between the Western Brown Line station and Fullerton. I use it occasionally because I can't stand the Brown Line and its overcrowded trains which are not going to be decrowded all that much from an addition of 2 to 3 trains per day. And it also happens to be an easier connection to Ashland and the number 9 bus there than walking along Roscoe from the Paulina station and always missing the bus every time or missing the train on the reverse trip. As for Emanuel throwing his backing behind this, that means nothing because it's because growing obvious that his way to governing is to try to bully his way through. That got him nowhere with the teachers because they voted 90% yes to authorize a strike if needed which he thought wasn't going to happen. If he wants to continue burning his bridges I say go for it. But that still shouldn't stop people from making their voices heard at the September 4 public meeting as CTA invited them to do just because Rahmbo decided to open his mouth and say deal with it.

[CURRENTZ_09]

They do but it would be the 82, 96, 210 and 290 because those CTA and Pace routes go directly into that shopping center's lot. But you and sw bring up exactly my point though with trying to cancel bus service between the Western Brown Line station and Fullerton. I use it occasionally because I can't stand the Brown Line and its overcrowded trains which are not going to be decrowded all that much from an addition of 2 to 3 trains per day. And it also happens to be an easier connection to Ashland and the number 9 bus there than walking along Roscoe from the Paulina station and always missing the bus every time or missing the train on the reverse trip. As for Emanuel throwing his backing behind this, that means nothing because it's because growing obvious that his way to governing is to try to bully his way through. That got him nowhere with the teachers because they voted 90% yes to authorize a strike if needed which he thought wasn't going to happen. If he wants to continue burning his bridges I say go for it. But that still shouldn't stop people from making their voices heard at the September 4 public meeting as CTA invited them to do just because Rahmbo decided to open his mouth and say deal with it.

@jajuan, all we can do is suggest or complain, but by not going yo the September 4th meeting, don't be suprised when September 12th rolls around and the proposals are final and you didn't have time to write or visit the CTA community meeting because you were on this fourm trying to be correct about every statement you post just to get reputation boost. Write to the CTA, they might just hear your outcry. The ONLY supporters im hearing from is from route 11 riders and their doing a hell of a job to keeping that route intact. If you want a bus stop when you step outside your door, protect your route because once it's cut, it's most likely it won't return the same way it left.

[Busjack]

@jajuan, all we can do is suggest or complain, but by not going yo the September 4th meeting, don't be suprised when September 12th rolls around and the proposals are final and you didn't have time to write or visit the CTA community meeting because you were on this fourm trying to be correct about every statement you post just to get reputation boost. ...

As I said before, and jajuan certainly points out, with respect to Emanuel's style, this IS Chicago.

I had said early in this thread that sw won't be happy about this, so since he is directly impacted (and I and from best I can tell jajuan aren't), it will be up to him to decide whether to go, whether it is a waste of time, or whether the Lakeview Chamber of Commerce will adequately represent his interests.

BTW, you seem not to have a response to my prior post, including that, despite the press release saying so, CTA has only been barely responsive to comments at the Red Line meetings. Maybe like the poseur from East New York, you don't know how CTA and Chicago really are governed.

[BusHunter]

When they say there going to increase service on routes, does that mean just in the rush hour or in the early evenings or weekend service? They seem to be hush hush on this so far. Alot of the problems to me are when they start cutting service right after the rush hour like on the #77. Some of the intervals seem high to me for such a high ridership route. Also I've been thinking about other things. Like the #69. If it takes the #69 15 minutes to run the route, then it should take 10 extra minutes each way for the #81w to provide service. If so, then that's 20 extra minutes round trip. That's another bus needed for #81W (although it's probably going to interline to cover the #69 service) So what would be the point of cutting service to #69? There not gaining a bus. One more thing, if the 48 routes they mention are getting service increases, where are the buses coming from. By the time they add service to the #146 or #120, #121 where's the rest of the buses? I would think, they could not get more than one bus on each route if there lucky, and when your talking a two hour round trip, that's just a gain of 2 minutes based on a 15 minute interval route. I think they did too drastic a cut in 2009, and this is there way of getting there head above water. The question will remain is it enough? or will there be a round two?

[Busjack]

When they say there going to increase service on routes, does that mean just in the rush hour or in the early evenings or weekend service? They seem to be hush hush on this so far. Alot of the problems to me are when they start cutting service right after the rush hour like on the #77. Some of the intervals seem high to me for such a high ridership route. Also I've been thinking about other things. Like the #69. If it takes the #69 15 minutes to run the route, then it should take 10 extra minutes each way for the #81w to provide service. If so, then that's 20 extra minutes round trip. That's another bus needed for #81W (although it's probably going to interline to cover the #69 service) So what would be the point of cutting service to #69? There not gaining a bus. One more thing, if the 48 routes they mention are getting service increases, where are the buses coming from. By the time they add service to the #146 or #120, #121 where's the rest of the buses? I would think, they could not get more than one bus on each route if there lucky, and when your talking a two hour round trip, that's just a gain of 2 minutes based on a 15 minute interval route. I think they did too drastic a cut in 2009, and this is there way of getting there head above water. The question will remain is it enough? or will there be a round two?

Again, there is still no map, but 2 things seem pretty obvious:

• As others point out and I tend to agree, 81W won't be covering the entire 69; it will take East River between Lawrence and Bryn Mawr, and if you want to go south on Cumberland, you have to take 331 (or any community vehicle that Norridge provides, I suppose).
• Since this is supposed to be "no net effect moneywise," you take off money from 145 and put it into 146. A half a million dollars changes pots, but probably with no real effect. That's what happens when accountants run an enterprise. Ask Jeff Skilling. There might be an effect on garage allocations, though.

The last point may be related to the "number drift" thread. For instance, CTA doesn't run 202-204 any more, so they don't have to compare the ridership/revenue with 205 and 206. However, they still run 201, even though half of it is the old 203.

However, it also seems obvious that something is being taken out of the bus system to beef up the rapid transit system, and it has to be more than 11.