dp1 Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 Reading about the new Pullman Walmart that opened to no CTA service to it's location on 109th and Doty. An Alderman complained and forced CTA to provide service. However, why did the CTA not plan this when they were breaking up the former 111 Pullman/115th route, and also, why couldn't CTA just extend route #106 east 103rd to the site on it's trips to and from 103rd garage. Route 106 needs the ridership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 Reading about the new Pullman Walmart that opened to no CTA service to it's location on 109th and Doty. An Alderman complained and forced CTA to provide service. However, why did the CTA not plan this when they were breaking up the former 111 Pullman/115th route, and also, why couldn't CTA just extend route #106 east 103rd to the site on it's trips to and from 103rd garage. Route 106 needs the ridership. Already discussing this in the Service Changes Effective December 16, 2012 thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted December 22, 2013 Report Share Posted December 22, 2013 Alerts indicate new schedules effective Dec. 22, apparently for the new pick. However, for 111A, the alert there says a new schedule effective Dec. 16, but while there is some rerouting, the surmised merger with some other route didn't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nflyer22 Posted December 22, 2013 Report Share Posted December 22, 2013 I'm quite surprised the merger didn't happen; I even had money that the 111A was just a temporary fix to hush the Alderman. What's not surprising is that the frequency went up from every 20 to 25 minutes, which says something about the ridership, despite extending service earlier and later into the day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted December 22, 2013 Report Share Posted December 22, 2013 I'm quite surprised the merger didn't happen; I even had money that the 111A was just a temporary fix to hush the Alderman. What's not surprising is that the frequency went up from every 20 to 25 minutes, which says something about the ridership, despite extending service earlier and later into the day. I don't know if that says something about the ridership, or, because the alert includes "to improve reliability," that it couldn't keep a schedule (according to news reports). If nothing else, the reference to "earlier and later service," which you picked up, would imply that to "match demand and ridership patterns" referred to increasing service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nflyer22 Posted December 22, 2013 Report Share Posted December 22, 2013 I don't know if that says something about the ridership, or, because the alert includes "to improve reliability," that it couldn't keep a schedule (according to news reports). If nothing else, the reference to "earlier and later service," which you picked up, would imply that to "match demand and ridership patterns" referred to increasing service. Agreed, keeping schedule is be a better way to put it, since there have been some instances I have seen on Bus Tracker where drivers pull-in into either terminus and would leave immediately after picking up and letting go passengers. As for the increase in service (earlier and later service hours), I believed a hypothetical merger of the 111A into the current 106 would have been a nice fit, where the current 106 service hours now match the new 111A service hours (~6:00 AM - ~10:30 PM). Probably could have saved some folks an extra transfer from their transport, but again, that never played out as I expected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.