Bringing Back a Route and/or Segment

[NewFlyerMCI]

42 minutes ago, XE NewFlyer said:

before i start i will no longer the question the ability of buses to drive these streets if someone who knows the area well says that buses can't navigate and I have noticed @jajuan using the word proposal these ideas are in the thinking stage not the planning stage so they should be called visions or any other word that means the same thing and i do live in Chicago 

 

70: extend west to Thatcher or Harlem

66: extend west to Lake, 1st Ave, Thatcher or Harlem whichever one works best (if lake, via Chicago, lake, 9th, Chicago) 

12: extend west to Austin to connect with the 91

18: extend east to museum campus

126: extend west to Oak Park

44: extend south to 95th  

70: Suburban territory. CTA is pretty good at staying out of the suburbs, with the exceptions being Evanston/Skokie, 21, 81W, 86?, 90 and if you're pedantic, the 72. Also, where is the demand?

66: See 70

12: The 12 used to go to Austin (or at least Monitor) before being rerouted to the Central/Harrison terminal. I assume because of better transfers and/or the occasional use of artics. Furthermore, the turnaround at Roosevelt/Monitor is no longer CTA property I believe, if the pseudo car junkyard that was there last time I was over there is still there and the 91 turns around on city streets. Also, Pace 305

18: I support this. I'm still trying to figure out why the 12 was ever rerouted from Museum Campus to serve that section of Indiana. I assume that Museum Campus wanted less buses in the area? Someone who knows more can correct me.

126: See 70

44: Lack of turnaround means that it would have to just go on ahead to 95th/Ashland, 95th/Red Line or a rush only 104th/Vincennes like the 9 does now, but where is the demand? This would also compete with the 112, which I imagine more people would be inclined to take for a faster ride.

[Anthony Devera]

9 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

18: I support this. I'm still trying to figure out why the 12 was ever rerouted from Museum Campus to serve that section of Indiana. I assume that Museum Campus wanted less buses in the area? Someone who knows more can correct me.

I might be wrong, but I think in 2008, Route 3 was moved to run on Michigan on both directions instead of running on Indiana in one direction. The 12 was rerouted to replace the 3 service. CTA decided to then route the 146 onto State and Roosevelt rather than Balbo and Columbus to keep the connection between the Red/Green/Orange station and the Museum Campus. I do agree the 18 should have been routed to Museum Campus, or the 12 kept the way it was and the 18 serving the current 12 loop.

[andrethebusman]

Reason 12 was cut back was that museum riding only went to State St where there was a 100% changeover of passengers where 146 carries them up to downtown and up Michigan Av. This is where the museum business is - tourists.

[andrethebusman]

Roosevelt/Monitor was leased, lease not renewed. Maybe owner wanted too much?

[jajuan]

1 hour ago, XE NewFlyer said:

before i start i will no longer the question the ability of buses to drive these streets if someone who knows the area well says that buses can't navigate and I have noticed @jajuan using the word proposal these ideas are in the thinking stage not the planning stage so they should be called visions or any other word that means the same thing and i do live in Chicago 

 

70: extend west to Thatcher or Harlem

66: extend west to Lake, 1st Ave, Thatcher or Harlem whichever one works best (if lake, via Chicago, lake, 9th, Chicago) 

12: extend west to Austin to connect with the 91

18: extend east to museum campus

126: extend west to Oak Park

44: extend south to 95th  

I say proposals because there are community guidelines on the forum that say you need to identify traffic generators and other reasons you think there would be a justifiable demand for such a service change, given CTA's (and for that matter the other transit boards') limited resources. You're ignoring those guidelines and simply playing, let's fill in lines on a Google map with no real thought of how the buses will navigate some of these areas, given your clearly shown lack of knowledge of how given neighborhoods or the streets that flow through them are structured. 

2 minutes ago, Anthony Devera said:

18: I might be wrong, but I think in 2008, Route 3 was moved to run on Michigan on both directions instead of running on Indiana in one direction. The 12 was rerouted to replace the 3 service. CTA decided to then route the 146 onto State and Roosevelt rather than Balbo and Columbus to keep the connection between the Red/Green/Orange station and the Museum Campus. I do agree the 18 should have been routed to Museum Campus, or the 12 kept the way it was and the 18 serving the current 12 loop.

44: Also, Racine south of 87th is too narrow for buses to pass each other.

Anthony Devera's point about the 44, just proved my point and that of the others who pointed out the same, that you're breaking community guidelines and simply playing let's fill in the grid. On Anthony's point about the 3, I highly doubt CTA meant the rerouting of the 12 from Museum Campus to 15th/Indiana as a replacement for the SB 3 being rerouted back to Michigan instead of diverting on to Indiana, given the 3 was heading south after leaving Indiana while the 12 heads back to Roosevelt road to head west. Plus pulling the 3 off Indiana came a few years after CTA cutback the 12's operations to Museum Campus. Both reroutes are completely unrelated. The 12 was cutback because CTA was of the thought that the demand was not as high for folks coming from the city's west side as it is of those coming from the north. They figured what few people used the 12 for the Museum Campus could transfer to the rerouted 130 and 146. The 3 was rerouted to speed up the 3's SB service, which was a needed move they finally saw given the X3's elimination back in 2010. 

[XE NewFlyer]

13 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

70: Suburban territory. CTA is pretty good at staying out of the suburbs, with the exceptions being Evanston/Skokie, 21, 81W, 86?, 90 and if you're pedantic, the 72. Also, where is the demand?

66: See 70

12: The 12 used to go to Austin (or at least Monitor) before being rerouted to the Central/Harrison terminal. I assume because of better transfers and/or the occasional use of artics. Furthermore, the turnaround at Roosevelt/Monitor is no longer CTA property I believe, if the pseudo car junkyard that was there last time I was over there is still there and the 91 turns around on city streets. Also, Pace 305

18: I support this. I'm still trying to figure out why the 12 was ever rerouted from Museum Campus to serve that section of Indiana. I assume that Museum Campus wanted less buses in the area? Someone who knows more can correct me.

126: See 70

44: Lack of turnaround means that it would have to just go on ahead to 95th/Ashland, 95th/Red Line or a rush only 104th/Vincennes like the 9 does now, but where is the demand? This would also compete with the 112, which I imagine more people would be inclined to take for a faster ride.

i see what your saying about the 12, 126 and the 44. The main reason i think extending the 66 and 70 is to connect with the 86 and 90. Now that i think about it extending the routes past Harlem might be pointless.

[Busjack]

14 hours ago, XE NewFlyer said:

so they should be called visions or any other word that means the same thing

Stay off the hard stuff and adhere to the Community Guidelines. But @jajuan already made the point.

[artthouwill]

13 hours ago, jajuan said:

I say proposals because there are community guidelines on the forum that say you need to identify traffic generators and other reasons you think there would be a justifiable demand for such a service change, given CTA's (and for that matter the other transit boards') limited resources. You're ignoring those guidelines and simply playing, let's fill in lines on a Google map with no real thought of how the buses will navigate some of these areas, given your clearly shown lack of knowledge of how given neighborhoods or the streets that flow through them are structured. 

Anthony Devera's point about the 44, just proved my point and that of the others who pointed out the same, that you're breaking community guidelines and simply playing let's fill in the grid. On Anthony's point about the 3, I highly doubt CTA meant the rerouting of the 12 from Museum Campus to 15th/Indiana as a replacement for the SB 3 being rerouted back to Michigan instead of diverting on to Indiana, given the 3 was heading south after leaving Indiana while the 12 heads back to Roosevelt road to head west. Plus pulling the 3 off Indiana came a few years after CTA cutback the 12's operations to Museum Campus. Both reroutes are completely unrelated. The 12 was cutback because CTA was of the thought that the demand was not as high for folks coming from the city's west side as it is of those coming from the north. They figured what few people used the 12 for the Museum Campus could transfer to the rerouted 130 and 146. The 3 was rerouted to speed up the 3's SB service, which was a needed move they finally saw given the X3's elimination back in 2010. 

The 3 on Indiana was actually in both directions between 16th and 14th (NzB) and Roosevelt (SB).  This reroute coincided with the 3 extension to Chicago  Ave.  As has been pointed out. The 3 returning to Michigan was the  result of eliminating X3 and X4.  Also pointed out was there was no correlation between the  3 reroute and the 12 reroute to 15th/Indiana. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

Honestly, having thought on this for some years, I'd like to see the 3 cut back to before the river. Traversing the Mag Mile causes the 3 to get mired in traffic, which then requires more buses to balance out and both of these scenarios lead to bunching. Passengers needing to head north of Wacker can transfer to the 146, 147 and/or 151 anywhere from Mich/Washington to Mich/Wacker. Even on a Sunday, between those three routes, there should be a bus on the Mag Mile at least every 5-7 mins. The 3 can have improved on-time performance (even if its marginal at best) and might even be able to lose a bus or two (and give it to the 4) and maintain the same frequency of service. The only issue I can think of is where it would end. In that area, there is:

• Randolph/Harbor
• Michigan/Wacker
• llinois Center

Alternatively: 

• It could also be routed towards Union Station (possibly serving more of downtown?) and connections to the 146/147/151 can still be made at Adams/State.
• This would be redundant on some level and goes against the spirit of this post, but it could also be rerouted to Navy Pier via the 124's or less preferably, the 2's routing, which does not experience the same traffic crush as the Mag Mile

[pudgym29]

I diverge on this to state that a reason why somebody would propose a route segment adjustment is because the standard transfer on the Authority allows a customer only two transfers. There are, by my observation, frequent transit trips which (would) involve three transfers.

In the current payment scheme, a third transfer will cost another $2.25. This is how transit customers look for routes which will get them to their destination without having to change to a third route. So - they make proposals in this thread to adjust a certain route to eliminate the transfer.

I propose petitioning the Authority, as well as Pace, to allow a third transfer within the two hours the standard transfer time permits. I believe this does not involve any expenditures from the agencies. I would find it hard to believe this would cost the agencies any business; because more customers would ride transit due to this liberalization.

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Honestly, having thought on this for some years, I'd like to see the 3 cut back to before the river. Traversing the Mag Mile causes the 3 to get mired in traffic, which then requires more buses to balance out and both of these scenarios lead to bunching. Passengers needing to head north of Wacker can transfer to the 146, 147 and/or 151 anywhere from Mich/Washington to Mich/Wacker. Even on a Sunday, between those three routes, there should be a bus on the Mag Mile at least every 5-7 mins. The 3 can have improved on-time performance (even if its marginal at best) and might even be able to lose a bus or two (and give it to the 4) and maintain the same frequency of service. The only issue I can think of is where it would end. In that area, there is:

• Randolph/Harbor
• Michigan/Wacker
• llinois Center

Alternatively: 

• It could also be routed towards Union Station (possibly serving more of downtown?) and connections to the 146/147/151 can still be made at Adams/State.
• This would be redundant on some level and goes against the spirit of this post, but it could also be rerouted to Navy Pier via the 124's or less preferably, the 2's routing, which does not experience the same traffic crush as the Mag Mile

The .ain reason for the  3 being extended  was so those along Michigan and Indiana  between Cermak and Roosevelt could have a one seat ride to North  Michigan Avenue.  Until the 3 extension, South Siders coming downtown via bus had to transfer to one of the north side routes to cross the river.  North side riders always had access to all of downtown, but now the 3 and 26 offers some one seat ride options for  South Siders.  

[Sam92]

2 hours ago, artthouwill said:

The .ain reason for the  3 being extended  was so those along Michigan and Indiana  between Cermak and Roosevelt could have a one seat ride to North  Michigan Avenue.  Until the 3 extension, South Siders coming downtown via bus had to transfer to one of the north side routes to cross the river.  North side riders always had access to all of downtown, but now the 3 and 26 offers some one seat ride options for  South Siders.  

How about a few short turns?  Or maybe even swaping tail ends of J14 and 26? Or the 2

[Busjack]

12 hours ago, artthouwill said:

The .ain reason for the  3 being extended  was so those along Michigan and Indiana  between Cermak and Roosevelt could have a one seat ride to North  Michigan Avenue.  Until the 3 extension, South Siders coming downtown via bus had to transfer to one of the north side routes to cross the river.  North side riders always had access to all of downtown, but now the 3 and 26 offers some one seat ride options for  South Siders.  

The other thing is that one destination sign is NW MEM HOSP, so someone thought people were going there.

9 hours ago, Sam92 said:

How about a few short turns?  Or maybe even swaping tail ends of J14 and 26? Or the 2

I think it is a valid question why in the South LSD restructuring, CTA changed the south ends of the routes, but not the north ones. However, 26 would provide only rush hour service, which would be inadequate.

[artthouwill]

9 hours ago, Sam92 said:

How about a few short turns?  Or maybe even swaping tail ends of J14 and 26? Or the 2

Short turning or starting some p.m trips at Michigan/South Water for the 3 is not a bad idea.

Swapping the downtown terminals of the J14 and 26 makes no sense.  During the  P.m rush, the J14 serves as a downtown  shuttle to  Oglivie which you would lose with 26 because it doesn't operate NB in the p.m. rush. The 2 supplements 29 Navy Pier service on State.  None of these accomplish any of your goals.

[geneking7320]

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

The other thing is that one destination sign is NW MEM HOSP, so someone thought people were going there.

I think it is a valid question why in the South LSD restructuring, CTA changed the south ends of the routes, but not the north ones. However, 26 would provide only rush hour service, which would be inadequate.

Tuesday 9/11/2018 sometime after dark I boarded a northbound #3 at 95th and King Dr.

There was a passenger wearing Northwestern Memorial Hospital scrubs on board. It appeared she was actually riding to work from one end of the route to the other.

 

[artthouwill]

2 hours ago, geneking7320 said:

Tuesday 9/11/2018 sometime after dark I boarded a northbound #3 at 95th and King Dr.

There was a passenger wearing Northwestern Memorial Hospital scrubs on board. It appeared she was actually riding to work from one end of the route to the other.

 

Safer than the Red Line with less transferring and less walking.  Also saves 50 cents a day.

[NewFlyerMCI]

8 hours ago, artthouwill said:

Short turning or starting some p.m trips at Michigan/South Water for the 3 is not a bad idea.

Swapping the downtown terminals of the J14 and 26 makes no sense.  During the  P.m rush, the J14 serves as a downtown  shuttle to  Oglivie which you would lose with 26 because it doesn't operate NB in the p.m. rush. The 2 supplements 29 Navy Pier service on State.  None of these accomplish any of your goals.

This could theoretically work during peak, right? From 1p-9p, every other SB 3 trip could start/end at Michigan/South Water, and the 26 is still there to service that corridor. I can't think of a solution for people heading NB, however, during that time period, as I forgot about NW Univ Hosp. You could possibly reroute the 1, but this exchanges one service area for another (not to mention that it is also peak-directional) and still leaves 35th to 95th w/o a one-seat ride half the time. I honestly can't think of a viable solution.

[Bjorn]

The 4 does seem to be a long route; with a 90+ min peak running time it's right at the edge of what I'd personally find acceptable for operator comfort.

Throwing this idea out of left field out there... perhaps the 4 should terminate at the 35th Street Red Line Station? Some remarks:

1. The South Side Red and Green lines, while not empty, are not close to capacity during peak hours. The marginal cost of accommodating customers on rail services is lower compared to buses. In contrast, the 4 takes about one hour round-trip between its King/35th and Illinois Center timepoints. At a six minute peak headway, this would free up very roughly about 8-10 buses (subtracting layover and the small additional distance west to La Salle St).

2. For intra-neighborhood customers, on-time performance would likely increase as the 4 would no longer be subject to CBD traffic, especially on Michigan Ave.

3. The freed up buses could be used in part for a complementary x4 route (Cottage Grove-Pershing-Lake Shore-Columbus-Balbo-Mich) during rush hours. A peak hour express route, akin to the 14# series on northern Lake Shore, would siphon off peak-heavy CBD customers while leaving the 4 with a more consistent demand and a 'flatter' schedule.

Regardless, even if the above wouldn't work bus lanes on Michigan Ave are sorely needed to keep buses on time.

[NewFlyerMCI]

9 hours ago, Bjorn said:

The 4 does seem to be a long route; with a 90+ min peak running time it's right at the edge of what I'd personally find acceptable for operator comfort.

Throwing this idea out of left field out there... perhaps the 4 should terminate at the 35th Street Red Line Station? Some remarks:

1. The South Side Red and Green lines, while not empty, are not close to capacity during peak hours. The marginal cost of accommodating customers on rail services is lower compared to buses. In contrast, the 4 takes about one hour round-trip between its King/35th and Illinois Center timepoints. At a six minute peak headway, this would free up very roughly about 8-10 buses (subtracting layover and the small additional distance west to La Salle St).

2. For intra-neighborhood customers, on-time performance would likely increase as the 4 would no longer be subject to CBD traffic, especially on Michigan Ave.

3. The freed up buses could be used in part for a complementary x4 route (Cottage Grove-Pershing-Lake Shore-Columbus-Balbo-Mich) during rush hours. A peak hour express route, akin to the 14# series on northern Lake Shore, would siphon off peak-heavy CBD customers while leaving the 4 with a more consistent demand and a 'flatter' schedule.

Regardless, even if the above wouldn't work bus lanes on Michigan Ave are sorely needed to keep buses on time.

The 4's extension to 115th shows that CTA is prioritizing one-seat rides, which would probably work against the favor of this proposal. On the X4 part, that probably won't come back, for at least a while, it was one of the lower performing X routes at the time of its termination, doing only a bit better than the X3.

[jajuan]

On 9/18/2018 at 8:52 AM, NewFlyerMCI said:

The 4's extension to 115th shows that CTA is prioritizing one-seat rides, which would probably work against the favor of this proposal. On the X4 part, that probably won't come back, for at least a while, it was one of the lower performing X routes at the time of its termination, doing only a bit better than the X3.

And I believe you answered your own question of why can't CTA cut back the #3 at its north end and leave the service over to the #26 given that the #26 starts its express zone at Columbus/11th and therefore can't adequately replace service for those riders who are riding in to the Mag Mile from points between Roosevelt Road and 67th Street. Art pointed out the #26's service hours as being another important reason why it can't adequately replace the #3 along the Mag Mile. 

[TripleTransit1]

It may have been mentioned on here already, but I would like it if the #56 had service to Navy Pier again.

[Sam92]

1 hour ago, TripleTransit1 said:

It may have been mentioned on here already, but I would like it if the #56 had service to Navy Pier again.

Eh.  It's already tied up with hipster highway.  Having to crawl out of river north would make it worse which is why #124 took over full time instead of just for special services 

[Anthony Devera]

4 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Eh.  It's already tied up with hipster highway.  Having to crawl out of river north would make it worse which is why #124 took over full time instead of just for special services 

Plus, Navy Pier would lose its connection to Union Station.

[XE NewFlyer]

On 9/17/2018 at 11:19 PM, Bjorn said:

 

Regardless, even if the above wouldn't work bus lanes on Michigan Ave are sorely needed to keep buses on time.

i was thinking the same thing but Michigan has so many routes going on it north of Washington that bus lanes won't have much of an effect. However bus lanes on state, Dearborn and Clark would make buses go through downtown a lot faster   

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 hour ago, XE NewFlyer said:

i was thinking the same thing but Michigan has so many routes going on it north of Washington that bus lanes won't have much of an effect. However bus lanes on state, Dearborn and Clark would make buses go through downtown a lot faster   

More like without dedicated patrol & enforcement, they'd be effectively useless since everyone uses it to get on Norf LSD. Bus lanes on Clark probably wouldn't work that well either, only 2 buses. Dearborn, and at least SB State (5 regular service buses vs NB State's 3), however, are excellent ideas. 

After all, anything is better than the PM rush LaSalle Express crawl on Wacker, with all the buses essentially forcing their own bus lane ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.