Bringing Back a Route and/or Segment

[XE NewFlyer]

17 hours ago, Nova's at 103rd said:

 

• 155 Devon to Pulaski or Pulaski/Peterson as alternating service to Kedzie

I like that idea, but I would extend the 155 all the way to Harlem Blue Line.

17 hours ago, Nova's at 103rd said:

 

• 112 renamed to 112 Vincennes to 135th/Western (Possibly not)

If that we're to happen it should start at 69th Red Line.

17 hours ago, Nova's at 103rd said:

 

• 95 95th renamed 95 93rd/95th runs regular route until Western then travels 95th Street, California, 93rd Street, Pulaski, 95th Street, Hilton Drive, and 94th Street ending at .

93rd dosen't go all the way through.

17 hours ago, Nova's at 103rd said:

 

• Eliminate 165 West 65th (this shouldn't even be discussed)

The 165 exists because nobody takes it. its Just the 63W going back quicker. and there might as well be service it won't slow the buses down much.

18 hours ago, Nova's at 103rd said:

 

• 57 Laramie extend to Jefferson Park Blue Line (nice try as well)

 i like that idea but i'm not sure people will care that much.

[TaylorTank1229]

On 3/4/2019 at 11:25 PM, Nova's at 103rd said:

I think as if the following...

• 155 Devon to Pulaski or Pulaski/Peterson as alternating service to Kedzie
• 112 renamed to 112 Vincennes to 135th/Western (Possibly not)
• 111 King Drive/111th rerouted from Marshfield Plaza to 111th/Pulaski due to Target closing(Possibly not)
• 54B extended to 95th and 383 every busy stop until 95th
• 95 95th renamed 95 93rd/95th runs regular route until Western then travels 95th Street, California, 93rd Street, Pulaski, 95th Street, Hilton Drive, and 94th Street ending at 94th and Cicero
• 157 Streeterville/Taylor to travel along Ogden after California to Cicero/24th Place
• With elimination of 54A, 54 Cicero extended to either Jefferson Park Blue Line or the empty lot between Foster and Elston (will CTA have resources)
• Eliminate 165 West 65th (this shouldn't even be discussed)
• A new route named 64 Oak Park from Harlem Blue Line to Oak Park Blue Line (nice try)
• 57 Laramie extend to Jefferson Park Blue Line (nice try as well)
• 9 or X9 (doesn't matter or both) extend to Edgewater/Ashland

That's all I got and half of this probably and wouldn't happen, never.

The only one of these that I could actually see being a not-likely but also a not-unlikely future possibility is the 155 idea. However, I wouldn’t suggest the 155 extended to the Pulaski/Peterson turnaround as I don’t believe its design would be right for two different routes especially if one bus needed to pull out and the bus in front wasn’t ready. I think it would be simpler for the 53 bus to extend its route north of Peterson to serve the Devon and Kedzie terminus point, via northbound on Pulaski to Devon, then eastbound on Devon to Kedzie Avenue. This would provide connectivity for routes #11, #82, #155, and to Pace #210. In addition, maybe the Pulaski bus could still terminate at Peterson but during Overnight (Owl) service, allowing the N53 to connect with N81 buses at Lawrence during overnight service. Just seems like more a of a plausible suggestion.

 

I did once have a thought of extending the 53 bus north of Devon, but the Pace #215  Crawfor/Howard bus is going to have its route changed later this year, terminating at Jefferson Park Blue Line instead of Howard Red/Purple/Yellow Line Station, continuing south of Howard to Peterson, Peterson to Cicero, Cicero to Foster, Foster to Milwaukee, and Milwaukee to the Jefferson Park terminal.

[NewFlyerMCI]

2 hours ago, TaylorTank1229 said:

The only one of these that I could actually see being a not-likely but also a not-unlikely future possibility is the 155 idea. However, I wouldn’t suggest the 155 extended to the Pulaski/Peterson turnaround as I don’t believe its design would be right for two different routes especially if one bus needed to pull out and the bus in front wasn’t ready. I think it would be simpler for the 53 bus to extend its route north of Peterson to serve the Devon and Kedzie terminus point, via northbound on Pulaski to Devon, then eastbound on Devon to Kedzie Avenue. This would provide connectivity for routes #11, #82, #155, and to Pace #210. In addition, maybe the Pulaski bus could still terminate at Peterson but during Overnight (Owl) service, allowing the N53 to connect with N81 buses at Lawrence during overnight service. Just seems like more a of a plausible suggestion.

This is what I said as well, one of the only ones on that list that is feasible. I didn't realize the Pulaski/Peterson turnaround was so small.

If we look at rush hour, extending the 53 to Devon/Kedzie only works if the 96 gives up its bay, since it runs 20 min headways at all times. The 155 does 8-10 mins, the 82 does 6-12 mins, so throwing in the 53's 7-8 min headways while the 96 shows up occasionally makes it too crowded. If you look at the sat image of Devon/Kedzie right now, there are 5 buses sitting in there. This would only work if the 96 was kicked back to Lincolnwood Town Center.

With your point to the N53, never thought about it going to Lawrence, but I always felt that it should go to Pulaski Orange, seeing as its only OOS from 1a-3:30a and it can still meet up with the N62

[YoungBusLover]

If enough money was available I would bring Route X4 back with a modified schedule to 115th during peak rush periods. Getting from Roosevelt to 79th can be a nightmare at times during peak rush periods, Sometimes 90 minutes versus an average of 45-50 minutes with the old express service.

[Sam92]

9 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

If enough money was available I would bring Route X4 back with a modified schedule to 115th during peak rush periods. Getting from Roosevelt to 79th can be a nightmare at times during peak rush periods, Sometimes 90 minutes versus an average of 45-50 minutes with the old express service.

I'd rather use the green line and split routes 3/4 into a 3a/4a south king drive/cottage grove ala the orange line restructuring

[NewFlyerMCI]

9 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

If enough money was available I would bring Route X4 back with a modified schedule to 115th during peak rush periods. Getting from Roosevelt to 79th can be a nightmare at times during peak rush periods, Sometimes 90 minutes versus an average of 45-50 minutes with the old express service.

Unfortunately, the X4 is probably the last route they would bring back. If we don't count the X98 & X99, the X4 was the second lowest performing X route (compared to the other X routes), averaging maybe around 2500 passengers per month while in service, only slightly ahead of the X3. Now, I was a consistent X4 & X3 rider, but if I had to bring any of them back first, it's probably going to be the X80, X55 & X54, as those were the highest performing ones after X9 & X49. Maybe X20 to show off the Loop Link, possibly the X28 because it already halfway exists.

[NewFlyerMCI]

2 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

I'd rather use the green line and split routes 3/4 into a 3a/4a south king drive/cottage grove ala the orange line restructuring

The 3 & the 4 run more frequently than the East 63rd & West 63rd branches during rush hour, people wouldn't be happy with that. And I think CTA wants the 1-seat ride more than they want people on the train. I've taken the 3 to 63rd or Garfield on occasion, but usually when I get on, it is to go downtown. Besides, if anything needs to happen over there, its an N4 extension to Cottage/94th or even 95th Red Line

[Sam92]

3 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

The 3 & the 4 run more frequently than the East 63rd & West 63rd branches during rush hour, people wouldn't be happy with that. And I think CTA wants the 1-seat ride more than they want people on the train. I've taken the 3 to 63rd or Garfield on occasion, but usually when I get on, it is to go downtown. Besides, if anything needs to happen over there, its an N4 extension to Cottage/94th or even 95th Red Line

I mean from all the way out south a one seat ride to downtown is pretty lengthy unless they reinstated X service. The east 63rd branch is pretty underutilized as is; but in a hypothetical alternative to the south LSD restructuring(and various tweaks in between) , the advantage of stopping at streets that the red line doesn't can be played apon (thus possibly bumping ridership on those connecting buses) by cutting frequency on 3 and 4, creating an X3A South King Drive express (115th to Garfield Green M-F, local weekends) giving far south siders an interim alternative to red line along with job access to the Fulton district along Lake (lack of job access is an issue in Roseland and while a red line extension will help solve that, access to west lake will hopefully provide even more job opportunity). A new 4A South cottage Grove (115th to U of C Hospitals, M-F replacing and feeding service south of 63rd into the more frequent Green Line) will also be created to help keep frequent connections to the green line along with a boost in frequency to the Green line (every 10 min from the branches in the peak and 15 in the off peak). The cost savings of not having buses get "lost"/delayed on lengthy trips downtown can be reinvested into more frequent service that's needed else where. 27 S Deering would have retained its connection to the Green  which saves time on route by shortening length but still providing a connection to a fairly frequent line, 6 would be 63rd and Stony to Wacker/Columbus since 27 remained (which results in more reliable 6 service considering the stretch south of 63rd is what helps kill schedule adherance for the route). Boom now we killed a bunch of bird with one stone, made a bit more use out of the Green Line (the resulting 5 min rush frequency might even help eliminate the already useless 1 Bronzeville/Union Station.

[NewFlyerMCI]

19 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

I mean from all the way out south a one seat ride to downtown is pretty lengthy unless they reinstated X service. The east 63rd branch is pretty underutilized as is; but in a hypothetical alternative to the south LSD restructuring(and various tweaks in between) , the advantage of stopping at streets that the red line doesn't can be played apon (thus possibly bumping ridership on those connecting buses) by cutting frequency on 3 and 4, creating an X3A South King Drive express (115th to Garfield Green M-F, local weekends) giving far south siders an interim alternative to red line along with job access to the Fulton district along Lake (lack of job access is an issue in Roseland and while a red line extension will help solve that, access to west lake will hopefully provide even more job opportunity). A new 4A South cottage Grove (115th to U of C Hospitals, M-F replacing and feeding service south of 63rd into the more frequent Green Line) will also be created to help keep frequent connections to the green line along with a boost in frequency to the Green line (every 10 min from the branches in the peak and 15 in the off peak). The cost savings of not having buses get "lost"/delayed on lengthy trips downtown can be reinvested into more frequent service that's needed else where. 27 S Deering would have retained its connection to the Green  which saves time on route by shortening length but still providing a connection to a fairly frequent line, 6 would be 63rd and Stony to Wacker/Columbus since 27 remained (which results in more reliable 6 service considering the stretch south of 63rd is what helps kill schedule adherance for the route). Boom now we killed a bunch of bird with one stone, made a bit more use out of the Green Line (the resulting 5 min rush frequency might even help eliminate the already useless 1 Bronzeville/Union Station.

I like the 4 overlap (although I would've placed it's terminus at 47th/Lake Park.

The last part makes me wonder why the 1 kept getting cut back. If i understand correctly, it went from 83rd/South Shore > 79th/South Shore > 63rd/Stony Island > 51st/Drexel > 35th/Michigan. Why so many cuts?

[Sam92]

57 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

I like the 4 overlap (although I would've placed it's terminus at 47th/Lake Park.

The last part makes me wonder why the 1 kept getting cut back. If i understand correctly, it went from 83rd/South Shore > 79th/South Shore > 63rd/Stony Island > 51st/Drexel > 35th/Michigan. Why so many cuts?

There was always an overlap replacing it. 27 S Deering replaced the 83rd segment after being rerouted onto south shore, 15 Jeffrey Local resulted in covering the 51st- 63rd/Stony segment along with 6  replacing 27 local service. The 35th cut back is a result of decrowding and being seen as redundant south of 35th

[TaylorTank1229]

On 3/6/2019 at 2:46 PM, NewFlyerMCI said:

This is what I said as well, one of the only ones on that list that is feasible. I didn't realize the Pulaski/Peterson turnaround was so small.

If we look at rush hour, extending the 53 to Devon/Kedzie only works if the 96 gives up its bay, since it runs 20 min headways at all times. The 155 does 8-10 mins, the 82 does 6-12 mins, so throwing in the 53's 7-8 min headways while the 96 shows up occasionally makes it too crowded. If you look at the sat image of Devon/Kedzie right now, there are 5 buses sitting in there. This would only work if the 96 was kicked back to Lincolnwood Town Center.

With your point to the N53, never thought about it going to Lawrence, but I always felt that it should go to Pulaski Orange, seeing as its only OOS from 1a-3:30a and it can still meet up with the N62

Yeah, there is that to consider. Perhaps the 53 could take the boarding island that the 96 currently uses. And perhaps 96 could share 82’s boarding island, as the 82 doesn’t really run to Devon/Kedzie during the day, expect for like 1-2 buses during the midday.

[NewFlyerMCI]

22 minutes ago, TaylorTank1229 said:

Yeah, there is that to consider. Perhaps the 53 could take the boarding island that the 96 currently uses. And perhaps 96 could share 82’s boarding island, as the 82 doesn’t really run to Devon/Kedzie during the day, expect for like 1-2 buses during the midday.

I totally missed that about the 82. Moving the 96 over would definitely work as well.

[YoungBusLover]

5 hours ago, Sam92 said:

I mean from all the way out south a one seat ride to downtown is pretty lengthy unless they reinstated X service. The east 63rd branch is pretty underutilized as is; but in a hypothetical alternative to the south LSD restructuring(and various tweaks in between) , the advantage of stopping at streets that the red line doesn't can be played apon (thus possibly bumping ridership on those connecting buses) by cutting frequency on 3 and 4, creating an X3A South King Drive express (115th to Garfield Green M-F, local weekends) giving far south siders an interim alternative to red line along with job access to the Fulton district along Lake (lack of job access is an issue in Roseland and while a red line extension will help solve that, access to west lake will hopefully provide even more job opportunity). A new 4A South cottage Grove (115th to U of C Hospitals, M-F replacing and feeding service south of 63rd into the more frequent Green Line) will also be created to help keep frequent connections to the green line along with a boost in frequency to the Green line (every 10 min from the branches in the peak and 15 in the off peak). The cost savings of not having buses get "lost"/delayed on lengthy trips downtown can be reinvested into more frequent service that's needed else where. 27 S Deering would have retained its connection to the Green  which saves time on route by shortening length but still providing a connection to a fairly frequent line, 6 would be 63rd and Stony to Wacker/Columbus since 27 remained (which results in more reliable 6 service considering the stretch south of 63rd is what helps kill schedule adherance for the route). Boom now we killed a bunch of bird with one stone, made a bit more use out of the Green Line (the resulting 5 min rush frequency might even help eliminate the already useless 1 Bronzeville/Union Station.

That would actually be a good idea in regards to splitting up the routes and using the vacant Garfield layover lot as a hub for the 3. In regards to the 4 where would it layover though is my concern in the U of C area.

[Sam92]

3 minutes ago, YoungBusLover said:

That would actually be a good idea in regards to splitting up the routes and using the vacant Garfield layover lot as a hub for the 3. In regards to the 4 where would it layover though is my concern in the U of C area.

Where ever the 192 does ??

[YoungBusLover]

9 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Unfortunately, the X4 is probably the last route they would bring back. If we don't count the X98 & X99, the X4 was the second lowest performing X route (compared to the other X routes), averaging maybe around 2500 passengers per month while in service, only slightly ahead of the X3. Now, I was a consistent X4 & X3 rider, but if I had to bring any of them back first, it's probably going to be the X80, X55 & X54, as those were the highest performing ones after X9 & X49. Maybe X20 to show off the Loop Link, possibly the X28 because it already halfway exists.

That is actually surprising to say the least for the X4, I didn't think it was that bad for ridership back then during its time in service.

[YoungBusLover]

2 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Where ever the 192 does ??

Good Point. 

[XE NewFlyer]

19 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Where ever the 192 does ??

Speaking of the 192 in the afternoon it should start on the east side of the midway with a layover on Stony Island between 60th and 61st.

Its current layover spot is on 59th Just west of Ellis.

[NewFlyerMCI]

40 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Where ever the 192 does ??

 

13 minutes ago, XE NewFlyer said:

Speaking of the 192 in the afternoon it should start on the east side of the midway with a layover on Stony Island between 60th and 61st.

Its current layover spot is on 59th Just west of Ellis.

The 192 doesn't layover. Buses come from 103rd as they are needed. I'm pretty sure southbound 192 buses are converted 26 deadheads and vice versa.

[XE NewFlyer]

12 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

 

The 192 doesn't layover. Buses come from 103rd as they are needed. I'm pretty sure southbound 192 buses are converted 26 deadheads and vice versa.

I don't know about the morning but in the afternoon they definately Layover.

[Sam92]

49 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

 

The 192 doesn't layover. Buses come from 103rd as they are needed. I'm pretty sure southbound 192 buses are converted 26 deadheads and vice versa.

Every bus lays over even interlined deadheads

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 hour ago, XE NewFlyer said:

I don't know about the morning but in the afternoon they definately Layover.

 

36 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Every bus lays over even interlined deadheads

Let me clarify. I don't think any bus is laying over at U of C and not as a 192 designation. My guess is that they lay over between the end of the 26 run and the start of the 192 run somewhere downtown, in both morning and evening peak.

[orionbuslover]

6 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

 

The 192 doesn't layover. Buses come from 103rd as they are needed. I'm pretty sure southbound 192 buses are converted 26 deadheads and vice 

 The J14, downtown terminals are around the block from each other. I always see the supervisor in the morning at Olgilvie, directing J14 to 192 as needed if a bus is late.

[Sam92]

8 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

 

Let me clarify. I don't think any bus is laying over at U of C and not as a 192 designation. My guess is that they lay over between the end of the 26 run and the start of the 192 run somewhere downtown, in both morning and evening peak.

 

4 hours ago, orionbuslover said:

 The J14, downtown terminals are around the block from each other. I always see the supervisor in the morning at Olgilvie, directing J14 to 192 as needed if a bus is late.

These 192's are scheduled interlines with J14 and yes the 192 does in fact layover unless youre saying my eyes have lied to me 10+ times

[orionbuslover]

26 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

These 192's are scheduled interlines with J14 and yes the 192 does in fact layover unless youre saying my eyes have lied to me 10+ times

Yea I see them layover alot near Olgivie. One morning while waiting for the #20 at Olgivie, a J14 pulls up and I overhear the whole convo between operator and supervisor. Due to the summer closure on Columbus/Balbo, J14s were really backed up. The operator told the supervisor he was supposed to deadhead back south and do another in service NB trip, then sb 192 trip. The supervisor didn't think he'd make it back on time and had the operator go around and sit on Canal until the time was right.

[busfan2847]

11 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

 

The 192 doesn't layover. Buses come from 103rd as they are needed. I'm pretty sure southbound 192 buses are converted 26 deadheads and vice versa.

192 are J14 deadheads that used to return or arrive via I-90. There are far more northbound J14s in the morning than southbound and vice versa in the afternoon and both routes terminate around Madison/Clinton/Washington/Jefferson area. I have seen buses change from J14 to 192 and 192 to J14.