Jump to content
garmon757

Bringing Back a Route and/or Segment

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, andrethebusman said:

Oh? How be that? In fact, that is when my involvement became the closest. Obviously you lived and traveled about in different parts of the system than I did, and saw different things than I did. I mostly hung around the south side and south suburbs.

Read my prior posts about the demographics of the south suburbs. The signs in windows in Calumet City for "HERE TO STAY" are long gone.Those people are long dead, too. Instead there are signs for Harold's Chicken Shack and carnicerias. If they hate the city and prefer Pace, it isn't because they fled in the 1960s. It's for such reasons as that Chicago public housing was torn down and not replaced, and many got Section 8 vouchers to move to the suburbs. More recent flight seems to be that gang wars have made Chatham, South Shore and similar areas unlivable.

For instance, Suburban Stats says Calumet City is 70% Black, 19% White, and 15% Hispanic.

Dolton is 90% Black. South Holland in 74% black.Blue Island is 30% Black and 47% Hispanic.Olympia Fields is 66% Black. Jesse Jackson Jr's district was extended out there, but it appear that the current congresswoman, Robin Kelly of Olympia Fields, is actually representative of her constituents.

An example of such flight is that Englewood has become so depopulated that they want to close 4 high schools now and replace them with one high school later. (Sun Times source) Population is on the decline in Chicago; only places that appear to have growth are near north and Little Village. The state's population is down too.

As I indicated, I don't think that news has made it down to you in Vero Beach, but the statistics bear out what anyone recently in the south suburbs has seen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see what we are arguing about. In the 1970-80's a large percentage of the center city's population fled to the suburbs to get away from "them". Since then, a significant part of the center city's black population has followed them out to the suburbs, and the whites they displaced have moved further out. Meanwhile, millennials are moving back into the city to reclaim areas like Uptown, Bucktown, Lincoln Park that 30 years ago were hellholes. Armitage and Sheffield in the 1960's was an absolute dump where you would be afraid to wait for the bus. I remember riding the L past Willow St and looking down at all the abandoned buildings and seeing a dead dog in the middle of the street. Look at it now! This is the natural cycle, where an area is colonized by the relatively wealthy, gets passed down to less and less wealthy until it becomes a dump, then gets re-colonized by the wealthy looking for a "deal".

Places like Calumet City, Dolton, South Holland are still on the downward part of the cycle. As for city depopulation, considering many more housing units are being demolished than being built, why is this a surprise? In the early 60's my girlfriend Samantha's family lived at 53rd and Peoria. We went back there a couple of years ago. There is a single house standing within two blocks. So in that square block, the population has gone down by what, 99%? Most of Englewood is like that. So is much of Austin. If there are no houses, chances are nobody lives there. 

As a historical statement, in the mid-60's, when I started exploring, this is what I saw: the west side was black largely bound by Western on the east, the CNW on the north, Burlington on the south, Garfield Park on the west. South side was black south of 31st to about 79th, between the Rock Island and the IC, excluding 47th to 60th east of Washington Park (Hyde Park area). Black suburbs were East Chicago Heights, Robbins, Dixmoor, parts of Harvey, Chicago Heights east of the C&EI, and what was referred to as the Juneway Jungle, Howard to Juneway east of the L yards. That was about it. It might really surprise people today that on 9/28/69 the area around 95th/Dan Ryan was all white except for the projects west of the Ryan, even around 87th. South of South Shops was too.

Just some historical perspective...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, andrethebusman said:

I don't see what we are arguing about

You were the one who somehow turned the topic of this thread from "why is/isn't CTA running in suburbs" into some rant about the suburbs hate Chicago because of white flight in the 1960s. You also made a factually incorrect statement that CTA did not poach Pace bus lines, based on streeetcar and Insull history, notwithstanding the incidents I mentioned that happened in the 2000s.

Instead of facing how that would be irrelevant in 2018 to running 12 to Hillside or Wheaton (I suppose in your mind, the only reason 8A doesn't run to Chicago Heights is white racism), you just spent maybe 20 minutes typing a historical discourse that's irrelevant, because you lost track of what you started.

...which should end it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, andrethebusman said:

CTA should be running the 352. Or at the very least 108 should go to Harvey. 127th as the end of the line for 108 does not make much sense.

No, it shouldn't. It doesn't have the resources. Is CTA going to come up with 25 CNG buses? There is a coordination project going, and besides, the only justification for 108 (and it is a big justification) is that north of 127th has too heavy ridership to turn it over to Pace.

And since the community guidelines say

Backup facts and explain your positions. If making a statement of fact, always provide supporting evidence. For opinions or suggestions, always provide justification for your position. For example, do not suggest changes to CTA routes or operations without providing reasonable justification.

You haven't complied with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The presence or absence of CNG buses has nothing to do with anything. 352 could just as well use artics.

As for use of resources, 352 would be a better fit for CTA than say 201, 205, 206 or even 54A, which are all very light routes by comparison,  and in the first three cases are strictly non-Chicago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, andrethebusman said:

The presence or absence of CNG buses has nothing to do with anything. 352 could just as well use artics.

As for use of resources, 352 would be a better fit for CTA than say 201, 205, 206 or even 54A, which are all very light routes by comparison,  and in the first three cases are strictly non-Chicago. 

May I repeat, if you didn't get the message the first time:

[T]he community guidelines say

Backup facts and explain your positions. If making a statement of fact, always provide supporting evidence. For opinions or suggestions, always provide justification for your position. For example, do not suggest changes to CTA routes or operations without providing reasonable justification.

What are the facts (passenger generators, revenue sources, existence of resources) to justify your fantasy? Not the strawman that the CTA, after at least 10 years, finally did the right thing on the North Shore (especially since it also has a coordination project on S. Halsted).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes no sense to argue conditions today as if they always were. For instance, 352 before about mid-80's was a pretty minor route, in fact usually ran with the 8000-series 4523's. Now, it is probably the heaviest suburban route with 10-15 minute headway during rush hours and standing loads most of the day. If this is not justification for using artics, what is? 

If the only thing one worries about is cost, then any change to anything, except cutbacks, can never be justified. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, andrethebusman said:

It makes no sense to argue conditions today as if they always were. For instance, 352 before about mid-80's was a pretty minor route, in fact usually ran with the 8000-series 4523's. Now, it is probably the heaviest suburban route with 10-15 minute headway during rush hours and standing loads most of the day. If this is not justification for using artics, what is? 

If the only thing one worries about is cost, then any change to anything, except cutbacks, can never be justified. 

Again, you are evading. The question posed is what justification is there for CTA to run it?

If you are saying the sole justification for CTA to run it is that CTA has surplus artics., then you have to answer such questions as whether artics will fit in the bays of the Harvey TC, or whether CTA would have to pay big bucks to remodel Pace property.

One would also have to take into account that CTA's attempts to run artics on 66 and 79 apparently failed, and whether those reasons would also apply here.

You also seem to imply that Pace is incapable of running the route as it has structured it, and is incompetent to participate in the South Halsted Coordination Project. And also that it was improvident in just putting new equipment on the route (that was the basis of my CNG comment), something CTA is frequently guilty of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Busjack said:

Again, you are evading. The question posed is what justification is there for CTA to run it?

If you are saying the sole justification for CTA to run it is that CTA has surplus artics., then you have to answer such questions as whether artics will fit in the bays of the Harvey TC, or whether CTA would have to pay big bucks to remodel Pace property.

One would also have to take into account that CTA's attempts to run artics on 66 and 79 apparently failed, and whether those reasons would also apply here.

You also seem to imply that Pace is incapable of running the route as it has structured it, and is incompetent to participate in the South Halsted Coordination Project. And also that it was improvident in just putting new equipment on the route (that was the basis of my CNG comment), something CTA is frequently guilty of.

66 and 79 artic service failed for a very good reason - the schedule was too fast. If you stop every block to load and unload with almost never skipping a stop on a street with a tremendous amount of auto traffic, an artic will be very slow compared to a 40-footer.vehicle. In addition, CTA reduced the number of buses on the routes when the artics were put on since they figured that two artics have about the same capacity as three 40-footers. Trouble was, it also increased to number of people getting on and off per trip. Biggest problem was slowness is the back doors, which are much slower closing than a standard bus rear door. Clark St (22) seems to work pretty decent because the schedule in the evenings is quite slow. However, artcs work best on routes with the least number of stops, especially under max load conditions.

Now getting back to "new equipment" - fine, Pace has CNG's, CTA has hybrids. Pace had to build a fueling station at South so those 91 buses are pretty much stuck there unless Pace builds another fueling station somewhere. A hybrid can run anywhere (see artics at 77th and Chicago Av). So who made a better decision? 

Where did CTA put the 7900's? Pretty much at every route out of 77th, 74th, Chicago, Forest Glen. Seems like they "spread the wealth" a lot better than Pace did...

If Pace built Harvey TC and others so small they can never use a bigger bus, I would call that severe lack of advance thinking if Pace is forever stuck with 40-foot or smaller buses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm done with this. If all you can do is ramble, instead of answering a simple question (you did not answer why CTA should run 352 or if an artic can run there, and what the capital cost would be at the TC), there is no use pursuig it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know this topic has been dead for a while, but I thought I might bring it back because just recently, the 31 pilot was canceled and then reinstated. I have a couple ideas for routes that CTA could try and see how successful they are.

41 Clybourn: This route would start at the DeVry/Lane Tech campus (similar to the current 52 loop), run on the whole length of Clybourn between Belmont and Division. I'm not sure what the Downtown routing should be, but I think State, LaSalle, or Orleans/Wells would be good. Passenger generators could be DeVry, Lane Tech, and the shopping district along Clybourn. This route should run between morning rush and evening rush to serve the students at DeVry and Lane Tech.

74 extension: East of Halsted, Route 74 would run via Fullerton and Cannon to the Nature Museum. This would connect more people to Lincoln Park, and also connect that part of Lincoln Park with the Red Line, considering the Red Line does not stop at Diversey. This extension should be implemented for all 74 trips.

157 extension: West of Western, Route 157 would run via Ogden to Pulaski Pink Line. This would connect more people to UIC and the hospitals near Illinois Medical District. Considering Route 157 is already weekday only, this extension should be implemented for all 157 trips. One problem would be that it partly duplicates the Pink Line.

83 83rd: This route would run on 83rd between Kedzie and South Shore, then run via South Shore and Lake Shore to 79th/Lake Shore. There would be a deviation via Holland Rd, 87th, and State (eastbound) or Lafayette (westbound) to serve the Walmart Supercenter and 87th Red Line. Passenger generators would be Simeon Career Academy, Walmart Supercenter and the whole Chatham Market area, and 87th Red Line. This route could also reduce crowding on Routes 79 and 87. This route should run between morning rush and evening rush.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anthony Devera said:

I know this topic has been dead for a while, but I thought I might bring it back because just recently, the 31 pilot was canceled and then reinstated. I have a couple ideas for routes that CTA could try and see how successful they are.

 

These ideas are old, too. Let dead topics lie.

1 hour ago, Anthony Devera said:

41 Clybourn: This route would start at the DeVry/Lane Tech campus (similar to the current 52 loop), run on the whole length of Clybourn between Belmont and Division. I'm not sure what the Downtown routing should be, but I think State, LaSalle, or Orleans/Wells would be good. Passenger generators could be DeVry, Lane Tech, and the shopping district along Clybourn. This route should run between morning rush and evening rush to serve the students at DeVry and Lane Tech.

CTA had an approved JARC grant for this and could not come up with the matching funds. The route doesn't work unless the bus enters the big box parking lots.

Also, as Lincoln points out, diagonal routes generally don't work.

1 hour ago, Anthony Devera said:

74 extension: East of Halsted, Route 74 would run via Fullerton and Cannon to the Nature Museum. This would connect more people to Lincoln Park, and also connect that part of Lincoln Park with the Red Line, considering the Red Line does not stop at Diversey. This extension should be implemented for all 74 trips.

There was the 74Lphant bus, but, generally speaking, Fullerton Parkway east of Halsted isnb't wide enough to handle bus traffic.Certainly not all 74 trips.

1 hour ago, Anthony Devera said:

157 extension: West of Western, Route 157 would run via Ogden to Pulaski Pink Line

Whether this was 58 or 37, it was killed west of Mr. Sinai Hospital for lack of ridership. Area is served by 18 or 21.

1 hour ago, Anthony Devera said:

83 83rd: This route would run on 83rd between Kedzie and South Shore,

Again an oldie and a moldie. @andrethebusman pointed out that those on 83rd east of the Dan Ryan didn't want it.

Also, this smells like one of the "a bus every 1/4 mile," even though it would have to detour around a forest preserve. Also, it violates the Community Guideline that an explanation is required, i.e. a passenger generator. While your 41 and 74 ones state some, the last two do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, Busjack said:

CTA had an approved JARC grant for this and could not come up with the matching funds. The route doesn't work unless the bus enters the big box parking lots.

I'd argue the diagonal routes work in spite existing factors (e.g. the 62 and 56). Those two, the 65 and the 30 have been around for a while and working fine. It's really only been the 11 and the 38 (157 now) that have really exhibited any issues. Was there an official reason released as to why they couldn't get matching funds for the 41?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

 

I'd argue the diagonal routes work in spite existing factors (e.g. the 62 and 56). Those two, the 65 and the 30 have been around for a while and working fine. It's really only been the 11 and the 38 (157 now) that have really exhibited any issues. Was there an official reason released as to why they couldn't get matching funds for the 41?

Archer's most successful days were before the Orange Line  opened and Archer had local and Express service along with artic buses and some Stevenson  Expressway routes.  Now it is more of an Orange Line alternate.  

The 56 also serves as a  Blue Line alternate.   It doesn't  hurt that Archer  and Milwaukee are the  two diagonals that get you the closest to downtown.  Ogden's failure is that there were too many other options to get directly downtown whether by train or by bus.

South Chicago is nearly a  failure except for students  traveling to CVS High School.  There are really no other traffic generators nor residential areas along South Chicago north of 92nd.  Every east west route it crosses also serves the Red Line.   If it weren't for the  students,  this route would have been  canceled  a long time ago.  It really lost its value a long time ago when it was no longer an Express route going downtown. 

To be honest, I don't  see Clybourn having much success.  There's a  Red Line  station at North Avenue and sufficient  east west bus service to the Red and Brown Lines as well as north south service to the Blue Line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Was there an official reason released as to why they couldn't get matching funds for the 41?

The same one as for all such things: CTA is impoverished. Apparently it isn't like Pace which has winners (such as I55 or I90) or can go to municipalities and say "if you want the bus, cough up" (554, 714).

 

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

The 56 also serves as a  Blue Line alternate.   It doesn't  hurt that Archer  and Milwaukee are the  two diagonals that get you the closest to downtown.  

I noted at the time 11 was first cut back that there was a certain amount of hypocrisy in CTA saying that 11 was parallel to the Brown Line, but keeping 56, but also noted the passenger count on 56. At the time, 56 had about 10,000. The March 2018 report has about 8500, while the inference on the last year to this on 11 is that south of the Western station was about 500.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 62 Archer gets a good crowd from Chinatown and also has an unsurprising Bridgeport-Loop ridership because the Orange Line stations were not planned around serving the neighborhood. There's another wave of ridership between the 35th St Orange Line station and Brighton Park, then again from the Pulaski station out to Harlem. 

I think some attention should be paid to splitting the 62 up, because the high passenger turnover and route length absolutely kill reliability. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

I know this topic has been dead for a while, but I thought I might bring it back because just recently, the 31 pilot was canceled and then reinstated. I have a couple ideas for routes that CTA could try and see how successful they are.

41 Clybourn: This route would start at the DeVry/Lane Tech campus (similar to the current 52 loop), run on the whole length of Clybourn between Belmont and Division. I'm not sure what the Downtown routing should be, but I think State, LaSalle, or Orleans/Wells would be good. Passenger generators could be DeVry, Lane Tech, and the shopping district along Clybourn. This route should run between morning rush and evening rush to serve the students at DeVry and Lane Tech.

74 extension: East of Halsted, Route 74 would run via Fullerton and Cannon to the Nature Museum. This would connect more people to Lincoln Park, and also connect that part of Lincoln Park with the Red Line, considering the Red Line does not stop at Diversey. This extension should be implemented for all 74 trips.

i totally agree with these route choices its where the 11 failed here it only went to the red line and not clark or lincoln so all the east lincoln park folks had no idea the 11 was back the 74 should go to nature museum all times all runs they can even have the route go via webster so they can go around each other but the cta might have to add artics to this route with the extra people

the 41 clybourn is a good choice diagonals that go downtown always work such as the 56, 62, 60, 65, 157 so takeing it downtown will work 

 

some other route ideas

149: Ridge/Michigan express starts at Indiana +15th goes up Michigan to LSD to Hollywood to Ridge to Church to Davis purple line same on the way back exept via Indiana from Roosevelt to 15th piolet should run something like the 145 did

58: ravenswood this might be a big no no but just putting this out there starts at wellington straight up Ravenswood to Lunt same back down rush hour only 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, XE NewFlyer said:

149: Ridge/Michigan express starts at Indiana +15th goes up Michigan to LSD to Hollywood to Ridge to Church to Davis purple line same on the way back exept via Indiana from Roosevelt to 15th piolet should run something like the 145 did

At one time I lived on Ridge and thought that, but Ridge is basically too narrow especially at Ravenswood (under the UP). People take 155 to 147 or the Red Line.

Your Evanston link gets negated by 201/206 already serving it and the rationale of the North Shore Coordination project. Evanston does not want the additional buses and CTA does not want to run them.

11 hours ago, XE NewFlyer said:

58: ravenswood this might be a big no no but just putting this out there starts at wellington straight up Ravenswood to Lunt same back down rush hour only 

If Lincoln paralled the Brown Line, this certainly does, as well as parallels the UPN, at east at the Ravenswood station. It also has the defect I noted above for Ridge, as well as would have to drive through several cemeteries. There also isn't any Ravenswood north about Granville. South of Bryn Mawr, 50 Damen serves the territory. North of Bryn Mawr, 22 serves the territory.

These demonstrate:

  • You are totally unfamiliar with the area.
  • Again, you are violating the Community Guidelines by drawing lines on a hypothetical map without pointing out any unserved passenger generators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, XE NewFlyer said:

i totally agree with these route choices its where the 11 failed here it only went to the red line and not clark or lincoln so all the east lincoln park folks had no idea the 11 was back the 74 should go to nature museum all times all runs they can even have the route go via webster so they can go around each other but the cta might have to add artics to this route with the extra people

the 41 clybourn is a good choice diagonals that go downtown always work such as the 56, 62, 60, 65, 157 so takeing it downtown will work 

 

some other route ideas

149: Ridge/Michigan express starts at Indiana +15th goes up Michigan to LSD to Hollywood to Ridge to Church to Davis purple line same on the way back exept via Indiana from Roosevelt to 15th piolet should run something like the 145 did

58: ravenswood this might be a big no no but just putting this out there starts at wellington straight up Ravenswood to Lunt same back down rush hour only 

 

As far as 74, diversey or Belmont are close enough to that area. As far as the point on 41, anyone wanting to go for a quick downtown trip is better off taking Red or Brown as both parallel clybournto an extent as far north as Armitage. The stretch between North/Clybourn and Clark/Division is pretty dry which probably explains why the red line essentially follows that same stretch with no infill stations 🤔🤔 by the time you reach something that MIGHT generate something youre already pretty much at North ave. 🤷

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, XE NewFlyer said:

i totally agree with these route choices its where the 11 failed here it only went to the red line and not clark or lincoln so all the east lincoln park folks had no idea the 11 was back the 74 should go to nature museum all times all runs they can even have the route go via webster so they can go around each other but the cta might have to add artics to this route with the extra people

the 41 clybourn is a good choice diagonals that go downtown always work such as the 56, 62, 60, 65, 157 so takeing it downtown will work 

 

some other route ideas

149: Ridge/Michigan express starts at Indiana +15th goes up Michigan to LSD to Hollywood to Ridge to Church to Davis purple line same on the way back exept via Indiana from Roosevelt to 15th piolet should run something like the 145 did

58: ravenswood this might be a big no no but just putting this out there starts at wellington straight up Ravenswood to Lunt same back down rush hour only 

 

A Ridge bus is needed north of Devon, as there's no N/S service between Clark & Western, which is close to a mile apart.  But I would just extend the 50 Damen to Howard/Western.

The 96 Lunt should be moved to Pratt, since Pratt was widened to a normal arterial street width in 1979.  Previous to that, Pratt was exactly 16 feet wide from Seeley to Western, due to the golf course, which is the sole reason why the 96 runs on Lunt, which is in reality a side street with no parking allowed on one side of the street, between Ravenswood & California.

But I certainly agree that the 74 needs to east to at least Clark.   This is just one more case of the CTA just replacing the old streetcars with buses that follow the same route as 100 years ago. 

Another route that needs extending is the 53 Pulaski which ends at Peterson, simply because they didn't want the previous streetcar route to cross the C&NW grade crossing at Granville.  That should be extended to Devon/Kedzie, as there's not any service on Devon west of Kedzie.  I remember the trial of the 155A years ago, but it ran so infrequently, that few bothered to use it.

And last, midday, non-rush runs of the 151 Sheridan should all go to Clark/Devon.   Hardly anyone goes west on Belmont at that time & beyond Belmont, waits of 30-40 minutes for a 151 are not uncommon, especially north of Foster.   Those few wanting to west on Belmont can transfer to the 77.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, XE NewFlyer said:

74 should go to nature museum all times all runs they can even have the route go via webster so they can go around each other but the cta might have to add artics to this route with the extra people

Neither Fullerton or Webster, east of Halsted/Lincoln, is wide enough to support normal buses, especially artics. As someone who has walked that stretch of Fullerton from Halsted to Clark, I wish I didn't have to, but its not absolutely necessary to have bus service. Depending on where you're coming from, you'd probably be better served getting off at Clark/Division and taking the 22 or 36 up to that tiny portion of the North side.

11 hours ago, XE NewFlyer said:

the 41 clybourn is a good choice diagonals that go downtown always work such as the 56, 62, 60, 65, 157 so takeing it downtown will work 

60 and 157 aren't that diagonal compared to the other ones listed. Furthermore, in an ideal world, the 41 would go from Jeff Park, Lawrence or Foster, Elston, Belmont, Clybourn, end at North/Clybourn, with that section of Clybourn btwn Diversey & North serving as a retail generator and the rest as residential generators. As @busjack and others have essentially pointed out, the ridership levels of the 56 is fairly indicative of what the 41 would look like. Furthermore, any route that the 41 takes into downtown would add a layer of redundancy to an area that probably won't need it (such as LaSalle, which uses artics, but doesn't run on weekends). 

 

19 hours ago, artthouwill said:

South Chicago is nearly a  failure except for students  traveling to CVS High School.  There are really no other traffic generators nor residential areas along South Chicago north of 92nd.  Every east west route it crosses also serves the Red Line.   If it weren't for the  students,  this route would have been  canceled  a long time ago.  It really lost its value a long time ago when it was no longer an Express route going downtown. 

Yeah, I figured as much when headways reached every 30 mins when I helped out at eta creative arts. My main reason for including it here was the weekend extension from 92nd/Buffalo? Brainard? Exchange? to 79th/Stony Island. Was that because of community requests?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, strictures said:

the 151 Sheridan should all go to Clark/Devon.   Hardly anyone goes west on Belmont at that time & beyond Belmont, waits of 30-40 minutes for a 151 are not uncommon, especially north of Foster.   Those few wanting to west on Belmont can transfer to the 77.

I imagine this is because it's easier to turn the bus around at B/H instead of D/C due to the length of the route. The 151 isn't exactly hurting for alternatives to taking it, with the 156, 146, the Red line north of Sheridan, to some extent, the 36, and the 147. Happy to be wrong however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, strictures said:

A Ridge bus is needed north of Devon, as there's no N/S service between Clark & Western, which is close to a mile apart.  But I would just extend the 50 Damen to Howard/Western.

The 96 Lunt should be moved to Pratt, since Pratt was widened to a normal arterial street width in 1979.  Previous to that, Pratt was exactly 16 feet wide from Seeley to Western, due to the golf course, which is the sole reason why the 96 runs on Lunt, which is in reality a side street with no parking allowed on one side of the street, between Ravenswood & California.

But I certainly agree that the 74 needs to east to at least Clark.   This is just one more case of the CTA just replacing the old streetcars with buses that follow the same route as 100 years ago. 

Another route that needs extending is the 53 Pulaski which ends at Peterson, simply because they didn't want the previous streetcar route to cross the C&NW grade crossing at Granville.  That should be extended to Devon/Kedzie, as there's not any service on Devon west of Kedzie.  I remember the trial of the 155A years ago, but it ran so infrequently, that few bothered to use it.

And last, midday, non-rush runs of the 151 Sheridan should all go to Clark/Devon.   Hardly anyone goes west on Belmont at that time & beyond Belmont, waits of 30-40 minutes for a 151 are not uncommon, especially north of Foster.   Those few wanting to west on Belmont can transfer to the 77.

As Busjack previously said,  Ridge Rd is too narrow to support bus service.  There also is no law that requires bus service every 1/2 mile.  Thus Ridge, and for that matter, Pratt doesn't need bus service.  Not that Lunt does, as opposed to Touhy,  but that's another story.

The 151 Belmont short turns have nothing to do with Belmont except the bus turnaround at Belmont and Halsted.  The majority of 151 ridership is SOUTH of Belmont, which is the reason for the short turn.  If you haven't  noticed, the Belmont trips are operated by Kedzie garage while the Devon trips are operated by North Park garage.

In addition, due to overcrowding on the 77, some of the Belmont 151s turn into WB 77s during the evening rush period.

North of Belmont has plenty of Express bus service.  The ridership north of Belmont  doesn't  support having all 151s going to Devon.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×