154 Wrigley Field Express

[cta_44499_FG]

Word has come down that the 154 Wrigley Field Express route is being turned over to an outside company starting with this coming season. Trying to find something on paper, but nothing as of yet.

[See Tea Eh]

That would be good. No matter how CTA tried to spin it (or cover it up by converting route 152 school trippers into 154s), that service pretty much counted as a charter and should have been cancelled as soon as the FTA implemented the "no charter" rules back in 2008 or so.

Then again, just as with the "no standing forward of the standee line" rule, or the misreporting of in-service mileage, CTA hasn't always been totally honest with obeying federal rules.

[ctrabs74]

That would be good. No matter how CTA tried to spin it (or cover it up by converting route 152 school trippers into 154s), that service pretty much counted as a charter and should have been cancelled as soon as the FTA implemented the "no charter" rules back in 2008 or so.

Then again, just as with the "no standing forward of the standee line" rule, or the misreporting of in-service mileage, CTA hasn't always been totally honest with obeying federal rules.

Don't most of the other "express" routes, such as the #128 service to Soldier Field for Bears games or the #19 to the United Center for Bulls and Blackhawks games fall under this category as well?

[artthouwill]

That would be good. No matter how CTA tried to spin it (or cover it up by converting route 152 school trippers into 154s), that service pretty much counted as a charter and should have been cancelled as soon as the FTA implemented the "no charter" rules back in 2008 or so.

Then again, just as with the "no standing forward of the standee line" rule, or the misreporting of in-service mileage, CTA hasn't always been totally honest with obeying federal rules.

Don't most of the other "express" routes, such as the #128 service to Soldier Field for Bears games or the #19 to the United Center for Bulls and Blackhawks games fall under this category as well?

I don't see 154 as a charter route per se. The question is how does that service get subsidized? Is the CTA roundtrip fare and the cost of parking for the passenger covered by what is being charged at the farebox? Perhaps CTA was looking for an increase in subsidy to cover the costs of operating this route (similar to Goose Island, University of Chicago, Mag Mile Express). If the Cubs are subsidizing this route, perhaps they decided it might be cheaper to have a charter service or school bus company operate it. That way, they only have to pay for the actual service If they pay CTA for actual service, CTA loses money as there are only a finite number of home games. I believe CTA was trying to at least recoup losses for the days that the Cubs are off or on the road. Plus there is no proof that the Cubs put out a bid request when the concept of the 154 first came about. My initial understanding was that DeVry offered its parking lot as a place for fans attending the game to park their cars. Perhaps the deal is between DeVry and CTA and not the Cubs.

As far as the other teams services, CTA charges regular fares (at least on the United Center route). It basically connects the Metra stations to the UC, though anyone can board downtown going that way. The Soldier Field route is somewhat similar to the 154, except that the 128 provides a direct connection for public transportation riders (Metra riders) and is not a service paid for by the Bears. It really is no different than the Pace Expresses to WRigley, US Cellular, and Soldier Fields.

[Busjack]

Most of this got hashed before. So long as it is a published route (and 154 was changed so that someone other than the parking lot users could board by paying regular fares), apparently it got within the regs. Then there was the question whether the Cubs were paying full freight, raised by the Crowd Reduction Plan, where the U of C and Metra were told to pay full freight, and stuff like the 33 were cut out completely and X98 cut back to one late shift trip. Then we found out that 128 was no different (Metra responsibility) even though it was not on the original Crowd Reduction List.

So, this essentially gets down to the same thing as when CTA told U of C to pay $106 a service hour, U of C first said it was going to get a private contractor, but eventually agreed to scaled down CTA service. The Cubs probably also is comparing that cost to what a private contractor would cost.

On the Pace ones, that's essentially within the regs in that it charges what the maximum premium ride would be, which in the case of the Express Service to Popular Destinations is $4 cash, same as the BOS buses. If the Premium Fare routes were not around, the ESPD fare apparently would be limited to the $1.75 fare Pace now charges on such routes as 877.

[See Tea Eh]

It's been a few years since I looked up the rules, but at the time I recall the main strike against the 154 is that someone else (the Cubs? Some third-party? I forget) was collecting the money and letting the people ride, and basically setting their own fares.

The 19 definitely wouldn't count as a charter as CTA pays for the whole route by itself, collects fares, etc. Even the 128 wouldn't count, because it's no different from any other subsidized route, except that the fare was different (I forget if the fare was $1 each way, or $1 round-trip, back in 2008).

But the fact that CTA converted school trippers into "154s" pretty much shows that they were trying to somehow legitimize service that would otherwise be ruled a charter (wasn't that around the same time the whole misreporting of deadhead mileage thing came out?).

[BusHunter]

Ultimately, I think it's a bad idea to outsource it. Where are the charter companies going to get articulated buses from, which means more buses on an already congested Addison. Is the city going to permit a private bus entity to park on a public street without a service fee? Plus if a charter company gets ahold of it, wouldn't they be able to set their own prices. Somehow I think the Pace service to Wrigley may grow 25 to 50 percent due to this change. Could this turn into another parking meters gimmick?

[Busjack]

It's been a few years since I looked up the rules, but at the time I recall the main strike against the 154 is that someone else (the Cubs? Some third-party? I forget) was collecting the money and letting the people ride, and basically setting their own fares.

The 19 definitely wouldn't count as a charter as CTA pays for the whole route by itself, collects fares, etc. Even the 128 wouldn't count, because it's no different from any other subsidized route, except that the fare was different (I forget if the fare was $1 each way, or $1 round-trip, back in 2008).

...

My understanding of 154 was that the Cubs were required to have the remote parking as part of some neighborhood preservation deal. CTA had originally posted that you can ride after paying the $5, later $6 parking fee. At the time, when ibebobo was grousing about other routes, I said that if anything came within the charter regulations, this was it. I assume that the charter regulations are why that CTA posted last year that anyone else could board by paying regular fare. I also assume that the reason Pace went from selling $7.00 round trip tickets for its popular destination buses to charging the $4 premium fare was the same reason.

As I also mentioned above, the real issue here is the CTA's Crowd Reduction Plan program that "contract routes" are no longer being subsidized, as in the U of C case above, where the hourly rate went from $53 to $106. In this case, obviously if the majority of the riders were only paying for parking, the Cubs now have to make up the difference, just like people with U of C identification rode free on the 170s. You can ride free if someone else pays, but the taxpayers no longer are paying.

Regardless of whether 128 is a charter operation, the CTA is making Metra subsidize it as a contract route (agenda word doc).

[Busjack]

Ultimately, I think it's a bad idea to outsource it. Where are the charter companies going to get articulated buses from, which means more buses on an already congested Addison. Is the city going to permit a private bus entity to park on a public street without a service fee? Plus if a charter company gets ahold of it, wouldn't they be able to set their own prices. Somehow I think the Pace service to Wrigley may grow 25 to 50 percent due to this change. Could this turn into another parking meters gimmick?

As I said above, it is a simple choice: Ricketts pays $106 an hour to CTA or some other price to the charter operator. The buses probably use Irving Park, anyway. If fact, if this did come under the charter regulations (note that I said they avoided it only by accepting regular fare customers), it appears that the transit authority would have to solicit competitive bids, which is what happened in South Bend (service taking fans from the South Shore station to Notre Dame Stadium).

It isn't a parking meters gimmick, but CTA treating all contract routes equally. In fact, one could make the argument that since CTA is no longer subsidizing 169, UPS should pay the full freight on its Pace routes, too.

[MetroShadow]

Ultimately, I think it's a bad idea to outsource it. Where are the charter companies going to get articulated buses from, which means more buses on an already congested Addison. Is the city going to permit a private bus entity to park on a public street without a service fee? Plus if a charter company gets ahold of it, wouldn't they be able to set their own prices. Somehow I think the Pace service to Wrigley may grow 25 to 50 percent due to this change. Could this turn into another parking meters gimmick?

Keep in mind, Pace service is already limited as long as school is still in session (at least at NW). Which also means that unless there are more buses to cover service, I don't know if they'll have the capacity for it.

[brownliner]

 

it appears that the transit authority would have to solicit competitive bids, which is what happened in South Bend (service taking fans from the South Shore station to Notre Dame Stadium).

There were two or three shuttles that transpo (the transit authority in South Bend and surrounding St. Joe county) ran for ND games. One from the airport (where the south shore station is) to the stadium, one from downtown SB (these two were sometimes run as one route), and the last was from the parking lots to the stadium. (It's between one and two mile walk from the lots that normal people get to park in to the stadium, the shuttle is very nice.)

the only one I've ever ridden is the parking to stadium one (and never from the stadium to the lot, not worth standing in line). Transpo did a much better job of it than the Free Enterprise people do. Cleaner buses, better control of drunk passengers, more service.

[Busjack]

.....

the only one I've ever ridden is the parking to stadium one (and never from the stadium to the lot, not worth standing in line). Transpo did a much better job of it than the Free Enterprise people do. Cleaner buses, better control of drunk passengers, more service.

My impression was that the only reason Free Enterprise had it was because Transpo had to put it out to bid. Is that correct, and, essentially, did Free Enterprise eventually lose the bid?

See this 2010 South Bend Tribune article: "Until last year, Transpo provided the shuttle service. Federal regulations specify that private carriers receive priority if they want to operate such routes, so Transpo no longer provides the service."

[brownliner]

 

My impression was that the only reason Free Enterprise had it was because Transpo had to put it out to bid. Is that correct, and, essentially, did Free Enterprise eventually lose the bid?

See this 2010 South Bend Tribune article: "Until last year, Transpo provided the shuttle service. Federal regulations specify that private carriers receive priority if they want to operate such routes, so Transpo no longer provides the service."

 

It's two parts -- the airport and town to bookstore shuttles, and the parking to library one. Notre Dame pay for the on-campus one, which involves at least ten buses, running load and go; the other one was not subsidized when Transpo ran it. (It only takes two or three buses to run, so they probably made good money on it.)

[andrethebusman]

It isn't a parking meters gimmick, but CTA treating all contract routes equally. In fact, one could make the argument that since CTA is no longer subsidizing 169, UPS should pay the full freight on its Pace routes, too.

Not sure if this is the reason, or something else is, but of late 169 has been using 1000's instead of artics. Probably riding is down, especially since PACE 395 runs to the Dan Ryan also, at a lower fare.

[Busjack]

Not sure if this is the reason, or something else is...

It also may be related to reports that the Cubs are no longer dealing with DeVry and will have remote parking at Rockwell and Irving Park, which will be free. The Press Release mentions a free shuttle, but nothing about taking a CTA 180 bus.

I also see that 154 is no longer on the pulldown on the CTA Schedules page.

[sw4400]

It also may be related to reports that the Cubs are no longer dealing with DeVry and will have remote parking at Rockwell and Irving Park, which will be free. The Press Release mentions a free shuttle, but nothing about taking a CTA 180 bus.

I also see that 154 is no longer on the pulldown on the CTA Schedules page.

Someone isn't doing their homework at the CTA, Busjack. That lot is transformed into the NBGC Carnival in May sometime for a week or half a week. What would the Cubs do then for remote parking and bus pickup?

[Busjack]

Someone isn't doing their homework at the CTA, Busjack. That lot is transformed into the NBGC Carnival in May sometime for a week or half a week. What would the Cubs do then for remote parking and bus pickup?

Do they have any night games for that week? Otherwise, it is Ricketts's problem. Certainly not the CTA's.

Anyway, the Cubs are on the road from May 7 to May 15, and again from May 22 to June 1. Probably this was scheduled similar to the Bulls and Black Hawks ice show and circus road trips.

[BusHunter]

Probably just better to set up a limited stops bus on either addison or irving pk.

[Busjack]

Probably just better to set up a limited stops bus on either addison or irving pk.

Again, since Ricketts has to pay, and is establishing his own shuttle, not relevant to the parking lot shuttle issue.

Now, if CTA wants to do something to get the fans out of Wrigley Field who otherwise would still ride the bus.....

[jajuan]

It also may be related to reports that the Cubs are no longer dealing with DeVry and will have remote parking at Rockwell and Irving Park, which will be free. The Press Release mentions a free shuttle, but nothing about taking a CTA 180 bus.

I also see that 154 is no longer on the pulldown on the CTA Schedules page.

Yup it's even gone among the list of direct schedule links that are below the schedule pull downs. So maybe the CTA is going to do anything for Cubs fans, maybe they'll put out extra #152 buses like they have in past Cubs seasons. The press release indirectly mentions the 154 as we know it when it says at the end that the new remote parking program replaces the remote lot program previously at the DeVry parking lot. So if Ricketts does surprise everyone and fork up the $106 per hour CTA is asking for, then I'm guessing the Wrigley Field Express shifts from Addison to Irving Park since the new remote lot is at 3900 N. Rockwell.

[MarioM]

Probably just better to set up a limited stops bus on either addison or irving pk.

A bus originating at the MD-N Grayland station and serving the UP-NW Irving Park and CTA Irving Park stations along the way would kill many birds with one stone.