Forest Glen Garage Expansion

[ChicagoNova]

12 hours ago, Bus fanatic30 said:

Heard from a operator that works at fg that they are getting artics, but she couldn't tell me when

Whoa! Now I would love to see that happen.

[artthouwill]

Sharing 77 amongst different garages sounds good.   However the above mentioned suggestions only concern trips EAST of Kimball.   My understanding was that the majority of the problem lies WEST of Kimball. For example,  running a 151 to Belmont,  then a 77 to Kimball will not alleviate overcrowding on 77s continuing west.  I suppose you could do peak direction trips starting at the Kimball Blue Line station,  but unless you can interline that with something,  those buses are available only for one trip. 

My opinion,  artics will exacerbate the traffic problem. 

[jajuan]

14 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Sharing 77 amongst different garages sounds good.   However the above mentioned suggestions only concern trips EAST of Kimball.   My understanding was that the majority of the problem lies WEST of Kimball. For example,  running a 151 to Belmont,  then a 77 to Kimball will not alleviate overcrowding on 77s continuing west.  I suppose you could do peak direction trips starting at the Kimball Blue Line station,  but unless you can interline that with something,  those buses are available only for one trip. 

My opinion,  artics will exacerbate the traffic problem. 

I've tended to observe a lot of the bunching problem east of Kimball as of late. Contributing factors to that side of it that I've seen were the construction at the intersection between Belmont, Clybourn and Western to reconfigure that intersection, the construction of the residential/retail building at Belmont and Clark intersection,  and the traffic snarls through Lakeview and near Lake Shore Drive. 

[artthouwill]

18 minutes ago, jajuan said:

I've tended to observe a lot of the bunching problem east of Kimball as of late. Contributing factors to that side of it that I've seen were the construction at the intersection between Belmont, Clybourn and Western to reconfigure that intersection, the construction of the residential/retail building at Belmont and Clark intersection,  and the traffic snarls through Lakeview and near Lake Shore Drive. 

No doubt about that at all.   But what goes east must go west. I don't know what else to suggest, except maybe. K and/or NP provide short trips between Lake Shore and Kimball AND C provides short trips beginning at Kimball.   I'm speaking of P.M. trips, so a.m trips C would provide from somewhere west to Kimball,  K and/or NP provide short trips between Kimball and the Lake with FG running full length of route.  Perhaps when the short trips operate, the full length buses don't have to turn in the Kimball station. 

[jajuan]

1 minute ago, artthouwill said:

No doubt about that at all.   But what goes east must go west. I don't know what else to suggest,  yet.

True, but you said most of the problem was west of Kimball, and I was countering that factors seem to have shifted to east of Kimball being the more of the source of the problem in recent years and even more in recent months. Plus I don't think artics would worsen traffic on Belmont much when the problem is there are more total vehicles on that street than its designed capacity, or more simply put the traffic is a numbers problem. By comparison, North Clark Street is one lane per direction for the majority of its length and is also a very busy street like Belmont. Yet the #22 still gets artics for much of its operations. Similar thing for Sheridan and #151.

[Busjack]

13 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

No doubt about that at all.   But what goes east must go west. I don't know what else to suggest, except maybe. K and/or NP provide short trips between Lake Shore and Kimball AND C provides short trips beginning at Kimball.   I'm speaking of P.M. trips, so a.m trips C would provide from somewhere west to Kimball,  K and/or NP provide short trips between Kimball and the Lake with FG running full length of route. 

I had suggested the opposite--a short line from Kimball to Harlem or Cumberland. At least it takes care of the crowd at the station.

[artthouwill]

17 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I had suggested the opposite--a short line from Kimball to Harlem or Cumberland. At least it takes care of the crowd at the station.

I actually was suggesting 2 short turns,  one for trips west of Kimball as you also suggest,  and one for east of Kimball.   At least there are 2 garages that could do that segment. 

[BusHunter]

3 hours ago, jajuan said:

 

Well since we're delving into the realm of realistic possibilities, it was reported that at one time recently, Kedzie had morning EB trippers on the 77 in the AM rush that began at Kimball became runs on Kedzie's portion of the 151. As you can imagine, these were almost always artics given K uses mainly artics for 151. Don't know if K still does those morning trippers on 77, but if they did it to help with morning 77s, it shouldn't be a reason why something similar in the reverse couldn't be set up for PM rush. K's final weekday 151 trip to Belmont/Halsted leaves Union Station* at 3 PM. After that point, all remaining K operated trips leave Union Station to Belmont/Sheridan until about 5 PM, and many of them then deadhead to downtown to hit Congress Parkway and then the Ike to Kedzie. Those deadheads to Kedzie through downtown could be instead used to become WB trippers on the #77 that end at Kimball and the Blue Line. Some of those 156s that end at Belmont/Sheridan that also deadhead to the garage through downtown instead of becoming another 156 rush extra from downtown can also be sourced to #77 WB tripper trips. 

 

*at this point Jackson/Riverside because of the Adams Bridge Reconstruction project

That's what I was suggesting that they do a full wb trip from Halsted and come back to Kimball via Octavia terminal. Question is what are they trying to serve/fix? It sounds like the wb commute, so it would have to take precedence at least in the afternoon. Perhaps they could do a few morning pullouts from Octavia that end up on the #151/#156. I see no difference really from when Kedzie was doing cubs extras.

Really they need some X service too. So many times I've sat and watched as operator after operator just gets ate up by the passenger volume on the side streets. If a bus just gets a little late at a relief point, the passenger volume just eats them up. The route is busy enough to justify X service and the double service would help with the main intersections which can eat them up too especially with ridership over 5 or 6 per stop. I wonder if it just wouldn't make sense to make a rush hour limited service that maybe could be tied into the #151 or #156 as an actual route. It seemed to work for Addison limited even long after the blue line was extended to jeff pk. Lasted a good 7-8 years beyond it opening.

[Busjack]

8 hours ago, BusHunter said:

Really they need some X service too. So many times I've sat and watched as operator after operator just gets ate up by the passenger volume on the side streets. If a bus just gets a little late at a relief point, the passenger volume just eats them up.

The passenger volume is there, but unlike Ashland, Western, or the former Irving Park, the 4 to 6 lanes are not.If the buses are already stuck in traffic, the X buses will be too.

[BusHunter]

40 minutes ago, Busjack said:

The passenger volume is there, but unlike Ashland, Western, or the former Irving Park, the 4 to 6 lanes are not.If the buses are already stuck in traffic, the X buses will be too.

But stuck further up the street as they will not have to pick up the locals.

[Busjack]

3 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

But stuck further up the street as they will not have to pick up the locals.

Doesn't help if stuck behind them.

Also, as pudgy indicated. most of the passenger congestion is at the 2 train stations, and you have to let passengers who get on there exit somewhere.

[BusHunter]

1 minute ago, Busjack said:

Doesn't help if stuck behind them.

it helps because while the follower may be doing the locals, they will not be working the main intersections as hard. They can always make all stops far side at the main intersections but most already are. Besides the whole belmont is not a parking lot just certain areas. What ever happened to the parking bans for the rush?

[Busjack]

14 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

What ever happened to the parking bans for the rush?

Have to pay off whoever owns the meters. However, I have seen some where not needed, such as 6400 block of N. Central.

[jajuan]

I'll just mention this caveat again as far as the thought that a street needs to be at least two lanes per direction for limited stop express, the former #X55. It mirrored the local #55 with the difference being it was limited stops the entire route. It and the local didn't seem to hinder the other, and both shared at least three continuous miles of road that is one lane per direction just like Belmont. 

[Busjack]

24 minutes ago, jajuan said:

I'll just mention this caveat again as far as the thought that a street needs to be at least two lanes per direction for limited stop express, the former #X55. It mirrored the local #55 with the difference being it was limited stops the entire route. It and the local didn't seem to hinder the other, and both shared at least three continuous miles of road that is one lane per direction just like Belmont. 

At that time, 55th east of Cottage Grove was not restricted to one lane as it is now with protected bike lanes, stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk every half block, and various other traffic deterrent measures. Only difference is that a local bus would have to cross over the parking and bike lanes to get to the bus stop, and thus could be passed.

Garfield Blvd. is a boulevard between King Dr. and Western, so that's not an issue there. However most of the buildings have also been cleared from there (at least King Dr. to Racine), so there isn't much passenger demand..

West of Western, neither the street or bus are that busy, and there is still the short turn at St. Louis.

In short, no reason for an X55 today.

[Busjack]

14 hours ago, artthouwill said:

I actually was suggesting 2 short turns,  one for trips west of Kimball as you also suggest,  and one for east of Kimball.   At least there are 2 garages that could do that segment. 

Looking at the 77 schedule, there are some east of Kimball short trips. I assume they are something like pullins or pullouts via I-94.

[jajuan]

11 minutes ago, Busjack said:

At that time, 55th east of Cottage Grove was not restricted to one lane as it is now with protected bike lanes, stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk every half block, and various other traffic deterrent measures. Only difference is that a local bus would have to cross over the parking and bike lanes to get to the bus stop, and thus could be passed.

Garfield Blvd. is a boulevard between King Dr. and Western, so that's not an issue there. However most of the buildings have also been cleared from there (at least King Dr. to Racine), so there isn't much passenger demand..

West of Western, neither the street or bus are that busy, and there is still the short turn at St. Louis.

In short, no reason for an X55 today.

Sigh, and again like before I'm NOT advocating for a return for the X55 in today's time. I was presenting it as an example that it is possible that an X route and local can share a roadway that's configured one lane per direction as Belmont and not configured down to one lane because of the incessant number of bike lanes. You have though pointed to the bubble heads in the City Hall transportation department being a part of the problem with executing transportation strategies in the city in conflicting ways instead steering those strategies to complement each other. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to see that overdoing the bike lane bit, not only slows the general traffic flow but also interferes with the buses staying on time since they share those roads with the rest of the motorized vehicular traffic. 

[Busjack]

18 minutes ago, jajuan said:

You have though pointed to the bubble heads in the City Hall transportation department being a part of the problem with executing transportation strategies in the city in conflicting ways instead steering those strategies to complement each other. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to see that overdoing the bike lane bit, not only slows the general traffic flow but also interferes with the buses staying on time since they share those roads with the rest of the motorized vehicular traffic. 

The question there, though, is whether the U of C's interest was in he 55 bus or turning East 55th St. into a pseudo mall.

[jajuan]

8 minutes ago, Busjack said:

The question there, though, is whether the U of C's interest was in he 55 bus or turning East 55th St. into a pseudo mall.

Yeah in that case, admittedly U of C had a vested interest. But at least U of C could be said to have an overall strategy that tied together. Outside of that, the city implements the bike lane strategy in such a way that places the bike riders' interests over those of everyone else using the roadway when there should be some form of balance. It's not simply a cut and dry matter of people being too in love with their cars. You got trucks that have to keep schedules of their respective companies and their companies' clients, transit buses that have to keep a schedule and those car drivers whose destinations make their cars the better option since transit may not be so great at their destination. 

[sht6131]

5 hours ago, Busjack said:

Looking at the 77 schedule, there are some east of Kimball short trips. I assume they are something like pullins or pullouts via I-94.

This may be off topic, Is there a link on the CTA site for the advanced time schedules as I can`t find it. I did not have a problem in the past with this.

[jajuan]

17 hours ago, sht6131 said:

This may be off topic, Is there a link on the CTA site for the advanced time schedules as I can`t find it. I did not have a problem in the past with this.

Here it is. 

[Busjack]

17 hours ago, sht6131 said:

This may be off topic, Is there a link on the CTA site for the advanced time schedules as I can`t find it. I did not have a problem in the past with this.

 

5 minutes ago, jajuan said:

That's because CTA hasn't posted an advanced schedule page on its website yet. 

As Taylor Tank pointed out in the 11 topic, they did last night. There is even a box on the transitchicago.com home page.

http://www.transitchicago.com/travel_information/service_changes/201606timetables.aspx

 

[jajuan]

1 minute ago, Busjack said:

 

As Taylor Tank pointed out in the 11 topic, they did last night. There is even a box on the transitchicago.com home page.

http://www.transitchicago.com/travel_information/service_changes/201606timetables.aspx

 

You quoted me at the same time that I was making the correction.

[Busjack]

28 minutes ago, Tcmetro said:

Yeah, they are tearing some unused buildings down at FG for more parking space. I believe they are also planning to do the same at NP.

About time. As indicated up this thread, that's been pending since 2014. NP would involve the old Foster Bank building.

[Mr.NewFlyer1051]

2 hours ago, Busjack said:

About time. As indicated up this thread, that's been pending since 2014. NP would involve the old Foster Bank building.