If I ran Transit for one day...

[NewFlyerMCI]

54 minutes ago, andrethebusman said:

Waukegan is your basic small town bus system (same as Elgin, Aurora, Joliet). All routes come together once of twice an hour. This is something that goes back to streetcar days and can be found in a thousand smaller cities. It works excellent. Big systems do not do this because headways are different on different routes. Like 95/Ryan. Many routes, but all leaving at different times. CTA tried a pulse point once, at night at State/Washington. Didn't work too good. Could not figure out the idea of we all leave at once 

Wait, so do nite owl buses that go downtown still not do State/Washington at :10 & :40 past the hour?

[Smolensk]

15 hours ago, fg.mark said:

If anything, the loop on the 88 Higgins should be eliminated.  The route should go westbound on Higgins to Foster, then continue on Foster to Canfield, then north on Canfield to Devon/Avondale.  

So you think that Resurrection Hospital and Resurrection High School should be cut off from public transit access?

 

Most of the people on the west end of the route are going to/from the Harlem Blue Line station.  Do you think that people in the far northwest corner of the city are going to want to want to travel all the way to Jefferson Park to catch a train?  Especially on that  narrow segment of Higgins between Foster and JP that slows to a crawl in rush hour?

[Pace831]

5 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

The NB 349 diversion would only take about 4-5 mins total because of the way Gregory is set up. Less time for SB 349. I said no diversion (as in an serious one) is needed, since Western/Gregory is right next to where I'm talking about.

The railroad crossing would cause delays. Otherwise, that time seems about accurate, although I'm not sure what exact routing you had in mind.

5 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

There's also no direct connection for NB 349 to 359. This is the sort of thing I was attempting to mitigate.

The pedestrian ramp isn't any less direct than having to cross the street at the corner to transfer.

5 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

• No unnecessary time for the 359, since the location I'm talking about is just off Vermont street.
• The creation of such a terminal might actually spur rail to bus ridership & vice versa (for example, if i lived on the 359, i'd certainly be interested in the RI or ME over the Red Line)

359 already stops just before the crossing on Vermont, about as close to the station as you can get. I don't think more people would start transferring to Metra if a terminal were built a block south, which would still add 2-3 minutes to the route.

[artthouwill]

44 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

• Only the 348 would end there because only the 348 ends there now
• The 349 and 877 serving Harvey is effectively immaterial
• The presence of a terminal could encourage transfers btwn Pace and ME/RI
  • However, it's intended purpose was to facilitate easier transfers between all bus routes in the area at a central location, which also would be located near the train stations, where there is also parking, and where the whole facility is stone's throw from "downtown" Blue Island
• You are the one that brought up pulse points, that's not what I was suggesting. I did not mention tailoring headways or substantial diversions to facilitate this
  • There wouldn't be any significant diversions, since it wouldn't take route more than 5 mins total (excepting extreme passenger loads, ADA passengers, etc) to deviate, serve and return to the original routing. The exception to this may be/probably is the 877, which runs so infrequently, it's immaterial.
• Yes, on street transfers are available. However,
  • Not between all routes
  • Lack of shelters
  • Current transfers to Metra are lacking

This is a fairly simple solution that makes things easier, has small QoL improvements, and can facilitate future growth, all without having to even acquire new property or cause any substantial change to area bus routes.

I guess if someone can get Pace to do a pilot, it would be worth a try.

[NewFlyerMCI]

26 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

The railroad crossing would cause delays. Otherwise, that time seems about accurate, although I'm not sure what exact routing you had in mind.

The pedestrian ramp isn't any less direct than having to cross the street at the corner to transfer.

359 already stops just before the crossing on Vermont, about as close to the station as you can get. I don't think more people would start transferring to Metra if a terminal were built a block south, which would still add 2-3 minutes to the route.

• Railroad crossing hadn't crossed my mind, thank you
• I think (I'm happy to be wrong) that this is my favor, since I was hoping to get rid of that type of transfer all together?
• Much like widening highway lanes, the option of having a central terminal might induce that demand

[Pace831]

4 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

I guess if someone can get Pace to do a pilot, it would be worth a try.

A pilot program shouldn't involve construction of a new facility that would become useless if the pilot were to fail.

51 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

This is a fairly simple solution that makes things easier, has small QoL improvements, and can facilitate future growth, all without having to even acquire new property or cause any substantial change to area bus routes.

I think you're underestimating the ease of implementing this and overstating the benefits. The current system doesn't need any major changes, although I agree there could be more shelters and directional signs to help with transfers.

[Pace831]

5 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

I think (I'm happy to be wrong) that this is my favor, since I was hoping to get rid of that type of transfer all together?

OK, I see your point here.

5 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Much like widening highway lanes, the option of having a central terminal might induce that demand

I don't understand the analogy. An option has to be perceived as the superior one for people to choose it, and I'm not sure what advantage the terminal has over the street stops for a 359 rider (which was the example you gave). For the other routes, I doubt that through riders would be OK with having to spend additional time diverting to the terminal.

[NewFlyerMCI]

10 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

A pilot program shouldn't involve construction of a new facility that would become useless if the pilot were to fail.

I think you're underestimating the ease of implementing this and overstating the benefits. The current system doesn't need any major changes, although I agree there could be more shelters and directional signs to help with transfers.

I agree with that first point. My vision was only the building of a turnaround with 2-3 bays with shelters, a small bike rack and a ventra card machine

I also agree, the solution is simple, implementation is not, and on this scale, when is it? And I've maintained from the beginning, it might not be an immediate need, but certainly one that could provide a net benefit later down the line, and the time may arise when it's worth exploring as an option.

1 minute ago, Pace831 said:

OK, I see your point here.

I don't understand the analogy. An option has to be perceived as the superior one for people to choose it, and I'm not sure what advantage the terminal has over the street stops for a 359 rider (which was the example you gave). For the other routes, I doubt that through riders would be OK with having to spend additional time diverting to the terminal.

Usually, when you widen a highway, you might reduce traffic for a little while, but ultimately, traffic will return to new or worse levels than when you started, known as "induced demand" (rough definition). A sort of "if you build it, they will come", and that was the analogy I was making.

5 extra mins shouldn't hurt that much, if at all, which is why only the routes in the immediate were chosen. I do see how this may be problematic for NB 349 riders

Edited September 26, 2019 by NewFlyerMCI
including an additional response

[Pace831]

5 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Usually, when you widen a highway, you might reduce traffic for a little while, but ultimately, traffic will return to new or worse levels than when you started, known as "induced demand" (rough definition). A sort of "if you build it, they will come", and that was the analogy I was making.

You're somewhat misinterpreting that theory. With highways, there is latent demand that is not generated until capacity is increased. Faster roads attract more traffic because of the existence of people who want them. For your analogy to work, you would have to show that:

1. Travel patterns exist where a transfer from bus to train would be an option. (You sort of did this already)

2. The absence of a terminal influences people to choose other options. (I'm not convinced)

That finally gets us back to the topic this discussion deviated from. If you believe the advocates for the south side Metra proposal, lower fares and faster service are what people really want.

[thomas88]

Is it always like that in NYC ?

[TransitQueen22]

I have a few more ideas::

Extend 16th/18th route via 18th to Indiana. Why does this route turn north on Halsted and onto Roosevelt? I assume to serve Roosevelt station, but why not go via 18th to Indiana and up to the station so the whole street has service?

NEW BROWN Line Stations: North/Halsted & Division

NEW BLUE: NAGLE

NEW PINK: IMD (connect w BLUE?) I've always wondered if this is possible.

YELLOW: Why didn't cta ever extend the Yellow Line to Old Orchard? I think the line would've gain ridership if they did do this.
 

[indigofoundue74]

@TransitQueen22 Polk station serves IMD, using the back entrance. 
                              Yellow to Old Orchard never existed because "racist suburbanites don’t want the Yellow going to Old Orchard".

[Sam92]

8 hours ago, TransitQueen22 said:

I have a few more ideas::

Extend 16th/18th route via 18th to Indiana. Why does this route turn north on Halsted and onto Roosevelt? I assume to serve Roosevelt station, but why not go via 18th to Indiana and up to the station so the whole street has service?

NEW BROWN Line Stations: North/Halsted & Division

NEW BLUE: NAGLE

NEW PINK: IMD (connect w BLUE?) I've always wondered if this is possible.

YELLOW: Why didn't cta ever extend the Yellow Line to Old Orchard? I think the line would've gain ridership if they did do this.
 

Route 18 was rerouted to pick up potential ridership in the roosevelt and maxwell area plus slight relief for the 12. The old routing via 18th is nothing but a river with a long bridge stretching from halsted to michigan so thats pretty much an empty bus vs the current routing. The old routing via 18th was during the days when the area was more industrial. Yellow line caught issues from the extension route going through residential areas to which the locals didnt take too kindly. Brown at north/ halsted would be redundant of the red line not to mention the red line station give more access as it not only gives a quicker ride into downtown plus areas in the south loop while brown would only end in the loop. Nagle i cant answer cause im not too familiar with thay area. Pink line IMD is essentially an issue of how would we connect an elevated station with one thats all the way down in the expressway in a safe manner BUT the campus is pretty spread out to where it actually gives more options to getting to and from downtown via either pink, blue line, 7 harrison or 157 streeterville buses

[strictures]

4 hours ago, indigofoundue74 said:

@TransitQueen22 Polk station serves IMD, using the back entrance. 
                              Yellow to Old Orchard never existed because "racist suburbanites don’t want the Yellow going to Old Orchard".

That's not why.  The idiotic CTA wasn't going to have the terminal at Old Orchard, they wanted it next to Niles North High School on the former North Shore Line right of way, because some fools think that it also should serve the courthouse on Old Orchard Road, even though the courthouse is open only 5 days a week & closes by 6PM. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

16 hours ago, TransitQueen22 said:

I have a few more ideas::

Extend 16th/18th route via 18th to Indiana. Why does this route turn north on Halsted and onto Roosevelt? I assume to serve Roosevelt station, but why not go via 18th to Indiana and up to the station so the whole street has service?

NEW BROWN Line Stations: North/Halsted & Division

NEW BLUE: NAGLE

NEW PINK: IMD (connect w BLUE?) I've always wondered if this is possible.

YELLOW: Why didn't cta ever extend the Yellow Line to Old Orchard? I think the line would've gain ridership if they did do this.
 

That Nagle station is interesting. Possible auxiliary entrance at Natoma? Taft HS is right there and connections to the 86 and 68 (with a reroute) could be made. I wonder if Norwood Park residents would use it over the existing Metra station

[TransitQueen22]

3 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

That Nagle station is interesting. Possible auxiliary entrance at Natoma? Taft HS is right there and connections to the 86 and 68 (with a reroute) could be made. I wonder if Norwood Park residents would use it over the existing Metra station

I second this! The station would fill the gap between JP and Harlem, which is way to big of  a gap, in my opinion. Apparently though, residents thought the station would "increase crime". How? 

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 hour ago, TransitQueen22 said:

I second this! The station would fill the gap between JP and Harlem, which is way to big of  a gap, in my opinion. Apparently though, residents thought the station would "increase crime". How? 

I'll take "What are poor and/or minority people?" for $500, Alex

[artthouwill]

21 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

That Nagle station is interesting. Possible auxiliary entrance at Natoma? Taft HS is right there and connections to the 86 and 68 (with a reroute) could be made. I wonder if Norwood Park residents would use it over the existing Metra station

I disagree.   First,  there's no room for a station now.  Second,  there's nothing wrong with the gap between Harlem and Jefferson Park.  The Blue Line travel time is too long now.  Why add more time?  Thirdly,  the 68 and 88 adequately fed Jefferson Park  and the 88 also serves Harlem.  Lastly,  the city  limits only one mile north of the expressway 

  You have the 68 and 270 to feed Jefferson Park. 

 

[NewFlyerMCI]

7 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

I disagree.   First,  there's no room for a station now.  Second,  there's nothing wrong with the gap between Harlem and Jefferson Park.  The Blue Line travel time is too long now.  Why add more time?  Thirdly,  the 68 and 88 adequately fed Jefferson Park  and the 88 also serves Harlem.  Lastly,  the city  limits only one mile north of the expressway 

  You have the 68 and 270 to feed Jefferson Park. 

 

You disagree that it's interesting? ?. I do share your sentiments though, I don't believe anything is wrong with the existing gap, although the travel time and location of the city limits are inconsequential imo. I personally didn't think it would be successful because of the existing Metra stations at Gladstone Park and Norwood Park

[monsieurmétro]

In terms of rail service, I would have the entire train announcement system redone (in terms of the logic that governs when what announcements are played). The system should be more of a point to point routing system where a train driver selects a route such as O'Hare to Forest Park, then can select any station to start and any station to end, as long as the start station is behind the end station in the given direction. Drivers operating trains that terminate at UIC/Racine/Jeff Park/Rosemont would still select this route, except that instead of selecting O'Hare and Forest Park as their start and end stations (or vice versa). As for the lines that terminate in the Loop, they would have a continuous route that would go Kimball to Kimball via the Outer Loop for the Brown Line, etc. As for buses, I would add the capability to program Pace, and O'Hare bus routes, for use when Pace and/or O'Hare would require to use CTA's Buses if they were short for some reason (weather, demand beyond the highest of predictions). CTA should also have a system of shuttle bus route numbers, so as to differentiate different shuttle buses serving the same stations. All of the shuttle bus route numbers would be prefixed with a S (examples: S1, S2, S3...). CTA would have some tool on their computers where they could define shuttle bus routes and put times when they go into and out of service. An example is when CTA decides to operate a shuttle bus covering Green Line service between Roosevelt and 35th-Bronzeville-IIT station, they would insert it into the route number that they would like and set it to take effect for that route number 1 hour before, up until 30 minutes after the service is supposed to finish. If they put the aforementioned example with the Green Line into the S1 route and then decided that the next weekend they would have a Blue Line shuttle between Rosemont and Harlem, then the bus drivers would always select S1 for both weekends, providing that they were operating a Green Line shuttle for the first weekend and a Blue line shuttle for the second weekend. The files would tell the bus which stops that the bus replaces on which lines, where the boarding location is, whether the stop is for boarding passengers, exiting passengers or both and what fare to charge (whether to charge a premium O'Hare fare, the normal CTA fare, or a fare representative of a Metra Zone). Stops would be announced as normal, with slightly more information due to the higher amount of space between 'L' stations when compared with bus stops. (such as "Lawrence and Rockwell for Rockwell Brown Line"). Bus routes providing express service to replace a section of track (such as running shuttle buses between O'Hare and Jefferson Park express when the section between O'Hare and Rosemont is closed for signal work) would be prefixed with SX (examples: SX1, SX2) and would have the same operating procedures and tools the S routes.

For the actual trains that are actually run, I would expand Red Line service to have equal frequencies in both directions, instead of having more service southbound in the morning and northbound during the evening. I would extend the small number of Blue Line trains that start at 54th/Cermak depot to be in service between 54th/Cermak and Jefferson Park, and possibly O'Hare. For the Brown Line, I would add Mimble/Kidway (Midway -> Kimball/Kimball -> Midway) service to evening peak. For the Green Line, I would add a reversing siding to the north of Garfield or an additional platform to operate shuttle services between Ashland/63rd / Cottage Grove and Garfield in order to have equal service on the entirety of the Green Line. The Orange Line would get owl service, running between Roosevelt and Midway via all intermediate stations (passengers can change at Roosevelt for Red Line or buses for the loop). For the Purple Line, I would bring back the Purple Line Express Saturday service and Redo their announcements:

Train: "This is a Purple Line Express."

Me in my head: "...to where?" (knowing that some passengers could be confused of where the train is actually going)

For the Yellow Line, I would merge all of the Yellow Line trains with Purple Line trains to have an Skokie/Linden express service during times when Purple Line express service is operating. The Purple Line trains would always be in front and would stop at the 8 car marks at all stations at and south of Howard. The Yellow Line train would connect to the back of the Purple Line trains and the Yellow Line drivers would then step off and wait for their next train (either from the depot or from the Loop) to take up the Skokie Branch. Due to the higher presence of trains on the Purple Line when compared to the Yellow Line, all Rush period Yellow Line Trains would go to the Loop (except those towards the very beginning or end of the rush period where Purple Line trains are less frequent than the Yellow Line trains) and most Purple Line trains would go to the Loop (including all trains towards the start/end of the rush periods due to the difference in frequency of Purple and Yellow Line trains). Purple Line trains who merge with the Yellow Line trains will run as 8 car trains and will split again at Howard, with the Purple Line portion leaving first and always being the front 6 cars. Purple Line trains who don't merge with any Yellow Line train will run as they currently do (stopping at all 6 car stopping marks). This would occur at all times that both the Yellow Line and Purple Line Express are operating. 

For New Years Eve/New Years Day service, I would have increased service on all CTA rail lines (lines with lightest loads would get every 20 minute service, medium load lines would get ever 15 minute service, heavy load lines would get ever 10 minute service during the later part and would get 15, 10 and 7.5 (alternating 7-8 minutes) respectively during the earlier part. Purple Line express would operate, with all Purple line trains going to the Loop via the express. At around 4-5 am, train service would start to ease into the normal service. Purple Line Express service would start easing out by going to 1/2 of trains going to the Loop, then 1/3 and then no service at all, which would happen around 7-8 am (possibly earlier depending on usage). Metra lines would run all services that run on Sundays at hourly intervals (with select lines increased to half-hourly service) and all services that don't run on Sundays having service every 90 minutes (1.5 hours). Pace and CTA should operate limited service on most of their weekday only/Monday to Saturday bus routes, including express buses, which would run in both directions during the night. Some routes would not receive service as their route is covered by a series of other routes.

For Metra trains, I would start the electrification process, where by a certain time, all Metra lines would be electrified. New rolling stock would be ordered with destination signs to indicate where the train goes and which stations it stops at. I would also have Metra accept Ventra. At larger stations like Union station or OTC, barriers or turnstiles would be installed. Each turnstile/barrier would have 1 Ventra reader, 1-3 ticket slots on the front, 1-3 ticket slots at the top and a scanner to read mobile tickets. Larger stations that serve Metra only would have one ticket slot on the front, where the ticket would be inserted and one ticket slot on the top where the ticket would be collected from. The machine would read the ticket and ensure that it is valid for the zone that the station in question is in. Stations that serve Metra and either South Shore Line OR Amtrak would have a second slot for the other operator's tickets and it would work in the same way, only ensuring that the ticket in question is valid at the station in question based on this operator's fare structure. If any station serves Metra, Amtrak and South Shore Line, then the turnstiles at this station would have three slots, one for each operator, working all working in the same way. The Metra ticket slot would always be on the top, the South Shore Line one would be second to top and the Amtrak one would always be on the bottom. Ventra tickets would not be accepted at Metra stations, but contactless PAYG, Apple Pay/Samsung Pay/Google Pay (or whatever smartphone payment systems are available for use on Ventra) PAYG, and Ventra cards would be accepted. Ventra cards would be required to have at least four dollars on them (or two dollars if the card is an RTA reduce fare permit or student Ventra Card). If the user traveled through more zones than their card has sufficient funds for, they would be permitted to exit, but would incur an negative balance and would not be permitted to travel until they refilled their card to the required minimum. All turnstiles would require the user to insert or scan their ticket or tap their PAYG card/smartphone or Ventra card on entry and exit to charge the correct fare and ensure that the ticket is valid for all zones travelled. At quieter stations, a Ventra reader would be installed, with Ventra/PAYG users expected to touch in and out on it whenever they enter or leave the station. If the system is unable to determine where the passenger has traveled, they will be charged the maximum fare (Ventra and PAYG users only). This would be either because one card entered but never exited or exited and never entered or entered one station and the exited without traveling and had stayed their for a long time (the system would think that the person made a journey to somewhere, then returned back to their start station to get a free fare). If a person enters, and then exits before a certain amount of time, then they would not be charged.

 

Metra should also trial an O'Hare express service once the O'Hare ATS opens, With hourly to half hourly service depending on the time of day, running Union Station to O'Hare transfer express and then returning back to Union Station express. The fare should be higher than the North Central Service fare (Zone A-D) for that journey. If it is successful, they should trial extending the service north of O'Hare to serve communities in the far northwest/north-northwest area, with select trains continuing beyond O'Hare. For these trains that continue, Passengers would be charged a higher fare, which would apply to all passengers going to O'Hare or Union station via the O'Hare express and to all passengers when North Central Service trains are operating, regardless of where they are traveling. 

[Sam92]

On 11/9/2019 at 11:16 PM, monsieurmétro said:

In terms of rail service, I would have the entire train announcement system redone (in terms of the logic that governs when what announcements are played). The system should be more of a point to point routing system where a train driver selects a route such as O'Hare to Forest Park, then can select any station to start and any station to end, as long as the start station is behind the end station in the given direction. Drivers operating trains that terminate at UIC/Racine/Jeff Park/Rosemont would still select this route, except that instead of selecting O'Hare and Forest Park as their start and end stations (or vice versa). As for the lines that terminate in the Loop, they would have a continuous route that would go Kimball to Kimball via the Outer Loop for the Brown Line, etc. As for buses, I would add the capability to program Pace, and O'Hare bus routes, for use when Pace and/or O'Hare would require to use CTA's Buses if they were short for some reason (weather, demand beyond the highest of predictions). CTA should also have a system of shuttle bus route numbers, so as to differentiate different shuttle buses serving the same stations. All of the shuttle bus route numbers would be prefixed with a S (examples: S1, S2, S3...). CTA would have some tool on their computers where they could define shuttle bus routes and put times when they go into and out of service. An example is when CTA decides to operate a shuttle bus covering Green Line service between Roosevelt and 35th-Bronzeville-IIT station, they would insert it into the route number that they would like and set it to take effect for that route number 1 hour before, up until 30 minutes after the service is supposed to finish. If they put the aforementioned example with the Green Line into the S1 route and then decided that the next weekend they would have a Blue Line shuttle between Rosemont and Harlem, then the bus drivers would always select S1 for both weekends, providing that they were operating a Green Line shuttle for the first weekend and a Blue line shuttle for the second weekend. The files would tell the bus which stops that the bus replaces on which lines, where the boarding location is, whether the stop is for boarding passengers, exiting passengers or both and what fare to charge (whether to charge a premium O'Hare fare, the normal CTA fare, or a fare representative of a Metra Zone). Stops would be announced as normal, with slightly more information due to the higher amount of space between 'L' stations when compared with bus stops. (such as "Lawrence and Rockwell for Rockwell Brown Line"). Bus routes providing express service to replace a section of track (such as running shuttle buses between O'Hare and Jefferson Park express when the section between O'Hare and Rosemont is closed for signal work) would be prefixed with SX (examples: SX1, SX2) and would have the same operating procedures and tools the S routes.

For the actual trains that are actually run, I would expand Red Line service to have equal frequencies in both directions, instead of having more service southbound in the morning and northbound during the evening. I would extend the small number of Blue Line trains that start at 54th/Cermak depot to be in service between 54th/Cermak and Jefferson Park, and possibly O'Hare. For the Brown Line, I would add Mimble/Kidway (Midway -> Kimball/Kimball -> Midway) service to evening peak. For the Green Line, I would add a reversing siding to the north of Garfield or an additional platform to operate shuttle services between Ashland/63rd / Cottage Grove and Garfield in order to have equal service on the entirety of the Green Line. The Orange Line would get owl service, running between Roosevelt and Midway via all intermediate stations (passengers can change at Roosevelt for Red Line or buses for the loop). For the Purple Line, I would bring back the Purple Line Express Saturday service and Redo their announcements:

Train: "This is a Purple Line Express."

Me in my head: "...to where?" (knowing that some passengers could be confused of where the train is actually going)

For the Yellow Line, I would merge all of the Yellow Line trains with Purple Line trains to have an Skokie/Linden express service during times when Purple Line express service is operating. The Purple Line trains would always be in front and would stop at the 8 car marks at all stations at and south of Howard. The Yellow Line train would connect to the back of the Purple Line trains and the Yellow Line drivers would then step off and wait for their next train (either from the depot or from the Loop) to take up the Skokie Branch. Due to the higher presence of trains on the Purple Line when compared to the Yellow Line, all Rush period Yellow Line Trains would go to the Loop (except those towards the very beginning or end of the rush period where Purple Line trains are less frequent than the Yellow Line trains) and most Purple Line trains would go to the Loop (including all trains towards the start/end of the rush periods due to the difference in frequency of Purple and Yellow Line trains). Purple Line trains who merge with the Yellow Line trains will run as 8 car trains and will split again at Howard, with the Purple Line portion leaving first and always being the front 6 cars. Purple Line trains who don't merge with any Yellow Line train will run as they currently do (stopping at all 6 car stopping marks). This would occur at all times that both the Yellow Line and Purple Line Express are operating. 

For New Years Eve/New Years Day service, I would have increased service on all CTA rail lines (lines with lightest loads would get every 20 minute service, medium load lines would get ever 15 minute service, heavy load lines would get ever 10 minute service during the later part and would get 15, 10 and 7.5 (alternating 7-8 minutes) respectively during the earlier part. Purple Line express would operate, with all Purple line trains going to the Loop via the express. At around 4-5 am, train service would start to ease into the normal service. Purple Line Express service would start easing out by going to 1/2 of trains going to the Loop, then 1/3 and then no service at all, which would happen around 7-8 am (possibly earlier depending on usage). Metra lines would run all services that run on Sundays at hourly intervals (with select lines increased to half-hourly service) and all services that don't run on Sundays having service every 90 minutes (1.5 hours). Pace and CTA should operate limited service on most of their weekday only/Monday to Saturday bus routes, including express buses, which would run in both directions during the night. Some routes would not receive service as their route is covered by a series of other routes.

For Metra trains, I would start the electrification process, where by a certain time, all Metra lines would be electrified. New rolling stock would be ordered with destination signs to indicate where the train goes and which stations it stops at. I would also have Metra accept Ventra. At larger stations like Union station or OTC, barriers or turnstiles would be installed. Each turnstile/barrier would have 1 Ventra reader, 1-3 ticket slots on the front, 1-3 ticket slots at the top and a scanner to read mobile tickets. Larger stations that serve Metra only would have one ticket slot on the front, where the ticket would be inserted and one ticket slot on the top where the ticket would be collected from. The machine would read the ticket and ensure that it is valid for the zone that the station in question is in. Stations that serve Metra and either South Shore Line OR Amtrak would have a second slot for the other operator's tickets and it would work in the same way, only ensuring that the ticket in question is valid at the station in question based on this operator's fare structure. If any station serves Metra, Amtrak and South Shore Line, then the turnstiles at this station would have three slots, one for each operator, working all working in the same way. The Metra ticket slot would always be on the top, the South Shore Line one would be second to top and the Amtrak one would always be on the bottom. Ventra tickets would not be accepted at Metra stations, but contactless PAYG, Apple Pay/Samsung Pay/Google Pay (or whatever smartphone payment systems are available for use on Ventra) PAYG, and Ventra cards would be accepted. Ventra cards would be required to have at least four dollars on them (or two dollars if the card is an RTA reduce fare permit or student Ventra Card). If the user traveled through more zones than their card has sufficient funds for, they would be permitted to exit, but would incur an negative balance and would not be permitted to travel until they refilled their card to the required minimum. All turnstiles would require the user to insert or scan their ticket or tap their PAYG card/smartphone or Ventra card on entry and exit to charge the correct fare and ensure that the ticket is valid for all zones travelled. At quieter stations, a Ventra reader would be installed, with Ventra/PAYG users expected to touch in and out on it whenever they enter or leave the station. If the system is unable to determine where the passenger has traveled, they will be charged the maximum fare (Ventra and PAYG users only). This would be either because one card entered but never exited or exited and never entered or entered one station and the exited without traveling and had stayed their for a long time (the system would think that the person made a journey to somewhere, then returned back to their start station to get a free fare). If a person enters, and then exits before a certain amount of time, then they would not be charged.

 

Metra should also trial an O'Hare express service once the O'Hare ATS opens, With hourly to half hourly service depending on the time of day, running Union Station to O'Hare transfer express and then returning back to Union Station express. The fare should be higher than the North Central Service fare (Zone A-D) for that journey. If it is successful, they should trial extending the service north of O'Hare to serve communities in the far northwest/north-northwest area, with select trains continuing beyond O'Hare. For these trains that continue, Passengers would be charged a higher fare, which would apply to all passengers going to O'Hare or Union station via the O'Hare express and to all passengers when North Central Service trains are operating, regardless of where they are traveling. 

None of these make sense especially assugning route numbers to shuttles

[NewFlyerMCI]

How come N55 doesn't run to Midway and N4 doesn't go to 94th?

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

How come N55 doesn't run to Midway and N4 doesn't go to 94th?

Most of the owls don't run the entire route.

N4 to 63rd

N9 between 95th and North Ave

N53 between Pulaski Blue and Peterson

N55 between Museum and St Louis

N62 between Kinzie and Midway Orange Line. 

N66 doesn't serve Navt Pier.  Does it still go to State and Washington?

N77 between Halsted and Harlem 

N79 between the Lakefront and Western 

N87 between Western and Red Line 

The N20, N22, N34, N49, N63, N81 run entire route.  One could argue against N20 since it doesn't go to Illinois Center,  but that is a rush hour only extension.

Thinking about 103rd and K getting Novas for owl service,  could P be in line for some too?  Ut does operate the N22.

[NewFlyerMCI]

12 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Most of the owls don't run the entire route.

N4 to 63rd

N9 between 95th and North Ave

N53 between Pulaski Blue and Peterson

N55 between Museum and St Louis

N62 between Kinzie and Midway Orange Line. 

N66 doesn't serve Navt Pier.  Does it still go to State and Washington?

N77 between Halsted and Harlem 

N79 between the Lakefront and Western 

N87 between Western and Red Line 

The N20, N22, N34, N49, N63, N81 run entire route.  One could argue against N20 since it doesn't go to Illinois Center,  but that is a rush hour only extension.

Thinking about 103rd and K getting Novas for owl service,  could P be in line for some too?  Ut does operate the N22.

I know most of the owls don't run the full route. I was asking specifically about those two because Midway is a pretty big destination not to serve (and 8 blocks away isn't close) and to leave 63rd to 95th with no north-south service seems like a pretty big swath of Chicago to miss. I'm fortunate that im close to 79th (my transit box is the 3, 4, 75, 79) if i needed to use those late services, but at 3am, I'd rather a 1-seat ride from downtown than chance it on the red line

N66 still goes to State/Washington, along with the N4, N20, N22, N60 & N62

[artthouwill]

15 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

I know most of the owls don't run the full route. I was asking specifically about those two because Midway is a pretty big destination not to serve (and 8 blocks away isn't close) and to leave 63rd to 95th with no north-south service seems like a pretty big swath of Chicago to miss. I'm fortunate that im close to 79th (my transit box is the 3, 4, 75, 79) if i needed to use those late services, but at 3am, I'd rather a 1-seat ride from downtown than chance it on the red line

N66 still goes to State/Washington, along with the N4, N20, N22, N60 & N62

In regards to the N4, there may be 2 factors.   First, it is acting as an alternative to Green Line trains.   Second,  at one time,  Cottage Grove was the most dangerous bus route in the city with most of those incidents south of 63rd.  Though I agree that the N4 should go all the way to 85th, apparently no one is complaining about the lack of service along that stretch of Cottage Grove. 

As for the N55, St Louis was the main west terminal for the 55 for years.  Service to Cicero and Archer was just an extension , but owl service was always terminated at St Louis.   I suppose with the N62 within a 1/2 mile to 3/4 mile from 55th, it would be redundant to extend owl service to Midway Orange Line on the N55.