If I ran Transit for one day...

[Tcmetro]

I think a 44 extension is a great idea, I'd take it a few blocks north and turnaround at Randolph for all the Metra and bus connections. 

 

Alternatively, I'd send the 44 to Cermak-Chinatown Red Line as Bridgeport - Chinatown is a common trip and downtown riders can take the Red Line.

[artthouwill]

16 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Any merit to extending the 44 to Union Station (via Canal, Adams, Clinton, Harrison, Canal). The downsides are that it would extend its duplicativeness of the 8 and that it would have to layover on the street (Clinton/Adams maybe?) unless it's going to loop through the transit center twice. Benefits include increased south side access to the shopping center at Roosevelt/Canal, access to Union Station and possibly easier access to West Loop, since it would be possibly faster to stay on the 44 than to ride to Halsted and transfer to the Orange Line. Alternatives also include a routing via Canal, Archer, Halsted, Canalport, 18th, Canal, then the rest of the extension since the 18 makes a left on Halsted, but that's not as necessary.

We've discussed this before somewhere in this forum.   The idea ranged extending to Clinton/Lake,  to running along Washington or Wacket..  The Northern Trust has run shuttles between 801 S Canal and Union and Ogilvie Station for years.  They even have a shuttle that serves Jackson Blue and Red Lines,Quincy Brown,  Metra Electric Van Buren and LaSalle Metra.  

An extended 44neess to go to at least Clinton and Lake in my opinion. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

6 hours ago, artthouwill said:

We've discussed this before somewhere in this forum.   The idea ranged extending to Clinton/Lake,  to running along Washington or Wacket..  The Northern Trust has run shuttles between 801 S Canal and Union and Ogilvie Station for years.  They even have a shuttle that serves Jackson Blue and Red Lines,Quincy Brown,  Metra Electric Van Buren and LaSalle Metra.  

An extended 44neess to go to at least Clinton and Lake in my opinion. 

I didn't know about Northern Trust (I assume they're a bank?). Are these the aries charter buses I see downtown and are they free for anyone to ride?

I didn't think demand would be that high, which is why I suggested Union Station, since there's now a terminal there (although considering the previous layover point, it's not like the potential routing would've changed).

[busfan2847]

1 hour ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

I didn't know about Northern Trust (I assume they're a bank?). Are these the aries charter buses I see downtown and are they free for anyone to ride?

I didn't think demand would be that high, which is why I suggested Union Station, since there's now a terminal there (although considering the previous layover point, it's not like the potential routing would've changed).

Northern Trust use New Enterprise to provide shuttle buses the same as Northwestern. They are not available to anyone except for people working at Northern Trust or NWU.

Aries Charter provides similar shuttle services for other companies - not sure who.

If you were planning to replace shuttles then they would need to serve Ogilvie as well as Union Station.

[NewFlyerMCI]

2 hours ago, busfan2847 said:

Northern Trust use New Enterprise to provide shuttle buses the same as Northwestern. They are not available to anyone except for people working at Northern Trust or NWU.

Aries Charter provides similar shuttle services for other companies - not sure who.

If you were planning to replace shuttles then they would need to serve Ogilvie as well as Union Station.

I wasn't, I didn't know these NT shuttles existed until today. This was just a way for far southsiders to reach Union Station (and Ogilvie now I guess) and the West Loop

[artthouwill]

2 hours ago, busfan2847 said:

Northern Trust use New Enterprise to provide shuttle buses the same as Northwestern. They are not available to anyone except for people working at Northern Trust or NWU.

Aries Charter provides similar shuttle services for other companies - not sure who.

If you were planning to replace shuttles then they would need to serve Ogilvie as well as Union Station.

Which is why I said it would need to go to Vlinton.

[strictures]

5 hours ago, busfan2847 said:

Northern Trust use New Enterprise to provide shuttle buses the same as Northwestern. They are not available to anyone except for people working at Northern Trust or NWU.

Aries Charter provides similar shuttle services for other companies - not sure who.

If you were planning to replace shuttles then they would need to serve Ogilvie as well as Union Station.

The company's name is 'Free Enterprise' from Jeffersonville Indiana.

[Pace831]

I was thinking about route 895 since its temporary suspension was discussed in another thread. Many riders get on or off at Rosemont, but the express trips via I-355 don't have many riders. My suggestion is to give these trips a different route number and add stops to them. They would get off the Tri-state at Roosevelt and follow the same routing as 877 and 888 until they reach I-355, where they continue north to Schaumburg. This change would serve the Oak Brook office corridor and provide numerous transfer opportunities, and could be done at minimal cost.

[artthouwill]

13 hours ago, Pace831 said:

I was thinking about route 895 since its temporary suspension was discussed in another thread. Many riders get on or off at Rosemont, but the express trips via I-355 don't have many riders. My suggestion is to give these trips a different route number and add stops to them. They would get off the Tri-state at Roosevelt and follow the same routing as 877 and 888 until they reach I-355, where they continue north to Schaumburg. This change would serve the Oak Brook office corridor and provide numerous transfer opportunities, and could be done at minimal cost.

This is an interesting idea.  There are plenty of opportunities for transfers at Oak Brook Mall and Yorktown.  Might have to swit6to Axxess buses. 

[geneking7320]

I would start the machinery to obtain the following:

1. Replace 40ft CTA buses with 45footers which have drive opened doors [think 4K series without the dividers]

2. Place displays showing bus due times every half mile on CTA routes [alternatively everywhere CTA routes cross or coincide as a minimum]

3. Change CTA L cars to units with 4 sections and wide open gangways between them. [ A 4 section unit would be no longer than 4 of the present cars].

4. Change 60ft artic buses from 2 door models to 3 door models [all doors driver openable].

Just my $0.02 .

Peace and stay healthy!

[strictures]

18 minutes ago, geneking7320 said:

3. Change CTA L cars to units with 4 sections and wide open gangways between them. [ A 4 section unit would be no longer than 4 of the present cars].

NYC is going to open gangway cars.  CTA did have two of them, bought by the Rapid Transit Company in 1947 & used only in rush hours, first on the Ravenswood & then on the Swift.

[artthouwill]

28 minutes ago, geneking7320 said:

I would start the machinery to obtain the following:

1. Replace 40ft CTA buses with 45footers which have drive opened doors [think 4K series without the dividers]

2. Place displays showing bus due times every half mile on CTA routes [alternatively everywhere CTA routes cross or coincide as a minimum]

3. Change CTA L cars to units with 4 sections and wide open gangways between them. [ A 4 section unit would be no longer than 4 of the present cars].

4. Change 60ft artic buses from 2 door models to 3 door models [all doors driver openable].

Just my $0.02 .

Peace and stay healthy!

Interesting ideas.

1.  Adding 5 ft may only increase seating capacity by 4.  However,  that 5 extra feet in length can make a huge difference in making turns.  The wheelbase generally is the same,  so that extra length is all back end.    You have the swing out effect on right turns and possible clearance issues on left turns.  Those are tight enough now in some routes with 40 ft buses.

3.  New York's newest cars will come with this feature.   This will eliminate the danger of crossing between cars and add a little more capacity.   Unlike NY, our cars are much shorter and make tighter turns, so any benefit will be minimal.  Plus it might be more expensive to  remate  cars if necessary. 

4.  I actually like this idea.   I first saw these types of artics in Las Vegas on the Strip nearly 20 years ago.  Las Vegas isn't Chicago,  so there would have to be a plan to combat the potential for fare evasion.   Perhaps open the rear doors first for exiting passenger then board at the front. I don't really see thus as a problem for the Lake Shore Expresses.   Other routes like 79th St will present challenges. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

7 hours ago, geneking7320 said:

I would start the machinery to obtain the following:

1. Replace 40ft CTA buses with 45footers which have drive opened doors [think 4K series without the dividers]

2. Place displays showing bus due times every half mile on CTA routes [alternatively everywhere CTA routes cross or coincide as a minimum]

3. Change CTA L cars to units with 4 sections and wide open gangways between them. [ A 4 section unit would be no longer than 4 of the present cars].

4. Change 60ft artic buses from 2 door models to 3 door models [all doors driver openable].

Just my $0.02 .

Peace and stay healthy!

1) Who makes 45ft buses, out of curiosity?

4) As I've understood it, 3-door artics are for routes that experience a lot of boarding and alighting at the same time, often, during multiple points along the stop (hence their prevalence in NYC, and their specific/selective application in Seattle) . CTA doesn't really have that imo. Almost all the North Shore express routes are boarding inbound, alighting outbound, with minor exceptions at times (147 at Devon, the 146, etc) and the same is mostly true for the South Shore Express routes bar the 6 (which experiences somewhat equal boarding/alighting at 47th, 51st, and to some extent, 63rd-67th). Artics with 3 doors would only be most effective on crosstown routes that don't head inbound towards the loop (9, 49, to some extent 77 & 79, etc) and/or travel to/thru multiple passenger generating destinations (the 6, maybe the 4, maybe the 151, etc)

7 hours ago, artthouwill said:

Interesting ideas.

1.  Adding 5 ft may only increase seating capacity by 4.  However,  that 5 extra feet in length can make a huge difference in making turns.  The wheelbase generally is the same,  so that extra length is all back end.    You have the swing out effect on right turns and possible clearance issues on left turns.  Those are tight enough now in some routes with 40 ft buses.

3.  New York's newest cars will come with this feature.   This will eliminate the danger of crossing between cars and add a little more capacity.   Unlike NY, our cars are much shorter and make tighter turns, so any benefit will be minimal.  Plus it might be more expensive to  remate  cars if necessary. 

4.  I actually like this idea.   I first saw these types of artics in Las Vegas on the Strip nearly 20 years ago.  Las Vegas isn't Chicago,  so there would have to be a plan to combat the potential for fare evasion.   Perhaps open the rear doors first for exiting passenger then board at the front. I don't really see thus as a problem for the Lake Shore Expresses.   Other routes like 79th St will present challenges. 

4) Fare evasion how, boarding through the rear? The addition of the 2nd door would be closer to the 1st, I don't see how it could get worse if the driver can see the the bus via the mirrors?

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

1) Who makes 45ft buses, out of curiosity?

4) As I've understood it, 3-door artics are for routes that experience a lot of boarding and alighting at the same time, often, during multiple points along the stop (hence their prevalence in NYC, and their specific/selective application in Seattle) . CTA doesn't really have that imo. Almost all the North Shore express routes are boarding inbound, alighting outbound, with minor exceptions at times (147 at Devon, the 146, etc) and the same is mostly true for the South Shore Express routes bar the 6 (which experiences somewhat equal boarding/alighting at 47th, 51st, and to some extent, 63rd-67th). Artics with 3 doors would only be most effective on crosstown routes that don't head inbound towards the loop (9, 49, to some extent 77 & 79, etc) and/or travel to/thru multiple passenger generating destinations (the 6, maybe the 4, maybe the 151, etc)

4) Fare evasion how, boarding through the rear? The addition of the 2nd door would be closer to the 1st, I don't see how it could get worse if the driver can see the the bus via the mirrors?

The driver can see the one rear door with his mirrors,  but that won't necessarily stop people from attire board from the rear. Especially with people simultaneously boarding at the front. 

 

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

The driver can see the one rear door with his mirrors,  but that won't necessarily stop people from attire board from the rear. Especially with people simultaneously boarding at the front. 

 

If that type of fare evasion is that prevalent (and I personally don't think it is, happy to be wrong), even more reason to consider 3-door artics less

[geneking7320]

If it matters I'll explain these suggestions.

1. Regain seating capacity lost due to modern buses being low floor. Try to have wheelbase and overhangs as to not cause difficulty with turns.

2. Provide more info to riders.

3. This would likely be more expensive but my ideas was to increase capacity. An additional benefit would be the elimination of two unused cabs .

4. What brought this to mind was the present COVID19 situation. Pace drivers can open the doors but CTA drivers (of 40 footers) are only unlocking them. I don't like having to pull open

    the door to board the bus.

When I visited Toronto in 1995 I boarded a TTC fishbowl which had a pair of touch bar doors at the rear [think of CTA bus #8499 as an example]. This was a "free transfer" subway

station so when the bus pulled up the driver opened all the doors and the passengers did NOT have to do anything but get on the bus. Can the rear doors on CTA 40ft buses

do that?

 

[Sam92]

14 hours ago, geneking7320 said:

If it matters I'll explain these suggestions.

1. Regain seating capacity lost due to modern buses being low floor. Try to have wheelbase and overhangs as to not cause difficulty with turns.

2. Provide more info to riders.

3. This would likely be more expensive but my ideas was to increase capacity. An additional benefit would be the elimination of two unused cabs .

4. What brought this to mind was the present COVID19 situation. Pace drivers can open the doors but CTA drivers (of 40 footers) are only unlocking them. I don't like having to pull open

    the door to board the bus.

When I visited Toronto in 1995 I boarded a TTC fishbowl which had a pair of touch bar doors at the rear [think of CTA bus #8499 as an example]. This was a "free transfer" subway

station so when the bus pulled up the driver opened all the doors and the passengers did NOT have to do anything but get on the bus. Can the rear doors on CTA 40ft buses

do that?

 

Maybe the new Nova's but not the flyers. 

[Anthony Devera]

There has been rumors about a major service reduction, as CTA has been losing a lot of money lately. Obviously, it's not ideal when routes are cut, but I mainly chose to reduce routes that either have low ridership or have alternate options within 1/2 miles away. Here are things I think CTA could do:

Routes entirely discontinued: 1, 10, 11, 96, 143, 171 (weekends only), 172 (weekends only)

Route segments discontinued: 30 (north of 79th/Stony Island), 44 (north of Root/Halsted), 62 (west of Pulaski), 151 (north of Belmont, weekends only)

Reroutes:

Route 62H will be rerouted to Pulaski Orange Line to replace Route 62 west of Pulaski. Sunday service will be introduced.

Routes 55A and 55N will be combined into Route 55W, looping around Austin, 59th, and Narragansett. It will be renamed 55W West 55th. This is similar to a plan from about 10 years ago.

Extensions:

Route 49B will be extended to Howard Station. This is so it can interline with other routes at Howard.

Other Changes:

Routes 43 and 44 will be combined into one route. It will also be moved from Root to 43rd. This is to give Route 44 riders a connection to the Red Line to make up for lost service on Wallace.

Route 90 will be absorbed into Pace Route 307. This would reduce duplication, as well as keep CTA out of the suburbs. Much of Route 90 is at the city border, so it wouldn't make much of a difference whether CTA or Pace is running the route.

[monsieurmétro]

22 minutes ago, Anthony Devera said:

There has been rumors about a major service reduction, as CTA has been losing a lot of money lately. Obviously, it's not ideal when routes are cut, but I mainly chose to reduce routes that either have low ridership or have alternate options within 1/2 miles away. Here are things I think CTA could do:

Routes entirely discontinued: 1, 10, 11, 96, 143, 171 (weekends only), 172 (weekends only)

Route segments discontinued: 30 (north of 79th/Stony Island), 44 (north of Root/Halsted), 62 (west of Pulaski), 151 (north of Belmont, weekends only)

Reroutes:

Route 62H will be rerouted to Pulaski Orange Line to replace Route 62 west of Pulaski. Sunday service will be introduced.

Routes 55A and 55N will be combined into Route 55W, looping around Austin, 59th, and Narragansett. It will be renamed 55W West 55th. This is similar to a plan from about 10 years ago.

Extensions:

Route 49B will be extended to Howard Station. This is so it can interline with other routes at Howard.

Other Changes:

Routes 43 and 44 will be combined into one route. It will also be moved from Root to 43rd. This is to give Route 44 riders a connection to the Red Line to make up for lost service on Wallace.

Route 90 will be absorbed into Pace Route 307. This would reduce duplication, as well as keep CTA out of the suburbs. Much of Route 90 is at the city border, so it wouldn't make much of a difference whether CTA or Pace is running the route.

Are you suggesting that these changes are permanent (or semi-permanent)?

[Anthony Devera]

18 minutes ago, monsieurmétro said:

Are you suggesting that these changes are permanent (or semi-permanent)?

I can imagine if such a thing is implemented, it would mostly be temporary. Some things could remain permanently, such as the 62/62H restructure, the 55W, and the 49B extension to Howard. Of course CTA would have to evaluate how ridership patterns change, as well as see which routes/segments people ask to bring back.

[Sam92]

54 minutes ago, Anthony Devera said:

I can imagine if such a thing is implemented, it would mostly be temporary. Some things could remain permanently, such as the 62/62H restructure, the 55W, and the 49B extension to Howard. Of course CTA would have to evaluate how ridership patterns change, as well as see which routes/segments people ask to bring back.

43 sounds good to be permanent as well ?

[artthouwill]

2 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

There has been rumors about a major service reduction, as CTA has been losing a lot of money lately. Obviously, it's not ideal when routes are cut, but I mainly chose to reduce routes that either have low ridership or have alternate options within 1/2 miles away. Here are things I think CTA could do:

Routes entirely discontinued: 1, 10, 11, 96, 143, 171 (weekends only), 172 (weekends only)

Route segments discontinued: 30 (north of 79th/Stony Island), 44 (north of Root/Halsted), 62 (west of Pulaski), 151 (north of Belmont, weekends only)

Reroutes:

Route 62H will be rerouted to Pulaski Orange Line to replace Route 62 west of Pulaski. Sunday service will be introduced.

Routes 55A and 55N will be combined into Route 55W, looping around Austin, 59th, and Narragansett. It will be renamed 55W West 55th. This is similar to a plan from about 10 years ago.

Extensions:

Route 49B will be extended to Howard Station. This is so it can interline with other routes at Howard.

Other Changes:

Routes 43 and 44 will be combined into one route. It will also be moved from Root to 43rd. This is to give Route 44 riders a connection to the Red Line to make up for lost service on Wallace.

Route 90 will be absorbed into Pace Route 307. This would reduce duplication, as well as keep CTA out of the suburbs. Much of Route 90 is at the city border, so it wouldn't make much of a difference whether CTA or Pace is running the route.

I'm assuming these are pandemic related ideas.  I actually liked the 43/44 combo to be permanent.  During the pandemic,  the suspension of the 90 in favor of the extension of the 307 is a god idea and could work permanently. 

The 55A/55N combo was actually suggested awhile ago way before the pandemic,  but political pressure played a part in quashing that idea.

As far as rerouting the 62H to Pulaski  to connect with a truncated 62, I didn't think that would go over well either.  The reason some 62s are short turned at Pulaski instead of Cicero is primarily due to CTA selling the Cicero and Archer bus turnaround.   The biggest benefit was that all of the 62s wouldn't have to cross the CN tracks at Kilpatrick.  Sending the 62H to Pulaski reintroduces that unnecessary problem.   Plus there are more and better transfer connections at Midway than at Pulaski. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

4 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

There has been rumors about a major service reduction, as CTA has been losing a lot of money lately. Obviously, it's not ideal when routes are cut, but I mainly chose to reduce routes that either have low ridership or have alternate options within 1/2 miles away. Here are things I think CTA could do:

Routes entirely discontinued: 1, 10, 11, 96, 143, 171 (weekends only), 172 (weekends only)

Route segments discontinued: 30 (north of 79th/Stony Island), 44 (north of Root/Halsted), 62 (west of Pulaski), 151 (north of Belmont, weekends only)

Reroutes:

Route 62H will be rerouted to Pulaski Orange Line to replace Route 62 west of Pulaski. Sunday service will be introduced.

Routes 55A and 55N will be combined into Route 55W, looping around Austin, 59th, and Narragansett. It will be renamed 55W West 55th. This is similar to a plan from about 10 years ago.

Extensions:

Route 49B will be extended to Howard Station. This is so it can interline with other routes at Howard.

Other Changes:

Routes 43 and 44 will be combined into one route. It will also be moved from Root to 43rd. This is to give Route 44 riders a connection to the Red Line to make up for lost service on Wallace.

Route 90 will be absorbed into Pace Route 307. This would reduce duplication, as well as keep CTA out of the suburbs. Much of Route 90 is at the city border, so it wouldn't make much of a difference whether CTA or Pace is running the route.

• I have always wondered why the 10 doesn't go to Union/Ogilvie. Does the museum pay for that route or CTA?
• 103 and 106 could probably be combined, via 103rd, Michigan, 95th, Wentworth, 103rd
• 100 could probably be cut as well. Alternatives include (I understand these options make it harder to do reliefs)
  • Rerouting the 15 via 95th & Yates
  • Rerouting the 15 via the above or the 71 (every other trip) along 106th, Avenue C, 112th & Avenue B
  • Rerouting the 30 via Ewing, 112th, Avenue C (SB), Avenue B (NB), 106th, Ewing

[Sam92]

2 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

• I have always wondered why the 10 doesn't go to Union/Ogilvie. Does the museum pay for that route or CTA?
• 103 and 106 could probably be combined, via 103rd, Michigan, 95th, Wentworth, 103rd
• 100 could probably be cut as well. Alternatives include (I understand these options make it harder to do reliefs)
  • Rerouting the 15 via 95th & Yates
  • Rerouting the 15 via the above or the 71 (every other trip) along 106th, Avenue C, 112th & Avenue B
  • Rerouting the 30 via Ewing, 112th, Avenue C (SB), Avenue B (NB), 106th, Ewing

Damn interesting point on #10 but it's probably like Andre said at one point in regards to #146 being sent down state. The tourist like that muesum to shopping area connection which the mag mile routing can provide. I'd go for the #71 option as far as a #100 replacement cause #15 gives late night serivce down Jeffery. Combining #103/106 would be a scheduling nightmare if they gotta take a 2 mile detour and the number of through customers would not be worth it not to mention would be a turn off to thru riders 

[strictures]

12 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

There has been rumors about a major service reduction, as CTA has been losing a lot of money lately. Obviously, it's not ideal when routes are cut, but I mainly chose to reduce routes that either have low ridership or have alternate options within 1/2 miles away. Here are things I think CTA could do:

Routes entirely discontinued:.....96

 

96 should've been moved to Pratt in 1979, when Pratt between Seeley & Western was finally widened out.  Lunt is just a side street that has parking banned on one side of the street!