CTA 2015 Bus Revisions

[TaylorTank1229]

This topic is to keep the public aware of changes to buses' scheduling & routing, new routes, etc. I'll keep posted during the year.

As of Friday, February 6th, 2015..

#39 Pershing will be given new weekend/holiday service as of below.

Length:

-Saturday, February 07, 2015

to TBD

Impact Level:

-Service Change

Full Description:

-How does this affect my trip?

-Weekend service will be added to the #39 Pershing route. Buses will operate on weekends during the following hours (times leaving the terminal):

Saturdays & Sundays/Holidays:

-38th/St. Louis east to 40th/Lake Park: 8:00am-5:18pm

-40th/Lake Park west to 38th/St. Louis: 8:41am-6:01pm

Service will run approximately every 25-30 minutes.

Why is service being changed?

-Weekend #39 bus service is being added as part of a 180-day experiment based on increased potential ridership demand.

[BusHunter]

Really?? why? The #35 is a pretty dead route west of Kedzie and now this? What do we have some extra warehouse workers or something. I'd probably give the weekend service to #59 first.

[TaylorTank1229]

Really?? why? The #35 is a pretty dead route west of Kedzie and now this? What do we have some extra warehouse workers or something. I'd probably give the weekend service to #59 first.

Well I believe there's an industrial facility on Pershing west of Kedzie, and plus #59 does have weekend service, just not on Sundays or holidays.

[jajuan]

Really?? why? The #35 is a pretty dead route west of Kedzie and now this? What do we have some extra warehouse workers or something. I'd probably give the weekend service to #59 first.

CTA must think something is there if they made the service on 35 west of Kedzie a permanent change after the experiments with that and if they're now experimenting with returning weekend service to the 39. Folks have been screaming about how management has taken the hatchet to service over the past 15 to 20 years. They'll never know if some cuts can be reversed and to what extent if they don't try to experiment here and there. There was a time when folks were adamant some of the cuts to routes like 18. 43, 73 or 94 wouldn't or couldn't be restored for example. But now 18 has its midday service back and all four of those run a later than what was left behind after Booz-Allen. And headways on some others gotten decreased back to a point of making them viable options again. Of course a chunk of that became options after De-Crowd. But it doesn't change that my point that it's refreshing to see them look into ways of putting some services back after a couple of decades of asking us to get used to expecting cuts.

[Juniorz]

This topic is to keep the public aware of changes to buses' scheduling & routing, new routes, etc. I'll keep posted during the year.

As of Friday, February 6th, 2015..

#39 Pershing will be given new weekend/holiday service as of below.

Length:

-Saturday, February 07, 2015

to TBD

Impact Level:

-Service Change

Full Description:

-How does this affect my trip?

-Weekend service will be added to the #39 Pershing route. Buses will operate on weekends during the following hours (times leaving the terminal):

Saturdays & Sundays/Holidays:

-38th/St. Louis east to 40th/Lake Park: 8:00am-5:18pm

-40th/Lake Park west to 38th/St. Louis: 8:41am-6:01pm

Service will run approximately every 25-30 minutes.

Why is service being changed?

-Weekend #39 bus service is being added as part of a 180-day experiment based on increased potential ridership demand.

Bringing back the R39 (Pershing Shuttle) concept. Looks like the ridership demand is there. This 180 day experiment will become a 360 day experiment (that's how long the route 35 (35th-31st) 31st st extension experiment took before it was permanent). Looks like between January-Late March 2016, we'll find out if the experiment is a success.

Also, one might think that the additional experimental weekend service is in part with the new McCormick station opening, just like Rahm proposed to reopen Kostner if the Obama Library was selected near the UIC Campus

[BusHunter]

They really increased ridership when they switched the #18 to a roosevelt routing. I think that the #18 while low ridership now has no problem not getting cut. Seems to me the #39 gets most of it's ridership from the east side Oakland area. Plus it does serve both Red and Green lines and Orange so maybe the rail lines can carry it. But there was a reason why they ran Optimas on it. Maybe they figure it could serve as supplemental #62 service which can be limited on Sundays. That might get it a few riders. Making #18 supplemental to #12 was a smart move that's working well as a comparison.

[Busjack]

CTA must think something is there if they made the service on 35 west of Kedzie a permanent change after the experiments with that and if they're now experimenting with returning weekend service to the 39....

Answer probably is that they finally got a match for JARC funds and the aldermen wanted something, which is how the 35 extension eventually was implemented.

And, as JuniorZ pointed out, the R39 might have proved something.

[NewFlyerMCI]

As of Friday, February 6th, 2015..

#39 Pershing will be given new weekend/holiday service as of below.

Finally!

[Buslover88]

Hopefully they add Saturday service to #86 Narrangansett-Ridgeland at some point this year. I think the route could get some ridership between Wright College and North Ave. on Saturdays.

[TaylorTank1229]

Hopefully they add Saturday service to #86 Narrangansett-Ridgeland at some point this year. I think the route could get some ridership between Wright College and North Ave. on Saturdays.

I suggested that idea too, because I know select Wright College students have classes on Saturdays and Narragansett Ave. could use some Saturday bus service for riders between Wright & North Ave. with its hours atleast at 7am to 6-6:30pm.

[NewFlyerMCI]

Hopefully they add Saturday service to #86 Narrangansett-Ridgeland at some point this year. I think the route could get some ridership between Wright College and North Ave. on Saturdays.

I feel as though more people are going to start asking CTA if their routes can get weekend service (7, 37, 96, etc) or if their routes can make a return (11, etc)

[Buslover88]

I feel as though more people are going to start asking CTA if their routes can get weekend service (7, 37, 96, etc) or if their routes can make a return (11, etc)

The difference of having service on #86 versus those other routes, however, is the fact that it serves a college and there are students who attend Wright that have Saturday classes, as well as employees who have to work on Saturdays. I don't know the exact numbers but a pretty good number of students take classes on Saturdays. That in my opinion should justify to have #86 running. At the very least, service could be every 30 minutes from 7am to 6pm, between Wright and North Ave. Not sure how well #7 and #37 would run on weekends, but in my opinion, I don't think there's enough ridership on #96 to justify weekend service.

[NewFlyerMCI]

The difference of having service on #86 versus those other routes, however, is the fact that it serves a college and there are students who attend Wright that have Saturday classes, as well as employees who have to work on Saturdays. I don't know the exact numbers but a pretty good number of students take classes on Saturdays. That in my opinion should justify to have #86 running. At the very least, service could be every 30 minutes from 7am to 6pm, between Wright and North Ave. Not sure how well #7 and #37 would run on weekends, but in my opinion, I don't think there's enough ridership on #96 to justify weekend service.

I was just listing random routes, nothing serious. I agree with the 86 thing, but short turns on the 86 would make it too short. If there is to be weekend service, just run the whole route. It shouldn't take more that 30-35 mins, especially on a weekend, bar OOC events.

[Busjack]

There always was a loop at North and Narragansett, which was used by 86 before it was extended to Oak Park and 72 before it was extended to Harlem. Apparently it is still there (Google Map), and is used by Pace 311.

I was just listing random routes, nothing serious. I agree with the 86 thing, but short turns on the 86 would make it too short....

[NewFlyerMCI]

There always was a loop at North and Narragansett, which was used by 86 before it was extended to Oak Park and 72 before it was extended to Harlem. Apparently it is still there (Google Map), and is used by Pace 311.

I don't understand your reasoning for posting this. I knew it was there, I saw when I did my research for my Oak Park bus route proposal. All I said was that adding weekend service with a short turn would be taking a short route and making it even shorter and that giving weekend service to only a portion of the route instead of the whole route would be slightly unfair, especially since it would only most likely require 2, maybe 3 (old) buses.

[Busjack]

I don't understand your reasoning for posting this. I knew it was there, I saw when I did my research for my Oak Park bus route proposal. All I said was that adding weekend service with a short turn would be taking a short route and making it even shorter and that giving weekend service to only a portion of the route instead of the whole route would be slightly unfair, especially since it would only most likely require 2, maybe 3 (old) buses.

Well, I certainly don't understand your reasoning. Either one supplies enough buses to meet the demand, or forgets the proposal, suggestion, or whatever you are calling this this morning.

If that was your point, post what your customer research says about the potential ridership, and how you are going to fund the trial.

[BusHunter]

I feel as though more people are going to start asking CTA if their routes can get weekend service (7, 37, 96, etc) or if their routes can make a return (11, etc)

Probably out of all of those the #11 stands out. Seems someone on the south side has found the loophole that will get them some additional service, a JARC application. If they want this route to return maybe they should take a page out of their book and apply for one.

[Busjack]

Probably out of all of those the #11 stands out. Seems someone on the south side has found the loophole that will get them some additional service, a JARC application. If they want this route to return maybe they should take a page out of their book and apply for one.

The JARC applications seem to have been hanging around for about 6 years. Maybe the issue is that Pawar has to find a source of the matching funds.

South side got the 35 and 67 extensions implemented, but the 1 and 83 ones have not been implemented, and 1 was cut back rather than expanded.

[pudgym29]

There always was a loop at North and Narragansett, which was used by 86 before it was extended to Oak Park and 72 before it was extended to Harlem. Apparently it is still there (Google Map), and is used by Pace 311.

Narragansett is still an official short-turn terminus for westbound #72 North buses. It has its own breakout even on the CTA Route Map.

[strictures]

96 needs to be moved to Pratt. The reason Lunt was used was due to Pratt being only 16 feet wide from Seeley to Western until 1979.

[jajuan]

96 needs to be moved to Pratt. The reason Lunt was used was due to Pratt being only 16 feet wide from Seeley to Western until 1979.

What about Busjack's mention of the Jewish population not wanting buses along the portion of Pratt they're living on? That would seem to explain why CTA uses Lunt as a detour of the 155 west of Western when they could very easily use Pratt as they have done to the east of Western. Obviously CTA hasn't found a way around that obstacle. So it seems it's more to it than simply Pratt used to be a narrow street especially when speaking of such a small stretch that it was a narrow street.

[Busjack]

What about Busjack's mention of the Jewish population not wanting buses along the portion of Pratt they're living on? That would seem to explain why CTA uses Lunt as a detour of the 155 west of Western when they could very easily use Pratt as they have done to the east of Western. Obviously CTA hasn't found a way around that obstacle. So it seems it's more to it than simply Pratt used to be a narrow street especially when speaking of such a small stretch that it was a narrow street.

I never mentioned that, and the population isn't any different 2 blocks south.

Besides the narrow street one, the only justification anyone has given is that there are many senior living facilities on Lunt.

And to bring up my prior point about Devon, it doesn't seem like the 155 bus has a permanent detour between Kedzie and California for the reason you mention.

NOTE: TaylorTank originally started this topic for real changes in 2015, such as weekend Pershing service. He said "This topic is to keep the public aware of changes to buses' scheduling & routing, new routes, etc. I'll keep posted during the year." The fantasy thread is the "If I ran Transit."

[BusHunter]

96 needs to be moved to Pratt. The reason Lunt was used was due to Pratt being only 16 feet wide from Seeley to Western until 1979.

How do buses travel down Lunt anyway when we get the big snows? Isn't Lunt considered a side street?

[jajuan]

I never mentioned that, and the population isn't any different 2 blocks south.

Besides the narrow street one, the only justification anyone has given is that there are many senior living facilities on Lunt.

And to bring up my prior point about Devon, it doesn't seem like the 155 bus has a permanent detour between Kedzie and California for the reason you mention.

NOTE: TaylorTank originally started this topic for real changes in 2015, such as weekend Pershing service. He said "This topic is to keep the public aware of changes to buses' scheduling & routing, new routes, etc. I'll keep posted during the year." The fantasy thread is the "If I ran Transit."

My mistake. I remember someone bringing up that folks along a stretch of Pratt don't want buses through there in prior talks of why that route isn't on Pratt and thought it was you since you did participate heavily in that prior discussion. At any rate, with the rate CTA is going with the 96 being on 20-30 minute headways, it'll probably be cut long before we see it get regularly routed on Pratt.

[andrethebusman]

The JARC applications seem to have been hanging around for about 6 years. Maybe the issue is that Pawar has to find a source of the matching funds.

South side got the 35 and 67 extensions implemented, but the 1 and 83 ones have not been implemented, and 1 was cut back rather than expanded.

83rd has a long and sad history. Back about 40! years back, CTA had a bright idea to have a route from 79th/Ryan to 91/Commercial via 79-S Chicago-83-Burley-87th-Buffalo to 91-Commercial-87 loop. I remember the public hearings on this idea. Degenerated into a nasty argument about why there couldn't be buses on 83rd between State and Jeffery (basically street is rather narrow, though not unworkable), and even the matter of West 83rd was dragged into it. Mind you, at this time, the 95 was still running to 83rd/Jeffery weekdays and Saturdays. CTA even went to the trouble of installing signs in all 77th St buses for "83 83rd". But in the end, there were so many competing interests pushing their own agendas that the "do nothing" option won and nothing changed, at least until all service was dropped on 83rd for lack of use.