Busjack

Pace/CTA North Shore Coordination Plan

47 posts in this topic

Maybe something for which I have been advocating for 10 years is actually going to happen. Pace has a Request for Proposals for a Pace CTA North Shore Transit Service Coordination Plan and Market Analysis.

Cracking this open, it states that the objective is to review and coordinate CTA and Pace services in the North Shore area, specifically where they overlap, including Evanston, Skokie, Chicago, and other adjacent North Shore communities.  It says that it is a continuation of the Pace North Shore Initiative of 2004 and the CTA Service Coordination Project of 2012, which I assume is the Crowd Reduction Plan.The study will review existing services and determine best routing alignment and service connections where service areas overlap. The study area includes Pace 208, 210, 213, 215, 250, 421, 422, 423, and CTA 54A, 93, 97, 201, 205, 206. The study also includes the Red, Yellow, Purple and Brown lines and the Metra UP-N.

The tasks include meeting with the Pace and CTA project teams (emphasis added). There is also supposed to be public involvement, and surveys of riders on the routes listed above. It is to take into account proposed ART for 250 and 208.

The contractor is supposed to complete the study and recommendations in 24 months.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe something for which I have been advocating for 10 years is actually going to happen. Pace has a Request for Proposals for a Pace CTA North Shore Transit Service Coordination Plan and Market Analysis.

Cracking this open, it states that the objective is to review and coordinate CTA and Pace services in the North Shore area, specifically where they overlap, including Evanston, Skokie, Chicago, and other adjacent North Shore communities.  It says that it is a continuation of the Pace North Shore Initiative of 2004 and the CTA Service Coordination Project of 2012, which I assume is the Crowd Reduction Plan.The study will review existing services and determine best routing alignment and service connections where service areas overlap. The study area includes Pace 208, 210, 213, 215, 250, 421, 422, 423, and CTA 54A, 93, 97, 201, 205, 206. The study also includes the Red, Yellow, Purple and Brown lines and the Metra UP-N.

The tasks include meeting with the Pace and CTA project teams (emphasis added). There is also supposed to be public involvement, and surveys of riders on the routes listed above. It is to take into account proposed ART for 250 and 208.

The contractor is supposed to complete the study and recommendations in 24 months.

​How does this take 24 months? 6 months I could understand, but two years? Just how many unemployed consultants are there in C[r]ook County?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​How does this take 24 months? 6 months I could understand, but two years? Just how many unemployed consultants are there in C[r]ook County?

​There is the unemployed consultant angle, but the market research, surveying, outreach meetings etc., which Pace actually does, take time. Maybe there is a big demand to go from New Trier H.S. to Harvey:D. But I could tell them in 5 minutes to eliminate 205 and bring back 212. There are other principles that could be applied, such as the Auditor General saying in 2007 that the lowest cost carrier should run the overlapping services, and that is not CTA.

I also bet that, like the Crowd Reduction Plan, CTA will never admit that it is participating with Pace in this. I also wonder how this is being funded. However, you can tell from my first sentence that it is time that it happened. Then maybe they could do the same thing for the near West area (Oak Park, Cicero and Berwyyyyyyyyn).

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like to me an excuse to cut service.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like to me an excuse to cut service.

​Any restructuring always is. However, as I indicated with regard to the lowest cost carrier comment, CTA really shouldn't be operating local bus service in Evanston and Skokie. As I also implied with regard to my question about "who is funding this," I'm somewhat surprised that Pace is handling this, instead of CTA just saying that it is dropping that service and leaving it to Pace to pick it up (which was its stance with regard to the Crowd Reduction Plan, except that, except for 17/317, that was primarily overlapping service in Chicago).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Any restructuring always is. However, as I indicated with regard to the lowest cost carrier comment, CTA really shouldn't be operating local bus service in Evanston and Skokie. As I also implied with regard to my question about "who is funding this," I'm somewhat surprised that Pace is handling this, instead of CTA just saying that it is dropping that service and leaving it to Pace to pick it up (which was its stance with regard to the Crowd Reduction Plan, except that, except for 17/317, that was primarily overlapping service in Chicago).

​In saying that you are also saying the "L" services shouldn't be in Evanston or Skokie either. No doubt when the #250 becomes Pulse #250 alot of those buses will become express buses and there will be hardly any local service on Davis/Dempster. If they take away services like the #93 or #201 or #205 or #206 that could potentially hurt Evanston because the buses will simply drive through their town instead of within it. Some of that no doubt will be cut by next year anyway so it may be hard to restructure when there is no foundation.

Edited by BusHunter
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​In saying that you are also saying the "L" services shouldn't be in Evanston or Skokie either. No doubt when the #250 becomes Pulse #250 alot of those buses will become express buses and there will be hardly any local service on Davis/Dempster. If they take away services like the #93 or #201 or #205 or #206 that could potentially hurt Evanston because the buses will simply drive through their town instead of within it. Some of that no doubt will be cut by next year anyway so it may be hard to restructure when there is no foundation.

​I previously said that Pace does not run an L system. This RFP is only for overlapping buses, and is to take into account connections with the current L and Metra systems.

201, 205, and 206 are strictly local buses within Evanston and Skokie, and so the consultant will have to decide and convince the boards who should run those routes. I was only contrasting Pace's view of cooperation vs. CTA's impression during the Crowd Reduction Plan that they were simply saying "ride Pace," without honestly saying that they had talked to Pace first, and Pace would be doing such things as making local stops on Milwaukee south of Devon and adding one trip.

Whether there are any local buses on 208 or 250 has nothing to do with overlap with CTA.

93 doesn't "drive through" Evanston to, say, Glencoe, There may be an unanswered question whether the 2003 CTA restructuring sending 93 north of Howard and killing 204 was a good idea, and I take it that the consultant will look into it.

54A raises a similar issue.

The two things that were said at the Pace meetings in about 2005 were (1) when CTA ran 205 via Golf to Old Orchard, Pace decided to withdraw 212 from that segment and link it to 422, thereby making the ride past Old Orchard 15 minutes longer, and (2) even though 254 had about 500 riders per Saturday, Pace was not going to provide better service on Saturday than what was provided by CTA during the week,

The other thing I see as a historical curiosity is 97, which is no different than 17, which became 317, as each substituted for L service on interurban tracks. If there is an argument that it is the local Howard bus, it also overlaps with 215.

I can also see CTA making the argument that since it is always crying about the funding formula, Pace has enough money to run Evanston and Skokie local bus service, and should do so. Also there is the question why Pace got bonding authority to expand the North Shore Garage--maybe it is the Edens project or maybe it is this. It can't be efficient to haul buses out of FG when there is already a garage in Evanston.

Finally, the repeated Rauner bugaboo indicates that maybe the TAs are doing the correct thing in eliminating redundancies. It is about time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By having a North Shore garage expansion it sure seems like Pace will have even more of the service than it does now in Evanston. #215 and #97 while being redundant on Howard are serving different areas on Crawford and Oakton and Niles Center. So how can you cut one of those? The biggest redundancies are the #97/#54A Dempster Yellow line to Old Orchard segment, but I doubt #54A will make it past this year. Now they could cut the #93 back to it's old terminal at Howard/McCormick but that's a service cut for anyone going south from Davis to Howard on Dodge. Again the #206 could be cut bait or possibly the #205 also. The west segment is not needed with a #208 nearby. #201 is probably safe unless they wanted to make that a Pace route. But probably alot of that (CTA) is going to be on the table if they do a service cut because they are serving Evanston with Chicago money. Why hurt the Chicago residents with more cutting. It is the CTA not the RTA.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By having a North Shore garage expansion it sure seems like Pace will have even more of the service than it does now in Evanston. #215 and #97 while being redundant on Howard are serving different areas on Crawford and Oakton and Niles Center. So how can you cut one of those? The biggest redundancies are the #97/#54A Dempster Yellow line to Old Orchard segment, but I doubt #54A will make it past this year. Now they could cut the #93 back to it's old terminal at Howard/McCormick but that's a service cut for anyone going south from Davis to Howard on Dodge. Again the #206 could be cut bait or possibly the #205 also. The west segment is not needed with a #208 nearby. #201 is probably safe unless they wanted to make that a Pace route. But probably alot of that (CTA) is going to be on the table if they do a service cut because they are serving Evanston with Chicago money. Why hurt the Chicago residents with more cutting. It is the CTA not the RTA.

​I made your cuts bold because you seemed to assume most of these were service cuts. The proposal is coordination. The service boards don't need a 2 year consultant process just to do cuts, even though I did say restructurings usually involve some cuts.

93 was one of the things I said I assumed they would study. If there is that much cross border traffic, one or the other agency will run the whole thing. If you reread my first post, connections with rail lines include the Brown Line. I said 54A raised the same issue.

I made 205 Orange, because I mentioned that as the crux of what I mean by coordination. Read above what I said about Pace pulling back 212 because CTA overlaid 205 on the same route between Evanston and Old Orchard. For this purpose, it probably is irrelevant whether 205 is restricted to the south segment and 212 is brought back, or 205 is extended to Northbrook Court and 422 cut back to Old Orchard as it was, but the service should be coordinated. I seem to remember Bus Expert saying something about CTA extending 205 to Northbrook Court, to which I said that would never happen, but it is clear that Pace backing down after CTA started competing with 205 has inconvenienced riders in Glenview and Northbrook. At least that's the comment I will submit when the survey gets going.

Other restructurings are possible, for instance, the initial round in 2004 suggested that 226 run via Oakton, Des Plaines, Oakton, Crawford and Howard to Paulina. I don't know if there is any demand for that, but that would be possible if 97 and 215 are reconsidered.

I made unless they wanted to make that a Pace route Purple because that's what I am suggesting. For instance, since the main purpose of 206 is to cover Evanston Township High School, it may be more economical for Pace just to run school trippers, as it does in Waukegan or from Maine East.

I made they are serving Evanston with Chicago money green, not because they actually are (CTA gets 30% of the sales tax money collected in suburban Cook County because it claims it serves 40 suburbs), but Carole Brown and Frank Kruesi proved what their intent really was. If you remember the initial Doomsday plan, it was to run the Sunday schedule 7 days a week. Now, very conveniently, routes such as 93 and 96 in the city and all CTA routes in Evanston did not run on Sunday. So, you are heading in the correct direction in indicating that if another doomsday comes, the first thing Chicago politicians would do is cut service in Evanston, Skokie and Oak Park. That threat was made and the first thing the mayors of Evanston said was "we support Carole in seeking funding." No, the first thing they should have said was "we want Pace to take over as a condition of supporting a tax increase." As I also stated, there may be a question whether the funding formula allows Pace to do that, but given such things as that Pace doesn't yet have budget problems with a $1.75 base fare while CTA's is $2.25, fare increases, which are probably more likely than service cuts once Metra opened that option, will probably cover it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never thought about the #226 going to Howard, but it would have to be reinstated as a 7 day operation then unless you want no service on the weekend. Still cutting #97 would be bad because you have no back up for the Yellow line. Plus you would be removing the link from Old Orchard to Dempster/Yellow line which does well. Well enough to consider expanding the Yellow line there. Plus when you start cutting all the service that goes down Howard or most of it, those riders will all flock to a #226 with not the best frequency. Turning the entire suburban operation over to Pace will hurt those riders because they will no longer get 20 minute service, it will most likely be 30 minute service with weekends possibly every 45-60 minutes. But I do understand if they have to cut someone has to lose service. Wouldn't this put a greater burden though on Pace to do this and put them in a budget cut situation? If I was them then I want the 30 percent suburban subsidy mentioned above that CTA gets. So i don't really see a benefit here for CTA or Pace. If they turn over the service they'll lose the subsidy and Pace is just increasing it's burden.

One other thing on cutting the south portion of #226, nobody said the #85A would stick around either (probably on the table) and then you are putting the N. Central corridor without a bus.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never thought about the #226 going to Howard, but it would have to be reinstated as a 7 day operation then unless you want no service on the weekend. Still cutting #97 would be bad because you have no back up for the Yellow line. Plus you would be removing the link from Old Orchard to Dempster/Yellow line which does well. Well enough to consider expanding the Yellow line there. Plus when you start cutting all the service that goes down Howard or most of it, those riders will all flock to a #226 with not the best frequency. Turning the entire suburban operation over to Pace will hurt those riders because they will no longer get 20 minute service, it will most likely be 30 minute service with weekends possibly every 45-60 minutes. But I do understand if they have to cut someone has to lose service. Wouldn't this put a greater burden though on Pace to do this and put them in a budget cut situation? If I was them then I want the 30 percent suburban subsidy mentioned above that CTA gets. So i don't really see a benefit here for CTA or Pace. If they turn over the service they'll lose the subsidy and Pace is just increasing it's burden.

One other thing on cutting the south portion of #226, nobody said the #85A would stick around either (probably on the table) and then you are putting the N. Central corridor without a bus.

​I repeat again--why are you only talking about CUTTING?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​I repeat again--why are you only talking about CUTTING?

​Why do you think they are going to add service? Being efficient is getting rid of the pork and getting rid of the pork means cutting. Plus with this budget coming up adding service is the opposite of what that budget says needs to be done. Perhaps the dust will settle by 2017 but I doubt it. Unfortunately we are back in the era of doomsday budgets. We'll be lucky if we are not a garage less by 2-3 years. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

​Why do you think they are going to add service? Being efficient is getting rid of the pork and getting rid of the pork means cutting. ...

​Yes, but getting rid of pork means getting rid of redundancies and wasteful "competition," not apparently your view that this project is to remove all bus service from Evanston (except maybe the ART208 and ART250). Like I said, they don't need a consultant and a 2 year passenger input survey mechanism to do that.

The issue the Auditor General and I raised was that who can provide the service more efficiently, and it certainly isn't CTA in this instance.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Why do you think they are going to add service? Being efficient is getting rid of the pork and getting rid of the pork means cutting. Plus with this budget coming up adding service is the opposite of what that budget says needs to be done. Perhaps the dust will settle by 2017 but I doubt it. Unfortunately we are back in the era of doomsday budgets. We'll be lucky if we are not a garage less by 2-3 years. 

You can make service better without making cuts (you already were aware of this). Not to say they are mutually exclusive, since they aren't (and especially if one is/isn't addressing the budget hole, that's a separate issue in itself). Yes, there will be a concern of costs, and some issue of service improvements. You'll have to just stay tuned.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the point is you cannot keep dual service be efficient and not cut. Cutting service on Howard is like cutting service on 95th. There are multiple lines for a reason. I don't think you can expect riders to ride one bus route is my point. If they do change service to Pace they'll have to get some more buses. They got money for that. Might as well put CNG in at north shore while they are at it. This plan influences a fleet cut at CTA and happening post 2016 budget cut what would be left to keep open all the garages.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the point is you cannot keep dual service be efficient and not cut. Cutting service on Howard is like cutting service on 95th. There are multiple lines for a reason. I don't think you can expect riders to ride one bus route is my point. If they do change service to Pace they'll have to get some more buses. They got money for that. Might as well put CNG in at north shore while they are at it. This plan influences a fleet cut at CTA and happening post 2016 budget cut what would be left to keep open all the garages.

​But they did cut service on West 95th, in Chicago, with CTA cutting back to once every 20 minutes and letting Pace 381 pick up the other half of the runs. Same thing between 63W and 386,

The difference between that and this is that the Crowd Reduction Plan was based on cutting in the city because Pace had to get to the nearest Rapid Transit station. My arguments are based on that Pace is the low cost provider for the suburbs and that most of these routes are purely suburban routes.

Now,  maybe we shouldn't prejudge what the final recommendations will be, including what routes will be restructured, although I suggested a few. However, in that Pace is the one advertising for this consultant's report, and CTA is always crying about resources being diverted, yes, there could be cuts at CTA garages. But that's no different than CTA abandoning large parts of the northwest side to Pace (56A, 69, 90N). Forest Glen just got stuck taking over Diversey, and apparently 103rd doesn't need as many buses as it had. The argument could also be made that operations would be more efficient because 30 foot buses could be run on some Evanston routes (which CTA did out of Forest Glen, but decided to get rid of the buses), although probably not on the high school runs, or there would be more flexibility because Evanston buses could be interlined with other North Shore routes (such as 213 and whatever goes to Northbrook).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would advocate two things:

1) 226 from Elk Grove to Howard L via Oakton-Dodge-Howard

2) (2)97 Old Orchard to Jeff Park via Niles Center-Touhy-Lehigh-Central.

85A is basically a lost cause as a separate route as almost all its riding is Jeff Park to Touhy and Lehigh intersection, going to Walmart and other retail in the area. There is almost no on or off between Devon and Touhy. 226 straight via Niles Center does nothing between Touhy and Devon either. Also, Touhy/Lehigh to Jeff needs later service, at least until most stores closes. Riding is mostly store employees. In addition, getting to Old Orchard from NW side is a bear.

As far as Oakton, Dempster, Touhy, Golf have thru EW service. Why not Oakton? And give the whole area to pace and be done with it. CTA Evanston service exists because in 1973 United was incapable of running it, no other reason. 226 exists as it does because in 1975 RTA did not want to duplicate 97 east of Lincoln, and CTA was more than happy to give up 13-Southwest Skokie Lincoln/Oakton to Jeff Park. Plus Teletype still existed at Touhy/Niles Center, not the retail area that is there now.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I would advocate two things:

1) 226 from Elk Grove to Howard L via Oakton-Dodge-Howard

2) (2)97 Old Orchard to Jeff Park via Niles Center-Touhy-Lehigh-Central.

85A is basically a lost cause as a separate route as almost all its riding is Jeff Park to Touhy and Lehigh intersection, going to Walmart and other retail in the area. There is almost no on or off between Devon and Touhy. 226 straight via Niles Center does nothing between Touhy and Devon either. Also, Touhy/Lehigh to Jeff needs later service, at least until most stores closes. Riding is mostly store employees. In addition, getting to Old Orchard from NW side is a bear.

As far as Oakton, Dempster, Touhy, Golf have thru EW service. Why not Oakton? And give the whole area to pace and be done with it. CTA Evanston service exists because in 1973 United was incapable of running it, no other reason. 226 exists as it does because in 1975 RTA did not want to duplicate 97 east of Lincoln, and CTA was more than happy to give up 13-Southwest Skokie Lincoln/Oakton to Jeff Park. Plus Teletype still existed at Touhy/Niles Center, not the retail area that is there now.

​Sounds interesting with the #97 but the Touhy/Lehigh corner would have to flock to #290. Maybe a #97 or Pace bus to Touhy down to Lehigh over to Central would work. They would still be serving Edgebrook and most importantly the shopping in an even greater scale. That might actually increase ridership. Central/Touhy is a busy stop. Whether they would still want to go up Caldwell would be up to them but a bidirectional service on lehigh probably wouldn't work nb as there isn't anywhere to have a stop. That would basically stick a fork in the #54A as it's better connections, more shopping and higher traffic areas. Only thing is when the Yellow line fails to run CTA can't say well ride the #97 because it won't be there and will Pace actually run a #226 with hours like a #606?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Yellow Line fails to run, CTA will have to provide a shuttle, as it does now.

On the proposed 97 via Lehigh the question would be whether it would pull into the Village Crossing and connect with the Niles Free Bus (whenever that is reconfigured, which apparently is not in the near future). I agree that it probably would make 54A unnecessary.

However, the way this study is defined, it isn't clear that 226 is included, unless 97 is modified. It was not listed in the RFP, I only mentioned it because it came up 11 years ago. But since it touches Skokie, I guess it could be considered.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But probably alot of that (CTA) is going to be on the table if they do a service cut because they are serving Evanston with Chicago money. Why hurt the Chicago residents with more cutting. It is the CTA not the RTA.

I use the 201 all the time to get to and from work around Northwestern since I live near Old Orchard. The 97 and 215 are also very useful especially since there is no weekend or evening service on the 422. Also, our taxes fund the whole RTA (CTA, Pace and Metra) regardless of where we live in Chicagoland. There are also many people from the city who use the 97 or 201 to go places in Skokie or Evanston and vice versa to Chicago. Also, there are CTA buses that operate in the nearby western suburbs. The 21 Cermak bus goes though Cicero and Berwyn all the way to North Riverside Mall, so how is that different from the 97 going to Old Orchard? The CTA also runs through Oak Park with the 90 and 86. IMHO, CTA buses should go into the suburbs to serve a major destination as long at it is not too far past where the L ends. Additionally once you get close to any major bus terminal whether it is Howard or Jeff Park or 95th, you are going to have some overlap in order to provide services that branch out in different directions. 


 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Yellow Line fails to run, CTA will have to provide a shuttle, as it does now.

On the proposed 97 via Lehigh the question would be whether it would pull into the Village Crossing and connect with the Niles Free Bus (whenever that is reconfigured, which apparently is not in the near future). I agree that it probably would make 54A unnecessary.

However, the way this study is defined, it isn't clear that 226 is included, unless 97 is modified. It was not listed in the RFP, I only mentioned it because it came up 11 years ago. But since it touches Skokie, I guess it could be considered.

​Yellow shuttle runs via Dempster-Skokie-Howard so it does not even come close to duplicating 97. Plus only intermediate stops are at Oakton station. one NB and 2 SB.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the 201 all the time to get to and from work around Northwestern since I live near Old Orchard. The 97 and 215 are also very useful especially since there is no weekend or evening service on the 422. Also, our taxes fund the whole RTA (CTA, Pace and Metra) regardless of where we live in Chicagoland. There are also many people from the city who use the 97 or 201 to go places in Skokie or Evanston and vice versa to Chicago. Also, there are CTA buses that operate in the nearby western suburbs. The 21 Cermak bus goes though Cicero and Berwyn all the way to North Riverside Mall, so how is that different from the 97 going to Old Orchard? The CTA also runs through Oak Park with the 90 and 86. IMHO, CTA buses should go into the suburbs to serve a major destination as long at it is not too far past where the L ends. Additionally once you get close to any major bus terminal whether it is Howard or Jeff Park or 95th, you are going to have some overlap in order to provide services that branch out in different directions. 


 

​The issue I raised before is what you are going to do if CTA pulls a similar Doomsday plan as it tried in 2007 with if "it doesn't run Sunday it doesn't run at all." You are then stuck. CTA has no political incentive to serve you.

Sure you would have some overlap in any event, but wouldn't it make sense to have Pace run 201, or would you rather be at Emanuel's mercy rather than served by a board that has a North Shore representative?

And you certainly haven't refuted what I said about the status quo making it more inconvenient in suburbs past Old Orchard.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Yellow shuttle runs via Dempster-Skokie-Howard so it does not even come close to duplicating 97. Plus only intermediate stops are at Oakton station. one NB and 2 SB.

​But that's irrelevant to BusHunter's point of "what do you do if the Yellow Line fails."

I am still convinced that you, BusHunter and Zol are convinced that this 2 year project is to abolish bus service in Evanston and Skokie rather than rationalize it. If you folks want your tax money wasted to provide inefficient and somewhat deficient bus service, there is something wrong.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use the 201 all the time to get to and from work around Northwestern since I live near Old Orchard. The 97 and 215 are also very useful especially since there is no weekend or evening service on the 422. Also, our taxes fund the whole RTA (CTA, Pace and Metra) regardless of where we live in Chicagoland. There are also many people from the city who use the 97 or 201 to go places in Skokie or Evanston and vice versa to Chicago. Also, there are CTA buses that operate in the nearby western suburbs. The 21 Cermak bus goes though Cicero and Berwyn all the way to North Riverside Mall, so how is that different from the 97 going to Old Orchard? The CTA also runs through Oak Park with the 90 and 86. IMHO, CTA buses should go into the suburbs to serve a major destination as long at it is not too far past where the L ends. Additionally once you get close to any major bus terminal whether it is Howard or Jeff Park or 95th, you are going to have some overlap in order to provide services that branch out in different directions. 


 

​Yes true, but each branch of the parent organization, RTA gets it's own cut or otherwise we would just have one super budget proposal. I understand your frustration, I'm almost in the same boat. When they did the suburban west restructuring, they did cut #304 back to North Riverside mall (are you listening Busjack? :P) Also I believe they trimmed off a few #322's to 54th and only ran those to the mall. So there is a pattern of cutting. Why not just cut the #21? Probably because it just gets too many riders. Eventually when Pace brings a Pulse #307 to Harlem. I wouldn't doubt they cut the #90 or at least trim it back to Grand it all depends on whether they expand the #307 to the O'Hare blue line or not. The #86 is another route that's going to be on the table. I wouldn't doubt by next year it goes to rush service only. But like I said before running CTA bus service in the suburbs is no different than running the "L" in the suburbs. So I don't really see the point of switching everything. At least it keep the consultants employed.

Edited by BusHunter
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​Yes true, but each branch of the parent organization, RTA gets it's own cut or otherwise we would just have one super budget proposal. I understand your frustration, I'm almost in the same boat. When they did the suburban west restructuring, they did cut #304 back to North Riverside mall (are you listening Busjack? :P) Also I believe they trimmed off a few #322's to 54th and only ran those to the mall. So there is a pattern of cutting. Why not just cut the #21? Probably because it just gets too many riders. Eventually when Pace brings a Pulse #307 to Harlem. I wouldn't doubt they cut the #90 or at least trim it back to Grand it all depends on whether they expand the #307 to the O'Hare blue line or not. The #86 is another route that's going to be on the table. I wouldn't doubt by next year it goes to rush service only. But like I said before running CTA bus service in the suburbs is no different than running the "L" in the suburbs. So I don't really see the point of switching everything. At least it keep the consultants employed.

​I made the red point exactly,  first by noting that this was another instance where Pace retreated and it made it more inconvenient for riders, this time in the Brookfield area, by cutting off direct service to the Pink Line and second that a near west survey should also be done, instead of the ad hoc cutback for 307. Now, maybe such a survey would conclude that 304 riders should transfer to 322, but there never was a real restructuring, just a Pace reaction to CTA.

Harlem Pulse also makes my point. I have a hard time justifying a Harlem Pulse, but if it is done, it should be done with an explicit agreement with CTA for CTA to cut back 90, either frequency wise or the extension south of Grand.

However, there is a difference between coordinating bus service and cutting L service to the suburbs. If nothing else, bus service is not restricted to current routes, while moving L service requires construction. However,if you want an analogy, it should be that CTA should not be running the Green Line west of Laramie, because it is also served by Metra. Besides that, early CTA was not that gung ho on continuing CRT service in the suburbs, having cut Douglas at 54th instead of Oak Park Ave., Congress at Forest Park instead of 22nd and Mannheim, and Skokie from about 1948 to 1964, leaving vestigial routes 21 west of 54th, 17 (finally gone) and 97. Maybe 21 to North Riverside is justifiable, but CTA operating 97 based on a 68 year old rationale doesn't appear to be, just like 17 wasn't.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now