2016 South Side Service Changes

[Busjack]

14 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

.any start date for #95 93rd/95th?

The video said Sept.

[jajuan]

1 hour ago, Sam92 said:

 

Idk the 26 kinda received quite a bit of attention in recent years compared to before considering it went from 40ft to almost exclusively attics indicating some type of ridership increase. Now this... maybe cta is testing to see if there is potential for ridership outside of the main rush and may very well make it bidirectional if this proves successful. I mean its a one seat ride to the from that corner of the city to downtown. In fact would probably be an advantage improving 71 seeing as those riders are transferring to the red line anyway. Its also cheaper than the metra and runs more often so it could possibly become a stronger route. 

Yes the #26 has seen some attention in recent years, but we've also seen that artic exclusivity go to a roughly half and half mix of types of buses used. And it may be getting attention now under CTA's right to enhance services in the city, but that doesn't necessarily change the south side yuppies of all stripes from fighting tooth and nail to hold on to as much ME local and South Chicago branch services as possible. That particular constituency still has a lot of political pull to this date, and CTA's DeCrowd plan and Metra's past attempts to do any type of adjustments to the ME involving cuts or scaling back show that there is a lot of history of the service boards backing away from cuts and trimming back those services that serve those areas with a large measure of political clout with the city mayor. 

1 hour ago, Sam92 said:

Yes. It would take some pressure off some of the feeders in the rush along with knocking down crowds on the school runs because people on routes like 112/115 looking to travel across 95th no longer have ride all the way to the Dan Ryan to switch. With the #4 extending to 115th the #115 will probably get a frequency reduction.any start date for #95 93rd/95th?

Yes there may be some easing of crowds during rush hour for folks seeking to travel across 95th street but not needing the Red Line to do so. However, you're still probably going to see enough riders heading north who prefer the Red Line to continue beyond 95th. This is evidenced by CTA saying that it would be certain trips of the #4 extending to 115th and not all. So any adjustment to #115 would quite likely be insignificant. You don't want to penalize those #115 riders who board the route outside of the Cottage Grove leg of of the route. Remember bus ridership took a hit in recent years  vs CTA rail because of being too slow, and part of that included some routes having service headways too high to make the route a viable option. Also remember that #115 still significantly intertwined with the #111 through a large amount of interlining. Tweaking the #115 affects buses on the #111 schedule. Not only that, if the destination is of a significant distance north of 95th, the Red Line is still the faster north-south option, another reason why I wouldn't be looking for any large adjustments to the #115.At any rate, Da Mare announced improvements, not improvements at the expense of other's inconvenience in that area. And given how Emanuel loves doing press opts from the South Side in general and from the Red Line in particular, you can bank on him stressing any inconvenience being kept to a minimum.

[Busjack]

27 minutes ago, jajuan said:

but that doesn't necessarily change the south side yuppies of all stripes from fighting tooth and nail to hold on to as much ME local and South Chicago branch services as possible.

I really doubt that is the reason. If they did that you'll have whoever is the Congressman (Robin Kelly?--reference was to JJJr. making a big stink that Metra should upgrade the stations such as at 71st and Stony Island) and all the activists yelling racism at the necessary public hearing, and Metra doesn't need that political problem.

The only arguably yuppie stop is 57th, which is served by main line trains. Maybe also 53rd, which isn't.

 

[jajuan]

4 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I really doubt that is the reason. If they did that you'll have whoever is the Congressman (Robin Kelly?--reference was to JJJr. making a big stink that Metra should upgrade the stations such as at 71st and Stony Island) and all the activists yelling racism at the necessary public hearing, and Metra doesn't need that political problem.

The only arguably yuppie stop is 57th, which is served by main line trains. Maybe also 53rd, which isn't.

 

That line has been a political minefield that's tricky to navigate beyond just the Hyde Park stations. Some kind of clout is in place for as many South Chicago branch trains to stick around with the #26 being in place in that same area. To hear some speak, the #26 should have induced Metra execs to have already begun reexamining service on the South Chicago Branch, which doesn't seem to have happened. 

[Busjack]

16 minutes ago, jajuan said:

That line has been a political minefield that's tricky to navigate beyond just the Hyde Park stations. Some kind of clout is in place for as many South Chicago branch trains to stick around with the #26 being in place in that same area. To hear some speak, the #26 should have induced Metra execs to have already begun reexamining service on the South Chicago Branch, which doesn't seem to have happened. 

As I said, Jesse Jackson Jr.

There are also the Mike Paynes of the world, although he wanted CTA to pay for it. I think I told him about 12 years ago that the only way that would work is cutting off various buses, such as 14, at 71st St., but it seems like the riders have cast their lot elsewhere.

By the same token, it doesn't look like CTA gets riders on 3 and 4 to transfer to the Green Line. But Rahm somehow found it necessary to increase service on it to once every 15 minutes from 20 on that branch.

[artthouwill]

20 minutes ago, jajuan said:

That line has been a political minefield that's tricky to navigate beyond just the Hyde Park stations. Some kind of clout is in place for as many South Chicago branch trains to stick around with the #26 being in place in that same area. To hear some speak, the #26 should have induced Metra execs to have already begun reexamining service on the South Chicago Branch, which doesn't seem to have happened. 

I would love to see the ME South Chicago branch thrive.   But it hasn't happened.   I took a train from 93rd to Randolph around 12:40 one day.   It was a four car train, but only the lead car was used for passengers the entire trip.   The majority of people boarded south of 79th/Cheltenham.  On the branch maybe a total of about 25 people boarded.   Half were smart (I wasn't) and transferred to an express mainline at 57th. Total travel time from 93rd to Randolph was 40 minutes. 

I think the 26 expansion will be a success.   I really think Metra should rethink its ME inner city strategy.  

[jajuan]

2 hours ago, Busjack said:

As I said, Jesse Jackson Jr.

There are also the Mike Paynes of the world, although he wanted CTA to pay for it. I think I told him about 12 years ago that the only way that would work is cutting off various buses, such as 14, at 71st St., but it seems like the riders have cast their lot elsewhere.

By the same token, it doesn't look like CTA gets riders on 3 and 4 to transfer to the Green Line. But Rahm somehow found it necessary to increase service on it to once every 15 minutes from 20 on that branch.

Oh no, not Mike Payne's crazy Grey Line idea. With Jesse Jackson, Jr out of Congress and looking after his kids now that his wife is doing her turn in prison, one wonders how much of that clout he still has as one the South Chicago Branch's main political patrons. If things ever did get to a call any station upgrading, I can't see that getting too far as the stations appear to be of the same decent quality of many of Metra's suburban stations. And I'd say cries of prejudice or racism in regards to the line would be be unfounded as I seem to recall Metra backing away from rearranging its fare zone structure some years ago in such a way that South Branch riders would not have fare advantage not really seen with other Metra lines that come into the city. Heck the branch appears to have a fare advantage over even the main line portion of that very same line.

As for more riders on #3 or #4 transferring to the Green Line, the Green Line has seen a noticeable bump in riders from what I've seen riding it. So shaving five minutes off the branches' 20 min headway may have a market the rest of us may not see only looking at the surface. But it still only goes to 63rd Street on either south side branch, so you're not going to see as much moving from the #3 or #4 to the Green as you may like. More moving to the Red Line may seem a better call from relatively recent reports of a service imbalance between the Howard leg and Dan Ryan leg having developed in the 23 years since the Red and Green Lines swapped south ends months ahead of CTA moving to color coded rail names.

[Busjack]

22 minutes ago, jajuan said:

With Jesse Jackson, Jr out of Congress and looking after his kids now that his wife is doing her turn in prison, one wonders how much of that clout he still has as one the South Chicago Branch's main political patrons.

However, you can't count on that the people he represented in South Shore aren't going to rise up in anger. That's why I said Robin Kelly, even though she lives in Olympia Fields.

22 minutes ago, jajuan said:

If things ever did get to a call any station upgrading, I can't see that getting too far as the stations appear to be of the same decent quality of many of Metra's suburban stations

They did redo the one on Stony Island, and that has about another 30 years of service life left.

22 minutes ago, jajuan said:

And I'd say cries of prejudice or racism in regards to the line would be be unfounded as I seem to recall Metra backing away from rearranging its fare zone structure some years ago in such a way that South Branch riders would not have fare advantage not really seen with other Metra lines that come into the city.

The South Chicago Branch is in Zone B when it should be in Zone C. Metra said "those riders said the additional fare wasn't worth it to them." You  also seem to have forgotten all the complaints a couple of years ago when Metra proposed make the fare interval the same between A and B as between other adjacent zones (50 cents from D to E, for example), even though I pointed out to the defender of Chatham that the main line south of 79th was in Zone C (fare jump from B to C is now $1.25).

In short, there have been shouts of racism before, and I assume (and Metra probably figures) will arise again if abandonment hearings are held. South Shore and South Chicago are not yuppie territories.

22 minutes ago, jajuan said:

. More moving to the Red Line may seem a better call

Which brings up the issue of the need for the Green Line at all. When rebuilt in 1995, the original theory, when CTA management still believed in  rapid transit (instead of stopping every few blocks) was that the Green Line would serve bus routes (39, 43, 51) that the Red Line then did not, and, for instance, the Garfield station was not then rebuilt. Yet, the "temporary" rerouting of those buses to Red Line stations was never reversed. Only real value the Green Line had was when the Red Line was closed.

In this announcement, Rahm took credit for new cars on the Green Line, though.

[jajuan]

26 minutes ago, Busjack said:

However, you can't count on that the people he represented in South Shore aren't going to rise up in anger. That's why I said Robin Kelly, even though she lives in Olympia Fields.

They did redo the one on Stony Island, and that has about another 30 years of service life left.

The South Chicago Branch is in Zone B when it should be in Zone C. Metra said "those riders said the additional fare wasn't worth it to them." You  also seem to have forgotten all the complaints a couple of years ago when Metra proposed make the fare interval the same between A and B as between other adjacent zones (50 cents from D to E, for example), even though I pointed out to the defender of Chatham that the main line south of 79th was in Zone C (fare jump from B to C is now $1.25).

In short, there have been shouts of racism before, and I assume (and Metra probably figures) will arise again if abandonment hearings are held. South Shore and South Chicago are not yuppie territories.

Which brings up the issue of the need for the Green Line at all. When rebuilt in 1995, the original theory, when CTA management still believed in  rapid transit (instead of stopping every few blocks) was that the Green Line would serve bus routes (39, 43, 51) that the Red Line then did not, and, for instance, the Garfield station was not then rebuilt. Yet, the "temporary" rerouting of those buses to Red Line stations was never reversed. Only real value the Green Line had was when the Red Line was closed.

In this announcement, Rahm took credit for new cars on the Green Line, though.

No I didn't forget the complaints, I just couldn't remember all the details of which fare zone respective portions should actually be in. From what Art mentioned of scarcely 25 people boarding for just about the whole trip on the day he rode, it doesn't seem to be much of anyone's territory. Yes ridership tends to decrease on any transit service during off peak hours, but 25 people seems to be somewhat low even for off peak. Plus I was not saying folks living along the line wouldn't get up in arms about any change they disagree on. I'm just asking will time show whether Robin Kelly can garner the type of clout for that constituency on Capitol Hill that Jackson Jr managed to. So far it seems kind of early still to say those folks still have the same type of congressional punch they had with Jackson. And sure, the Green Line is never going to be a Red Line anytime in the near future, but it does have a noticeably high enough ridership on both its west and south legs to justify still being in service. It sure as heck has much more in ridership in its off peak times than Art seems to have observed on the South Chicago Branch. 

[artthouwill]

With the South Chicago branch being a total Zone B, Metra has boxed itself in a corner.   On the one hand,  there is now precedent to extend the same courtesy to Mainline locals to 111th to boost ridership.   However,  doing so will certainly cause backlash through the rest of the system.   Restoring the South Chicago branch back to zone C south of 79th seems fair,  but will it shift more riders to the 26?   The ME is the only Metra service that competes with CTA and loses to the CTA.  

[jajuan]

5 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

With the South Chicago branch being a total Zone B, Metra has boxed itself in a corner.   On the one hand,  there is now precedent to extend the same courtesy to Mainline locals to 111th to boost ridership.   However,  doing so will certainly cause backlash through the rest of the system.   Restoring the South Chicago branch back to zone C south of 79th seems fair,  but will it shift more riders to the 26?   The ME is the only Metra service that competes with CTA and loses to the CTA.  

So basically that fare advantage that Metra tried fixing and backed away from doesn't do much to help it against CTA especially with the #26 having been instituted and in service over the past decade. Plus trains on the branch just creep along from operating on grade level and having so many crossings at roadways. They can't really pick up any real speed until merging with the mainline tracks. 

[Busjack]

53 minutes ago, jajuan said:

So basically that fare advantage that Metra tried fixing and backed away from doesn't do much to help it against CTA especially with the #26 having been instituted and in service over the past decade. Plus trains on the branch just creep along from operating on grade level and having so many crossings at roadways. They can't really pick up any real speed until merging with the mainline tracks. 

One way is $3.50 compared to CTA cash bus fare of $2.25. Only question is whether a monthly at $102.25 is worth it compared to a CTA monthly of $100.00.*

*Carole Brown used to complain that Metra from Kenilworth was cheaper than CTA, but then she had to admit that was only for monthlies, and that was 10 years ago. Now the rich pay $160.

[jajuan]

19 minutes ago, Busjack said:

One way is $3.50 compared to CTA cash bus fare of $2.25. Only question is whether a monthly at $102.25 is worth it compared to a CTA monthly of $100.00.*

*Carole Brown used to complain that Metra from Kenilworth was cheaper than CTA, but then she had to admit that was only for monthlies, and that was 10 years ago. Now the rich pay $160.

True CTA has the advantage overall inside the city on fares, but I was actually getting at fare advantage among those who prefer hopping on a Metra train over a CTA bus.  My apologies there for not being as clear in my prior statement.

[Busjack]

17 minutes ago, jajuan said:

but I was actually getting at fare advantage among those who prefer hopping on a Metra train over a CTA bus. 

I thought $3.50 vs. $2.25 was responsive to that, especially since the CTA $2.25 cash fare doesn't get you a transfer, so it is one ride vs. one ride.

[jajuan]

52 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I thought $3.50 vs. $2.25 was responsive to that, especially since the CTA $2.25 cash fare doesn't get you a transfer, so it is one ride vs. one ride.

True, but when strictly comparing to other Metra riders and taking CTA out the equation for a moment you'd think more people would be taking that branch into downtown than Art suggests is actually the case from his last experience. 

[Busjack]

4 hours ago, jajuan said:

True, but when strictly comparing to other Metra riders and taking CTA out the equation for a moment you'd think more people would be taking that branch into downtown than Art suggests is actually the case from his last experience. 

But the issue was why the 26 bus was being beefed up while the ME is there, as opposed to why more ride Metra from Edgebrook (which has lousy CTA service) than South Chicago. This was a south side bus topic.

[jajuan]

37 minutes ago, Busjack said:

But the issue was why the 26 bus was being beefed up while the ME is there, as opposed to why more ride Metra from Edgebrook (which has lousy CTA service) than South Chicago. This was a south side bus topic.

Hmmmm and making one minor comparison of how fare advantage the rail service competing with the bus has relative to other rail lines of the competing transit agency to make the larger point that the rail service is there due more to clout when it's been argued that the bus should have made the rail branch superfluous far earlier than the bus route's beef up in service might, hurts the topic how exactly?

[Busjack]

17 minutes ago, jajuan said:

rail service is there due more to clout

I never said that, you did. I said Metra didn't want to go to the trouble of holding public hearings where they would be called racist. I might not have used the term racist,but figure out what I meant by "activists." It wasn't the bike crowd like the Active Transportation Alliance.

It isn't like the 10th Ward is the 11th or 23rd wards, where clout was actually used on the CTA.

[jajuan]

3 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I never said that, you did. I said Metra didn't want to go to the trouble of holding public hearings where they would be called racist. I might not have used the term racist,but figure out what I meant by "activists." It wasn't the bike crowd like the Active Transportation Alliance.

It isn't like the 10th Ward is the 11th or 23rd wards, where clout was actually used on the CTA.

Yes I was the one who said clout, as in I was making the minor connection about fares solely between the rail lines in that instant to add to my earlier and already stated larger point that clout on that side of town was a big part of why that service is still structured the way it is when outside wisdom would seem to suggest that #26's introduction and apparent successes of the route over almost thirteen years of its operation should have induced Metra to examine whether the current service level along the branch was still justifiable.  And I also agreed with your implied but not really stated point that a racism charge in regard to the line would be unwarranted looking at the way fare is structured, how the service levels look to be higher than need be when the #26 is now there, and how the stations on the branch look to be in pretty good condition especially when come to think of it looking at how a few of the mainline stations appear to need some work.

[renardo870]

On Friday, May 13, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Busjack said:

 

Definitely a service increase, but the bidirectional suggestion isn't that much of a cost increase, given all the deadheads ti 103. Question though (like the J14/15) is if there is enough demand to accommodate those who don't want to transfer to the Red Line at 69th.

 

On Friday, May 13, 2016 at 6:33 AM, Sam92 said:

If this attract enough people it could eventually become bi directional all day service

The improved 26 South Shore Express will definitely have the one seat ride effect, keeping most riders from transferring @67/Jeffery to get the J14, and pick up additional riders between Balbo and Chicago for most of the Mag Miles shopping area and the Millennium Park/Grant Park during the midday lunch crowds NB and all early PM/mid evenings SB, and of course pick a few ME/SC riders. The J14 will have a few more seats available with the 26 running and it may have all day service in the future

[jajuan]

6 hours ago, renardo870 said:

 

The improved 26 South Shore Express will definitely have the one seat ride effect, keeping most riders from transferring @67/Jeffery to get the J14, and pick up additional riders between Balbo and Chicago for most of the Mag Miles shopping area and the Millennium Park/Grant Park during the midday lunch crowds NB and all early PM/mid evenings SB, and of course pick a few ME/SC riders. The J14 will have a few more seats available with the 26 running and it may have all day service in the future

We'll have to see how the increase performs  to get to the all day bidirectional point, but Busjack is on to something about it not being much of a cost increase considering the current deadheads. There aren't just the deadheads to from the garage though. There are also the deadheads through the duration of service stemming from buses making it to the end and deadheading back to the start point relevant to that particular rush period of the day. The #6 has similar deadheads to the latter weekdays during evening offpeak hours to account for SB headways being every 10 minutes most of the evening vs the headways of every 20 minutes for NB buses. Same on the #147 because SB weekday evening headways are every 20 minutes and NB throughout the evening is every nine minutes. 

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, jajuan said:

Busjack is on to something about it not being much of a cost increase considering the current deadheads

Also, if rush hour service isn't affected (only the time span of service), not much of a need for more equipment.

[jajuan]

20 hours ago, Busjack said:

Also, if rush hour service isn't affected (only the time span of service), not much of a need for more equipment.

True, they would basically only need to do a modified version of what they do now with this route and other unidirectional peak service routes. If a bus makes to the end and it's still within the span of service, it can simply deadhead back up to the start point to position for another service trip. 

[Sam92]

Advanced schedule for the 26 is now online.

New hours are:

NB: 420a-150p

Sb: 1:14p-920p

Main rush period headways are 9-10min roughly while the New hours outside the rush are basically every 15 min. 

[TaylorTank1229]

36 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Advanced schedule for the 26 is now online.

New hours are:

NB: 420a-150p

Sb: 1:14p-920p

Main rush period headways are 9-10min roughly while the New hours outside the rush are basically every 15 min. 

Here's the new schedule for #26.

http://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/advance_schedules/2016-06/26.pdf