Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
BusHunter

A Push To Reinstate The #41 Elston bus

Recommended Posts

I was reading an article in the Nadig, a NW side press newspaper dated March 8th, that states Alderman Margaret Laurino (39th) wants to bring back the #41. She claims Alderman Deb Mell (33rd) is working with her on this. At Laurino's annual "State of the Ward" address on March 2nd she was quoted as saying "I'm hoping to see progress on this by next year" The article goes on to state that the #41 stopped running 25 years ago, and Laurino states all the revitalization that has occurred on Elston as of late such as Seafood City, Mariano's and the Senor Pan Cafe. So I guess we'll see what happens next year.

Didn't think I would find a link but one does exist!! LOL!!

http://nadignewspapers.com/2017/03/06/ald-laurino-seeks-to-bring-back-elston-bus/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

I was reading an article in the Nadig, a NW side press newspaper dated March 8th, that states Alderman Margaret Laurino (39th) wants to bring back the #41. She claims Alderman Deb Mell (33rd) is working with her on this. At Laurino's annual "State of the Ward" address on March 2nd she was quoted as saying "I'm hoping to see progress on this by next year" The article goes on to state that the #41 stopped running 25 years ago, and Laurino states all the revitalization that has occurred on Elston as of late such as Seafood City, Mariano's and the Senor Pan Cafe. So I guess we'll see what happens next year.

Didn't think I would find a link but one does exist!! LOL!!

http://nadignewspapers.com/2017/03/06/ald-laurino-seeks-to-bring-back-elston-bus/

Is this for real? And plus it was the Elston/ Clybourn bus route.

IMG_2399.JPG

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the revival of Routes 11 & 31 are inspirations for this to happen. Should one or both become successful, then I think the 41 may have a chance, just not in it's previous configuration. 

Good Luck!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember riding the #41 in the 80s and it didn't have much ridership then in the rush. South of belmont/blue I thought it always had decent ridership. It needs to link up to something like jeff pk or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BusHunter said:

I remember riding the #41 in the 80s and it didn't have much ridership then in the rush. South of belmont/blue I thought it always had decent ridership. It needs to link up to something like jeff pk or something.

Yeah I also remember the Clybourn section being the stronger portion of the route. I remember buses almost always pretty close to empty north of the Kimball Blue Line station. Plus the route was axed on October 6, 1997, so it's been almost 20 years ago since the route got eliminated and not the 25 that the alderman stated. At any rate, the commercial development that's occurred along Clybourn also might also call into question whether the Clybourn section would even be as strong in today's transit market. The small section of Clybourn used by the 132 today is really light in use even with part of the reason being that stretch is at the tailend of the northern leg of the route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BusHunter said:

I remember riding the #41 in the 80s and it didn't have much ridership then in the rush. South of belmont/blue I thought it always had decent ridership. It needs to link up to something like jeff pk or something.

The about 10 year old JARC application was for south of Logan Square (Diversey). The Nadig article seems to indicate that Laurino wants it on the north portion, around Forest Glen. I'm not sure where she is proposing the southern terminal, as all the addresses cited are north of Lawrence. Maybe she wants the dotted line area on the sign @TaylorTank1229 found. However, unless it gets to the Clybourn corridor, I can't see it having any better luck getting ridership than the 11 extension seems to have.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Belmont has such high ridership that even the #41 benefited off that. That was what I remember as the strongest portion of the route. Probably I would go for south of belmont blue to start off. Maybe they could try a rush hour portion north of that but they would probably end up with south of belmont blue service only. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, BusHunter said:

Belmont has such high ridership that even the #41 benefited off that. That was what I remember as the strongest portion of the route. Probably I would go for south of belmont blue to start off. Maybe they could try a rush hour portion north of that but they would probably end up with south of belmont blue service only. 

But the problem is that Laurino didn't articulate any justification for that. Maybe Deb Mell can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What it seemed to serve back in the day on Elston was mostly the factory workers of forest glen but with alot of those gone now I don't know what it would serve. The residents don't seem to ride it that much. I think they have a hard sell on that portion of the route. If cta did use its pullins wisely, thinking of the #77 pulling at kimball wb, perhaps they could send those in service to fg via Elston in service which is close to the route they would be doing anyway but I would make the garage the new terminal. At least deb mell would get 3/4 of a route and maybe cta wouldn't lose too much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Busjack said:

The about 10 year old JARC application was for south of Logan Square (Diversey). The Nadig article seems to indicate that Laurino wants it on the north portion, around Forest Glen. I'm not sure where she is proposing the southern terminal, as all the addresses cited are north of Lawrence. Maybe she wants the dotted line area on the sign @TaylorTank1229 found. However, unless it gets to the Clybourn corridor, I can't see it having any better luck getting ridership than the 11 extension seems to have.

I agree with that assessment if that's what's she's calling for, especially from the standpoint that folks across the northern and northwestern sections of the city are increasingly turning to Uber as a travel option. It's appearing that the 11 extension has run into some of that. She's definitely going to have to ask for and get a route configuration that people will think is worth getting on the bus, and it's going to have to overcome the Uber factor that CTA and the traditional cabbies are finding themselves seeing larger competition citywide but in definite pockets of the city in particular. I can't see that section of the old # 41 north of Belmont, which was rush only and the weaker part of the route when the route still existed, being able to do that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they would reinstate the #41, it should be as the #41 Clybourn Ave bus, minus the Elston portion of the route. We’re starting to see more businesses along Clybourn than we used to. If a pilot was to be initiated, it could run service between the Blue Line at Belmont and Kimball, and maybe either up to the Brown/Purple Line Express station at Chicago and Franklin or end at Union Station like before. The pilot could start off with buses running on Weekdays, earliest between 5am or 6am, and could end when the PM rush ends, somewhere between 6:30p-7:30p. I suggest tunning a bit later but CTA should start off simple. Buses could run every 20-30 minutes during its running times. Southbound routing via Belmont, Clybourn, Division, Orleans, Chicago, Wells, Wacker, Randolph, Clinton to the Union Station Transit Center. Northbound via Canal, Lake, Wacker, Orleans, Division, Clybourn, Belmont to the Blue Line. Garage running the route would best likely be Forest Glen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is some justification for an Elston bus these days, as there is a lot of new retail along the street, particularly between Logan and Fullerton. But how to do it would be difficult. Best suggestion, seriously, would be to run the 50-Damen via Damen-Diversey-Logan-Elston-Damen. Right now Damen between Diversey and Fullerton is just a bridge. Via Elston would add maybe 7 or 8 minutes, but then Damen isn't exactly a hot-shot route anyhow. Might lure millennials from Wicker Park to the shopping center south of Logan?

North end is probably unworkable (Bryn Mawr to Foster). Only conceivable routing would be 85-Central via Bryn Mawr-Elston to Foster, but then what? No place really to turn around there? Unless you go down Lacrosse, but I can just hear the NIMBY's screaming...

Andre

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2017 at 10:32 PM, TaylorTank1229 said:

If they would reinstate the #41, it should be as the #41 Clybourn Ave bus, minus the Elston portion of the route. We’re starting to see more businesses along Clybourn than we used to. If a pilot was to be initiated, it could run service between the Blue Line at Belmont and Kimball, and maybe either up to the Brown/Purple Line Express station at Chicago and Franklin or end at Union Station like before. The pilot could start off with buses running on Weekdays, earliest between 5am or 6am, and could end when the PM rush ends, somewhere between 6:30p-7:30p. I suggest tunning a bit later but CTA should start off simple. Buses could run every 20-30 minutes during its running times. Southbound routing via Belmont, Clybourn, Division, Orleans, Chicago, Wells, Wacker, Randolph, Clinton to the Union Station Transit Center. Northbound via Canal, Lake, Wacker, Orleans, Division, Clybourn, Belmont to the Blue Line. Garage running the route would best likely be Forest Glen.

Question is has retail grown that strong to ask #50 Damen riders to accept that diversion when the buses on that route are already slowed enough by all the freaking traffic signals and stop signs at every intersection from Foster to Diversey and the relatively high traffic density on weekdays for a street of its width from roughly Armitage to Division due to the bottleneck effect caused by trying to get past the three street intersection of Damen/North/Milwaukee avenues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jajuan said:

Question is has retail grown that strong to ask #50 Damen riders to accept that diversion when the buses on that route are already slowed enough by all the freaking traffic signals and stop signs at every intersection from Foster to Diversey and the relatively high traffic density on weekdays for a street of its width from roughly Armitage to Division due to the bottleneck effect caused by trying to get past the three street intersection of Damen/North/Milwaukee avenues. 

In addition to that, since Elston is mostly big box, whether shoppers will hike to a bus stop on the street. As it is, Walmart needed contracts with CTA to stop near its stores (especially Pullman Park, where it appeared that it was more necessary to have the Walmart act suburban and face the expressway).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are in a hurry to go anywhere, the Damen bus isn't how you go there. Besides, when the Damen bus was detoured via Elston for over a year while the bridge was replaced didn't cause anybody to have a fit, routing it that way to actually go somewhere shouldn't be a problem. Besides, we are thinking more about store employees than customers as potential passengers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2017 at 10:32 PM, TaylorTank1229 said:

If they would reinstate the #41, it should be as the #41 Clybourn Ave bus, minus the Elston portion of the route. We’re starting to see more businesses along Clybourn than we used to. If a pilot was to be initiated, it could run service between the Blue Line at Belmont and Kimball, and maybe either up to the Brown/Purple Line Express station at Chicago and Franklin or end at Union Station like before. The pilot could start off with buses running on Weekdays, earliest between 5am or 6am, and could end when the PM rush ends, somewhere between 6:30p-7:30p. I suggest tunning a bit later but CTA should start off simple. Buses could run every 20-30 minutes during its running times. Southbound routing via Belmont, Clybourn, Division, Orleans, Chicago, Wells, Wacker, Randolph, Clinton to the Union Station Transit Center. Northbound via Canal, Lake, Wacker, Orleans, Division, Clybourn, Belmont to the Blue Line. Garage running the route would best likely be Forest Glen.

When did the 41 end at Union Station?  I remember it ending at the Chicago/State subway station/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, strictures said:

When did the 41 end at Union Station?  I remember it ending at the Chicago/State subway station/

It was rerouted to serve the RR stations I believe in the late 80s to mid 90s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, strictures said:

When did the 41 end at Union Station?  I remember it ending at the Chicago/State subway station/

 

35 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

It was rerouted to serve the RR stations I believe in the late 80s to mid 90s.

Also, it originally went downtown; any cutback must have been in the 1973 cutbacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Busjack said:

 

Also, it originally went downtown; any cutback must have been in the 1973 cutbacks.

IiRC ridership fell when the routes was rerouted through Cabrini-Green

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

IiRC ridership fell when the routes was rerouted through Cabrini-Green

There was all sorts of stuff like that going on then, like the area around the 10 Lincoln-Larrabee bus being wiped out by urban renewal (I was with a group that had about the last meal at the Tap Root Pub before it was condemned).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many, many years ago, when buses replaced streetcars 05/04/47, the 41 ran via Clybourn-Division-Orleans-Franklin to Monroe-State-Adams-Franklin loop at all times. After a couple of years (09/10/49) all except weekday daytime service was cut back via Clybourn-Division to Clark. 12/17/50 short line was extended via Division-Orleans-Chicago to State (at the time the area around Clark and Division was at best "sketchy"). Routing via Clybourn-Larrabee-Chicago-Orleans started 4/28/57, same date Clybourn was thru routed with upper Elston. Remember here that Cabrini-Green was just being built at the time, and was considered an improvement on what had been around Division and Larrabee previously. Next change wasn't until 08/06/73 when remaining weekday daytime service was cut back from downtown to Chicago and State. 09/08/86 downtown service restored, replacing 128-Orleans trips more or less, via Chicago-Orleans-Franklin-Wacker-Lake to Lake-Clinton-Van Buren-Canal loop. 06/06/89 due to one-way streets SB buses via Chicago-Wells-Wacker-Lake. 04/15/94 due to issues with turn at Wacker-Lake, rerouted southbound again via Wacker-Randolph-Clinton. This was final routing until the end on 10/03/97.

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/4/2017 at 9:49 AM, andrethebusman said:

If you are in a hurry to go anywhere, the Damen bus isn't how you go there. Besides, when the Damen bus was detoured via Elston for over a year while the bridge was replaced didn't cause anybody to have a fit, routing it that way to actually go somewhere shouldn't be a problem. Besides, we are thinking more about store employees than customers as potential passengers.

Excuse me for contending, Andre, but the route #50 Damen bus is a key, if under-noted, way to go to | from the near northwest side to Andersonville.

I have ridden the #50 as recently as Saturday. Prior trips from here to Andersonville includes destinations like Empirical Brwy., The Hopleaf Bar, Simon's Tavern, and Andersonville Brwg.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I drove the 50 when I was at North Park - you talk about a slow trek down the street - a stop light or stop sign every block north of Diversey, and what can only be described as near gridlock in Bucktown Webster to Grand. Not a very crowded route, but not a speedy way to go either. This is why I would say routing via Damen-Diversey-Logan-Elston-Damen might actually get some new business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/4/2017 at 9:49 AM, andrethebusman said:

If you are in a hurry to go anywhere, the Damen bus isn't how you go there. Besides, when the Damen bus was detoured via Elston for over a year while the bridge was replaced didn't cause anybody to have a fit, routing it that way to actually go somewhere shouldn't be a problem. Besides, we are thinking more about store employees than customers as potential passengers.

For longer distance travel, that's correct. But you still have the folks who work at locations on or near Damen, and they make up the bulk of the ridership on that route. So if it's thought that Elston needs bus service again as much as thought, then it needs to be tried under a separate route and not taking riders on existing routes out of their way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering how the 11 failed, I doubt that the 41 would have much success now. Plus, the 41 has been gone for more than 20 years, while the 11 has been gone for only 5 years. However, the 41 would serve DeVry University and Lane Tech High School, so it might have a better chance.

I think a good Downtown routing for the 41 would be via either State or LaSalle. A southern terminus could be either Union Station or Congress Plaza.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×