Random CTA

[Sam92]

10 hours ago, Busjack said:

 

The general idea has merit. Currently, it is every 15 minutes russh and 20 off peak on each branch, which is too infrequent for real rapid transit service. There were, long, long ago, Normal Park and Stock Yards shuttles--which brings up the point: how much demand is at each of the 4 affected stations?  Looking at RTAMS for July 2019 (to eliminate COVID), average daily ridership is: Ashland 999, Halsted 512, King Dr. 481, and Cottage Grove 1081. That compares to 2808 at 63/Red Line. Maybe the TOD at Cottage will increase ridership, in which case Cottage  Grove should be the main line. Whether this is enough to justify the shuttle, or, as Art suggests, the transfer would kill ridership, I don't know.

Going off numbers I'd say Ashland would be the one that needs disconnecting but personally I'd just shut all service down; barely anyone rides the branch now with that frequency and you're better off taking the red if you're going downtown. If you're going to somewhere on the lake branch, I'd just take Ashland down; plus as you and I pointed out at times, heavy frequency on 3 and 4 gobble up riders and competes with the green line due to them being more attractive frequency wise vs waiting so long for a train....you add more trains you now have a reason to reduce 3 and 4 service north of 63rd now you aren't wasting so many bus hours trapped in traffic since more people are on the train 

[strictures]

3 hours ago, Sam92 said:

Going off numbers I'd say Ashland would be the one that needs disconnecting but personally I'd just shut all service down; barely anyone rides the branch now with that frequency and you're better off taking the red if you're going downtown. If you're going to somewhere on the lake branch, I'd just take Ashland down; plus as you and I pointed out at times, heavy frequency on 3 and 4 gobble up riders and competes with the green line due to them being more attractive frequency wise vs waiting so long for a train....you add more trains you now have a reason to reduce 3 and 4 service north of 63rd now you aren't wasting so many bus hours trapped in traffic since more people are on the train 

I go to the U of C medical campus & I often just take the 4 to & from the Loop.  I hate the L now, the Red Line is just a rolling homeless shelter, complete with smoking & screaming mentally ill, plus of course the peddlers selling crap on the South Side trains.

[artthouwill]

8 minutes ago, strictures said:

I go to the U of C medical campus & I often just take the 4 to & from the Loop.  I hate the L now, the Red Line is just a rolling homeless shelter, complete with smoking & screaming mentally ill, plus of course the peddlers selling crap on the South Side trains.

I suppose taking the 4 is a longer trip time wise but has the benefit of dropping off close to the hospital.  Uou could take the Green line to Cottage Grove and ride the 4 north about 5 blocks.   If you're arriving or leaving in the rush hour,  the 2 is about 2 blocks away and runs express to/from 57th and Stony Island to/from downtown.  These are better alternatives to the Red Line unless your initial trip includes the Red Line anyway.  In other words,  if you are on the north side and board a Red Line train, it would be easier to just ride it to Garfield and take the 55.  If you don't want to or can't walk from 55th and Cottage Grove,  you can always take a SB 4 for the other 3 or 4 blocks. 

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, artthouwill said:

I suppose taking the 4 is a longer trip time wise but has the benefit of dropping off close to the hospital.  Uou could take the Green line to Cottage Grove and ride the 4 north about 5 blocks.   If you're arriving or leaving in the rush hour,  the 2 is about 2 blocks away and runs express to/from 57th and Stony Island to/from downtown.  These are better alternatives to the Red Line unless your initial trip includes the Red Line anyway.  In other words,  if you are on the north side and board a Red Line train, it would be easier to just ride it to Garfield and take the 55.  If you don't want to or can't walk from 55th and Cottage Grove,  you can always take a SB 4 for the other 3 or 4 blocks. 

On the few times I did it, I got off either the Red Line or the Milw-N downtown, and then took a 6. If I didn't feel like walking, I took a 171. Even when it was the Howard-Jackson Park, I didn't take it south of Washington.

[strictures]

3 hours ago, artthouwill said:

I suppose taking the 4 is a longer trip time wise but has the benefit of dropping off close to the hospital.  Uou could take the Green line to Cottage Grove and ride the 4 north about 5 blocks.   If you're arriving or leaving in the rush hour,  the 2 is about 2 blocks away and runs express to/from 57th and Stony Island to/from downtown.  These are better alternatives to the Red Line unless your initial trip includes the Red Line anyway.  In other words,  if you are on the north side and board a Red Line train, it would be easier to just ride it to Garfield and take the 55.  If you don't want to or can't walk from 55th and Cottage Grove,  you can always take a SB 4 for the other 3 or 4 blocks. 

I'll be honest, I've gotten scared to ride the Red Line except at rush hour & then only the first car!  In the past, I often went to 63rd/Cottage & rode the 4 north or even walked it.  I never felt unsafe walking there & still wouldn't.  But crime on the L, especially the Red is utterly out of control & only putting a cop in every car & on every platform, will stop that!

[jajuan]

So looking at 146 and 147 signs today, looks like destination signs have changed to the new names on SB buses of both routes, but on NB 147 it looks to be the same. And I didn't get a chance to see what's going on with NB 146 signs.

[Mr.NewFlyer1051]

12 minutes ago, jajuan said:

So looking at 146 and 147 signs today, looks like destination signs have changed to the new names on SB buses of both routes, but on NB 147 it looks to be the same. And I didn't get a chance to see what's going on with NB 146 signs.

i’ll check it out today and post pics so now it says “147 outer dusable lake shore express to congress plaza”?

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

On the few times I did it, I got off either the Red Line or the Milw-N downtown, and then took a 6. If I didn't feel like walking, I took a 171. Even when it was the Howard-Jackson Park, I didn't take it south of Washington.

Historically that was the case for a lot of South zsiders to get off at Washington and transfer to the Dan Ryan L or some other service like the 6.  When the south end switched to 95th, that eliminated the need to transfer

  

  

38 minutes ago, strictures said:

I'll be honest, I've gotten scared to ride the Red Line except at rush hour & then only the first car!  In the past, I often went to 63rd/Cottage & rode the 4 north or even walked it.  I never felt unsafe walking there & still wouldn't.  But crime on the L, especially the Red is utterly out of control & only putting a cop in every car & on every platform, will stop that!

Even though crime has definitely increased on the Red line,  it seems most people take it because of necessity  ( living far south) or convenience being fast and frequent.   For those who find it too unsafe and take alternatives the Green Line seems to be at the bottom of the choice list.  During most of my life, since the Dan Ryan Line opened, the SSM has sunk to the bottom as he alternate choice to Dan Ryan service.   The 3, 4, 6, and 14 are the more preferred choices. 

[Busjack]

51 minutes ago, Mr.NewFlyer1051 said:

i’ll check it out today and post pics so now it says “147 outer dusable lake shore express to congress plaza”?

Before this change, the signs on the buses were changed to TO IDA B. WELLS. So, 147 got or is getting a double historical change.

[Tcmetro]

I was looking through some old maps, and they suggest that routes like 31, 39, 43, 51, 59 at one time didn't go out of the way to connect with the Dan Ryan line. I imagine modifying those lines also contributed to ridership decline on the South Side Main.

 

Edit: looks like the changes happened in 1994 when the Green Line closed and were never reverted upon reopening in 1996.

[Busjack]

25 minutes ago, Tcmetro said:

I was looking through some old maps, and they suggest that routes like 31, 39, 43, 51, 59 at one time didn't go out of the way to connect with the Dan Ryan line. I imagine modifying those lines also contributed to ridership decline on the South Side Main.

 

Edit: looks like the changes happened in 1994 when the Green Line closed and were never reverted upon reopening in 1996.

Your last sentence is correct. There was also a proposal when the EL-Jack (now Green Line) rebuild was initiated (about 1991) that there would be Green Line stations where there were not Dan Ryan stations, such as only at Indiana, 43rd, and 51st. This might be the reason that Garfield was not rebuilt until later, although it might have been due to a lack of funds.

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, Tcmetro said:

I was looking through some old maps, and they suggest that routes like 31, 39, 43, 51, 59 at one time didn't go out of the way to connect with the Dan Ryan line. I imagine modifying those lines also contributed to ridership decline on the South Side Main.

 

Edit: looks like the changes happened in 1994 when the Green Line closed and were never reverted upon reopening in 1996.

That is true.  I'm not exactly sure why the reroutes were not rescinded other than maybe customer demand.   

At one time the 75 also didn't serve a Red Line station but at some point,  unrelated to the other rerouted lines, got its own reroute to the 79th Red Line station. 

Good thing for CTA and everyone else the Green Line is still intact 

  The tracks have proven to be valuable for the Red Line rebuild and the 95th station expansion.

[Anthony Devera]

Sometimes I feel like the Dan Ryan branch north of 63rd should not have been built. Instead, the ramp that currently connects the SSM with the Englewood branch should have been repurposed to connect the Dan Ryan to the SSM. Basically, trains wound run along the Dan Ryan from 95th to 63rd, then take the ramp and continue along the SSM to Downtown. The two 63rd branches would then be joined together (and possibly extended west) to create a 63rd crosstown line, and there would be a transfer station at 63rd/Dan Ryan. Although such a plan would result in slower rides for some people, it would place the stations closer to where the businesses are and possibly attract more ridership. This would be similar to the Blue Line O'Hare branch, where trains run along the Kennedy between O'Hare and Addison, then move to the Milwaukee subway/elevated, which runs along a business corridor. But it's unlikely that such a plan would be implemented now or anytime in the future.

[strictures]

1 minute ago, Anthony Devera said:

Sometimes I feel like the Dan Ryan branch north of 63rd should not have been built. Instead, the ramp that currently connects the SSM with the Englewood branch should have been repurposed to connect the Dan Ryan to the SSM. Basically, trains wound run along the Dan Ryan from 95th to 63rd, then take the ramp and continue along the SSM to Downtown. The two 63rd branches would then be joined together (and possibly extended west) to create a 63rd crosstown line, and there would be a transfer station at 63rd/Dan Ryan. Although such a plan would result in slower rides for some people, it would place the stations closer to where the businesses are and possibly attract more ridership. This would be similar to the Blue Line O'Hare branch, where trains run along the Kennedy between O'Hare and Addison, then move to the Milwaukee subway/elevated, which runs along a business corridor. But it's unlikely that such a plan would be implemented now or anytime in the future.

Apparently you never saw the original 1960s plans for the South Side L lines.

The original plan was that after the Dan Ryan was opened, the South Side Mainline was going to be moved to two abandoned tracks of the IC Mainline & then continue to 115th St.  The IC Mainline had 10 tracks at the time & they only needed 8 of them.  Now only 6 are used.   For unknown reasons, that never happened, but when Richie Daley, stupidly rebuilt the SSM into south half of the Green Line, he killed that project forever & now they want to extend the Red Line to 130th at a cost of billions.

I've always though the Daley did his thing, so that his contractor buddies & some landowners could make a killing off of an extended Red Line.  The cost of moving the SSM to the IC was nothing compared to the multi-billions it's going to cost to go to 13oth!

[Anthony Devera]

4 minutes ago, strictures said:

Apparently you never saw the original 1960s plans for the South Side L lines.

The original plan was that after the Dan Ryan was opened, the South Side Mainline was going to be moved to two abandoned tracks of the IC Mainline & then continue to 115th St.  The IC Mainline had 10 tracks at the time & they only needed 8 of them.  Now only 6 are used.   For unknown reasons, that never happened, but when Richie Daley, stupidly rebuilt the SSM into south half of the Green Line, he killed that project forever & now they want to extend the Red Line to 130th at a cost of billions.

I've always though the Daley did his thing, so that his contractor buddies & some landowners could make a killing off of an extended Red Line.  The cost of moving the SSM to the IC was nothing compared to the multi-billions it's going to cost to go to 13oth!

I am aware of the plan you mentioned, and I was merely making an alternate suggestion. I feel like even if my plan had been implemented instead of building the full Dan Ryan, a L line could still have been built along the IC Mainline, as the SSM and IC Mainline are not that close to each other.

I do agree that the SSM rebuild was a waste of money and an L line should've been built along the IC Mainline. Did the plan have trains going only to 115th, or would there have been another branch going to 93rd/South Chicago as well? I feel like the South Chicago branch could also become an L line. Maybe if CTA had dismantled the SSM, some of the SSM's structure could've been moved so as to convert the South Chicago branch into an elevated line and get rid of all the grade crossings.

[artthouwill]

43 minutes ago, Anthony Devera said:

Sometimes I feel like the Dan Ryan branch north of 63rd should not have been built. Instead, the ramp that currently connects the SSM with the Englewood branch should have been repurposed to connect the Dan Ryan to the SSM. Basically, trains wound run along the Dan Ryan from 95th to 63rd, then take the ramp and continue along the SSM to Downtown. The two 63rd branches would then be joined together (and possibly extended west) to create a 63rd crosstown line, and there would be a transfer station at 63rd/Dan Ryan. Although such a plan would result in slower rides for some people, it would place the stations closer to where the businesses are and possibly attract more ridership. This would be similar to the Blue Line O'Hare branch, where trains run along the Kennedy between O'Hare and Addison, then move to the Milwaukee subway/elevated, which runs along a business corridor. But it's unlikely that such a plan would be implemented now or anytime in the future.

I get your point but there are some things that you need to take into consideration. 

The Dan Ryan Line opened in 1969 as an extension of the Lake Street service.  Obviously Lake would be a separate line.  However building a connection between the 63rd branches would have been quite expensive as it would have to be built over a rail yard and over two Chicago Skyway ramps (overpasses)  i discussed how h high the former Harvard Station was and I don't think many people would transfer from that L to the one you proposed.   

Before the Dan Ryan Line opened,  there was a 69th and Normal terminal in addition to the 63rd and Loomis terminal.

The difference between this and the old Milwaukee service is that the latter was an extension of an existing service and the Dan Ryan was a new service and not an extension of Englewood,  Normal, or Jackson Park service  (SSM).

@strictureshas said that the original plan was to reroute the SsM over the IC.   I don't know if the IC objected because it might have been the most successful commuter rail line in the region at the time.   IC certainly wasn't going to dissolve its freight service.   Maybe IC'a row fees would be too high.  One would think that if CTA could come to an agreement with CNW that it could have come to an agreement with the IC.

The other thing is that maybe political forces along the SSM fought that plan seeing the shifting of service as being racially motivated, taking a train from the heart of the Black community to a White Hyde Park  and (possibly) South Shore.   Yo that end, I don't think the South Chicago branch was part of the city's plan, but maybe the IC wanted that branch to be either the plan or included in the plan.  That probably would have been too expensive for the city 

[Shannoncvpi]

1900 brokedown on the 72

[strictures]

12 hours ago, artthouwill said:

@strictureshas said that the original plan was to reroute the SsM over the IC.   I don't know if the IC objected because it might have been the most successful commuter rail line in the region at the time.   IC certainly wasn't going to dissolve its freight service.   Maybe IC'a row fees would be too high.  One would think that if CTA could come to an agreement with CNW that it could have come to an agreement with the IC.

The other thing is that maybe political forces along the SSM fought that plan seeing the shifting of service as being racially motivated, taking a train from the heart of the Black community to a White Hyde Park  and (possibly) South Shore.   Yo that end, I don't think the South Chicago branch was part of the city's plan, but maybe the IC wanted that branch to be either the plan or included in the plan.  That probably would have been too expensive for the city 

The IC had no objections to the plan, as the IC was going to close many stations on the Mainline & then people would take the L instead. 

One of these days, I'll have to go to the library & try to find that issue, which I think was a front page article, complete with a map,  in either the Sun-Times or Daily News. 

[ajay]

Some photos I taken while I was at Forest Glen Thursday.

[Erin Mishkin Jr.]

1 hour ago, ajay said:

Some photos I taken while I was at Forest Glen Thursday.

looks like 1574 might be down again, bus was on 77 on Thursday when it went off the tracker around 3:30 so possible breakdown since the engine door is open

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, ajay said:

Some photos I taken while I was at Forest Glen Thursday.

Significance? Such as that 8220 was there, then gone with the plastic seat trials, and now back?

[jajuan]

22 hours ago, Mr.NewFlyer1051 said:

i’ll check it out today and post pics so now it says “147 outer dusable lake shore express to congress plaza”?

The 147 one says 147 OUTER DUSABLE LAKESHORE EXPRESS to Michigan/Ida B Wells Dr actually.

[Shannoncvpi]

Was back in the boneyard today & seen the new novas getting worked on also got the video uploaded on my channel 

 

[Mr.NewFlyer1051]

1 hour ago, jajuan said:

The 147 one says 147 OUTER DUSABLE LAKESHORE EXPRESS to Michigan/Ida B Wells Dr actually.

correct NB says 147 OUTER DUSABLE LAKE SHORE EXPRESS TO SHERIDAN/DEVON and other says TO HOWARD STN

[Mr.NewFlyer1051]

1 hour ago, Shannoncvpi said:

Was back in the boneyard today & seen the new novas getting worked on also got the video uploaded on my channel 

 

glad to see the 8350’s being worked on fast they’ll be in service soon also did you see 1551 by any chance?