Charging Forward (bus electrification plan)

[artthouwill]

10 minutes ago, Tcmetro said:

Fisk is going to be redeveloped into a data center, I'm not sure about some of the land around it.

NewFlyerMCI is right about TAs getting outbidded for bus garage land. Industrial and warehousing has huge demand right now, and they're moving into the city as they've already built out a lot of the easy suburban sites. Pilsen and Little Village are going through industrial redevelopment and Amazon's making moves south of there.

This might sound strange but it has precedent in other markets.  CTA may have to consider a west suburban or southwest suburban location for a garage, think Stickney, Lyons, Bedford Park.   If space is being snapped up in the city, then they have to look quickly before the very limited suburban options disappear too.  Then CTA would really have to consider building double deck garages on its current sites 

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, Tcmetro said:

...

The amount of work that the garages need is surprising to me (as someone that doesn't work for CTA and never sees the garage). I wonder if CTA has anticipated these needs before the idea of electrification came about, otherwise it seems that it is going to be a big struggle to do so much facility work that wasn't budgeted for.

The essential problem is that, for about 25 years, CTA has not budgeted for new garages, even though the discussions in the capital plans during that period indicated that 77, FG, and NP needed to be replaced. The newest garage is 74th, and that's now 27 years old. Instead, all that happened was that Archer was torn down.

Pace is now able to go on a garage building spree only because it got a $220 million earmark in the state capital bill.  It couldn't do it based on bonding authority, CTA needs a similar source of funding, but based on the amount of work described in the report, might be $1.5 billion.

2 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Once again, such a shame that CTA didn’t pounce on that huge plot of land next to Western Orange line and that Parks got it instead.

...

 

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

I don't know if there's available land in the Back of the Yard area, but that would be ideal.  Also there's land in Cicero that once was LeClair Courts  that wouldn't be bad except its surrounded  y by  residences to the west and the south.   What happened to the Fisk sire? Lastly there is that vacant land on State between Cermak and the Stevenson,  but that might still be tied up in litigation.   Even if the city won, I think that particular parcel  would be developed in a different way.   The city might deem it too valuable to put a CTA garage there.

Aside from the new garage, I don't know where they would build indoor storage for NP and FG. The Rogers Park area is too densely developed, but maybe there is enough land on the current site to put a building on it. There is the purchased property around FG that would allow reconfiguration, but they would have to deal with Armstrong Avenue to build a unified garage building at FG.

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

This might sound strange but it has precedent in other markets.  CTA may have to consider a west suburban or southwest suburban location for a garage, think Stickney, Lyons, Bedford Park.   If space is being snapped up in the city, then they have to look quickly before the very limited suburban options disappear too.  Then CTA would really have to consider building double deck garages on its current sites 

That's inconsistent with the Report's theses on block duration and minimizing en route chargers. Only routes it would help would be 62 and those out of Midway, the latter of which already has a charger.

[BusHunter]

23 hours ago, Busjack said:

Therof FG ane was the fictional Fisk garage. With block length or range anxiety being a concern, I would thin nearer to downtown would be better, which is the only reason I mention it.

However, with the report leaving the fates  of FG and NP up in the air, it'ss probably not worth speculating about it.

Art never said that. He was talking about today.

Maybe you can time travel back to the 1950s and put battery electric buses where, at the time, CTA was running electric streetcars and trolley buses, the comment would have some relevance.

Again, irrelevant to the discussion in the report that the purchase schedule in the report was based on the 14 year replacement schedule for diesel buses. The report never asserted that the 600s would last until 2036.

Maybe you can read the following:

 

Well the last time I looked in the dictionary standard means basic as in all types. It doesnt say there a diesel bus can do something an electric cant. Standard means all types of bus. Besides the article is stating the agencies are getting in hot water cause they cant reach the mandate, so the feds sure thing a ekectric bus can do what a diesel does. 

[BusHunter]

21 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Foothill hasn't had to pay the feds back, they just haven't been able to operate the buses. Wouldn't they just be sidelined until they could be scrapped?

Yeah because they choose to not run them. Thats a good use of a million a bus. What do you do when you have full fleets of electric buses, say well today we're not going to run the #66?

[BusHunter]

14 hours ago, Busjack said:

The essential problem is that, for about 25 years, CTA has not budgeted for new garages, even though the discussions in the capital plans during that period indicated that 77, FG, and NP needed to be replaced. The newest garage is 74th, and that's now 27 years old. Instead, all that happened was that Archer was torn down.

Pace is now able to go on a garage building spree only because it got a $220 million earmark in the state capital bill.  It couldn't do it based on bonding authority, CTA needs a similar source of funding, but based on the amount of work described in the report, might be $1.5 billion.

 

Aside from the new garage, I don't know where they would build indoor storage for NP and FG. The Rogers Park area is too densely developed, but maybe there is enough land on the current site to put a building on it. There is the purchased property around FG that would allow reconfiguration, but they would have to deal with Armstrong Avenue to build a unified garage building at FG.

The problem with garages out south is the problem garages are north. Garages south are in decent condition barring 77th. What does a garage at western orange line do for fg? They did have the land out at the old reed- dunning mental hospital land but it went to a high school and condos and an industrial area. It would have been perfect as it doesnt have residents that close to it. State land would have probably been cheap too. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

Yeah because they choose to not run them. Thats a good use of a million a bus. What do you do when you have full fleets of electric buses, say well today we're not going to run the #66?

I mean, they didn't choose not to run them, they can't. It's not like the buses are sidelined for giggles and amusement, they literally can't be fixed. Is it a waste of money, sure, but it's not Foothill's money and they currently don't owe anything to the feds, so I'd say right now they're in the best case scenario they could be in.

As BEB technology progresses, hopefully situations like this will occur less (not that they're widespread now) and as developments in the technology slows down, the means to repair buses remains stable for longer. I'm also doubtful that such a scenario like the one we're discussing would be come so problematic that it'd be fleet-wide and causing bus routes not to run

[artthouwill]

3 hours ago, BusHunter said:

The problem with garages out south is the problem garages are north. Garages south are in decent condition barring 77th. What does a garage at western orange line do for fg? They did have the land out at the old reed- dunning mental hospital land but it went to a high school and condos and an industrial area. It would have been perfect as it doesnt have residents that close to it. State land would have probably been cheap too. 

A garage at Western Orange line,  which isn't happening, would have been beneficial systemwide.  As it relates to electrification, having that 8th garage could help in the rebuilding garages.   Routes could be shifted south while FG and NP got rebuilt (*not simultaneously)  and 77rh routes could be shifted north while 77th gets rebuilt.   CTA has been operating with 7 garages and having an 8th facility in Back of the Yards, near Fisk, or wherever  gives CTA flexibility.   Pretty much can function like Lawndale did when K got rebuilt and North Ave garage being closed while Chicago Ave was being built. Since XRA said it was prioritizing the south and west sides, I would build the new garage first, then rebuild 77th. Cut 64th abd/or 103rd need to temporarily close for retrofit,  77th has the space to absorb those buses. 

I wonder if there's any space available in Lincoln Yards for a daciluty?

[BusHunter]

2 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

I mean, they didn't choose not to run them, they can't. It's not like the buses are sidelined for giggles and amusement, they literally can't be fixed. Is it a waste of money, sure, but it's not Foothill's money and they currently don't owe anything to the feds, so I'd say right now they're in the best case scenario they could be in.

As BEB technology progresses, hopefully situations like this will occur less (not that they're widespread now) and as developments in the technology slows down, the means to repair buses remains stable for longer. I'm also doubtful that such a scenario like the one we're discussing would be come so problematic that it'd be fleet-wide and causing bus routes not to run

No worries I meant it how you have said, but I see how you perceived it different. Im just trying to make a point , better to fail now before all the eggs in the basket fall to the floor. 

[BusHunter]

2 hours ago, artthouwill said:

A garage at Western Orange line,  which isn't happening, would have been beneficial systemwide.  As it relates to electrification, having that 8th garage could help in the rebuilding garages.   Routes could be shifted south while FG and NP got rebuilt (*not simultaneously)  and 77rh routes could be shifted north while 77th gets rebuilt.   CTA has been operating with 7 garages and having an 8th facility in Back of the Yards, near Fisk, or wherever  gives CTA flexibility.   Pretty much can function like Lawndale did when K got rebuilt and North Ave garage being closed while Chicago Ave was being built. Since XRA said it was prioritizing the south and west sides, I would build the new garage first, then rebuild 77th. Cut 64th abd/or 103rd need to temporarily close for retrofit,  77th has the space to absorb those buses. 

I wonder if there's any space available in Lincoln Yards for a daciluty?

Probably not lincoln yards is too politically clout driven. The city has been licking its chops on that piece of real estate for awhile.

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

Probably not lincoln yards is too politically clout driven. The city has been licking its chops on that piece of real estate for awhile.

Maybe not but the city and CTA need to get moving on finding space for another garage before it's too late.   I don't know if there's any space up north outside of Lincoln Yards. 

[BusHunter]

30 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Maybe not but the city and CTA need to get moving on finding space for another garage before it's too late.   I don't know if there's any space up north outside of Lincoln Yards. 

The 78 has alot of land.

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, BusHunter said:

The 78 has alot of land.

If you mean cemeteries?

[BusHunter]

31 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

If you mean cementaries?

Why thats dead land? Actually it would be a nice downtown garage something they dont have.

[NewFlyerMCI]

2 hours ago, BusHunter said:

No worries I meant it how you have said, but I see how you perceived it different. Im just trying to make a point , better to fail now before all the eggs in the basket fall to the floor. 

I agree with that last part.

Although the people in power won't say it, trolleybuses would've been a great solution, especially for garages like FG or 74th which don't have a lot of expressway deadhead, but pretty much every locale that tore their wires down don't want them back up.. Or at least, the opposition to such a move would be both fiercely supported & contested. Dayton, SFO & Seattle probably won't be plagued by some of the same BEB issues that have cropped up elsewhere. MBTA is going to replace their trolleybuses with diesel buses as part of their transition to BEBs and that was met with much opposition (people suggested just getting new trolleybuses, and I'm inclined to agree). SEPTA has their little contingent of trolley buses, but it'll be interesting to see what they do with those. I know a couple of local voices want old trolley routes that got converted to buses to be converted to trolleybuses since the rails are mostly in the street but FUBAR'd, but the wires are still up.

[artthouwill]

9 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

I agree with that last part.

Although the people in power won't say it, trolleybuses would've been a great solution, especially for garages like FG or 74th which don't have a lot of expressway deadhead, but pretty much every locale that tore their wires down don't want them back up.. Or at least, the opposition to such a move would be both fiercely supported & contested. Dayton, SFO & Seattle probably won't be plagued by some of the same BEB issues that have cropped up elsewhere. MBTA is going to replace their trolleybuses with diesel buses as part of their transition to BEBs and that was met with much opposition (people suggested just getting new trolleybuses, and I'm inclined to agree). SEPTA has their little contingent of trolley buses, but it'll be interesting to see what they do with those. I know a couple of local voices want old trolley routes that got converted to buses to be converted to trolleybuses since the rails are mostly in the street but FUBAR'd, but the wires are still up.

I recently watched a YouTube video of SEORA Market to Frankford train (B stops onlt) and a trolley subway train.    Very interesting stuff.

I hope to be alive in 2040, but I think electrifying rge entire fleet won't happen until 2050.  I think CRA needs to order at least one more round of 40 ft diesels and at least one more round of diesel 60 ft buses with some electric artics mixed in..

[NewFlyerMCI]

2 hours ago, artthouwill said:

I recently watched a YouTube video of SEORA Market to Frankford train (B stops onlt) and a trolley subway train.    Very interesting stuff.

I hope to be alive in 2040, but I think electrifying rge entire fleet won't happen until 2050.  I think CRA needs to order at least one more round of 40 ft diesels and at least one more round of diesel 60 ft buses with some electric artics mixed in..

Doesn't CTA have one more diesel order planned for 2026?

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, BusHunter said:

The 78 has alot of land.

 

3 hours ago, artthouwill said:

If you mean cemeteries?

 

The 78 is the chunk of vacant railroad yards between the Roosevelt Road area and Chinatown. It is being developed by Related Midwest (site), and is one of the candidates for the Chicago casino. Given that it has a high-end developer, it probably is as unlikely as is Lincoln Yards. 

[Busjack]

8 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Doesn't CTA have one more diesel order planned for 2026?

if you read the report, no. There is the current 5 year contract with Nova Bus, which could extend into 2026, so yes if you mean an option.

[Tcmetro]

A site could be assembled in the IMD, but I believe that they are pushing for residential developments there now.

[jajuan]

With all the infrastructure changes they'll need to make not to mention securing of the necessary finding, I honestly don't see them getting fully electrified by 2040. But I will give them credit that they aren't make as bold a commitment as LA Metro, and if I'm not mistaken SF's MUNI, in committing to a full electrified bus fleet by 2030.

[artthouwill]

11 minutes ago, jajuan said:

With all the infrastructure changes they'll need to make not to mention securing of the necessary finding, I honestly don't see them getting fully electrified by 2040. But I will give them credit that they aren't make as bold a commitment as LA Metro, and if I'm not mistaken SF's MUNI, in committing to a full electrified bus fleet by 2030.

Isn't California law a factor?  I thought 2030 was the year diesel vehicles couldn't be bought in California.   

[jajuan]

29 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Isn't California law a factor?  I thought 2030 was the year diesel vehicles couldn't be bought in California.   

It's possible given California's environmental laws and regulations having a history of being more stringent than the rest of the U.S. If it is a factor, I'm not seeing how they meet the electrification deadline they set for themselves when from what I've seen, neither agency is any further along with electric buses than the CTA is. But that's right now though.  Metro admittedly is moving relatively quicker and is getting close to ready to fully electrify its 901 BRT from what I read of recent reports. And if the state law is speaking strictly of diesel vehicles, then LA Metro is already there by having an all CNG bus fleet before even getting electric buses. In that case, MUNI, Samtrans, AC Transit and the other Bay area bus transit systems are the ones to watch since they are still using diesel to some degree though MUNI's buses outside of the trolleybuses are now all hybrids.

[NewFlyerMCI]

23 minutes ago, jajuan said:

It's possible given California's environmental laws and regulations having a history of being more stringent than the rest of the U.S. If it is a factor, I'm not seeing how they meet the electrification deadline they set for themselves when from what I've seen, neither agency is any further along with electric buses than the CTA is. But that's right now though.  Metro admittedly is moving relatively quicker and is getting close to ready to fully electrify its 901 BRT from what I read of recent reports. And if the state law is speaking strictly of diesel vehicles, then LA Metro is already there by having an all CNG bus fleet before even getting electric buses. In that case, MUNI, Samtrans, AC Transit and the other Bay area bus transit systems are the ones to watch since they are still using diesel to some degree though MUNI's buses outside of the trolleybuses are now all hybrids.

MUNI has the advantage of already having a robust, operable, trolleybus system, they have a leg up

[BusHunter]

13 hours ago, Busjack said:

if you read the report, no. There is the current 5 year contract with Nova Bus, which could extend into 2026, so yes if you mean an option.

That would just be the purchase stage. Delivery is up to 2027. Clean diesels until then. 

You know how the feds passed a law stating in 2023 and every year after a car must be more fuel efficient than the year before. I wonder does that apply to buses and if it does would it force them to buy at least hybrids after a certain point.