Service beyond SP2025 (was: March 25 System Pick)

[Sam92]

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

It's not my proposal. It was on the CTA pick list. CTA said go to Bryn Mawr. Exactly how, it didn't say. I said that based on where I used to live, this would make sense, if the bus can make the turn.

On the other hand, you have been engaged in pure fantasy. You had various routes moving to K when the pick list only had minor changes like 39 to 77th, and then made wild assumptions from that. As a driver pointed out, the Owl statement included "consolidate, eliminate," not put Owl service on residential streets like Jeffrey and N. Ashland (Clark has late-night establishments; Ashland in Edgewater does not), and now you are assuming 11 Lincoln is being canceled with no substantiation. The only thing you seem to have a hit was canceling 54B.

As @MetroShadow quoted me, it's time for "informed speculation," but this has reached the "passing the pipe" stage. As such, your s.w.a.g. is no longer entertaining.

 

  

Sir just like you said.... I'm not saying ANY of this is WHAT is going down. The topic is "Beyond the 2025 System pick" We're all pretty much making EDUCATED GUESSES on this and beyond no different than the others guessing who would handle 53. Also keep in mind YOU YOURSELF earlier in this thread when NP possibly mentioned moving a route out that "93 to K makes sense" which we both backed off of (and fell off to the wayside anyway). My claims of routes moving to K in accommodation of the 53 extension (which again I did back away from and admited I misjudged Pulaski's headways and wouldn't put too much strain on C) outside of 93 weren't too wild considering they were or still are in some form K routes also maybe more sense than sharing with 7 plus cta only prefers to share routes in situations where you have lopsided reliefs (hinted by them wanting to move #9) or to put artics on school/peak runs when the main garage doesn't have them As far as #39... It's closer to K and 39 doesn't seem like something you'd move due to crowding and from experience having lived over there #35 would handle that service with the cut back. Taking into account other members who have at various multiple times said 39 is heavier over east and the fact that 74th could have handled 39 if it was just cut back to the orange line it's not THAT outlandish. As far as passing the pipe that was passed when they put "extend the #1 and put a bus on Yates" at least what I suggested kinda makes it make sense without duplicating 3, 15, 29 and the green line. As far as the Jeffery situation "just to shut people up" basically means I don't think it's needed but again somebody might whine and just like with 145 CTA might do something to please them. And on N22 the paper says EXTEND as well as consolidate/eliminate and to me the only thing I can think that is expendable would be N87 from red line to western (if not extended), N22 because you would still have service (which is the type of stuff that gets targeted in these types of situations because they can say it's in between Ashland which can take it's place to still keep SOME service and connect to the red line to get people further north). That was the whole point of me pulling up the map to show I'm not just making uneducated guesses. I'm at least pointing out generators and WHO is asking for what. I'm not one of the guys that says wild stuff like "let's put a bus on 91st" 🙄

[strictures]

8 hours ago, Busjack said:

This ain't the Metra thread, I only brought it up for the "nobody is there" claim. But the part I quoted shows the inconsistency of your "put 50 on Clark from Bryn Mawr to Devon" point. if that stretch can't even handle 22.

The 22 bus on Clark isn't the problem, the never used bike lanes are the problem.  Too much traffic for a single lane street, unlike before with two lanes in each direction.

[strictures]

3 hours ago, Sam92 said:

While we're on this area.... With 93 getting 7 day service and #11 on it's last legs it might be on its way out soon. The #96 alignment covers some of the Kedzie part. 

96 only runs five days a week & should've been moved to Pratt in 1979, when they finally widened that stretch of Pratt from Seeley to Western from exactly 16' wide to a full four lanes, two traffic lanes & two parking lanes.  And now EB Pratt east of Hamilton is just one lane & yet another useless bike lane, this one just painted on the street!

[strictures]

4 hours ago, Sam92 said:

It's the only way I can think of to keep the route intact. My other thought is to say give up on Clark for any fast long distance travel and split it into a North Clark route and the other half works in tandem with 36 on the southern end 🤷 cta spent like 10 years trying every thing from adding artics, schedule changes etc so it looks like something buggers gonna have to happen especially if there's a 2 year study

Splitting Clark wouldn't help.  What would help is adding short turn buses that go north on Halsted to the Belmont/Halsted  terminal & return SB the same way. That's the most heavily used section of Clark & really can slow them down with the huge passenger loads.

[Sam92]

17 minutes ago, strictures said:

Splitting Clark wouldn't help.  What would help is adding short turn buses that go north on Halsted to the Belmont/Halsted  terminal & return SB the same way. That's the most heavily used section of Clark & really can slow them down with the huge passenger loads.

Bruh you had me thinking Belmont was too far south to turn around 💀💀💀🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Sam92]

27 minutes ago, strictures said:

96 only runs five days a week & should've been moved to Pratt in 1979, when they finally widened that stretch of Pratt from Seeley to Western from exactly 16' wide to a full four lanes, two traffic lanes & two parking lanes.  And now EB Pratt east of Hamilton is just one lane & yet another useless bike lane, this one just painted on the street!

Yeah keep in mind I'm just pondering where this is leading to lol. Moving 96 removed duplication with #290 and introduces some coverage via Pratt I'm not really expecting it to directly replace 11 cause of that. Now if you reroute it to Bryn Mawr that takes care of the people on ridge south of Pratt that busjack thinks the 201 extension is to solve while 201 maintains service on east Pratt and also serves ridge along with riders wanting to get from Edgewater and Rogers park into Evanston along ridge. What makes me think after these moves that they might look at getting rid of the 11 is the ridership is still weak and even before COVID lost about 400 riders and soon the 93 will be offering service to the brown line as well as Evanston so people might flock to that. 

[$100KBusoperator]

Route changes and elimination are coming 

[Busjack]

15 hours ago, Sam92 said:

We're all pretty much making EDUCATED GUESSES on this and beyond

Which is basically what I said abput "informed speculation," but yours have not been.

BTW, in your obsession of Northwestern students living at Sheridan and Albion (who can take the L), you missed the obvious reason why Chicago residents want a cross-border trip on Ridge. It's at 355 Ridge Ave.

[EasyMoney]

I just feel like Clark needs a express route it’s to many stops bunched up together north of Irving Park that’s why service Is fucked up in that area trust me I Do Clark on Fridays and Wednesday 

[artthouwill]

6 minutes ago, EasyMoney said:

I just feel like Clark needs a express route it’s to many stops bunched up together north of Irving Park that’s why service Is fucked up in that area trust me I Do Clark on Fridays and Wednesday 

I don't think an " Express" route would work on Clark.  Perhaps the better solution would be to remove some stops, thereby spacing them further apart.  But maybe that area has a bunch of seniors that can't walk that far.  

Marine Drive and Inner Lake Shore Drive also have closely spaces bus stops but those streets are in very high density areas.  The tradeoff of spacing these buses stops further apart could result in increased dwelling times at the remaining bus stops ( assuming the passengers can get there).  Other than between Bryn Mawr and Devon, Clark is not conducive to having an X route.

[Sam92]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

Which is basically what I said abput "informed speculation," but yours have not been.

BTW, in your obsession of Northwestern students living at Sheridan and Albion (who can take the L), you missed the obvious reason why Chicago residents want a cross-border trip on Ridge. It's at 355 Ridge Ave.

Yeah which my speculated alignment still addresses/serves. By saying this bus will stay on ridge and not serve Howard I'm not serving just Sheridan. Also taking the 'L' requires a transfer and coincidentally CTA adds this 201 change after multiple complaints from people in the area that are NOT just going to north western (thus the shuttle does not address either)about transferring at Howard. Also this doesn't touch that much of Sheridan AND touches an unserved area of ridge that wasn't previously served it just doesn't go straight don't ridge to Bryn mawr. Also since connectivity is a thing cta is looking at what I suggests connects TWO areas to Evanston and not just one. Again I ask if you agree that there are people in Rogers park that want that ride, and those people don't want anything to do with the L how does this not make sense? 

As far as 39 and the 1 I know that's a bit extreme but again we do know they might want to extend the 1 and DOES have to get to the lakefront somehow. But what I said about N22 (which was the night change I actually saw as realistic vs Jeffery) counts as informed speculation cause we know they're talking about "extending, eliminating and consolidating" night service. Looking at how close it is to both Ashland and Red Line (the bars are close to the red line and on the other side Ashland isn't TOO far). 

[Busjack]

5 hours ago, Sam92 said:

Again I ask if you agree that there are people in Rogers park that want that ride, and those people don't want anything to do with the L how does this not make sense? 

What doesn't make sense in this regard (and I've said it before):

• Why there is any need to put more service on Sheridan between Pratt and Bryn Mawr when there is plenty already.
• Why passengers in the vicinity of Misercordia (and I don't mean the residents but the staff) should have to use  the Devon bus and your dreaded Howard station to get to Evanston. (Of course there's also @strictures's unsupported assertion that only immobile Section 8 people live around there.)
• While 201 eventually gets to the Northwestern campus, why the fictional Northwestern student at Loyola can't take the L directly to Noyes (as I just noted, it is good enough for you to have someone from Devon and Ridge make the same transfer) or the Intercampus Shuttle. 201 is much more roundabout.

More trivially, you tell us  why it is called "Ridge Blvd." SE of 6100 N. Ravenswood Ave.

As I also implied above, it's also illogical to conclude that moving 96 2 blocks south is the "death knell" for 11, not only because you otherwise consider 2 blocks (Albion to Pratt on Sheridan) trivial, but also assume that whoever lives on N. Kedzie or Lincoln prefers to go to Morse-Red Line than the Brown Line.

Finally, if Howard is so bad, why is CTA proposing moving 49B to there?

But maybe your text buddies are telling you differently.

[YoungBusLover]

In regards to Clark, whenever there is major delays going NB, to help combat that North Ave is usually the turn around point besides maybe Wacker Drive.  The infrastructure has been favored more and more towards cyclists over the past several years. So the only thing that can fix that is adding to SB short turns before entering the downtown area and at the very least TSP at major intersections for buses to get a head start on traffic and lane clearance. 

[Busjack]

5 minutes ago, YoungBusLover said:

In regards to Clark, whenever there is major delays going NB, to help combat that North Ave is usually the turn around point besides maybe Wacker Drive.  The infrastructure has been favored more and more towards cyclists over the past several years. So the only thing that can fix that is adding to SB short turns before entering the downtown area and at the very least TSP at major  for buses to get a head start on traffic and lane clearance. 

I'll repeat the question again: How does this help someone waiting for a bus at Granville? It seems to assure only that a bus won't get there, or if it does, it won't go downtown.

[YoungBusLover]

13 minutes ago, Busjack said:

I'll repeat the question again: How does this help someone waiting for a bus at Granville? It seems to assure only that a bus won't get there, or if it does, it won't go downtown.

I'm speaking more in general of the route in it's entirety. However, to answer that question directly. It doesn't help anyone at all. If North Ave is too far south for a short turn the next one would have to be Belmont/Halsted terminal or Addison via Halsted, Waveland, Broadway via Addison to Clark to head back NB. If the 8 can short turn at Root as long as it is, the 22 should be able to do the same especially during rush to help even out the anticipated delays.  

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

I'm speaking more in general of the route in it's entirety. However, to answer that question directly. It doesn't help anyone at all. If North Ave is too far south for a short turn the next one would have to be Belmont/Halsted terminal or Addison via Halsted, Waveland, Broadway via Addison to Clark to head back NB. If the 8 can short turn at Root as long as it is, the 22 should be able to do the same especially during rush to help even out the anticipated delays.  

The Halsted-Root (and North Branch) shorts seem to be a belated response to the problem Krambles noted 32 years ago, that the most costly routes were the ones that had the greatest passenger loads in the middle, which set the minimum amount of equipment. Clearly, the heaviest passenger generators on Halsted are Bridgeport, UIC, and Greektown. The question is whether Clark is like that (i.e. hardly anyone rides it across Diversey, because passengers prefer the L or 36), or there is fairly consistent ridership throughout.

Getting back to the proposed future changes, while I see the CTA planners' point (in connection with 53 and 53A) that passengers don't like inconvenient transfers, whether such proposals as extending X49 will cause similar  problems, although Western is a wider street.*

------

*EDIT: I took my own advice, and looked again at the pick list.  It says 49B to Howard station, not 49.

 

[Sam92]

29 minutes ago, Busjack said:

 

Getting back to the proposed future changes, while I see the CTA planners' point 

 

This is what I'm getting at in relation to 201....

2 hours ago, Busjack said:

What doesn't make sense in this regard (and I've said it before):

• Why there is any need to put more service on Sheridan between Pratt and Bryn Mawr when there is plenty already.
• Why passengers in the vicinity of Misercordia (and I don't mean the residents but the staff) should have to use  the Devon bus and your dreaded Howard station to get to Evanston. (Of course there's also @strictures's unsupported assertion that only immobile Section 8 people live around there.)
• While 201 eventually gets to the Northwestern campus, why the fictional Northwestern student at Loyola can't take the L directly to Noyes (as I just noted, it is good enough for you to have someone from Devon and Ridge make the same transfer) or the Intercampus Shuttle. 201 is much more roundabout.

More trivially, you tell us  why it is called "Ridge Blvd." SE of 6100 N. Ravenswood Ave.

As I also implied above, it's also illogical to conclude that moving 96 2 blocks south is the "death knell" for 11, not only because you otherwise consider 2 blocks (Albion to Pratt on Sheridan) trivial, but also assume that whoever lives on N. Kedzie or Lincoln prefers to go to Morse-Red Line than the Brown Line.

Finally, if Howard is so bad, why is CTA proposing moving 49 to there?

But maybe your text buddies are telling you differently.

If this was about getting people from Sheridan to northwestern I wouldn't  even be bringing this up. These people are going to south Blvd, main, areas in that ARENT northwestern from stops between Granville to Morse. Anyone north of there is close enough to Howard to jsur walk there and hop on the 213 since 201 will stay on ridge. Which is why when I myself asked these guys in the comments why not take the shuttle if the purple line transfer is so bad because it bypasses all of that and again since Red and Purple have been arriving at Howard on separate platforms, they seem the transfer unreliable. So what Im suggesting more coincides with cta's move to ease transfers for those people not to get someone from Sheridan to northwestern. 

In regards to #11, it was #93 which also serves the brown line and now provides it 7 days a week that made me wonder along with #11's ridership declining even before COVID (400 riders lost one year). Outside of that small section of Kedzie it is close to 82, 93 and 49B which all go to the brown line.  Maybe as a rush only service it could stay. I just noted 96 just happens to keep SOME service not that it's a direct replacement. 

[artthouwill]

6 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

This is what I'm getting at in relation to 201....

If this was about getting people from Sheridan to northwestern I wouldn't  even be bringing this up. These people are going to south Blvd, main, areas in that ARENT northwestern from stops between Granville to Morse. Anyone north of there is close enough to Howard to jsur walk there and hop on the 213 since 201 will stay on ridge. Which is why when I myself asked these guys in the comments why not take the shuttle if the purple line transfer is so bad because it bypasses all of that and again since Red and Purple have been arriving at Howard on separate platforms, they seem the transfer unreliable. So what Im suggesting more coincides with cta's move to ease transfers for those people not to get someone from Sheridan to northwestern. 

In regards to #11, it was #93 which also serves the brown line and now provides it 7 days a week that made me wonder along with #11's ridership declining even before COVID (400 riders lost one year). Outside of that small section of Kedzie it is close to 82, 93 and 49B which all go to the brown line.  Maybe as a rush only service it could stay. I just noted 96 just happens to keep SOME service not that it's a direct replacement. 

I don't live over there, but it seems like Mather High School is the life support for the current iteration of the 11.  If 49 can operate School trips to/from Western  and the 82 can replace the 11 between Devon and Howard/McCormick,  then the 11 can completely be eliminated.

[Nova's at 103rd]

With the realignments of Pulaski and Cottage Grove to an extent, is CTA's goal over time to consolidate all corridors to one or two consistent routes? The possible elimination of the redundant 11. The 93 and 94 will finally connect California. The 4, 9, 49, and 53 all running 13+ miles, but providing one-seat connections along the entire corridor (the necessary portions at least). Does that mean routes like 8A, 52A, 53A, 54A, 54B, 55A, 55N, 62H, 81W, and 85A might be eliminated or consolidated to the main route sooner rather than later? (I'm leaving 63W out cause it seems to be well off.)

It sounds like Clark, Broadway, and Sheridan could use some schedule realignments so they can all balance each other out. Clark is the heaviest ridership bus out of the three, so maybe some runs on the 36 and 151 end at Clark/Devon or their SB terminals and become 22’s. I’d also argue that cutting the 134, 135, 136, 143, and 148 and focusing more on 22, 36, 146, 147, 151, and 156 might be more beneficial for this case as well. (I’m not a 22 rider, so idk what the real issue might be, just going based on what I briefly skimmed over).

Lastly, what purpose would the 1 serve coming to the Lakefront, as this market is already serviced? (2, 4, X4, 6, J14, 15, 26, 28) That feels redundant, unless the 28 would no longer be serving downtown. Would it also be more ideal to combine 31st and Pershing as one route if they'll both be 77th routes?

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

and the 82 can replace the 11 between Devon and Howard/McCormick,  then the 11 can completely be eliminated.

82 runs on the other side of the North Shore Channel. Since there isn't a bridge between Touhy and Devon, if the potential passengers can swim....otherwise not.

Now maybe you have a reason for 96 to use Kedzie to get to the toilet at Devon and Kedzie, but that hasn't been proposed. And, as you implied, that doesn't take care of Mather HS.

The 2024 Annual Ridership Report shows 1201 average weekday ridership, so @Sam92's claim that it is "on its last legs" is demonstrably FALSE.

I'll only respond to @Sam92 that he's now only responding in circles and won't respond to a direct question.

[Busjack]

23 minutes ago, Nova's at 103rd said:

Does that mean routes like 8A, 52A, 53A, 54A, 54B, 55A, 55N, 62H, 81W, and 85A might be eliminated or consolidated to the main route sooner rather than later? (I'm leaving 63W out cause it seems to be well off.)

If you look at the pick sheet posted twice, much of that is what's indicated. Look yourself; don't rely on others' speculation.

In that regard, 11 is not listed on the pick sheet as a possible change; that was an invention of a poster.

63W was coordinated with 386 about 10 years ago.

[Sam92]

41 minutes ago, Busjack said:

82 runs on the other side of the North Shore Channel. Since there isn't a bridge between Touhy and Devon, if the potential passengers can swim....otherwise not.

Now maybe you have a reason for 96 to use Kedzie to get to the toilet at Devon and Kedzie, but that hasn't been proposed. And, as you implied, that doesn't take care of Mather HS.

The 2024 Annual Ridership Report shows 1201 average weekday ridership, so @Sam92's claim that it is "on its last legs" is demonstrably FALSE.

I'll only respond to @Sam92 that he's now only responding in circles and won't respond to a direct question.

Admittedly I was looking at RTAMS which showed more around 960 for 2024 which by the math came to 80 riders per hour avg so I'll give you that one. 🤔 Also I've answered and CLARIFIED numerous times any discrepancies regarding 201 (that it's not about just north western) and about N22