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.