Yellow Line and Weekend Service...

[cta_44499_FG]

Im excited that the "Swift" is coming back to saturday operation. I used to joyride it when I was in hig school. Ill certainly be taking advantage of it again. Im looking forward to it. Let me know if anyone wants to join me for a saturday joyride, when the weather gets better of course! We could do some filming of run bys.

sounds like a good idea. i mentioned that also to some people...also to "terrorize" a certain operator friend we know if he picks weekends. Lol. :P

[Guest joemvcnj]

Not really. The only Pace that connects with Yellow Line/Dempster on the weekend is 250, which is a trunk route. The only CTA there at the time is 97, but it is doubtful that CTA would run just an Old Orchard-Dempster shuttle. Buses like 54A and 626 don't run on the weekend. What rationalizations are you proposing?

I am not proposing anything, but the 250 could be truncated to Dempster to feed the "L" rather than doing so in Evanston. They did similar restructurings with the old 212 (if memory serves), yoking with the 422, and with the 210 diverted to Berwyn on the Howard "L" rather than Western on the Ravenswood (for reasons I never understood). I would not put this truncation past PACE's bean-counters come next cash crunch. "Trunks" do become "feeders", especially in WMATA service areas when rail lines get built.

When non-transit sympathetic or knowledgeable politicians look at a map, perceive "duplication", say in this case the 208 and the Yellow are close enough, screw Sundays, accusations of inefficiency result, and funding is affected.

As for the 97, killing the old CRT Skokie Branch local stops is why the 97 was created to begin with. Old Orchard is precisely where the Yellow Line should go. And should they ever add back Oakton and Ridge stations, you can bet that will be end of the 97, at least weekends.

[Busjack]

I am not proposing anything, but the 250 could be truncated to Dempster to feed the "L" rather than doing so in Evanston.

That isn't the purpose of 250. I was around for the restructuring. At that time, the route was restructured to provide a one seat ride from Evanston to O'Hare. It is not a Yellow Line feeder. The 422 deal was done because CTA decided to compete in Evanston with 205 against 212.

BTW, do you live in the Chicago area? Your posts seem to indicate Philadelphia or New Jersey.

[Guest joemvcnj]

That isn't the purpose of 250. I was around for the restructuring. At that time, the route was restructured to provide a one seat ride from Evanston to O'Hare. It is not a Yellow Line feeder. The 422 deal was done because CTA decided to compete in Evanston with 205 against 212.

BTW, do you live in the Chicago area? Your posts seem to indicate Philadelphia or New Jersey.

New Jersey, but the last few years have become very intrigued with Chicago operations, subscribe to F&F. but every CTA book I can get, visit every summer. A nice outing is the Skokie Swift, chow down in the Starbucks, and browse in that auto parts store.

[RIPTA42]

I am not proposing anything, but the 250 could be truncated to Dempster to feed the "L" rather than doing so in Evanston.

That would leave three miles of Dempster Street - and the most densely populated portion of it - without local bus service.

As for the 97, killing the old CRT Skokie Branch local stops is why the 97 was created to begin with. Old Orchard is precisely where the Yellow Line should go. And should they ever add back Oakton and Ridge stations, you can bet that will be end of the 97, at least weekends.

Leaving people between stations without local bus service. By the same logic, buses on Broadway, State Street, Milwaukee Avenue, Lincoln Avenue, Cermak Road, Archer Avenue, and Harrison Street should be truncated or eliminated because they "duplicate" 'L' service.

[Guest joemvcnj]

That would leave three miles of Dempster Street - and the most densely populated portion of it - without local bus service.

Leaving people between stations without local bus service. By the same logic, buses on Broadway, State Street, Milwaukee Avenue, Lincoln Avenue, Cermak Road, Archer Avenue, and Harrison Street should be truncated or eliminated because they "duplicate" 'L' service.

Well, that is EXACTLY what happened to the Sheffield and Lake Street buses, even with some local "L" stops long since ripped out, Wellington at a "200" block, being an exception. There's certainly a long gap between Clinton and Ashland on the Lake "L".

[Busjack]

I'm sorry, but it seems like you need to do more research before assuming things in New Jersey. What Sheffield Bus? There was a Taylor-Sedgwick-Sheffield, but now it is bascially the 11 Lincoln Sedgwick. The Lake bus was within a 1/4 mile of Madison, and 1/4 mile of the portion of Grand under discussion. CTA service standards only require a bus every 1/2 mile for a certain percentage of its ridership (and that was going to go out the window with Doomsday, anyway).

As I said, I live in the Pace North Shore area, know who rides the Dempster bus, and agree with RIPTA that you have misconceived its purpose.

CTA in Evanston and whether there should be more stops on the Green Line have been debated on their merits elsewhere (the latter by an organization that is now out of business), but have little to do with this topic.

I know that I will get the ire of the politically correct crowd again, but so be it. ;)

[trainman8119]

I agree 100% with RIPTA and Busjack. There would be no need to eliminate the 97 or the 250. Neither one is designed to be a feeder, and serve many who work and shop (for example) in areas along both routes. The real purpose of the Skokie Swift is to get the Skokieites downtown, since they have no commuter rail line all that close to the area. The L or the Metra train, in general, does not serve those who rely on buses for areas that rail does not, nor is intended, to serve.

You also have to realize that the 16 and the old 37 had little, if any, ridership...and more than anything else, that is why they no longer operate today.

[Guest joemvcnj]

I'm sorry, but it seems like you need to do more research before assuming things in New Jersey. What Sheffield Bus? There was a Taylor-Sedgwick-Sheffield, but now it is bascially the 11 Lincoln Sedgwick. The Lake bus was within a 1/4 mile of Madison, and 1/4 mile of the portion of Grand under discussion. CTA service standards only require a bus every 1/2 mile for a certain percentage of its ridership (and that was going to go out the window with Doomsday, anyway).

I know that I will get the ire of the politically correct crowd again, but so be it.

Yes, out the window with Doomsday. That 1/2 mile standard could easily become 1 or 1.5 miles, like on weekends, and the diagonal buses like the 11-Lincoln go away altogether. I can read Doomsday plans in Jersey or anywhere in the world. All I am saying is that given another cash crunch, the 97 could appear redundant and be reduced.

This competition nonsense between PACE and CTA buses really blows my mind. This is why some suburban politicians call RTA subsidiaries inefficient and would have gladly have sat through one round of doomsday.

A friend grew up in Chicago, and says there was a Sheffield bus. What portion of it, I have no idea. But it's gone, as is a good chunk of the CTA bus network you had 30 years ago.

[Busjack]

A friend grew up in Chicago, and says there was a Sheffield bus. What portion of it, I have no idea. But it's gone, as is a good chunk of the CTA bus network you had 30 years ago.

As about 50% of the ridership. Which reinforces what trainman said. And as I noted above, the bus you refer to isn't gone--a part of the name was changed, and the north end was rerouted.

What extent of New Jersey's network is left from the early 70s (when CTA made its first cuts)? And how do its fares compare to what they were then? Or its current recovery ratio? Or ridership measured using a consistent basis (CTA having changed the measurement from originating fares to unlinked trips, thereby probably doubling its numbers)? Times change from distant memories.

[Guest joemvcnj]

As about 50% of the ridership. Which reinforces what trainman said. And as I noted above, the bus you refer to isn't gone--a part of the name was changed, and the north end was rerouted.

What extent of New Jersey's network is left from the early 70s (when CTA made its first cuts)? And how do its fares compare to what they were then? Or its current recovery ratio? Or ridership measured using a consistent basis (CTA having changed the measurement from originating fares to unlinked trips, thereby probably doubling its numbers)? Times change from distant memories.

I came over from Long Island in 1992, so I don't know. Nassau County has pretty much the same system with higher ridership. Suffolk County system is much larger now too. NJ had major cuts on local routes in the mid-1970's and mid-1980's, especially southern NJ. County government in some places filled in on weekdays. OTOH, The MCI "Cruiser" routes to Manhattan, once held down mostly by SDM Fishbowl Suburbans, is bigger than ever. We have about 1,900 MCI's, and kept their plant in ND alive for a few years. The Lincoln Tunnel express bus lane is regarded as running at 104% of capacity and the Port Authority terminal is getting close to that point. That includes some 45' foot and Artic buses too. Long Island has fixed fares, about even with the NY subway fare. New Jersey has old-fashioned zone fares from Public Service days on all its buses.

[Guest]

Can I make a friendly request? Lets keep to the subject of the Swift weekend service. This is an exciting thing happening, id like to read more posts about it.

[nextstopchicago]

Two things:

First, on the issue of the new Oakton station, while both wiki and Chicago-l refer to a 2008 opening, the best info I can find suggests that design work hadn't gone very far at all as of last August, when the design/engineering firm was still talking in vague terms about their intention to present three very different designs for public input, one "prairie style", one "high-tech tubular" and one that would be "a combination."

That release said that they expected Skokie would request construction bids sometime this year, and construction would take 18 months. So I don't think we're very close at all to station opening.

Second, I don't think the New Jerseyite commenting on the idea of eliminating the 250 has a sense of the relevant geography. When the Lake St. bus was eliminated, it ran PARALLEL to the Lake St. el. You have to go back to 1970 to find a "Sheffield route". At that point, the 37 ran for about 9 blocks of Sheffield. (After 1975, it ran on Sheffield only for 2 blocks to turn around.) But again, it ran ALONG the el. It didn't cross it once and then continue away from the el.

Whereas the 250 runs down Dempster St., with no corresponding el service making it even remotely redundant.

[Busjack]

A Village of Skokie Community Development Release dated Jan. 24, 2008 is here, which pretty much confirms what nextstopchicago said.

Also, if I remember correctly, the Pioneer Press had reported that land condemnation was required on Skokie Blvd. north of Oakton for a kiss and ride and bus turnaround. Also, if I remember correctly, some electrical towers and trackwork needs to be moved north of Oakton to clear that area between the tracks for the platform.

[Guest joemvcnj]

Two things:

Second, I don't think the New Jerseyite commenting on the idea of eliminating the 250 has a sense of the relevant geography. When the Lake St. bus was eliminated, it ran PARALLEL to the Lake St. el. You have to go back to 1970 to find a "Sheffield route". At that point, the 37 ran for about 9 blocks of Sheffield. (After 1975, it ran on Sheffield only for 2 blocks to turn around.) But again, it ran ALONG the el. It didn't cross it once and then continue away from the el.

Whereas the 250 runs down Dempster St., with no corresponding el service making it even remotely redundant.

Perhaps if you and Busjack were not so contemptuous of a "Jerseyite†participating here, and assumed to have no sense of geography, you would not misunderstand everything I have said or start nitpicking not so great analogies.

After what you folks have been through with various scenarios of Doomsday, which included at various times killing the Diversey bus (weekends), the Addison bus, the LaSalle bus, the Lincoln bus, and all the downtown CTA shuttles from METRA, despite no redundancy with an "L", are you so naiive to think that such a crisis will never happen again, and somehow the Dempster and Oakton buses are sacred cows?

Right now, it is a non-issue, but I asked some threads back how long is the CMAQ money going to last, and not one of you local experts seem to know, or even brought it up. They generally last 2 to 5 years. At that point, it has to be absorbed into the operating budget, because nothing runs at a profit, and something at that point may have to give way. There are hostile state legislators in some of the PACE suburbs who have less understanding of the day-to-day situations than I do. They control your purse strings, not me.

[nextstopchicago]

Perhaps if you and Busjack were not so contemptuous of a "Jerseyite†participating here, and assumed to have no sense of geography, you would not misunderstand everything I have said or start nitpicking not so great analogies.

After what you folks have been through with various scenarios of Doomsday, which included at various times killing the Diversey bus (weekends), the Addison bus, the LaSalle bus, the Lincoln bus, and all the downtown CTA shuttles from METRA, despite no redundancy with an "L", are you so naiive to think that such a crisis will never happen again, and somehow the Dempster and Oakton buses are sacred cows?

Right now, it is a non-issue, but I asked some threads back how long is the CMAQ money going to last, and not one of you local experts seem to know, or even brought it up. They generally last 2 to 5 years. At that point, it has to be absorbed into the operating budget, because nothing runs at a profit, and something at that point may have to give way. There are hostile state legislators in some of the PACE suburbs who have less understanding of the day-to-day situations than I do. They control your purse strings, not me.

Look, I wasn't harsh in my first post about this, but I don't need to be called naive by someone who is clueless. In addition to knowing the local geography better, we're also in a better position to know what happens when CMAQ grants run out. What happens is that useful routes are generally picked up, and those that prove useless aren't. You've mixed things up anyway, as the CMAQ grant in question is for yellow line service, not the bus routes you seem to think are in grave danger.

We're also in a better position to know about the legislative situation, and "hostile legislators from the Pace suburbs" do not in fact control our budget. Despite disaffection with the governor and the legislative gridlock, Obama looks likely to bring an even larger democratic majority in the fall, which will continue to be a Chicago-friendly majority. There was never much doubt someone would blink over the CTA, as the three Chicago Dems who led the House, Senate and executive branch couldn't afford to come home telling their constituents they agreed on the need to save CTA, but couldn't agree how. I was more afraid we'd wind up with an expansion of mobbed-up gambling, but we avoided that too.

Eat your cheerios, read more than you post, and I'm sure your posts will often be on point. The one that we've criticized was criticized because it wasn't very realistic at all. You'd serve yourself well by admitting the comparison wasn't very good, rather than trying to defend it from a distance of a thousand miles. We'd love to have well considered posts from out of town, even well-considered posts that suggest a route or two may be in danger of being cut. But they have to give a real reason that a given route is in danger, not just say HEY, OTHER ROUTES HAVE BEEN CUT, SO YOU'RE NAIVE TO SAY THIS ONE WON'T!!! Cassandras without a lot of facts are a dime a dozen right here in Chicagoland, so we aren't in great need of importing that kind of post from elsewhere.

[Buslover88]

Look, I wasn't harsh in my first post about this, but I don't need to be called naive by someone who is clueless.

Eat your cheerios, read more than you post, and I'm sure your posts will often be on point.

What's up with you and your name calling? Gosh, i've never seen anybody who's always calling someone a name and it needs to stop. This board isn't about name calling AT ALL. There's a such thing as private messaging!

Anyway, everyone seems to be right about the whole Yellow Line service thing.

[Guest joemvcnj]

I said "Right now, it is a non-issue". ,

I did NOT say "the bus routes you seem to think are in grave danger"

AND

I did NOT say "not just say HEY, OTHER ROUTES HAVE BEEN CUT, SO YOU'RE NAIVE TO SAY THIS ONE WON'T!!! "

What I did say is the IDEA (not the person) is naiive that there can never be another doomsday, and nothing is off the table, with no specifics mentioned, because there are none.

As for "we're also in a better position to know what happens when CMAQ grants run out. " -

I KNOW THAT, which is why I TWICE asked the question. Still no answer, but speculation and a generic answer that can be applied to any situation anywhere, and you all must know better than me a thousand miles away. I can read the CTA website and the Sun-Times as well as anybody in Chicagoland. That's how I'll probably find out. Not much insider information to be had here, but plenty of railfan snobbery.

Then there's " You've mixed things up anyway, as the CMAQ grant in question is for yellow line service, not the bus routes"

Well it's all out of the same pot when CMAQ ends isn't it ? Nothing mixed up there.

Perhaps if you got out of attack mode, started reading what I write, simply corrected any wrong facts or figures stated, you'd stop misundertstanding.

(And I thought New Yorkers were nasty).

[Busjack]

Let me say that I agree with buslover (and for that matter, CTA5750 in this thread, although not elsewhere) and have moved on.

[nextstopchicago]

I did NOT say "not just say HEY, OTHER ROUTES HAVE BEEN CUT, SO YOU'RE NAIVE TO SAY THIS ONE WON'T!!! "

What I did say is the IDEA (not the person) is naiive that there can never be another doomsday, and nothing is off the table, with no specifics mentioned, because there are none.

Joemvcnj of 2/28, I'd like you to meet Joemvcnj of 2/27:

are you so naiive to think that such a crisis will never happen again

.

.

Then we come to

Perhaps if you got out of attack mode, started reading what I write, simply corrected any wrong facts or figures stated, you'd stop misundertstanding.

(And I thought New Yorkers were nasty).

.

.

Coming from the man who called me "contemptuous", "naive", said I "misunderstand everything (he) has said", that I was "nitpicky" and sarcastically said that "not one of you local bus experts seems to know", all in response to my first rather mild post ...

[nextstopchicago]

The CMAQ grant for the yellow line is a one year grant for $300,000. This isnt' very expensive, and my guess would be that they're hoping that it will come close to paying for itself pretty shortly. $300,000 equals 1,500 rides/weekend day, or about 15 riders per run. Particularly once the new Oakton station opens up, giving it two stations from which to draw that many fares, it just doesn't seem like much.

A bigger question arose when I went to look up the CMAQ data, a question that perhaps demands its own thread:

Why is it that CMAQ, supposedly to improve air quality, will provide $17 million for parking lots in the next year, but only $9 million to all CTA projects combined?

I'd also note that it looks to me like the CTA's signal preemption project no longer has committed CMAQ funds. Anyone know what's up?

[Busjack]

Nextstopchicago:

Could you post a link to your CMAQ information?

I don't have the inside information, but maybe I could give you some analysis.

My one CMAQ observation was that it certainly didn't work on the 636 bus, which was running nearly empty on the Tri-State, but spewing a lot of exhaust. Which probably explains why it was cut back to once an hour and eventually eliminated.

[nextstopchicago]

My numbers in the above post were done pretty hastily. Actually, the new service would seem to be open about 17 hours/day, with 4 trains/hour in each direction, for a total of 136 runs/day. (ie, round trip equals two runs -- if that's not using the terminology correctly, someone tell me.)

That means about 11 passengers/run would pay for the $300,000.

Also, I'd note that when CTA says that Yellow had about 1,800 riders/day last year, they actually mean 1,800 people boarding at Dempster. Presumably there was nearly an equal flow in the opposite direction, though the fares would be attributed to Howard or to one of the Red (or sometimes Purple) stations.

[nextstopchicago]

Nextstopchicago:

Could you post a link to your CMAQ information?

I don't have the inside information, but maybe I could give you some analysis.

My one CMAQ observation was that it certainly didn't work on the 636 bus, which was running nearly empty on the Tri-State, but spewing a lot of exhaust. Which probably explains why it was cut back to once an hour and eventually eliminated.

I must have been composing my previous reply when your post showed up, and I didn't notice it.

Anyway, I don't have the exact link anymore -- I must have been searching for CMAQ, yellow line and a related term or two in google. Right now, I come up with some charts that are pretty similar to what I based my post on, including:

http://www.catsmpo.com/prog/cmaq/fy_2008/c...8_vmt_final.pdf

where you can see this fiscal year's data. The chart I was looking at before showed future fiscal years as well.

[Busjack]

Thanks. For my observations:

• The parking lots don't bother me, because they are clearly Pace or Metra park and rides, and theoretically they keep cars off the expressway.
  
• The number of bike path ones might bother me, but that's clearly clean air. I similarly wonder about the intersection widening ones.
  
• With regard to the length of the grants, clearly there are proposals to renew them for several years, such as the ones for X9, X49, and 714. Hence, the alternatives are not simply meet the recovery ratio at the end of the year or discontinue the bus.
  
• I noted a proposal to expand 54A midday and weekend after CTA (midday) and Pace (Saturday) abandoned them. Also, this indicates that the planning agency does not believe that it is inconsistent with the Yellow Line grant.
  
• I am bothered by the Jefferson Park to Village Crossing Bus Service proposal, which states that it duplicates existing Pace service.
  
• Since the document is dated in 2007, I wonder how the Doomsday threats affected the grants actually being awarded.