[ajcalcote]

I have ideas for the following six new CTA bus lines, and they should all operate seven days a week:

#61 - North Kedzie: This new bus line, with the first (northbound) bus at 4:30 a.m., and the last (southbound) bus at 1:15 a.m., would operate between the Metra Milwaukee District North and West lines station on Western Avenue and the Kimball Brown line station, via Western, Grand, and Kedzie. The bus line should be operated by the Chicago garage.

#83 - 83rd Street: Another daily bus line, with the first (eastbound) bus at 5:00 a.m., and the last (westbound) bus at 1:00 a.m., would operate between 87th and Cicero and 79th and South Shore, via 79th, South Shore Drive, 83rd, Lafayette, 87th (with convenient connection to the Red line), State, 83rd, Vincennes, Halsted, 83rd, Kedzie, 83rd Place, Columbus Avenue, and 87th. This bus line should be operated by the 77th garage.

#99 - 99th Street: another bus line, this time operating 24/7, between the 95th Red line terminal and 104th and Pulaski, via 95th, Vincennes, 99th, and Pulaski. This bus line should be operated by the 103rd garage.

#107 - 107th Street: another bus line, also operating 24/7, between the 95th Red line terminal and 104th and Pulaski, via 95th, Michigan, 107th, and Pulaski. This bus line should also be operated by the 103rd garage.

#114 - 95th Street & Longwood Drive: another new bus line, with the first (northbound) bus at 4:00 a.m., and the last (southbound) bus at 1:30 a.m., operating between the the 95th Red line terminal and 135th and Old Western Avenue, in Blue Island, via 95th, Longwood Drive, and Western Avenue/Gregory Street. This bus line should be operated by the 103rd garage as well.

#159 - Pratt Blvd.: another bus line, operating 24/7, between the Morse Red line station and Central and Caldwell avenues, via Sheridan Road, Pratt, and Cicero, with the bus line turing around Morse, Glenwood, and Lunt avenues, and Sheridan. This bus line should be operated by the North Park garage.

[jajuan]

ajcalcote, on 04 June 2010 - 01:38 AM, said:

I have ideas for the following six new CTA bus lines, and they should all operate seven days a week:

#61 - North Kedzie: This new bus line, with the first (northbound) bus at 4:30 a.m., and the last (southbound) bus at 1:15 a.m., would operate between the Metra Milwaukee District North and West lines station on Western Avenue and the Kimball Brown line station, via Western, Grand, and Kedzie. The bus line should be operated by the Chicago garage.

#83 - 83rd Street: Another daily bus line, with the first (eastbound) bus at 5:00 a.m., and the last (westbound) bus at 1:00 a.m., would operate between 87th and Cicero and 79th and South Shore, via 79th, South Shore Drive, 83rd, Lafayette, 87th (with convenient connection to the Red line), State, 83rd, Vincennes, Halsted, 83rd, Kedzie, 83rd Place, Columbus Avenue, and 87th. This bus line should be operated by the 77th garage.

#99 - 99th Street: another bus line, this time operating 24/7, between the 95th Red line terminal and 104th and Pulaski, via 95th, Vincennes, 99th, and Pulaski. This bus line should be operated by the 103rd garage.

#107 - 107th Street: another bus line, also operating 24/7, between the 95th Red line terminal and 104th and Pulaski, via 95th, Michigan, 107th, and Pulaski. This bus line should also be operated by the 103rd garage.

#114 - 95th Street & Longwood Drive: another new bus line, with the first (northbound) bus at 4:00 a.m., and the last (southbound) bus at 1:30 a.m., operating between the the 95th Red line terminal and 135th and Old Western Avenue, in Blue Island, via 95th, Longwood Drive, and Western Avenue/Gregory Street. This bus line should be operated by the 103rd garage as well.

#159 - Pratt Blvd.: another bus line, operating 24/7, between the Morse Red line station and Central and Caldwell avenues, via Sheridan Road, Pratt, and Cicero, with the bus line turing around Morse, Glenwood, and Lunt avenues, and Sheridan. This bus line should be operated by the North Park garage.

A few questions:
1) The first and obvious one is given the cuts of this year still being quite fresh, where would the money come from to pay for these routes? If CTA couldn't afford what they had previously past Feb of this year, how could they afford six new routes that operate daily, three of which you propose be 24 hour operations and the other three in operation 20-21.5 hours daily?

2) Where would the extra buses come from to accomplish this? As of Feb, 103rd, the garage you propose take on half your theoretical routes, has now taken on quite a chunk of bus operations from 77 so that 77th could squeeze in some of the operations that were previously at the now defunct Archer garage. Also as the current service structure now stands, the remaining seven garages are stretched as is even with the increased route sharing among garages.

3) Where's the passenger demand for them? For example, the North Kedzie route has been tried in various forms in CTA history and still managed not to survive. It's latest form died a little under 20 years ago, 18 years to be exact.

[Busjack]

Agreeing with jajuan. Also, most of these seem to be "filling the grid" where there was no demand or a previous failure.

For instance, one does not need a Pratt bus and a Lunt bus within a block or 2 of each other. The Pratt bus can't go beyond Kedzie because there is no bridge over the North Shore Channel. Beyond the channel "to Cicero" is Pace territory served by 290, and Pratt is not a main street in Skokie or Lincolnwood.

Similarly, one does not need a Longwood bus when there is the 49A/349 and CTA is pretty disinterested in running its portion of that.

The only one that passes the sniff test is 83, which supposedly had JARC or CMAQ money east of the Dan Ryan, but didn't happen, undoubtedly for the reasons jajuan said.

Next, the following community guideline was posted when we had a spate of these a couple of years ago:

Quote

Backup facts and explain your positions. If making a statement of fact, always provide supporting evidence. For opinions or suggestions, always provide justification for your position. Example of violation: Suggesting changes to transit routes without providing any reasonable justification.

Arbitrary route numbers, routes not on through streets, and especially arbitrary hours of operation don't meet that test.

Also, I had the additional test that if a new bus route was being proposed, someone would have to say what the new traffic generator is; i.e. someone built a new hospital, factory, or school. Don't see any of that, especially in Beverly. You can count on that if there were any demand for the 99-114, Mike Madigan would have insisted on them.

[exitzero]

Busjack, on 04 June 2010 - 06:27 AM, said:

Next, the following community guideline was posted when we had a spate of these a couple of years ago:



Arbitrary route numbers, routes not on through streets, and especially arbitrary hours of operation don't meet that test.

Also, I had the additional test that if a new bus route was being proposed, someone would have to say what the new traffic generator is; i.e. someone built a new hospital, factory, or school. Don't see any of that, especially in Beverly. You can count on that if there were any demand for the 99-114, Mike Madigan would have insisted on them.

That's funny, I did a search and haven't seen that quote or any subset anywhere but in this thread.

[Busjack]

exitzero, on 04 June 2010 - 05:18 PM, said:

That's funny, I did a search and haven't seen that quote or any subset anywhere but in this thread.

Have your laugh, but did you click on the Community Guidelines link and read it?

[MetroShadow]

Remind me (and funny how I just left TransportChicago an hour ago), that JARC/NF aren't used in X amount of years, that money would be gone...because the 83 (and 31) would be the only ones working on that list.

[dp1]

I have some suggestions for the proposed routes.

61 No Kedzie: CTA would'nt consider putting this route into service because the route would be within a few blocks of the #82 Kimball/Homan. I understand that on the west side the #52 Kedzie/California and the #82 are within less of a half mile of each other, but those routes have been long established, and any new route the CTA places into service would have to have more separation than just four blocks which is the distance between Kimball and Kedzie. On the other hand the distance between Kedzie and California Ave is 8 city blocks a half mile apart. The #61 would take riders away from the #82 from Grand Avenue through the end of the route which is the Kimball Brown Line. The #61 would provide convenience for those who live between Kedzie and California avenues. CTA also looks for traffic generators for routes, and all you got are the Metra Station and the Brown Line. Metra Stations are not big generator usually and you need more than just an "L" stop to make it viable. I would extend the route to Northeastern Illinois Univ at Bryn Mawr perhaps, and you'd have a generator for the route connecting NEIU to the Brown Line at Kedzie. But as other posters have said, there have been service north on Kedzie and it wasn't well supported. Also the schedule if it run would likely be AM rush through PM rush at best with no weekends. Most likely if ever implemented, it would run peak periods as a relief for #82.

83 83rd: This route has legs but again the routing is off. An #83 route would terminate at 79th and Western. As the route that is 1/2 mile between 79th and 87th the service would operate where those routes are most busy, and that is from the east terminus to Western Avenue. A good example is #87. I live off of 87th and I can tell you that 87th buses to Cicero gets support but is not high enough to warrant service on 83rd. #87 buses going that way are only crowded when school is in. At other times buses moderately full going to Cicero are sporadic at best. Odd thing is that I have been on some full eastbound #87 buses from Cicero. As for the #79 buses, if it wasn't for Ford City
79 79th-CICERO buses would probably get comparable ridership to #87 west of Western Ave. Aside from that, when funding is found, I can see a route on 83rd street.

As for the two routes serving Beverly,Mt Greenwood area, CTA wouldn't do it because ridership is light. For the 99th street route, Pace 381 operates every half hour outside of rush hours, and CTA 103 buses are barely filled outside the rush hours. A #99 route would probably be considered for peak period but I don't see it. As for the Longwood route, a good example is the 49A South Western route which the CTA barely operates. If CTA doesn't want to increase it's presence on south Western Avenue, the main street, CTA would not invest buses for a route on Longwood Drive with rts #9 [on Beverly] being peak period, and #112 operating on a reduced schedule

The #107 route can be doable between the Red Line and 103rd and Vincennes. Beverly and neighborhoods west have proven to be vehicle friendly as compared to transit.

I don't know about the Pratt route, so I will leave that to someone else.

For full disclosure, I have submitted route ideas to the CTA, and even got a reply back. In my planning I had to prepare myself for arguments that CTA planning would make and try to counter them. I apologize if my critiques are too rough.

I look forward to hearing what you have to say. Thank you for providing the forum.

[BusExpert32]

The 31 31st, 41 Clybourn, and 83 East 83rd have already been approved for trials. If there's going to be any new routes, it would be these. For the extra buses needed, there are around 225 Flxibles at Archer garage still available for revenue service, but other factors have to be eliminated first to get anything done. If anything does happen, the X express routes will probably be the first ones to run.

[rmadisonwi]

One should point out that there already isn't any room at 95th Street for the service that's there now. Adding more service through that terminal would be damn-near impossible during rush hour.

[jajuan]

dp1, on 05 June 2010 - 04:53 PM, said:

I have some suggestions for the proposed routes.

61 No Kedzie: CTA would'nt consider putting this route into service because the route would be within a few blocks of the #82 Kimball/Homan. I understand that on the west side the #52 Kedzie/California and the #82 are within less of a half mile of each other, but those routes have been long established, and any new route the CTA places into service would have to have more separation than just four blocks which is the distance between Kimball and Kedzie. On the other hand the distance between Kedzie and California Ave is 8 city blocks a half mile apart. The #61 would take riders away from the #82 from Grand Avenue through the end of the route which is the Kimball Brown Line. The #61 would provide convenience for those who live between Kedzie and California avenues. CTA also looks for traffic generators for routes, and all you got are the Metra Station and the Brown Line. Metra Stations are not big generator usually and you need more than just an "L" stop to make it viable. I would extend the route to Northeastern Illinois Univ at Bryn Mawr perhaps, and you'd have a generator for the route connecting NEIU to the Brown Line at Kedzie. But as other posters have said, there have been service north on Kedzie and it wasn't well supported. Also the schedule if it run would likely be AM rush through PM rush at best with no weekends. Most likely if ever implemented, it would run peak periods as a relief for #82.

83 83rd: This route has legs but again the routing is off. An #83 route would terminate at 79th and Western. As the route that is 1/2 mile between 79th and 87th the service would operate where those routes are most busy, and that is from the east terminus to Western Avenue. A good example is #87. I live off of 87th and I can tell you that 87th buses to Cicero gets support but is not high enough to warrant service on 83rd. #87 buses going that way are only crowded when school is in. At other times buses moderately full going to Cicero are sporadic at best. Odd thing is that I have been on some full eastbound #87 buses from Cicero. As for the #79 buses, if it wasn't for Ford City
79 79th-CICERO buses would probably get comparable ridership to #87 west of Western Ave. Aside from that, when funding is found, I can see a route on 83rd street.

As for the two routes serving Beverly,Mt Greenwood area, CTA wouldn't do it because ridership is light. For the 99th street route, Pace 381 operates every half hour outside of rush hours, and CTA 103 buses are barely filled outside the rush hours. A #99 route would probably be considered for peak period but I don't see it. As for the Longwood route, a good example is the 49A South Western route which the CTA barely operates. If CTA doesn't want to increase it's presence on south Western Avenue, the main street, CTA would not invest buses for a route on Longwood Drive with rts #9 [on Beverly] being peak period, and #112 operating on a reduced schedule

The #107 route can be doable between the Red Line and 103rd and Vincennes. Beverly and neighborhoods west have proven to be vehicle friendly as compared to transit.

I don't know about the Pratt route, so I will leave that to someone else.

For full disclosure, I have submitted route ideas to the CTA, and even got a reply back. In my planning I had to prepare myself for arguments that CTA planning would make and try to counter them. I apologize if my critiques are too rough.

I look forward to hearing what you have to say. Thank you for providing the forum.

Good points but a couple of corrections to your otherwise well thought out post. Kimball/Homan and Kedzie are two blocks apart, not four. And Kedzie and California are four blocks apart, not eight. In Chicago's grid numbering system, one hundred street numbers = one city block and eight city blocks (or 800 street numbers) = one full mile and not a half-mile. The only exceptions are Madison to Roosevelt Road, technically twelve blocks; and Roosevelt to Cermak, technically ten blocks which according to older CTA system route maps are considered equal to one mile.

[BusHunter]

BusExpert32, on 05 June 2010 - 01:07 PM, said:

If anything does happen, the X express routes will probably be the first ones to run.

I think the #X80 (the blue line/ east end version) should be restored for game days at Wrigley Field. Since the cuts traffic is way to heavy on the #80 and the service goes downhill because everyone is late. Either that or possibly a #153 should run from the ballpark to the Blue line as an express. It would take alot of strain off the east side service grids.

[MetroShadow]

rmadisonwi, on 05 June 2010 - 01:29 PM, said:

One should point out that there already isn't any room at 95th Street for the service that's there now. Adding more service through that terminal would be damn-near impossible during rush hour.

I'm sure this was addressed, if not the history goes back to before my time: Has there been any thought to combine the two? I know it would be bloody long, but it would alleviate (minimally) at 95th.

[Busjack]

DSorrell24, on 10 June 2010 - 07:43 PM, said:

I'm sure this was addressed, if not the history goes back to before my time: Has there been any thought to combine the two? I know it would be bloody long, but it would alleviate (minimally) at 95th.

I'm not sure what you mean by "combine the two."

As far as alleviating overcrowding at the 95th bus terminal, that is the object of the Red Line extension, with the city having reserved vacant land for a bus terminal at 115th between Michigan and State. Also, with that extension, it wouldn't be necessary for the 103rd, 111th (in the sense of 111, not to mention whether 112 would still be necessary on Vincennes), and 119th buses to go to 95th to connect to the Red Line. The group discussed all sorts of hypothetical scenarios for restructuring bus service in the area after the extension.

[MetroShadow]

Busjack, on 11 June 2010 - 08:54 AM, said:

I'm not sure what you mean by "combine the two."

Combining 95E with 95W

[Busjack]

DSorrell24, on 11 June 2010 - 11:27 AM, said:

Combining 95E with 95W

That would be trivial, in that buses from both directions would still have to pull into the terminal, whether they exit in the same or different direction. Sort of like 85s at Jefferson Park.

Since both seem to be on a 10 minute headway during rush hour, one doesn't gain much anyway.

As implied in the prior posts, what really needs to be done is to get most routes out of that terminal, with the indication being that you could get most---other than 95E, 95W, 34, 108, and something serving Cottage, King Dr., and Vincennes south of 95th--out by extending the Red Line.

[New Flyer]

95E and 95W were one route when the Red Line opened, but there were to many problems and the route was to long. At that time the route went from 83rd South Chicago to The Plaza. The bus was packed from one end to the other, the operators worked like dogs so they split it.

[jajuan]

New Flyer, on 11 June 2010 - 07:14 PM, said:

95E and 95W were one route when the Red Line opened, but there were to many problems and the route was to long. At that time the route went from 83rd South Chicago to The Plaza. The bus was packed from one end to the other, the operators worked like dogs so they split it.

Yes tough technically at the time it wasn't the Red Line, but the Dan Ryan branch of the West-South (later Lake-Dan Ryan) line. But as Busjack points out, you wouldn't really get much from it now since the rmadison's point is to alleviate bus crowding from the routes that are currently there now. One caution I will put out there though is to not fall in the trap of cutting the nose off despite the face on the bus side of things if the extension does come about any time soon.

[Busjack]

jajuan, on 11 June 2010 - 10:14 PM, said:

One caution I will put out there though is to not fall in the trap of cutting the nose off despite the face on the bus side of things if the extension does come about any time soon.

I believe that the premise of the former discussion was that the current configuration was to get people to the Red Line and the southernmost place to do it was 95th. Obviously, if the extension intersects bus lines further south, that rationale no longer exists. The only question then would be what level of service is appropriate on South Michigan.

That determination would also have to take into account what traffic is diverted from bus to the L as a result of having an Altgeld Gardens station at 130th.

However, that is no different than the CTA saying that it needs the Orange Line extension to Ford City primarily to get congestion out of the Midway terminal.

[artthouwill]

I believe the purpose of a Red Line extension would be to decrease travel time for far south siders and south suburbanites to get into downtown. A byproduct of that would be to reduce congestion at the 95th terminal. As such, the 34 S. Michigan would continue to operate as is. First it would still be a connection from those not traveling on the Red Line to access south Michigan Ave. Second, it is the major artery east of Halsted from 95th to 127th. For someone living, say 107th and State, the 34 would still be their best option to the Red Line, as 103rd and 111th are 1/2 mile walks, and the proposed extension of the Red Line is still about 400W. The question would be does the 34 retain owl service? This route would cross the Red Line 3 times, 95th, 115th and 130th. I still think it would make sense for this route to remain as is, as this route could serve the 130th and Altgeld Gardens.

It won't happen, but I would love to see that 5th lane of Ryan traffic eliminated and replaced with outer tracks so that there could be Purple Line like express service from 95th to the Loop.

As for the Orange Line extension, I've heard that Cicero was the proposed routing between Midway and Ford City. I would like to see it operated as a subway under the rail yard with an underground connection to the mall (probably cost prohibitive to build a tunnel, especially under a railyard.

[artthouwill]

Busjack, on 11 June 2010 - 10:37 AM, said:

That would be trivial, in that buses from both directions would still have to pull into the terminal, whether they exit in the same or different direction. Sort of like 85s at Jefferson Park.

Since both seem to be on a 10 minute headway during rush hour, one doesn't gain much anyway.

As implied in the prior posts, what really needs to be done is to get most routes out of that terminal, with the indication being that you could get most---other than 95E, 95W, 34, 108, and something serving Cottage, King Dr., and Vincennes south of 95th--out by extending the Red Line.

I agree that it seemed logical to split the 95 into 2 routes, but it should be noted at the time the eastern terminal for that route was at 83rd and South Chicago. It was eventually shortened to 92nd Buffalo as a result of service cuts. However, the logic of splitting that route in two becomes lost when you consider that the 104 and the 111 were combined into one ridiculously long route.