n/a ([info]lostinsound) wrote in [info]chicago_el,
@ 2007-06-20 15:46:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
cta doomsday in the tribune
(posted by me, elsewhere, too.)

I wrote the following letter to John Hilkevitch. I've not received a response. The tribune wrote this article:

"A reality check for commuters?"

The article was accompanied by a graphic showing ridership data for CTA, Metra, and Pace; the top bus routes, the train routes, and car data for the highways in Chicago.

Click here for the Tribune graphic

As I was reviewing the top bus routes, I just couldn't be convinced that the #152 Addison bus was the third busiest in the system. That made absolutely no sense to me. So I researched myself, and found out that the Addison bus didn't even make the top thirty of the routes. I listed out the top twenty-plus routes and sent them to Hilkevitch. The bus routes they listed were all on the north side and serving the communities mostly on the lake shore. Only four of the ten listed would be cut in the up-coming contingency plan. So I couldn't figure out why those were listed. In the report, the top routes by weekday boardings are listed very clearly. So, who ever generated that graphic that accompanied the article did something wrong, or if those were the routes chosen, I'm not sure why. Those most affected routes are absolutely saved in the plan.

Click here for the March 2007 CTA Bus Ridership Report

What do you guys think? Northsiders thinking everything revolved around them? Just bad data? Something else?

Anyway, here's what I wrote to the Trib:


--------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Hilkevitch,

"A reality check for commuters?" More like a reality check of your facts. I was just reviewing CTA bus ridership included in the graphic that accompanied your piece. (found here). I just couldn't believe that the #152 Addison bus was the third busiest in the system. According to the figures I reviewed in the CTA's Bus Ridership Report for March 2007 (found here), the Addison bus does have many boardings, in fact, your numbers are correct. However, it is not the third busiest, nor is the #151 Sheridan the first. Looking at the numbers, the top twenty bus routes are as follows:

01) #79 - 79th
total: 33,766

02) #20 - Madison
total: 24,437

03) #9 - Ashland
total: 23,475

04) #66 - Chicago
total: 22,621

05) #63 - 63rd
total: 21,979

06) #77 - Belmont
total: 21,974

07) #3 - King Drive
total: 21,314

08) #53 - Pulaski
total: 21,233

09) #4 - Cottage Grove
total: 21,125

10) #22 - Clark
total: 20,178

11) #151 - Sheridan
total: 20,156

12) #8 - Halsted
total: 19,857

13) #49 - Western
total: 19,125

14) #82 - Kimball-Homan
total: 18,679

15) #87 - 87th
total: 17,590

16) #67 - 67th-69th-71st
total: 15,643

17) #36 - Broadway
total: 15,467

18) #29 - State
total: 15,438

19) #72 - North
total: 15,430

20) #62 - Archer
total: 14,289


Your data was decidedly "northside-centric." Only four (4) of the routes you listed are affected by service cuts in the doomsday scenario; the #135, #136, #156, and #157. All of those don't even make it into the top twenty in terms of weekday boardings. If there's some other reason you chose to list only those bus routes, please let me know, as it is not immediately clear in the graphic or the copy.

Best,
Michael Kmak, Pilsen



(Post a new comment)


[info]kimbean
2007-06-20 09:30 pm UTC (link)
Is there anywhere that lists the bus cuts? It's not in the article.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-20 09:45 pm UTC (link)
It's in the CTA Contigency Plan. It's posted everywhere, most easily seen here:

http://www.transitchicago.com/news/motion/board/0705routecuts.pdf

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]kimbean
2007-06-20 09:48 pm UTC (link)
ha! thanks!

I've been away and I haven't really been paying attention to all this, and all of a sudden I see that #136 is getting cut.

EEp!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-20 09:53 pm UTC (link)
This is all just the "doomsday" scenario, which this year seems really possible. All routes not operating on Sundays will be cut.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]chi_thirdrail
2007-06-20 10:58 pm UTC (link)
Have you contacted your legislators to ask them to fix the problem? :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]fengi
2007-06-20 09:54 pm UTC (link)
Trib: "But 79th street is sooooo remote. It's totally, like, a different city. I mean, don't those people all have cars or go to Indiana or something?"

I admire your restraint in not wondering if race has something to do with it.

Checking that list...wow, the South Side would get severely shut down on Sundays.

Trib: "Well, they only go to church anyway, so whats the big deal?"

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-20 09:58 pm UTC (link)
What do you mean the South side would get shut down on Sundays? The proposed plan is that any route that currently has no service on Sunday would be discontinued. All of the routes listed in the top twenty have service on Sundays, I believe, as there is high demand.

Also, as an interesting note, number 21 on that list would be the #X49 - Western Express. It's the only express bus up that high with something like 13,000 weekday boardings on average.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]fengi
2007-06-20 10:09 pm UTC (link)
I'm sorry - the chart was vaguely labeled and I thought they'd only get cut on Sundays.

That's an even worse gouging.

I mean, what the hell. It's already appalling how so much of the city has no public transport save minimal bus service and now even that is getting cut. Why not just openly admit it going to be a commuter service for a lucky few?

I think this is the point where Daley and Co should put the Olympic and other special projects on hold and put more city funds into what the people really need.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-20 10:17 pm UTC (link)
It's pretty okay. The basis of the idea is that many routes that don't perform on Sundays are already experiencing low ridership other times. This, according to CTA's numbers, has the most minimal impact on ridership. Anything that DOES have Sunday service would remain, inferring those are the most demanded routes.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]chi_thirdrail
2007-06-20 11:04 pm UTC (link)
Keep in mind we're still living with the skeletal service with so many useful routes not running on Sundays at all or after 8 PM, as implemented by the third-party Booz-Allen cuts in the 90s.

I can't think of a much nicer way to do it. What runs on Sundays are the most important services, if you ask me--any route that doesn't run on a Sunday doesn't enable people to not have cars. Anyone who truly depends on transit would look at the Sunday service as the base system. The working class I think would be included here.

The routes that are cut are the ones that basically serve 9-5 commuters, who typically have more money and potentially other options, no?

This is why I got annoyed that LVEJO was coining the proposed cuts as "racist." It would seem to me that those people on the lakefront are going to get hit the hardest. The fare increases hurt EVERYONE, but there is a much higher increase for those people who get 30-day cards, for example, who are also more likely to have extra money. But nobody relies on the 39 Pershing to get by--or the lakefront express routes--these are supplemental weekday commuter services. Those who need transit the most already don't get to use those very often, or so is my impression.

What's most important to me is that they don't cut any owl service, and other services relied upon by the working masses who make the city run while the office workers are alseep in their central air conditioning.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]chi_thirdrail
2007-06-20 11:07 pm UTC (link)
I feel like that last comment was harshly populist and anti-professional. I am one who sleeps with air conditioning.

I just get a little misty-eyed when I think of that poor old Polish woman with the blue smock and the spray bottle of vinegar who wouldn't be able to make ends meet if the N62 stopped running. So I end up favoring these kinds of cuts as opposed to the old way at CTA, which would have cut overnight service and lower-ridership routes that people depend on before cutting high-ridership routes that serve wealthy north-side commuters.

Public transit is an essential service for all people, and I'm just glad to see signs that the powers-that-be see it that way and appear to be trying to find a balance when confronted with having to reduce service.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]yourbodyaboveme
2007-06-21 03:41 am UTC (link)
Hear hear!

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]backburner
2007-06-22 02:19 am UTC (link)
In general I'm pretty annoyed at the total lack of nuance in the plan.

Just cutting a list of routes arbitrarily chosen because they don't have Sunday service and the Yellow Line hardly seems like anyone gave it any real thought.

I mean, little old ladies needs aside or not, the rush hour routes tend to be the most crowded. The weekday routes from the West Loop train stations to the East Loop and Michigan Avenue are pretty critical (and crowded) at rush hour, and if the CTA doesn't actually turn a profit on them, they're seriously doing something wrong. Cutting a profitable route would be dumb.

I could understand reducing frequency of service on a lot of routes, maybe even at rush hour, but just arbitrarily cutting buses with no Sunday service is lazy and the sort of unimaginative and uncreative thinking that the CTA's critics are always accusing it of being able to overcome. Nothing like demonstrating that their critics just might be correct when they most need to prove them wrong.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]backburner
2007-06-22 02:23 am UTC (link)
*unable

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]kimbean
2007-06-20 10:20 pm UTC (link)
It's sad because those are the people that rely on bus service at off peak hours to get to work/errands/ etc.

Taking the bus on the southside was always an ordeal. I remember waiting almost 20 minutes for the 95th street bus, and the 103rd bus (the same route where that boy got shot) was once 25 minutes late... making me late for school.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-20 10:22 pm UTC (link)
But nothing is getting cut on those routes.... that's why I'm confused by the comment. Many Southside routes will be maintained under CTA's scenario.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]le_trombone
2007-06-20 10:03 pm UTC (link)
Send a copy of your letter to the Sun-Times. Maybe to Mark Brown.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-20 10:16 pm UTC (link)
Interesting Idea, but would they care if the Trib messed up something like this?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]bikinikillgrrl
2007-06-21 07:45 pm UTC (link)
Of course they care! Because then they have a chance to run something remotely accurate, a slap in the face to their largest competitor.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-21 07:53 pm UTC (link)
There's no Mark Brown to contact on the Sun-Times website. If you could point me in the right direction I would be much obliged.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]le_trombone
2007-06-21 08:47 pm UTC (link)
The link to his columns is http://www.suntimes.com/news/brown/index.html.

Click on one of the columns, then move the mouse over his name.

(Sorry for being so indirect, but I dislike even the remotest possibility of enabling spammers).

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-21 10:26 pm UTC (link)
Is there any reason I should know why he's the appropriate person to contact? He doesn't seem to handle stories in this arena that I can see.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]backburner
2007-06-22 02:02 am UTC (link)
Dunno, but the writer of this story seems to write most of their transit-related stories lately:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/transportation/394480,CST-NWS-cta21.article

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]le_trombone
2007-06-22 04:23 pm UTC (link)
No, it was just a random suggestion. I consider him to be one of the better columnists on the paper (there probably is a better choice in terms of compatibility in [name deleted], but I think he's a lousy writer).

Meanwhile, [info]backburner seems to have a better suggestion for whom to contact, and I'd go with it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]bluepoet
2007-06-21 12:15 am UTC (link)
Did you only look at data on the #152 for March? I bet the summer makes up for March in a MAJOR way. I'm just sayin'. I don't think it's "omg busiest route evar!!!!" or anything like that, but I think you have to take the entire year into consideration because the #152 gets much more use during baseball season. (Oh, gawd, how I remember trying to take it home from Target on game days...)

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]bluepoet
2007-06-21 12:18 am UTC (link)
I hereby amend my comment. It looks like THEY only cited March 2007 data. I can't believe that's right, unless it really is covering a year's worth of information that just happened to be released in March. (Way to be specific about your graphic, guys.)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-21 01:33 am UTC (link)
Exactly, I only cited what they cited.
I know the 152 gets busy during game days. However, I still don't think it's ranks in the top 20, game or no game. You can read the ridership data as it's averaged and changed over time and the difference in the last two years on that report, that's why I linked to it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]mrsarcastic
2007-06-21 03:40 am UTC (link)
For Serious.

I take the #152 to and from work every day. During Cubs games I'd almost rather throw myself in front of the bus than wait for 5 full buses to get on.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]mock26
2007-06-21 03:23 am UTC (link)
I think that cutting something like the #X9 Ashland Express isn't a bad idea. In all honesty, the X9 isn't all that much faster than the regular old #9 Ashland. I'd also say the same about the #X80 Irving Park Express, that it isn't that much faster than the regular #80 Irving Park bus, and maybe it should be added to the list.

(Reply to this)


[info]yourbodyaboveme
2007-06-21 03:35 am UTC (link)
That list still seems a bit perplexing to me. Because I ride the #20 bus enough to know that it is hardly ever crowded. At least, not enough that it's ever a crisis. And why is the ridership so high? Is it because of people going out to the United Center? Or is it more crowded on the parts of the line furthest from the loop? While the #8 is way down the list, and I've always got my nose in someone's armpit for while living pretty close to the beginning of the line, and sometimes is running 1 every 15 minutes during peak rush hour times. And the #22 has at least three times as many buses running on that route, despite not having that much more ridership and being fairly empty at my part of the route, but definitely each bus getting very crowded as it approaches the loop.

So maybe it's relative ridership? How many riders vs. how many buses on the line, and why it's most packed? The northside may seem like it's the least concern because it's got the most transportation options, but it still (and maybe because of these options) has almost guaranteed the highest percentage of people commuting during rush hour straight into or through the loop, as opposed to jobs in other locations. These routes are all still jam packed during rush hour, and I can't imagine what would happen if service were cut down on these lines. I haven't heard quite as many people complaining that they can't get to work in the mornings because bus after bus goes by that's too crowded to board in other parts of the city.

I'm not being facetious, I'm just wondering if there are other things going into consideration here. Or maybe just making it look like it's the northside transportation that's going to be the most severely affected gets all the white, wealthy people hot and bothered and the representatives will actually pay attention.

(Reply to this)


[info]mrsarcastic
2007-06-21 03:42 am UTC (link)
I ride the #152 every day. It sucks all the time... especially during Cubs games (which seriously boost ridership). Do you know if the numbers the writer went off include Cubs season?

(Reply to this)


[info]prdem
2007-06-21 05:04 am UTC (link)
Nice detective work there/nice job stickin' it to the Trib.

I immediately questioned the #152 being on there, too...hopefully other readers did as well and questioned the validity of the facts.

Anyway, I'd also like to question their data on number of vehicles using I-55. How the hell are there less than 10,000 cars on the Stevenson when there are almost 170,000 on the Edens and 274,000-286,000 on the Kennedy-Ryan?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]lostinsound
2007-06-21 02:57 pm UTC (link)
Thanks Tom.
How are you?

I questioned the Stevenson, too... but since I don't drive are a car and would like to see less of them on the road, I couldn't bring myself to study something out of the bounds of my interests.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]prdem
2007-06-22 04:43 am UTC (link)
I've been busy but good...one year left at that hell hole of a First Amendment-ignoring school! And then off to who knows where.

But we need to catch up sometime...I have Paula Deen stories. ;)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]coollead
2007-06-21 06:52 am UTC (link)
To everyone who thinks the X80 should be cut...I remember last year during the doomsday fest, someone suggesting it. It won't happen. From what I remember, it's a subsidized route by an alderman for his constituents, so, despite its horribly low ridership, it probably will stick around.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]teal
2007-06-21 07:00 am UTC (link)
The x80 is really nice to get from O'Hare to points on the North side

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]teal
2007-06-21 06:59 am UTC (link)
When I saw the 152 I was startled, same with the 155. I've ridden the 155 a lot and it was never really crowded.

I don't know why there wouldn't be more research going into this by the Trib, this really seems like a big amateur mistake.

(Reply to this)

How it happened
[info]borghunter11
2007-06-25 03:06 pm UTC (link)
The Trib looked at only Page 8 of the bus ridership reports. Those three bus routes are indeed the top bus routes...on Page 8. The North/South Side bias is related to the fact that route numbers tend to increase going south to north, and Page 8, containing routes 135 to 206, has a lot of high numbered routes.

Sloppy reporting? Yes. North Side bias? Probably not.

(Reply to this)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…