CTA: Some Local Bus Service Would Be Maintained on BRT Routes

The view from a Jeffery Jump bus with a local in its path. Photo: John Greenfield.

After Streetsblog Chicago readers voiced concerns that eliminating local bus stops on bus rapid transit streets would hurt senior citizens and people with disabilities, I contacted CTA spokeswoman Lambrini Lukidis, who confirmed that at least part, if not all, of current service would be preserved. “CTA would retain some local service, which provides immediate access for CTA customers, while adding the new BRT service,” she wrote.

The CTA and the Chicago Department of Transportation are currently considering Ashland and Western avenues as BRT routes. In general there are currently bus stops every 1/8 mile on these streets; the BRT proposal calls for express buses that stop every 1/2 mile. The express stops would require riders to walk at most two extra blocks, 1/4 mile, out of their way, which shouldn’t be a hardship for the vast majority of riders, and the extra 2.5 – 5 minute walk would be worth it for the time savings on trips of any significant length. But it does make some sense to maintain local stops for seniors, folks with disabilities and others who might choose a shorter walk or wheelchair trip to the bus stop over faster bus service.

Photo: John Greenfield

However, if local service is maintained, will the local buses slow down the express buses? That seemed to be a minor issue when I rode the J14 Jeffery Jump, a BRT-like express bus service the CTA launched last year on the South Side, featuring dedicated lanes for inbound buses during the morning rush hour and outbound buses during the p.m. rush. Although the bus lanes were almost entirely clear of parked and moving autos, once or twice a #15 Jeffery Local picking up passengers obstructed the Jump’s path. When this happened, our driver tapped his horn lightly to alert the other operator and briefly switched to the car lane to leapfrog the stopped bus.

Lukidis didn’t provide details about how the two types of buses would coexist on full-blown BRT corridors. “The next phase of the BRT project will include exploring how local bus service would operate on a route that would also have BRT service, to ensure both operate harmoniously.”

One possible solution springs to mind. The city is currently considering four potential BRT street configurations; center-running BRT with travel lane removals would be the most efficient, as well as ped-friendly, choice. In this scenario it might work to have local buses share the single travel lane with other motor vehicles and pick up passengers curbside. Cars wouldn’t be delayed by the local buses any more than they currently are on two-lane streets. Meanwhile, the center-running BRT vehicles could travel quickly in dedicated lanes and their drivers wouldn’t have to worry about leapfrogging the locals.

  • Joseph Musco

    Thanks for your hard work following up on this issue, John.

  • Sure thing Joe. Thanks for bringing up the subject.

  • iskandr

    Having the two routes at physically different stops is inconvenient for riders. Many times either a local or a “Rapid” (as AC Transit calls them in Berkeley-Oakland) will do for trips; thus I take whichever arrives first.

  • With a center running bus lane, local buses, with doors opening on the right, would be unable to use the center stations.

    There are many ways that people can obtain bus arrival times. It could be that a screen outside the BRT station has bus arrival times for the local and BRT routes so that if the local route is coming sooner the passenger could easily walk back across the street to the sidewalk to wait for it.

  • iskandr

    Yes NextBus was invented one city away so I am aware that IF it is working and IF it is not showing ghost buses then I can walk to the other bus stop. Hope you enjoy that in the snow or a downpour. IINM you are assuming left hand door buses for BRT which are nearly useless in the event of reroutes (whether emergency or “parade” caused). Then of course there is the spares issue. If the BRT fleet are physically unuseble on other routes then a larger fleet must be owned to cover breakdowns/periodic maintenace. Dumb and waste of capital funds.

  • The CTA Bus Tracker is very reliable.

  • Jim

    CTA’s Bus Tracker is much more usable and reliable than NextBus.

    Perhaps, CTA can include passing lanes and right-side islands for local stops, so that local bus service can run in center median. This would create a chicane effect and remove some parking.

  • The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA), in partnership with the Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT), Department of Housing and Economic Development (DHED), and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), is performing an Alternatives Analysis planning study as a means of exploring options for a variety of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) features and service on both Western and Ashland Avenues.


Citizens Taking Action Takes a Reactionary Stance on Bus Rapid Transit

If you wanted to film a hit comedy based on Chicago’s transit advocacy scene, you’d definitely need to include characters based on the grassroots group Citizens Taking Action. They’re a small circle of colorful, wisecracking guys, who are always good for memorable quotes at Chicago Transit Authority hearings. They’re passionate about local transit history, and […]