[ardecila]

Yes, if CN purchases the EJ&E, they would be able to abandon the St. Charles Air Line. But first someone has to figure out how to get Amtrak trains to and from the former IC north of Homewood.

Included in CREATE is a plan to restore a flyover ramp between the former IC and the former NYC at Grand Crossing. The viaduct is still there (you can see it in an aerial), but it needs tracks to be laid. Amtrak wants the old NYC right-of-way anyway as a high-speed-corridor to avoid having conflicts with freight trains on the parallel line - there was an article about it awhile back. I suppose the high-tension lines would need to be moved, but this would avoid the crazy dance of switching that Amtrak trains must do to enter the station from the Air Line, and pull Amtrak and freight off of the lakefront line, allowing expansion of Metra Electric/South Shore, bigger station facilities, or a new rapid transit line.

Anyway, am I the only one to think that Millennium Station already has a valuable location closer to the Mag Mile, State Street, Millennium Park, and the museums than any other downtown terminal? There's plenty of office space in Lakeshore East and in the financial district in the Central Loop that's not far at all from Van Buren/Millennium Stations, and as I said already, it's optimally-placed for downtown attractions.

Converting the Air Line into a linear park may be shortsighted, but there's no reason that the line needs to carry Amtrak or Metra Electric trains. Hell, I'd rather see it converted to a BRT line, allowing buses to bypass traffic on 18th and access the lakefront BRT line.

[OhioGuy]

Its been running really fast all weekend as well, it only took ~15 min last night to go from Sheridan to Chicago last night.

You got lucky. Your ride last night must have occurred after 6pm? Because the red line was rerouted to the elevated tracks over the weekend up until Sunday evening at 6pm. My ride on the red line from the Randolph station to Addision was slow Saturday afternoon, probably mainly because of all the twists & turns on the brown line tracks from near Sedgwick to Armitage. Though really it seemed the red line train was moving slower than brown line trains typically go through that area. Does the fact the red line was 8 cars vs the typical 6 cars for the brown line require slower movement through the area? Or is it a difference between the types of trains typically run on the red & blue lines vs the types of trains run on the lines that area entirely elevated? Whatever the case is, it's too bad the tracks have to be sooooo curvy through that area.

[the urban politician]

What Chicago needs is the equivalent of the Times Sq shuttle--an underground train that runs back and forth between Times Sq and Grand Central Terminal, tying together the sprawled-out Midtown office district and allowing Metro Railroad riders access to jobs farther west.

A combined Millennium/Block 37 superstation shuttle to a combined Union/Ogilvie superstation could serve a similar function. People arriving from the south suburbs/NW Indiana/OHare can transfer to the shuttle and get to a job in the west loop.

[UChicagoDomer]

Instead, the city is intent on converting the SCAL into a greenway, with bike and ped trails. No one's ever explained how they intend for it to cross the Metra Rock Island tracks.

This is awful. I've written Ron H. and Sen. Durbin with complaints (yes, I know, rational apathy should dictate that letter writing is lame and pointless, but my immediate righteous indignation at a modern day rails-to-trails travesty compelled me to ignore rational apathy). Is there really going to be no more public input on this? If there is, we should really get some civic organizing going.

[Abner]

This is awful. I've written Ron H. and Sen. Durbin with complaints (yes, I know, rational apathy should dictate that letter writing is lame and pointless, but my immediate righteous indignation at a modern day rails-to-trails travesty compelled me to ignore rational apathy). Is there really going to be no more public input on this? If there is, we should really get some civic organizing going.

Nothing really rational about apathy. Durbin is already inclined to listen to people interested in expanding passenger rail, and each letter his office gets on the subject is probably tallied--and if he gets a flood of letters complaining about train expansion but none supporting it, he is going to conclude that that is what the public opinion is. Now if you really want to be heard, you send a handwritten letter...

[VivaLFuego]

Everybody things converting these grade-separatd railroad embankments into linear parks and bike paths is such a great idea. I'm with Mr Downtown on this one, it's moronic because of the infrastructure costs. Rehabbing the Bloomingdale Line through Bucktown/Logan Square/etc was first estimated at $50 million, which by the time the multiplier finishes will be closer to $150 million....for what? A bike path with horrible security/safety/liability issues that a few people a day use a few days per year? Run some trains on that bitch, ditto the SAL. Real Estate and Construction costs are so exorbitant that giving up a grade-separated ROW seems unconscionable. Heck, just preserve it as weed-filled embankment failing all else, just cling to it.

[k1052]

What Chicago needs is the equivalent of the Times Sq shuttle--an underground train that runs back and forth between Times Sq and Grand Central Terminal, tying together the sprawled-out Midtown office district and allowing Metro Railroad riders access to jobs farther west.

A combined Millennium/Block 37 superstation shuttle to a combined Union/Ogilvie superstation could serve a similar function. People arriving from the south suburbs/NW Indiana/OHare can transfer to the shuttle and get to a job in the west loop.

That basically describes the proposed West Loop Transportation Center.
It makes way too much sense and costs to much to ever be built though.

[the urban politician]

^ Sort of. I'm essentially describing an East Loop Transportation Center (Block 37/MP Station) and its West Loop counterpart (Ogilvie/Union), both connected by a shuttle.

[VivaLFuego]

^ Sort of. I'm essentially describing an East Loop Transportation Center (Block 37/MP Station) and its West Loop counterpart (Ogilvie/Union), both connected by a shuttle.

Time was, that role would be served by the Monroe distributor subway, which would have been cut-and-cover just below the surface and crossing above the Dearborn and State subways (obviously then bored under the River to hit the commuter station). In theory the Central Area transitway system would eventually include the Monroe line, which could hopefully be at least somewhat well integrated with the commuter stations and transfer facilities where it crosses L lines.

[migueltorres]

hey, does anybody know if the city is planning on removing the defunct ramps on 90/94 where it goes right by the loop? aka randolph to 290... cuz that'd be a perfect way to get some more merge for the functional onramps that are quite suicidal right now

that's where I had my car accident 2 weeks after i bought my car! :hell: Can't wait to move downtown and finally get rid of my car.

[ardecila]

Time was, that role would be served by the Monroe distributor subway, which would have been cut-and-cover just below the surface and crossing above the Dearborn and State subways (obviously then bored under the River to hit the commuter station). In theory the Central Area transitway system would eventually include the Monroe line, which could hopefully be at least somewhat well integrated with the commuter stations and transfer facilities where it crosses L lines.

Hasn't that plan been changed to an underground bus road? I think this might be a little bit more acceptable publicly than a rail plan that's basically an underground people-mover. Plus, the buses can exit the busway and go in different directions, and it can tie into the bus level in the West Loop Transportation Center.

Of course, the city still hasn't done jack-shit with building the Carroll Street transitway, which gets more needed everyday...

[emathias]

Hasn't that plan been changed to an underground bus road? I think this might be a little bit more acceptable publicly than a rail plan that's basically an underground people-mover. Plus, the buses can exit the busway and go in different directions, and it can tie into the bus level in the West Loop Transportation Center ...

Anything that's going to be buried will be very expensive. Why spend 2/3 of the cost to get less than half of the capacity? If funding is going to be proposed for such a thing, then it should get bang for the buck.
As far as I know, there is currently zero active plan for Monroe, although at various times there have been heavy rail, light rail and busway solutions proposed for it. There is more than enough traffic in that corridor to justify a rail solution, though, especially with the growth in Streeterville and Lakeshore East, which with the original plan would have been tied into the Monroe subway. Streeterville desperately needs to be brought into the rail grid, and tying Streeterville, Lakeshore East, Millennium Park the Loop and the West Loop all together with one line would be idea. A close second to that would be to tie Streeterville to McCormick Place through the neighborhoods being built out between Grant Park and Cermak. Buses are good, but grade-seperated rail would be best.

Waiting to do this stuff isn't really an option - the longer we wait, the more we need it and the more it costs to build. The whole solution could have been built in the early 70s for about a billion dollars. Without a doubt, it would be the heaviest used set of lines in the city right now, but to build the Monroe-related portions of the 1968 plan now would probably cost far more than that now.

Whoever wins the White House is going to be slammed left and right by almost every single city for infrastructure monies - I hope Obama wins simply because he's at least said he knows infrastructure needs investment and, his being from here, would hopefully give us a leg up in the allocations.

[Busy Bee]

...Rehabbing the Bloomingdale Line through Bucktown/Logan Square/etc was first estimated at $50 million, which by the time the multiplier finishes will be closer to $150 million....for what? A bike path with horrible security/safety/liability issues that a few people a day use a few days per year? Run some trains on that bitch, ditto the SAL.

Hallelujah!!! My signature has said this for about a year. The Bloomingdale "trail" makes me want to barf. I've said it before and I'll say it again: The Bloomingdale ROW should be used as the Airport Express. Do a satellite view and follow the ROW all the way to O'Hare. Then imagine it connecting to the Metra mainline alongside the Kennedy and all the way downtown with two tracks branching off and connecting to the Milwaukee subway NW of the riverbend and continuing into B37, or possibly a future West Loop transportation center as well.

[Mr Downtown]

Millennium Station already has a valuable location closer to the Mag Mile, State Street, Millennium Park, and the museums than any other downtown terminal? There's plenty of office space in Lakeshore East and in the financial district in the Central Loop that's not far at all from Van Buren/Millennium Stations

You will have noticed that demand is low for East Loop office space. While clerical workers may arrive on Metra Electric and the L, managers (and the folks who make leasing decisions) more often arrive at Ogilvie or Union. That's pulling the office district west, so much so that Wacker is now the center rather than the western edge of it. East Loop office space is in so little demand that it's being converted to residential.

South suburbanites coming to Millennium Park or the museums once a year is charming, but it's not the core of Metra's ridership. It's a system organized (perhaps too much) around bringing suburbanites downtown in the morning and home in the afternoon.

Running some Metra Electric trains (perhaps the South Chicago branch) via SCAL into Union would allow the south suburbs better access to West Loop jobs--and help make the south suburbs a viable residential choice for West Loop officeworkers. Union is nearing capacity at the south end, but since Electric division trains wouldn't be serviced in the old Burlington yard, they could just run into Union Station on one of the riverside run-through tracks (fitted with high platforms) and have a step-on engineer to reverse ends and run back south.

[the urban politician]

I think the problem American cities face is with their reliance on the Federal Govt to fund transit expansions. The Federal Govt, by its very nature, has an antipathy towards cities and urban environments and will always hold a bias in favor of private versus public transportation. American railways and transit systems were largely built without the aid of large amounts of Federal money. In fact, the only significant national transportation system that has ever been built entirely by Federal dollars was the Interstate Highway System.

There are exceptions, of course, and in the past few decades cities have relied heavily on Federal dollars to build transit lines, but look at the end result--the construction of transit lines has virtually slowed to a trickle for a very long time.

Just as the city is trying to do with an OHare express line, has there ever been an effort to get a private developer to build a new route? Take, for example, a lakeshore route--connecting Streeterville, Navy Pier, LSE, the Museum Campus, Central Station, and McCormick Center together. What are the prospects of the city submitting a RFP to developers with the following stipulations:

1) The city will provide a ROW which can be leased to a developer for 50+ yrs
2) The developer must build a transit line, perhaps with the city pitching in a certain, small proportion of the costs
3) The developer must operate the transit line but may charge whatever he wishes and reap 100% of the profit. No connection to the CTA is necessary. And if the venture is a financial failure, the developer can declare bankruptcy and turn over the transit line to the city earlier, which will assume the rest of the costs (yeah, this part's a bit shady)
4) When the lease ends, the city has the option to either extend it or merge the established transit line with the CTA (or CTA's successor)

Isn't that how a lot of American urban transit systems evolved anyhow? Why can't the same be done today? Screw the damn Feds, I say. They're just too slow.

[Mr Downtown]

^Who would make up the difference between what people will pay and what it costs to provide the service? And who would pay for the construction costs?

It's only the smallest exaggeration to say that no one has ever made a profit transporting passengers. Virtually every streetcar line and rapid transit railway was either subsidized by real estate development, or was a scam that only made money for the founders' construction company and then went bankrupt. The story was much the same in the 19th century for railroads.

There are a few corridors in the world--Kowloon to Hong Kong, across Sydney Harbor, across San Francisco Bay, Brooklyn to Manhattan, Manhattan north-south, and maybe Lakeview to Loop--that have such intensive demand that they could pay both operating and capital costs of rail transit. I'm pretty sure that McCormick Place to Navy Pier ain't one of them.

[the urban politician]

^ Of course, that was just an example. What the city could do is open this discussion up to private contractors, who can propose routes in the city which would have enough demand to actually be profitable, if the city were to lease them the space/ROW to build it. I am assuming the contractor would build and operate the line themselves.

Isn't the city trying to do this with the OHare Express Line?

[VivaLFuego]

Union is nearing capacity at the south end, but since Electric division trains wouldn't be serviced in the old Burlington yard, they could just run into Union Station on one of the riverside run-through tracks (fitted with high platforms) and have a step-on engineer to reverse ends and run back south.

Eventually, Metra is planning to run the Southwest Service into LaSalle street, which would free up some capacity.

[VivaLFuego]

^ Of course, that was just an example. What the city could do is open this discussion up to private contractors, who can propose routes in the city which would have enough demand to actually be profitable, if the city were to lease them the space/ROW to build it. I am assuming the contractor would build and operate the line themselves.

Isn't the city trying to do this with the OHare Express Line?

A private operator could probably operate an Airport Express service profitably, but the fares would be exorbitant to cover the capital costs.

[aaron38]

I had to make a run to Champaign today and took Amtrak. Union Station and the trains were packed, way busier than I expected. My train only had a handfull of empty seats.

Are the Amtrak ridership numbers up from past years?

[Mr Downtown]

private contractors [could] propose routes in the city which would have enough demand to actually be profitable, if the city were to lease them the space/ROW to build it. I am assuming the contractor would build and operate the line themselves.

Did you miss the entire 20th century? This is the financial model under which Chicago's rapid transit lines were built. And the one under which they were pretty much bankrupt by 1911. If some company actually thought it could make a profit building and operating a rapid transit line, the city would franchise any right of way it wanted for $1 and would pay for fireworks at the groundbreaking. But with the exception of the real-estate cross-subsidized Hong Kong Mass Transit Railway, no rapid transit line anywhere in the world is profitable in the usual sense of the word.

[UChicagoDomer]

You will have noticed that demand is low for East Loop office space. While clerical workers may arrive on Metra Electric and the L, managers (and the folks who make leasing decisions) more often arrive at Ogilvie or Union. That's pulling the office district west, so much so that Wacker is now the center rather than the western edge of it. East Loop office space is in so little demand that it's being converted to residential.

South suburbanites coming to Millennium Park or the museums once a year is charming, but it's not the core of Metra's ridership. It's a system organized (perhaps too much) around bringing suburbanites downtown in the morning and home in the afternoon.

Running some Metra Electric trains (perhaps the South Chicago branch) via SCAL into Union would allow the south suburbs better access to West Loop jobs--and help make the south suburbs a viable residential choice for West Loop officeworkers. Union is nearing capacity at the south end, but since Electric division trains wouldn't be serviced in the old Burlington yard, they could just run into Union Station on one of the riverside run-through tracks (fitted with high platforms) and have a step-on engineer to reverse ends and run back south.

after the rehab of millennium station (vendors, waiting area, etc.), i doubt that metra will be willing to pull its service over into Union/Ogilve. what's the problem with running the circle line over the St. Charles Air Line (other than the fact that to connect it back into the "circle" you'd have to bore a hole under streeterville and connect the line back up at Clark/Division, which is never going to happen)?

[Mr Downtown]

Huh? The south part of the Circle Line is already in place. There's no need to build some expensive way to get from the Alley L to the SCAL and then another expensive connection from SCAL to Orange Line.

[UChicagoDomer]

Huh? The south part of the Circle Line is already in place. There's no need to build some expensive way to get from the Alley L to the SCAL and then another expensive connection from SCAL to Orange Line.

does the circle line as planned connect up with the Metra Electric, or will the Metra Electric be the sole Metra route that is isolated from the future "fully integrated" Metra-CTA transit system?

[Marcu]

Did you miss the entire 20th century? This is the financial model under which Chicago's rapid transit lines were built. And the one under which they were pretty much bankrupt by 1911. If some company actually thought it could make a profit building and operating a rapid transit line, the city would franchise any right of way it wanted for $1 and would pay for fireworks at the groundbreaking. But with the exception of the real-estate cross-subsidized Hong Kong Mass Transit Railway, no rapid transit line anywhere in the world is profitable in the usual sense of the word.

There are quite a few privately operated transit lines throughout the world. A lot in Asia where transit is infinetly superior to here and several in the Western Hemisphere including Vancouver and Sao Paolo. They usually do require some sort of subsidy but tend to save money overall due to efficiency gains. Also, there are more riders, stations are generally cleaner, and trains are on time since there's a profit motive in encouraging more use. A sure way of increasing transit use is to make it profitable.

[Mr Downtown]

Well, it would be a 350-foot walk from Millennium Station to Randolph/Wabash L station. That's roughly as integrated as all the other CTA-Metra connections.

Chicago's transit systems developed as kind of concentric rings, with very few intersections/transfer opportunities that make a network more useful to its users. That has been made worse by the political decision to isolate the Metra system from the CTA system. I'm not very keen on the Circle Line proposal, but it is at least an attempt to integrate the two systems.

My wild & crazy proposal is to adopt the Grey Line idea of running the Metra Electric South Chicago branch on rapid transit headways with CTA fare integration. But I would run those trains via the SCAL into Union Station, allowing cross-platform transfers at 59th and at McCormick Place with the other two Electric branches. That would give Electric riders access to either an East Loop terminal or a West Loop terminal. In addition, I'd put back stations in Kenwood, Oakland and Douglas, and I'd extend the branch into the South Works property. Suddenly the south lakefront has good rail access to downtown office jobs.

[Abner]

My wild & crazy proposal is to adopt the Grey Line idea of running the Metra Electric South Chicago branch on rapid transit headways with CTA fare integration. But I would run those trains via the SCAL into Union Station, allowing cross-platform transfers at 59th and at McCormick Place with the other two Electric branches. That would give Electric riders access to either an East Loop terminal or a West Loop terminal. In addition, I'd put back stations in Kenwood, Oakland and Douglas, and I'd extend the branch into the South Works property. Suddenly the south lakefront has good rail access to downtown office jobs.

Just curious, do those stations have sufficient capacity to run the Metra Electric at those headways?

[UChicagoDomer]

Just curious, do those stations have sufficient capacity to run the Metra Electric at those headways?

they do if the Metra-CTA adopts a universal fare card and gets rid of the Hyde Park-South Side buses (Nos. 6, 2, etc., etc.) that currently compete with Metra Electric service. wasn't greater integration and less inter-agency competition the point of the Hamos bill reform?

As to the Gray Line idea, it really doesn't seem that difficult to implement. the headways during rush hour are quite frequent (at least from Hyde Park). it seems that Metra would only have to run trains with the same headway during non-rush hours as it currently does during rush hours. the increased passengers from cancellation of bus routes would more than justify it.

[UChicagoDomer]

Well, it would be a 350-foot walk from Millennium Station to Randolph/Wabash L station. That's roughly as integrated as all the other CTA-Metra connections.

...

My wild & crazy proposal is to adopt the Grey Line idea of running the Metra Electric South Chicago branch on rapid transit headways with CTA fare integration. But I would run those trains via the SCAL into Union Station, allowing cross-platform transfers at 59th and at McCormick Place with the other two Electric branches. That would give Electric riders access to either an East Loop terminal or a West Loop terminal. In addition, I'd put back stations in Kenwood, Oakland and Douglas, and I'd extend the branch into the South Works property. Suddenly the south lakefront has good rail access to downtown office jobs.

as to the connection between Metra and CTA at Randolph/Wabash, the pedway would need to be kept open past 8pm (and on Sundays) to make that viable.

as to your last paragraph, did there really used to be Metra Electric stations in Kenwood/Oakland? i had no idea. given all the development along Cottage Grove and in Kenwood/Bronzeville in general, it's a travesty that those stations are no longer there.

[Mr Downtown]

Just curious, do those stations have sufficient capacity to run the Metra Electric at those headways?

Which stations? Remember that the IC was the south lakefront's rapid transit until the 1970s, with transit-like headways on the main line, better than 10 minutes most of the day and evening. And yes, Domer, there were stations every few blocks.

You'd have to revise the turnout a little at South Wye Junction so the Metra tracks rather than the freight tracks connected to the SCAL. But that should be done anyway, to allow an 18th Street viaduct to Lake Shore Drive, and would be pretty cheap if it doesn't have to be done under traffic.

If you mean Union Station, I'm sure there will be raised eyebrows. But I think it's quite doable using a step-on motorman for rapid turnback and track 30 or 32 so there's little interference with BNSF service and switching.

[Eventually...Chicago]

i have to say, reading the discussion in this thread is easily the most complicated to keep track of. (that's a pun, ha ha) You really have to wonder if any good transportation plans can go forward until there is a REAL government organization that can look at the rta, freight lines, highways, ... and do some straight-up Transportation Planning (capital T, capital P). I'm just so sick of everyone pissing in their own corner.

You get the feeling that even if there was enough money for all these things, no one could agree on the best way to spend it. The tranportation mess around the whole region/state/country just shows how worthless our DOT's really are. It seems like the only thing they want to do is advocate for every town to be like schaumburg. 4-6 lane suburban arterials EVERYWHERE!

[Nowhereman1280]

I had to make a run to Champaign today and took Amtrak. Union Station and the trains were packed, way busier than I expected. My train only had a handfull of empty seats.

Are the Amtrak ridership numbers up from past years?

Hell yes they are, most trains to Milwaukee are standing room only on busy days around holidays and even sometimes during rush hour and no empty seats ever during rush hours.

[jpIllInoIs]

Eventually, Metra is planning to run the Southwest Service into LaSalle street, which would free up some capacity.

The new SouthEast Service is planned to run into LaSalle St Station also.

http://metraconnects.metrarail.com/ses.php

[emathias]

Huh? The south part of the Circle Line is already in place. There's no need to build some expensive way to get from the Alley L to the SCAL and then another expensive connection from SCAL to Orange Line.

Well, the current plan is to link it to the Orange Line at Ashland. While that gives people another route to Midway, it adds no real value to any segment of the southwest portion of the city. What that poster was probably referring to was an idea that I (and others) have asked about, which is to turn the Circle Line east along the tracks near 16th Street. That gives new "L" access to East Pilsen, the southern half of UIC including, possibly, all the new development along Halsted, and the South Loop. Since there's possibly existing space for such a project (possibly not, I'm not sure), you'd be adding REAL new service instead of just extra trains to the SW side. Doing it that way could could also be done, with a little configuration, so that it joins the Red Line at the Dan Ryan portal just north of 18th. Then, eventually, if there were ever money for such a thing, it could be punched east to run along the Metra Electric alignment and up until it became a Streeterville subway. Like you said, money for that may never come to be (although Boston did manage to milk out $14 billion to bury a frickin' highway so never say never).

Here's to dreamin' ...

[ardecila]

Some interesting ideas here.

Couple of questions:

Why was IC service curtailed in the 70s?

Why have private citizens had to go to the trouble to prepare a detailed plan for the Gray Line, when transit planners should have realized this obvious move years ago?

[Abner]

Why have private citizens had to go to the trouble to prepare a detailed plan for the Gray Line, when transit planners should have realized this obvious move years ago?

I've been wondering this too. Could it be that it hasn't gone anywhere simply because the CTA and Metra are incapable of working closely together in such a way?

On a related note, has there been any movement at all on fare integration? Are there any ideas about how this could be done? It seems feasible to integrate Metra fares into Chicago cards via a similar system to the DC Metro (swipe when you board and when you alight, and the fare for the distance traveled is deducted automatically), but it has to preserve the ability to buy paper Metra tickets.

[Abner]

Well, the current plan is to link it to the Orange Line at Ashland. While that gives people another route to Midway, it adds no real value to any segment of the southwest portion of the city. What that poster was probably referring to was an idea that I (and others) have asked about, which is to turn the Circle Line east along the tracks near 16th Street. That gives new "L" access to East Pilsen, the southern half of UIC including, possibly, all the new development along Halsted, and the South Loop. Since there's possibly existing space for such a project (possibly not, I'm not sure), you'd be adding REAL new service instead of just extra trains to the SW side. Doing it that way could could also be done, with a little configuration, so that it joins the Red Line at the Dan Ryan portal just north of 18th. Then, eventually, if there were ever money for such a thing, it could be punched east to run along the Metra Electric alignment and up until it became a Streeterville subway. Like you said, money for that may never come to be (although Boston did manage to milk out $14 billion to bury a frickin' highway so never say never).

Here's to dreamin' ...

There is a Metra station at Halsted and the right of way through Pilsen is extremely wide, so there's probably room for stations. It may still be valuable to connect Pink to Orange--I wonder if in this hypothetical situation it would make sense to have the Circle Line continue south to the Orange Line tracks, and run the Pink Line as an east-west line continuing along 16th.

One of the sad side effects of connecting the Pink and Orange Lines would be the demolition of some buildings that have a very interesting relation to the tracks. At the turn in the track there are pillars right in people's front yards.

[Mr Downtown]

Why was IC service curtailed in the 70s?

Declining ridership. In 1970 the IC had 17 million pax. That had dropped to 14 million in 1974. In 2007 it was 12 million.

The biggest problem was that the city neighborhoods served by the IC were just emptying out, or at least losing their downtown commuters. As the railroad industry changed, the unprofitability of commuter operations became more obvious. When RTA took over in 1974, it introduced a uniform fare structure that made the IC less attractive than CTA. A 100 percent fare increase in 1981 instantly halved ridership on the South Chicago branch. I think there was also a Metra or railroad strike around this time that spurred CTA to increase service on the lakefront buses, particularly the 6. The schedules were also revised in a way that made the IC much less useful to in-city riders. Metra's financial support comes entirely from the suburbs, so the IC's in-city stations and service have always been stepchildren.

[Mr Downtown]

has there been any movement at all on fare integration? Are there any ideas about how this could be done? It seems feasible to integrate Metra fares into Chicago cards via a similar system to the DC Metro (swipe when you board and when you alight

Metra continues to insist it cannot be done. They funded a study around 2000 on better physical integration between CTA and Metra, but specifically excluded any consideration of fare integration.

Remember that Metra stations don't have any sort of access control or faregates, so there'd be no way to note the entry and exit stations. About the only idea that I think would work would be machines at Metra stations and on trains that treat a ChicagoCard as a stored-value source of funds, making a deduction in exchange for a seat-check paper ticket to the proper zone.

[VivaLFuego]

Why have private citizens had to go to the trouble to prepare a detailed plan for the Gray Line, when transit planners should have realized this obvious move years ago?

Yeah, those damn incompetent transit planners, incapable of seeing the obvious... :rolleyes:

The Gray Line, as proposed, is a bad idea for a number of reasons, particularly in terms of the proposed cost and operating model. The most sensible way to achieve a similar effect would be 1) increased subsidy to Metra to increase frequency on the branch (one wonders why the bonus $100 million they're getting from HB656, giving them an almost $100 million annual operating surplus not even counting their imminent fare hike, wasn't earmarked for increasing service levels or something else useful other than enriching a gov't agency that doesn't need it) and 2) integrated intermodal fare systems. The fare integration question has been beaten to death, and is a political problem whose solution (and funding thereof) must be forced down Metra's throats. Maybe once Metra is done bonding out their operating funds to supplement their capital budget (presumably to gold-plate their railcars and install butler service or something) there will be some left over that RTA makes them use on fare equipment.

[Mr Downtown]

The Gray Line, as proposed, is a bad idea for a number of reasons, particularly in terms of the proposed cost and operating model.

I have my own questions about it--particularly some of the benefits claimed--but can you elaborate on the problems you see?

[VivaLFuego]

There actually have been consultant studies done on this. There would be major facility issues at the north end of the line, particularly north of Roosevelt where the line narrows to 3 tracks, and then there were significant terminal costs at Randolph with the service as proposed. The operating cost increases significantly when you leave fantasyland and realize that Gray line service, will, in fact, need conductors and manual fare collection and cannot be operated as a CTA line (doing so makes for an even more absurd capital cost, aside from the fact that your assets would get trashed). The proposal also didn't take into adequate account 1) the increased capital cost from more wear and tear on railcars and track infrastructure, 2) ADA compliance considerations, 3) station facility issues (maintenance, etc.), 4) not giving adequate consideration to the capital costs and logistics of segregating CTA-style and Metra-style service along the same ROW.....I think there's more I'm forgetting but it really would be much easier logistically and politically to focus on identifying a proper subsidy to Metra earmarked for increased off-peak service levels and forcing fare integration down their throats. Fare integration would give the biggest boost to peak-period ridership on the branch, at which point Metra can include in their capital plan an easing of the bottlenecks north of Roosevelt to increase thoroughput.

[UChicagoDomer]

There actually have been consultant studies done on this. There would be major facility issues at the north end of the line, particularly north of Roosevelt where the line narrows to 3 tracks, and then there were significant terminal costs at Randolph with the service as proposed. The operating cost increases significantly when you leave fantasyland and realize that Gray line service, will, in fact, need conductors and manual fare collection and cannot be operated as a CTA line (doing so makes for an even more absurd capital cost, aside from the fact that your assets would get trashed). The proposal also didn't take into adequate account 1) the increased capital cost from more wear and tear on railcars and track infrastructure, 2) ADA compliance considerations, 3) station facility issues (maintenance, etc.), 4) not giving adequate consideration to the capital costs and logistics of segregating CTA-style and Metra-style service along the same ROW.....I think there's more I'm forgetting but it really would be much easier logistically and politically to focus on identifying a proper subsidy to Metra earmarked for increased off-peak service levels and forcing fare integration down their throats. Fare integration would give the biggest boost to peak-period ridership on the branch, at which point Metra can include in their capital plan an easing of the bottlenecks north of Roosevelt to increase thoroughput.

I've never understood all the clamor for Gray Line service. I don't how many times I've wanted to take the Metra from HP during non-peak hours, but either a) preferred the convenience of the Chicago Card, or b) the more likely scenario, either knew the Metra wasn't coming for another hour, or had no idea when the Metra was going to arrive.

more frequent service and a universal fare card would alleviate the problem of inter-agency competition and provide faster and better service (Metra is posh and fast; the No. 6 bus is a crowded, consistently late dump on 4 wheels).

since we're on the topic of increased Metra frequency, is there any chance that other Metra lines could increase service? i'm thinking specifically of BNSF, which has a stop at Halsted, which could provide train service to UIC's University Village, which currently lacks it. Or even the Milwaukee West Line (Grand/Cicero station, in an area not currently served by the el) and Milwaukee North Line (Grayland and Healy stations, in an area not currently served by the el)

[Eventually...Chicago]

my idea for an integrated fare system using the chicago card (CTA).

Right now conductors go person by person and collect fares. It is up to the conductor to remember how far people with 10 rides/monthly passes... are riding. So why not give them a little wireless, handheld device that has a reciever that can scan in chicago cards?

For the monthly pass rider-
I hold my card out, the conductor presses the reciever up to it, a little thing says "Monthly, Zone A to G" he moves on, everything operates like it currently does.

For the 10 Rider-
I purchase a cycle of 10 rides online and they get added to my chicago card. The conductor touches the reciever to my card and the screen pops up "3 rides remaining, Zone B to D" Everything else like normal.

For the occasional, one way rider that has a chicago card-
I tell the conductor "Lake-Cook to Union" as always he touches my card to the reciever and types in zone A to E. It prints out a receipt, (much like the portable credit card recievers do) and puts the receipt in the little clippy thing. All is well.

For the occasional, cash fare rider-
I say where i am going, hand him my money, he types in Cash, Zone H to A a receipt prints out and he puts it in the clippy thing.

Advantages:
Metra can streamline their tracking of fares and ridership digitally, rather than the 1950's way of using a hole puncher.
Riders get a real receipt, not the one-way tickets that are impossible to figure out what the heck is going on.
Minimal new equipment needed. They can continue to use their same trains, stations, conductors. No jobs replaced by machines so no union issues.

Disadvantages:
Well...That's what you guys are for :)

[VivaLFuego]

since we're on the topic of increased Metra frequency, is there any chance that other Metra lines could increase service? i'm thinking specifically of BNSF, which has a stop at Halsted, which could provide train service to UIC's University Village, which currently lacks it. Or even the Milwaukee West Line (Grand/Cicero station, in an area not currently served by the el) and Milwaukee North Line (Grayland and Healy stations, in an area not currently served by the el)

Metra claims that due to freight conflicts on most routes, they've already maxed out their schedules. This is plausible on several routes, particularly the 2-track routes that share trackage with freight service (the ME not being included here, except for a few potential conflicts at 115/Kensington). The BNSF, UP-W and UP-NW are 3-track, so I'm skeptical that more mid-day service couldn't be added (though I'd buy the argument that it's not possible on the MD-W, MD-N, UP-N, SWS, RI, and HC without further investment in more sidings, interlockings etc). Until there's political pressure for them to use their ridiculously high operating subsidy (so high it necessitates lazy fare collection and diversion of operating funds to capital just to reduce their recovery ratio to the mandated 54%) to increase service levels, I'm not sure we'll get the real scoop on where/when they could actually run more service.

[brian_b]

my idea for an integrated fare system using the chicago card (CTA).

Right now conductors go person by person and collect fares. It is up to the conductor to remember how far people with 10 rides/monthly passes... are riding. So why not give them a little wireless, handheld device that has a reciever that can scan in chicago cards?

For the monthly pass rider-
I hold my card out, the conductor presses the reciever up to it, a little thing says "Monthly, Zone A to G" he moves on, everything operates like it currently does.

For the 10 Rider-
I purchase a cycle of 10 rides online and they get added to my chicago card. The conductor touches the reciever to my card and the screen pops up "3 rides remaining, Zone B to D" Everything else like normal.

For the occasional, one way rider that has a chicago card-
I tell the conductor "Lake-Cook to Union" as always he touches my card to the reciever and types in zone A to E. It prints out a receipt, (much like the portable credit card recievers do) and puts the receipt in the little clippy thing. All is well.

For the occasional, cash fare rider-
I say where i am going, hand him my money, he types in Cash, Zone H to A a receipt prints out and he puts it in the clippy thing.

Advantages:
Metra can streamline their tracking of fares and ridership digitally, rather than the 1950's way of using a hole puncher.
Riders get a real receipt, not the one-way tickets that are impossible to figure out what the heck is going on.
Minimal new equipment needed. They can continue to use their same trains, stations, conductors. No jobs replaced by machines so no union issues.

Disadvantages:
Well...That's what you guys are for :)

Implementing such a system would be costly. You'd need to build up the infrastructure for the fare capture system all the way out into the farthest reaches of the Metra service area. But aside from that, I don't think it's all that difficult to do.

[Eventually...Chicago]

i thought about that too, but given the alternatives of trying to add scanners on the trains, and such, it doesn't sound too bad.

Lets put it this way, when i take the metra out every morning i can browse the internet on my computer, send emails from my phone and make phone calls to china. Hell, i can sit on the crapper and track elections in pakistan. If metra can't figure out a way to cheaply send information back and forth to whatever corner of the globe fox lake, joliet or harvard are on, shame on them. It is a little pathetic when the users of the system are light years beyond the system itself.

[UChicagoDomer]

Metra claims that due to freight conflicts on most routes, they've already maxed out their schedules. This is plausible on several routes, particularly the 2-track routes that share trackage with freight service (the ME not being included here, except for a few potential conflicts at 115/Kensington). The BNSF, UP-W and UP-NW are 3-track, so I'm skeptical that more mid-day service couldn't be added (though I'd buy the argument that it's not possible on the MD-W, MD-N, UP-N, SWS, RI, and HC without further investment in more sidings, interlockings etc). Until there's political pressure for them to use their ridiculously high operating subsidy (so high it necessitates lazy fare collection and diversion of operating funds to capital just to reduce their recovery ratio to the mandated 54%) to increase service levels, I'm not sure we'll get the real scoop on where/when they could actually run more service.

well, didn't the Hamos bill that just passed contain anything that granted more oversight and control to RTA so that the efficiencies mentioned in the various posts in this thread could be mandated??? it just kills me that chicago has so much rail infrastructure and untapped rail potential (if one considers all of the Metra and CTA routes as one system), yet maintains this sprawling, over-extended, and costly bus system.

optimally (assuming they get the federal funds they're seeking for upgrades to the Geneva/Elburn and Harvard lines), Metra would run trains all day with rush-hour type headways (perhaps with non-rush routes starting from stations within city limits if demand is too low in the burbs), and buses would be used solely as feeders to CTA and Metra stations (with exceptions for arguably indispensable routes like the 151, that basically need to end up downtown).

[VivaLFuego]

well, didn't the Hamos bill that just passed contain anything that granted more oversight and control to RTA so that the efficiencies mentioned in the various posts in this thread could be mandated??? it just kills me that chicago has so much rail infrastructure and untapped rail potential (if one considers all of the Metra and CTA routes as one system), yet maintains this sprawling, over-extended, and costly bus system.

optimally (assuming they get the federal funds they're seeking for upgrades to the Geneva/Elburn and Harvard lines), Metra would run trains all day with rush-hour type headways (perhaps with non-rush routes starting from stations within city limits if demand is too low in the burbs), and buses would be used solely as feeders to CTA and Metra stations (with exceptions for arguably indispensable routes like the 151, that basically need to end up downtown).

There is some greater oversight on the part of RTA, but now the power structure is even more skewed to the suburbs so why would anything change for the better?

Also, I disagree with downplaying the importance of the bus system, which is the heir of the streetcar system. Routes like the 20 Madison, 22 Clark/Wentworth, 36 Broadway/State, 49 Western, 56 Milwaukee (and many more) have played vital roles in guiding Chicago's urban form as we know it. These are corridors that warrant some form of serious transit (short of heavy rail rapid), but over the years the street design concerns have been made with only driver in mind, and not buses/pedestrians (most of these streets once had raised island boarding areas for streetcars, wider sidewalks, etc.) And further, the northside lakeshore express buses are absolutely needed because the rail system simply doesn't have adequate capacity in that corridor to meet demand.

That said, I agree that much of our rail network is drastically underutilized; in the city/CTA realm, it's largely due to some combination of disinvested neighborhoods (Green/Pink) and poor land use (Orange), and in the burbs/Metra realm, its because service frequency in the off-peak/weekends isn't what it should be and the relative lack of integration with the urban transit (CTA) system. The Pace network of feeder buses and the suburban taxi services actually interface with Metra quite well, so all parties deserve some commendation for that. Other causes for underutilization are more minor, isolated, and usually political in nature, e.g. the lack of a major park'n'ride facility on the Dan Ryan branch, the bizarre relationship between the south lakeshore CTA/Metra services, the lack of a South Loop L stop, etc.

[MayorOfChicago]

^ I agree with the poor land use. I was bored yesterday at work and actually jumped on the Orange Line by my office and rode it to Midway and back, just to listen to music and kill an hour.

I felt bad for the people coming back from Midway. There were 8 of them, the only people on the car, and they were all coming into Chicago with huge suitcases and staying downtown. It was their first trip to the city, and they were very excited - which was entertaining to watch.

Well first we leave Midway and they're all babbling how close together the houses are, how thin they are, how tall they are, and how long they are. They thought it was really cool. Then. We get to the 80% of the trip that goes through rundown industrial areas. They were all amazed and talking nonstop how ugly and industrial the area was. The scattered houses, railways, factories, smokestacks. I mean I live here, so I know it's just an industrial area of the city. You could tell that in their minds THIS was Chicago. It obviously got better once we arrived at Halsted. But that ride in from Midway is quite misleading. I'm not sure how the riders get to the train, I'm guessing buses? It would have been nice had their been more residential areas the Orange Line could have served directly...

I understand why it went where it did though....just too bad it had to work out that way. Think how the Brown Line is such a part of those neighborhoods, and so many thousands of people can just walk down the street and hop on the train (like me).

[OhioGuy]

I felt bad for the people coming back from Midway. There were 8 of them, the only people on the car, and they were all coming into Chicago with huge suitcases and staying downtown. It was their first trip to the city, and they were very excited - which was entertaining to watch.

Well first we leave Midway and they're all babbling how close together the houses are, how thin they are, how tall they are, and how long they are. They thought it was really cool. Then. We get to the 80% of the trip that goes through rundown industrial areas. They were all amazed and talking nonstop how ugly and industrial the area was. The scattered houses, railways, factories, smokestacks. I mean I live here, so I know it's just an industrial area of the city. You could tell that in their minds THIS was Chicago.

I fear this type of experience for some of the IOC members that potentially visit the city over the next year & a half, though on the green line instead of the orange line. A ride south from downtown to Washington Park goes through some pretty ugly areas and I just wonder what their reactions will be, particularly when we're proposing to have the Olympic Stadium in a location that basically requires attendees to go through such a blighted area. I swear if you didn't know better, you'd think you were riding the green line through Gary, what with the shape some of the buildings are in and the amount of vacant abandoned land in & around the green line.

[UChicagoDomer]

over the years the street design concerns have been made with only driver in mind, and not buses/pedestrians (most of these streets once had raised island boarding areas for streetcars, wider sidewalks, etc.)

see, e.g. that hideous stretch of North Avenue near Clybourne where the pittance of a sidewalk devoted to pedestrians suffices for about two or at most three people abreast. its particularly jarring to watch the bicyclists brave the traffic on North (and a good number of them do, even in winter). i'm surprised the "bike lobby" (http://www.biketraffic.org/) hasn't bitched to alleged bike advocate Daley about some of these streets. If the streets are going to suck for pedestrians they could at least be improved for bikers.

[Abner]

That's nothing. Just imagine how hideous the Mid-City Transitway would be, connecting O'Hare and Midway to all the other transit lines!

[Chicago3rd]

^ I agree with the poor land use. I was bored yesterday at work and actually jumped on the Orange Line by my office and rode it to Midway and back, just to listen to music and kill an hour.

I felt bad for the people coming back from Midway. There were 8 of them, the only people on the car, and they were all coming into Chicago with huge suitcases and staying downtown. It was their first trip to the city, and they were very excited - which was entertaining to watch.

Well first we leave Midway and they're all babbling how close together the houses are, how thin they are, how tall they are, and how long they are. They thought it was really cool. Then. We get to the 80% of the trip that goes through rundown industrial areas. They were all amazed and talking nonstop how ugly and industrial the area was. The scattered houses, railways, factories, smokestacks. I mean I live here, so I know it's just an industrial area of the city. You could tell that in their minds THIS was Chicago. It obviously got better once we arrived at Halsted. But that ride in from Midway is quite misleading. I'm not sure how the riders get to the train, I'm guessing buses? It would have been nice had their been more residential areas the Orange Line could have served directly...

I understand why it went where it did though....just too bad it had to work out that way. Think how the Brown Line is such a part of those neighborhoods, and so many thousands of people can just walk down the street and hop on the train (like me).

I transfered here sight unseen in 1997 from San Francisco for a 2 year stay and as the Orange line made the trip to the loop I thought the same thing...what the hell am I doing here! I can't make it 2 years. 11 years later I am so in love with this city.

[nomarandlee]

The whole article is postedsince its got a lof of information and details I at least don't know about and I don't really want to slice it. If someone insist on editing it then I can do it or a mod can...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-corridor_22feb22,1,5831660.story

Cook-DuPage corridor project would extend Blue Line
RTA to begin public hearings next month on highly conceptual plan
By Richard Wronski | Tribune reporter
11:34 PM CST, February 21, 2008

An ambitious but highly conceptual plan to greatly expand commuter rail and bus service through the heavily congested corridor connecting central Cook and DuPage Counties was presented Thursday to the Regional Transportation Authority board.

The key element of the proposal, the result of a three-year study by a committee of suburban mayors and county commissioners, would be an extension of the Chicago Transit Authority's Blue Line on an east-west route from suburban Forest Park as far west as the Yorktown shopping center in DuPage County.

While the elements of the study are not all new, it is the first time they have been compiled in one cohesive proposal.

The goal of the 133-mile project would be to provide better mass-transit options for the 750,000 commuters who travel the car-jammed Eisenhower Expressway and Tri-State and Reagan Memorial Tollways.

"We found a large suburban market that's not well-served by transit right now," said Bill Lenski, manager of corridor planning studies for the RTA.

The project remains highly conceptual, with few specifics on how to implement it.

An initial cost estimate is $5.5 billion, which is far more than other ambitious commuter projects that have already been the focus of regional transportation planners for years, all competing for fewer federal matching dollars.

Indeed, the RTA began grappling Thursday with its new role of prioritizing the major transit projects put forth by the CTA, Metra and Pace.

The funding legislation approved last month by the General Assembly gives the RTA more oversight and power to sign off on the transit agencies' wish lists.

The main artery of the Cook-DuPage corridor project would be the Blue Line extension.

The route would be intersected at four points between the city and Interstate Highway 355 by north-south feeder routes.

Three of these routes would be a combination of so-called bus rapid-transit routes, offering faster travel and fewer stops than regular bus service, and high-occupancy vehicle lanes on expressways.

One feeder, known as the J-Line because of its shape on a map, would use bus rapid transit to connect Naperville and Aurora on the south using the Reagan Memorial corridor to Oak Brook, O'Hare International Airport and the Woodfield/Schaumburg area.

Another bus rapid-transit line would travel on I-355. The plan also calls for extending the Elgin-O'Hare Expressway east to the airport.

The fourth feeder would be a rail component, using the Indiana Harbor Belt tracks to carry passengers from O'Hare to Midway Airport. The idea has been on planners' drawing boards for more than a decade.

The policy committee of suburban mayors and county commissioners recommended the package over two other options.

Public hearings on the project will be held next month.

The RTA intends to begin the next phase of the planning process over the summer, in cooperation with the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning and other transportation agencies.

Extending the Blue Line from its current terminus in Forest Park to DuPage County is listed in the Chicago region's 2030 long-term master plan.

"But it is not obviously as far along in the planning stages as CTA projects that have already qualified" for placement on a federal list of new projects, said CTA spokeswoman Noelle Gaffney.

CTA projects that are on the so-called new-starts list and currently are in the alternatives analysis phases of planning include Red, Yellow and Orange Line extensions and the Circle Line, which would connect all CTA and Metra rail lines.

"The CTA continues to work with the RTA, Metra and Pace on identifying opportunities to enhance and expand transit," Gaffney said.

rwronski@tribune.com

More articles

[OhioGuy]

Does the blue line really need to be extended *all* the way outside the county to Lombard when that area already has Metra service??? I don't have any problems with the Yellow line extension to Old Orchard Shopping Mall considering the area doesn't have Metra service. But Lombard does. I don't have any problem with the Orange Line extension to Ford City Mall because that's actually part of the city of Chicago. Lombard isn't. And I don't have any qualms with the red line being extended further south because that serves more of the city. Extending to Lombard won't. Personally I'd still like to see the brown line extended to Jefferson Park. Serving a dense area of the city with rail transit sounds better to me than extending the CTA rail lines even further out into the suburbs. And of course there is the circle line as well. To me, this blue line extension should be dead last unless DuPage county wants to fund it entirely themselves.

[k1052]

Does the blue line really need to be extended *all* the way outside the county to Lombard when that area already has Metra service??? I don't have any problems with the Yellow line extension to Old Orchard Shopping Mall considering the area doesn't have Metra service. But Lombard does. I don't have any problem with the Orange Line extension to Ford City Mall because that's actually part of the city of Chicago. Lombard isn't. And I don't have any qualms with the red line being extended further south because that serves more of the city. Extending to Lombard won't. Personally I'd still like to see the brown line extended to Jefferson Park. Serving a dense area of the city with rail transit sounds better to me than extending the CTA rail lines even further out into the suburbs. And of course there is the circle line as well. To me, this blue line extension should be dead last unless DuPage county wants to fund it entirely themselves.

The Blue Line is all ready as long as it should be IMO. Anything further out should be handled by Metra.

The primary expansion projects involving the the CTA should be the Red Line extension, the Circle Line, and the West Loop Transportation center.

Secondary projects should include extending the Orange Line to Ford City, extending the Yellow line to Old Orchard, adding a couple Yellow Line stops,

I don't see much in the way of feasably extending the Brown Line. You'd have to tear through a neighborhood with elevated or go subway ($).

[MayorOfChicago]

It's a cute proposal - but who in their right mind would sit on the Blue Line for what would probably be HOURS to get out to Lombard when they can just take a Metra train downtown in half the time?

The CTA L lines certainly aren't meant for long haul, I mean look how long it takes you just to get to Forest Park. Do they really think someone will take a bus from Naperville to Lombard and then switch and take the blue line lumbering through the west side of the city to get downtown? Hell no, they'll jump on Metra.

I do love the O'hare to Midway proposal though, even though I've already heard about it. Too bad it'll never happen in my lifetime.

[MayorOfChicago]

And why can't we honestly start acting on ANY of the proposals out there before we start bringing up more? This state just loves to dream big on transit, but where's the action??

Grey Line
Circle Line
Red Line extension
Yellow Line extension
Orange Line to Ford City
Blue Line to Schaumburg
Blue Line to Lombard
Metra Star Line
O'hare to Midway
Midcity Transit
Clinton Street Transit Hub
Carrol Street Transitway
Metra to Rockford
Metra to Milwaukee
Metra to DeKalb
Express trains to O'hare
Express trains to Midway

I mean, it all just makes me want to piss myself thinking of the possibilities - but can't we just ACT and actually build one thing??

Oh Joy, we built the Pink Line. Right...you rehabbed a mile of track and re-routed an existing line. It's not THAT exciting.

Anyway, just a rant - but why can't we focus focus focus instead of just daydreaming...

[VivaLFuego]

Well, the primary trip generators in the I-88 corridor (namely the huge employement/economic stretch along 22nd and Butterfield from Oak Brook to Downers Grove) are very poorly served by radially-oriented transit, with the BNSF a few miles to the south. Presumably any extension would be high speed (70mph) with wider station spacing, some of them with large parking facilities. The net effect is something functioning more like BART.

Forest Park into downtown is only about 25 minutes right now. Upgrade the tracks to 70mph, and the trip from Oak Brook to downtown could be reasonably made in about 40 minutes, which beats the hell out of driving in rush hour traffic. under 50 minutes from the Lombard terminal. Oak Brook to downtown is pretty comparable in distance to O'hare-Downtown, and plenty of people make that trip (or did at least until the slow zone epidemic...and they will again once the tracks are fixed).

The biggest issue are the track-miles, and the car-miles that would be racked up traveling over them. It would be very expensive to maintain such a line, so fares and subsidy on the extension would have to be commensurate to support it (again, a la BART). Dreaming here (and this ain't gonna happen), but some I-88 toll revenue could be diverted to support it, as a contribution to reducing congestion.

EDIT: Another thought in re: travel times. The Blue Line ROW is 4-tracks wide from the Halsted portal to about Pulaski. Express trackage anyone? As long as we're dreaming big with billions of federal dollars, why not?

[the urban politician]

^ I have to admit, what MayorofChicago said above at least partially rings true. We have heard of so many Chicago area transit proposals in recent years, and one has to wonder what, if any, of these will come to fruition?

I agree that it is important to study various routes and their potential contributions, but do so many have to land on the Federal New Starts list? I'd really like the RTA to simply cut through the crap and say "we badly need these 2 projects to happen", and throw all of their political weight behind them. I'm concerned that we could be spreading ourselves too thin, no?

[VivaLFuego]

^ Shotgun approach. Throw enough of these out there, eventually one will capture a powerful politician's imagination and he'll get it pork-barrelled. While some proposals are answers to questions no one really asked (e.g. the Ogden streetcar? STAR line? -Arguably- the Circle Line?), the large number of useful ones underscore the need for general investment in expanding transport infrastructure in the region. If reasonably affordable to do so, it doesn't hurt to have preliminary analysis done on any of these routes so the thing is ready to go to engineering/design once the money comes through.

[Abner]

I was actually going to ask what the story is with the open space/partial track along the Eisenhower that's been having some work done on it, apparently very slowly. Those could be CTA express tracks? Honestly, they could probably only skip about four stations though.

Also, if track/car maintenance issues would be such a problem with a line this long, how did they ever get an extension of the Congress line all the way out to Westchester? I guess it was just an extremely long, slow trip. Funny how so many of the current "expansion" proposals (Circle Line, Yellow Line infill stations, Gray Line) are in some part just proposals to restore service that once existed.

[schwerve]

Another thought in re: travel times. The Blue Line ROW is 4-tracks wide from the Halsted portal to about Pulaski. Express trackage anyone? As long as we're dreaming big with billions of federal dollars, why not?

IMO the only way that this makes sense is if this runs express like a purple line west. If you can use this money to help construct an express track and fold that into a airport express we might have something interesting on our hands.

[Chicago Shawn]

IMO the only way that this makes sense is if this runs express like a purple line west. If you can use this money to help construct an express track and fold that into a airport express we might have something interesting on our hands.

Yeah, that is what came to my mind as well. Although I would prefer to see inner city extensions first and foremost, I find this proposal plusable because of the high employment density of the Tech Corridor on I-88. It is much more efficient to have large employment centers on both ends of a transit line, rather than one end. It provides for better utilization of the system in both directions rather than having crush loads going one way and empty trains the other, and therefore boosts the overall rush hour capacity.

There will always be plentiful job markets in the suburbs, no matter how many cooperate HQs decide to move downtown in the future. Connecting them to transit, where the employment density is high enough to warrant it, is only a good thing for the entire region, as long as it doesn't starve other needed projects of needed funding through the high cost of implementation. If a creative financing method (toll revenue sharing, special assessment taxes on commercial property in the I-88 corridor) was used to help the project along, then I would be in favor of it.

Such a project could turn the West Side and near west 'burbs into sort of "sweet spot" or housing choice, as it would sit between one large and one extremely large employment center, both of which are saturated with white and pink collar jobs and connected by transit.


Look at the Blue Line's O'hare link. It provides access to thousands of jobs the other end of the line. Even at 3-4AM, trains heading out to O'Hare have every seat filed by the time they reach Jefferson Park, trains are filled with employees taking on the morning shift for airport and hotel jobs. Later, the reverse commuters for the O'Hare office market begin boarding.

[ArteVandelay]

I was actually going to ask what the story is with the open space/partial track along the Eisenhower that's been having some work done on it, apparently very slowly. Those could be CTA express tracks?

Not CTA express tracks. A contractor is redoing the signal system along the blue line, and almost all the work you've seen along the Eisenhower is related to this work. That is what the short rail siding at Peoria is for as well.

For what its worth, the ROW is only wide enough for express tracks to about the old California station (although it is VERY wide up to that point). After that the ROW gets tight until it leaves the middle of the freeway before the old Central station. Its not as tight as the Kennedy, but putting in a four track express through much of this area would still be massively expensive/impratical, particularly between Pulaski and Cicero.

[emathias]

...
I don't see much in the way of feasably extending the Brown Line. You'd have to tear through a neighborhood with elevated or go subway ($).

Straight-line rail on solid cement beds, like the Orange Line, is nowhere near as loud as the old-style steel structures even when it's elevated. Properly constructed, it's probably even quieter than the elevated embankment like the section of Red Line that runs on through Edgewater since you'd have the rail held solidly in place so there's less variation and less vibration and less wear.

There are a series of alleyways running parallel to and just between Lawrence and Leland, with only a couple short breaks all the way from Kimball to the Edens. Using the city's alley ROW, you could totally resurrect the old "alley 'L'" spirit and build it there.

I'm sure there'd be objections to it, but fighting and winning the right to build that would be a tremendously useful precedent for the CTA.

It seems like it could be done and, if the alley were used, for less money than might be expected. the most expensive part might be connecting to the Blue Line, and worst case it could just end there and force people to make a transfer. Transfers aren't really all THAT bad.

Side Note: This 1896 NYTimes article (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9807E0DC153BEE33A2575BC2A9639C94679ED7CF) about a legal obstacle to getting the subways there built over 100 years is pretty interesting.

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/transportation/chi-gettingaround25feb25,1,7176059.column

Gary as the 'third airport'?
Passenger air service returning next month
Jon Hilkevitch | Getting Around

.........For travelers who prefer not to drive, shuttle-bus service will begin operating March 13 to the airport from the South Shore Line commuter station about a mile away. The shuttle fare will be $1.25 a ride.

The South Shore runs between the Millennium Park rail station in downtown Chicago and South Bend, Ind., where the trains enter the terminal at South Bend Regional Airport. In the long term, if a second passenger terminal is built at Gary-Chicago, officials envision South Shore trains directly serving the airport.

The new rail routing could be incorporated into long-range plans costing at least $1 billion to extend the South Shore Line to Lowell and Valparaiso, Ind. The Gary-Chicago link is tentatively projected to cost about $130 million.................

[OhioGuy]

Could they just build something like the AirTrain used in New York that connects both Newark and JFK airports to the rail network? Or would that be more costly than relocating the actual tracks further north?

[VivaLFuego]

Could they just build something like the AirTrain used in New York that connects both Newark and JFK airports to the rail network? Or would that be more costly than relocating the actual tracks further north?

Probably alot more expensive than building a one-track spur off the main line and a flat junction.

[jjk1103]

......I've been riding the Brown Line a few times just recently. I haven't ridden it in probably a year. .......it really seemed to be moving quite well (I'm making exceptions for the construction zones) ....the only two true slow zones that I saw was the curve just after Damen and the stretch around Division St....am I correct, or is this just wishful thinking on my part. ?

[orulz]

Probably alot more expensive than building a one-track spur off the main line and a flat junction.

I certainly don't know what their exact plans are, but I would speculate that it involves through tracks configuration rather a single track spur. First, because the cost estimate for the south shore connection is $130 million. A spur would probably cost a lot less than that. Second, because they want to incorporate an intercity train station into the complex as well.

There are two ways I can see that they might do this. Either relocate the South Shore line to the north of the airport, and build the new terminal close to where the existing one is, or relocate the South Shore Line immediately north of I-90, building a new terminal south of the runway.

[ardecila]

I have a question about the Orange/Yellow line extensions. Both are planned to service major shopping centers (Ford City/Old Orchard, respectively).

The Orange Line only was feasible because it used unused/lightly-used railroad right-of-way. However, the Chicago Belt Railroad (which is parallels at Midway) doesn't go all the way to Ford City, but turns off into the railyards near 68th Street. Would the Orange Line be extended over the railyards and onto its own right-of-way to bring it right into the mall parking lot?

Likewise, the old North Shore Line right-of-way is several blocks away from Old Orchard. I'm not sure I see the point of extending the line another mile if the station won't even be in the mall complex, and mall visitors face a long walk down narrow sidewalks on Golf through a low-density neighborhood. It would be far cheaper to do signalling upgrades and bus lanes on Skokie Boulevard to carry people to the mall, and those actually WOULD go directly to the mall itself; buses could drop people off right at the pedestrian entrances.

Both of these projects seem like really short extensions that are pointless without direct access to their respective malls. The Orange Line shouldn't be too hard to do properly; just build a bridge over the railyard, seize one or two industrial properties, and there's enough to build directly into Ford City.

The Yellow Line extension is more tricky; either you build a short subway under Lawler Avenue to a terminal on the site of Old Orchard's retention pond, or you build an elevated line to a terminal in the same location, thereby eviscerating a neighborhood.

I'm not sure anybody actually cares, since this is merely academic, but I was looking through the City of Skokie's website for renderings of the Oakton Station when I found a nice planning survey for both the new station and the Old Orchard extension. It included a nice little map of the possible alignments for the extension - many that I hadn't even considered, since I viewed Niles North High School as an immutable obstacle. But apparently they're supportive of the extension, which could mean the loss of several athletic facilities and some parking.

However, in a weird twist of fate, Westfield refuses to support any sort of extension that uses Old Orchard parking lots for a new station, despite the fact that they would receive the biggest benefit from the station.

Lastly, the document also included a study of various alignment types (at-grade, elevated, embankment, open cut, subway). Embankment and subway were pretty much eliminated at the beginning. At-grade was obviously the cheapest, but some obscure law might prevent the CTA from building a grade crossing at Dempster, leaving elevated and open cut. Those two options came out very similar in cost, surprisingly. Open cut would come out more favorably on an EIS because of reduced noise, but it presents challenges in terms of relocating underground utility lines.

I photoshopped the map to color-code each possibility. Option G is a one-track subway loop surrounding Niles North High School. Option F is just a weird "fishhook" shape. The study eliminated all alignments except A, E, and B.

http://img412.imageshack.us/img412/7648/oldorchardctaat6.jpg

[youngregina]

i would chose option A

[ardecila]

Option A is the simplest/cheapest, no doubt about that, but it doesn't go anywhere near Old Orchard Mall (which is right underneath the red "C"). From the station at the end of option A, riders would need to walk through a business park and across a busy highway interchange, then past a gas station and another office building to get to the mall, all along narrow sidewalks.

Mall workers might be willing to do that, but shoppers with heavy bags are not going to walk that far, especially in bad weather. Running the line to a station near the mall would allow both kinds of people to easily use the line.

[OhioGuy]

Great map, ardecila! I'd been curious as to potential routing ideas.

I like option B. It follows the right-of-way up to the Edens Expressway and then just follows alongside it briefly before curving slightly east toward the Old Orchard Shopping Center. Looking at Google maps, to me it seems as though there is some extra space between the high school and I-94 to squeeze in the track, especially if they do a single track for that final small portion of the route. Double tracking doesn't seem to be necessary once it gets up to the Edens since it's a small enough section of the route that schedules shouldn't overlap between trains arriving at Old Orchard & trains departing Old Orchard. And if the high school is supportive of the extension and willing to give up some space to make it happen, then I say definitely go with that route.

Option E would be my next choice as it's basically the same as B, just not with the slight eastward turn at the end. So instead of eating up the high school's parking lot, I guess they'd be able to keep a portion of it. The downside is that it's ever so slightly further away from the shopping center.

Option A would be my last choice as it would involve building a bridge over I-94. Plus having the station on the other side of the interstate would mean Old Orchard Shopping Center patrons would be stuck walking across the bridge over the very busy interstate. Not exactly an inviting thing to do.

[Chicago Shawn]

Nice work!

First off, Westfield is retarded. And seeing as they just removed parking to add stores, I guess they are willing to shrink the lot if it works in their favor. I guess they feel to the poor folks using the train won't spend as much as someone parking a car. Did they ever take into account the extra spending power a train provides when people can drive less? Idiots. Even Mall of America has a rail connection.

I say option A, with an additional station at Golf Road. The Golf Station will provide a slightly shorter and easier walk to the Mall and High School. The Old Orchard Station will provide service to the Old Orchard Woods office park, Bell+Howell Tower, a hotel, branch university and Optima Condos, which collectively have a high enough density to support a station at all times of the day. The "A" station would also be close enough to the Cook County Circuit Court to make the final leg of the trip on foot.

Any other alignment not only is more costly, but provides service almost exclusively to Old Orchard Mall, rather than the surroundings. A station at Golf Road, I believe would provide service to both.

[youngregina]

Could there not be a shuttle bus that could take you from old orchard mall to the old orchard rd. station.?? (in option A)

[OhioGuy]

Could there not be a shuttle bus that could take you from old orchard mall to the old orchard rd. station.?? (in option A)

People who weren't willing to take a bus there in the first place won't do so after spending the time sitting on the train to get to the area. Plus who wants to wait around for a shuttle bus that runs every now & then? I wouldn't. Placing the station on the other side of the interstate would mean people buying things would be stuck lugging their bags further to get to the train. It would also mean students taking the train to school would be stuck with a further walk as well. I really think the station needs to be on the east side of the interstate. Maybe to appease everyone, option E would be best? Placing it there puts it equal distance between the shopping center to the east, the office park to the west, and the residential area on the north side of Old Orchard Road. It also avoids the need to build a bridge across the Edens Expressway. Option A just places it in the middle of a nondescript office park with parking lots everywhere. It's not as convenient to the shopping center or to the more populated residential areas. As I said, option E places the station basically between everything.

[ardecila]

It also avoids the need to build a bridge across the Edens Expressway.

There's already an underpass underneath the Edens that alignment A could use. The North Shore Line used to go from here all the way up to Milwaukee. Some pedestrian improvements (repaving/push-button signals) would need to be added along Old Orchard Road between the station and the mall.

I'm starting to like option E as well. The north parking lot for Niles North could be turned into an intermodal center/parking structure. The additional parking in the structure would offset the school's lost parking and provide a place for park'n'ride off the Edens. If the facility is big enough, I can see CTA introducing an express service directly to downtown.

[OhioGuy]

There's already an underpass underneath the Edens that alignment A could use.

Ah, ok. I hadn't realized that, though I guess it makes sense.

Having said that, I still prefer something on the east side of the interstate rather than the west side.

[MayorOfChicago]

Tribune:

The Chicago Transit Authority is installing 60 fare-card vending machines enabling customers to use credit cards to purchase rides, the transit agency announced Monday.

The machines accept Visa, MasterCard, Discover Card and American Express credit cards, as well as debit cards that have an accompanying credit card logo, officials said.

Customers using the machines will be able to purchase magnetic-strip transit cards and add value to either magnetic-strip transit cards or Chicago Cards, which are electronic smart cards.

When paying with a credit or debit card, the minimum value that can be added to a magnetic-strip transit card or Chicago Card is $5. As a security measure, the maximum value that can be charged to a credit card is $25 each calendar day.

The first five of 60 machines are located at the O'Hare International Airport station on the Blue Line, the Merchandise Mart station serving the Brown and Purple/Evanston Express Lines, the Clark/Lake station in the Loop, the Adams/Jackson station on the Blue Line and the Midway Airport station on the Orange Line, officials said.

After a 30-day test period, the remaining 55 fare-card machines are expected to be installed over the next four months at more than 45 CTA rail stations.

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ Its about time they did this, cash is so 20th century...

[Haworthia]

Ditto to that. I don't know how many times I've had to hunt down an ATM so I could put more money on my card. I hope they put some of these machines on the Green Line too.

[ardecila]

^^ I'm sure Harlem/Lake will be one of the 45 stations in the second phase, along with all the other terminal stations (95th, Forest Park, Howard, Kimball, etc.).

[Marcu]

^ Yes this is just a huge PR move for the CTA that that they had to spend very little on. Especially now that everyone's on the Chicago Card. But little things like this add up, and at least Huberman seems to be concerned with people's perception of the services they are getting for their money. The same can't be said for some other governing bodies in this area. (Cook County comes to mind).

[pip]

CTA vows 'breakout year' for service fixes

Crain’s) — The Chicago Transit Authority’s new boss Tuesday promised riders a specific set of service improvements — including a near-end to bus bunching and slow zones on el trains — that they will be able to count on seeing no more than 18 months from now.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=28456

[MayorOfChicago]

Check out the highlights.......

1) “The CTA’s got to be a better deal than a car” if it is to maintain its service and dream about future expansion, Mr. Huberman said.

“We know we’re cheaper. We need to be faster,” he added, describing the coming months as “a breakout year” for the long-challenged agency.


2) The CTA already had announced plans to spend tens of millions of dollars rebuilding much of the O’Hare Blue Line west of the Addison stop and Mr. Huberman said that action, combined with other steps, should cut the amount of tracks under slow zones to just 6.9% of the CTA system by the end of this year, down from 21.2% last June.

3) On bus bunching, in which buses delayed by traffic arrive in clumps rather than being scattered every few minutes, Mr. Huberman said the CTA already is doing everything from giving special training to supervisors and drivers to regularly informing workers at each garage how well they are doing at keeping schedules compared to other garages.

Severe weather always will have the potential to throw the CTA for a loop, but, “We’re making progress,” Mr. Huberman said. “By the summer, I think we’ll have it beat.”

4) In another change, electronic schedule boards telling riders how long it will be until their train arrives should be installed in every el station within 18 months, Mr. Huberman said. Based on systems now in place in London and other cities, the boards will carry some advertising which should totally pay their cost, he said.

[ardecila]

4) In another change, electronic schedule boards telling riders how long it will be until their train arrives should be installed in every el station within 18 months, Mr. Huberman said. Based on systems now in place in London and other cities, the boards will carry some advertising which should totally pay their cost, he said.

I've been waiting for this for YEARS! Newer systems like the DC Metro have these signs system-wide, and they're absolutely great. They make the system tremendously user-friendly. I doubt that CTA will install the flashing lights on the platform edges, but having a countdown sign is so much nicer than the canned recordings. Even NYC only has such signs on certain lines; a system-wide installation within 18 months is unreal.

However, I thought that proper countdown signs required a new signal system to be installed? I think Viva mentioned that the last time we discussed these signs a few months ago. If the CTA is not prepared to spend money upgrading the signals, then the signs will only be able to give estimated arrival times based on the planned schedule, and if the train is late, then the signs will be incorrect.

According to Wikipedia, MTA over in New York paid $160 million in 2003 dollars to outfit 158 stations with such signs. That would make it roughly $185 million today - how many years of advertising will it take to pay that off?

The article also mentioned several ways that the CTA is trying to increase revenue and decrease expenses. Increased concessions contracts were mentioned, including possibly Starbucks, as well as leasing out ticket machines to banks, who would then incorporate ATM functions into the machines. The revenue from concessions could be substantial, and leasing out ticket machines would replace a cost with another revenue source.

[Marcu]

^ Great news all around. We may finally get back to having a world class transit system.

[MayorOfChicago]

The buses always know where they are (to announce the next bus stop) by using GPS.

Can't we just throw a GPS on the trains, have it transmit the train # and location to a "headquarters", and then tie that in with the units in the train stations? If we can throw them on every bus, we should be able to do this without TOO much trouble.

Especially since so much of the system is above ground. GPS in cars can tell you where you are and how far you have until you arrive at your destination, this is the same concept. You just need to send that information from the train car to the specific unit in the train station...

[i_am_hydrogen]

CTA president offers broad platform for rail, bus improvements
New buses, cardless transit part of vision

By Jon Hilkevitch | Tribune reporter
10:51 PM CST, March 4, 2008

A lunchtime business crowd hungry for changes at the Chicago Transit Authority got all it could possibly digest Tuesday from CTA President Ron Huberman.

An energetic Huberman served up promises of rail-car seats clean enough to eat off of and technology to tell waiting riders when their buses and trains will arrive. He also vowed to quickly launch an ambitious campaign to post electronic advertising on bus exteriors and improve retail shops in rail stations, all to help fund an array of future transit projects.

But by the time dessert was finished at the City Club of Chicago luncheon, the big question staring back from empty plates was how Huberman would accomplish it all, especially in the 12- to 18-month timetable he laid out.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-huberman-speech-webmar05,1,7686476.story

[emathias]

... According to Wikipedia, MTA over in New York paid $160 million in 2003 dollars to outfit 158 stations with such signs. That would make it roughly $185 million today - how many years of advertising will it take to pay that off? ...

You're thinking too much like a constuction guy and not enough like a technologist.

I don't know how New York did it, but I have a hard time believing it would cost anywhere near $1 million per station to add this in Chicago. First of all, unless I've been severely misled, Chicago has a systemwide computer network already in place. Second of all, the equipment costs for LED signs should have dropped considerably in the past 5 years. I know union labor is ungodly expensive, but even if estimating the signs they choose cost $100,000 each (I actually think they should cost about 1/5 of that), and have 4 per stations with a total of $250,000 per station to install them, that's $102 million, not $185 million. And if the signs themselves do only cost $20k each, and can be installed for $100k per station, it would only be $28 million - which is easily an amount that could be financed with advertising I think.

I don't have any hard numbers, but I really don't think the cost will be anywhere close to $100 million, let alone $185 million.

[emathias]

The buses always know where they are (to announce the next bus stop) by using GPS.

Can't we just throw a GPS on the trains, have it transmit the train # and location to a "headquarters", and then tie that in with the units in the train stations? If we can throw them on every bus, we should be able to do this without TOO much trouble.

Especially since so much of the system is above ground. GPS in cars can tell you where you are and how far you have until you arrive at your destination, this is the same concept. You just need to send that information from the train car to the specific unit in the train station...

I've asked this question in the past and only gotten excuses about why it can't work - none of them very convincing. I think, perhaps, the CTA has simply lacked a leader who understood how to make good use of technology. If Huberman is now a leader who does (and all evidence indicates that he is), we may be close to a golden age of technological solutions to our local transit problems. That may be overly optimistic, but he at least seems to be advocating doing things that make sense to people who've grown up with technology.

[VivaLFuego]

I've asked this question in the past and only gotten excuses about why it can't work - none of them very convincing. I think, perhaps, the CTA has simply lacked a leader who understood how to make good use of technology. If Huberman is now a leader who does (and all evidence indicates that he is), we may be close to a golden age of technological solutions to our local transit problems. That may be overly optimistic, but he at least seems to be advocating doing things that make sense to people who've grown up with technology.

How many GPS transponders do you buy? One for every single railcar (since every railcar could potentially be the cab-car of a revenue train)? Or do you issue them straight to operators and then deal with things like responsibility and accountability? GPS receivers are cheap, but are you familiar with what's required to take that GPS data then transmit it back via IP to a central server? It's basically a laptop and cell-modem in every railcar (again, do you install it in the railcar, or issue it straight to operators?). Hardware installation for such a project would run (ballpark guess, based on the CTA Bus Tracker project) $15-30 million. That's just for railcar-side components, and it leaves you with a gaping hole in system coverage for the entire downtown area (GPS not working at all underground, and not working well among highrises).

Alternatively, for next train arrival predictions, you tie into the signal system (the choice taken by nearly every heavy rail transit operator who's done this...some lightrail operators go the GPS route). Remember, parts of the CTA system (Blue Line) are still controlled by pneumatic block signals from circa 1950 (currently being replaced, done by sometime in 2009). Even once everything is upgraded to automatic train control, the entirety of the signal system is not yet online for tracking in the control center (again, this should be done by sometime 2009). So given these two large projects (replacing Blue Line signals cost ~$160 million, for example), control center will now be able to monitor the signal system (and ergo train location) in real time.

Now, the arrival times have to be sent back to each station (regardless of whether control center is getting location data via GPS or signals). How to transmit this? The ability to use cell-modems for this sort of operation is very recent, only becoming commercial feasible in the past couple years. Most transit properties simply send it via conduit/fibre lines that run the length of the system along the ROW. As you can tell by the voice quality of announcements at some station platforms, many stations are yet to be wired with modern data transmission infrastructure. Again, this is another multi-year ongoing project necessary before rolling out a next-train arrival system. It could theoretically be sent back to stations via cell modems.

All told, none of these are insurmountable obstacles, nor are any of the final steps to an arrival countdown system absurdly expensive (many of the base features like modern signals, fibre optic lines, and tying control center into the signal system) should be done regardless for service reliability and safety purposes. It does take someone who really wants to get it done to make the investment and direct organizational resources to get a countdown system installed. But its not like there was no progress on this front, and suddenly a motivated individual decided It Must Be Done and CTA got to work. The necessary pieces, upgrading railroad ROWs with components dating back to the 1890s, have been ongoing for literally decades, and with a final push now a systemwide implementation is within reach.

Like with the CTA Bus Tracker, lots of people want to see a quick and dirty project that gives some sort of result (like the generally meaningless bus countdown clocks London installed some years ago); but of course, such a result will be of suspect quality and reliability. To do a project like this right, it takes a great deal of time (often many years) of planning and design.

[Abner]

http://www.wjinc.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1&ArticleID=10570&TM=57720.03

RTA comes to town for reaction on Blue Line plan
Meeting March 12 features Q & A on Cook-DuPage corridor study

By BILL DWYER

Officials from the Regional Transportation Authority and members of the Cook-DuPage Corridor Study will be at the Oak Park village hall March 12 to publicly present a preliminary set of plans addressing long-term public transportation needs in Chicago, western Cook County and DuPage County.

The public meeting, scheduled for 6 to 7 p.m. in the village council chambers, is one of five scheduled over an eight-day period.

...

Assistant to the Village Manager Rob Cole said the occasion is an opportunity to voice "strong opposition" to new high occupancy vehicle lanes, bus rapid transit or high occupancy toll lanes on the Eisenhower Expressway.

"The Blue Line extension is a far superior alternative for an abundant number of reasons, and we strongly urge opposition to any attempt to widen I-290," said Cole.

Rapid transit expert and advocate Rick Kuner, who is credited by many for stopping unilateral plans by the Illinois Department of Transportation to add additional lanes to I-290 in 2002, sent out an e-mail alert last week echoing Cole's concerns and urging people to attend the meeting.

"We need to send a loud, clear message that Oak Park says "yes" to the Blue Line and "no" to expanding the Eisenhower," wrote Kuner, calling the current process "a critical juncture."

[ardecila]

I don't see why they keep referring to bus rapid transit as "expanding the Eisenhower". In a dedicated right-of-way, BRT doesn't take up any more space than a rail line would. Operating costs are undoubtedly less, too. I'm definitely against adding regular lanes to the Eisenhower, though.

Viva: I thought the outmoded signals were on the O'Hare Branch. How can these signals date back to the 50s when the line wasn't constructed until the 70s? I don't doubt that the signals are outmoded, though.

Also, it seems like cell-modem is the easiest way to implement the train-arrival system. It can be easily done incrementally, station-by-station, as CTA sees fit, as supposed to a dedicated communications line down the tracks which must be installed at night or during a line shut-down, and requires lots of labor to lay down and wire properly.

[emathias]

Like with the CTA Bus Tracker, lots of people want to see a quick and dirty project that gives some sort of result (like the generally meaningless bus countdown clocks London installed some years ago); but of course, such a result will be of suspect quality and reliability. To do a project like this right, it takes a great deal of time (often many years) of planning and design.

I'm not familiar with the bus equipment in London, but I know the bus (and train) countdowns in Stockholm seemed to work just fine when i was there 5 years ago.

There is no universal single "right" way to do it. There are probably dozens of ways to create a reliable notification system - you mentioned or alluded to at least three - and while you talk about the CTA working on various pieces that can be used for such a system, the CTA has never said "we're going to do this," maybe because of money, or maybe because they never really understood the value to customers.

What the CTA has said publicly is, "We're doing this needed project and, oh yeah, it could also, maybe, in the unplanned future, possibly contribute to notification."

I think it is getting done now because someone is saying it will be done. And I think that someone is Huberman. However, it's also likely that part of the problem in the past is that the CTA had no unified plan for what they were going to do and when they would do it. Part of that is surely the result of spotty funding, or maybe the problem was they had a plan but never communicated it so they never felt any pressure to actually deliver on the plan. Deadlines are when things get done. No deadlines, in my experience, means no results. That Huberman is setting deadlines, even if they slip, should mean more things eventually get done.

[MayorOfChicago]

God bless Illinois....

CTA must cut $200 million from new train, bus budget

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-cta-capital-06mar06,0,3790823.story

[Abner]

I don't see why they keep referring to bus rapid transit as "expanding the Eisenhower". In a dedicated right-of-way, BRT doesn't take up any more space than a rail line would. Operating costs are undoubtedly less, too. I'm definitely against adding regular lanes to the Eisenhower, though.


I think the bigger concern is HOV lanes. The group in Oak Park sees these as a back-door way to sneak in more regular lanes, since HOV lanes can always be converted back to regular lanes when they find they're underused. Apparently the HOV lanes would only exist between Mannheim and Austin, so I don't know how many people would really bother with them. I think the concern for BRT lanes might be similar.

Also, isn't a traffic lane wider than a rail right-of-way? I don't know about this. Obviously Oak Park's main concern is to avoid the acquisition of property along the Eisenhower--it is pretty densely developed all along there.