[VivaLFuego]

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.


Prior to 2005, the only part of the Blue Line with 'modern' signals, meaning Automatic Train Control with Cab Signalling, was the O'hare Extension from Jefferson Park to O'hare. The Kennedy Extension was built in the late 60s and had block signalling. The Dearborn Subway and Congress branch (in the Ike median) still had original pneumatic block signals from the 1950s (you could even here the whooooosh of the signal tripping if you rode in the back of the rear car sometimes). I'm not sure how old the signals were on the short stretch of Milwaukee Elevated; that portion received major rehabilitation (track/structure/etc) in the last 15 years or so but I'm not sure if any signal work was involved. Either way it was still blind block signalling.
At this point in the signal upgrade project, they've switched over to cab-signalling on various portions of the branch and it's all ongoing, so I don't know the exact status at this point other than the project is supposed to be done in 2009. Maybe one of our construction forumers (Art Vandelay?) has more input/detail.

[ArteVandelay]

Automatic train control prior to 2005 on the Blue Line existed from the Western station on the Milwaukee elevated out to Ohare. Apparently at some point the block signals from Western out to the former terminal at Logan Square were removed and replaced, and of course the Kimball subway and Ohare extension were built with ATC. Interestingly enough, between Western/Milwaukee (or more specifically the Armitage Interlocking), and Jefferson Park Interlocking there were no actual signals installed whatsoever. The Ohare extension featured signals at the interlockings, which is the current standard.

Progress - Blue Line from Forest Park into Western/Congress has been cutover to the new system, with punchlist work remaining. From Jefferson Park to Belmont on the Ohare branch has been cutover, and currently crews are working at California/Milwaukee. This should be cutover by the end of next week. Progress will continue down the elevated, then jump back to the Congress, finish the remaining ballasted section, and then finish in the tunnel. Late 2008/early 2009 finish.

Subway is being completed last due to uncertainties with what will actually be built at Block 37 - CTA keeps going back and forth on just how much of the station they want to complete, which obviously affects the signal work significantly through there.

The Blue Line signals and switches are true relics - the interlocking at LaSalle station in the subway still features pneumatic switches, which I believe are the last location these exist systemwide. Of course, the track trips are also pneumatic on the elevated and subway currently too.

[Taft]

Viva and Arte: wow! Guys like you make this one of the best forums around.

Thanks for the detailed information.

Taft

[ardecila]

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.

A regular traffic lane is wider than a rail track, but I'm pretty sure a BRT lane can be narrower, since it has access control and all the drivers are trained. If the BRT lane is narrower than what federal law requires for a traffic lane, then it can't just be quickly converted back on the whim of some politician.

I would definitely be against property acquisition on the Eisenhower as well, but that may be necessary west of Forest Park, through Bellwood, Maywood, and Hillside, regardless of whether lanes are added or a Blue Line extension is built. I mentioned earlier that a convenient rail right-of-way already exists through those communities (former Chicago, Aurora, & Elgin), but apparently transit planners don't want to use it - the only excuse I've heard is that Forest View Cemetery has blocked part of the path, but the land exists to simply go around it. Planners are fixated on the highway-median alignment, even though the costs are tremendously higher.

[Busy Bee]

^ And the exhaust is a lot heavier.

[Abner]

The citizens' group trying to rally support for a Blue Line extension (or at least no Eisenhower expansion) is here:
http://www.citizensforappropriatetransportation.org/

There are a bunch of pictures and a fair amount of information.

[ardecila]

This article is interesting, but it sounds like CTA is dragging their feet as much as possible. I don't understand why they don't want to add a station in an exploding neighborhood to boost ridership on an underutilized line. Is there a politician or NIMBY group somewhere that's opposed to a new station?

Also, the costs seem exorbitant... $34 million for construction? Why can we build huge luxury homes in the suburbs for $1 million, but a new station with far less square footage and cheaper finishes costs 34 times that?

http://www.nearwestgazette.com/Archive/2008/0308/News0308c.htm

Study has community hopeful concerning Morgan el stop

A $2.5 million feasibility study and design proposal for a new Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) el station at Morgan and Lake Sts. is expected to be finished by the end of the year—which is not a minute too soon for Roger Romanelli of the Randolph/Fulton Market Association (RFMA) and Bob Wiggs of the West Central Association (WCA).

“The case for a Morgan St. stop is overwhelming," Romanelli said. "We’ve been making that case for almost a decade.”

[JV_325i]

^Their feasibility study is nearly 10% of their projection of the cost of a station. I'm with dude in the article: take that money and just build the damn thing. I know money is tight, and so it is easier said than done, but it seems plainly obvious that there needs to be a station in the area they are referring to (of course this is from the Near West Gazette so of course they are going to have some bias. However, on that note at least the article leans towards advocating a stop instead of diminishing the importance of any public transit whatsoever).

[ardecila]

West Loop NIMBYs have nothing against better CTA service. The Green Line has been running through the West Loop for 110 years, so it's part of the "character" of their neighborhood - building a new station just makes it more convenient for them to actually use something that they've had to listen to, every 8 minutes, for a very long time.

Most NIMBYs welcome transit improvements, actually. However, they want to have their cake and eat it too. They think that transit will be utilized in a neighborhood where building height is restricted, only large units are built, and everybody has their God-given right to 2 parking spaces fulfilled.

Unfortunately, the real world doesn't work this way.

[VivaLFuego]

^Morgan/Lake is a CDOT project, and I'm pretty sure is funded with federal transportation dollars like most CDOT transit projects (probably CMAQ), so it's not really coming out of any local agency's budget.

I was under the impression the station was farther along though.... like, currently in 100% design, with anticipated bidding of construction contracts in early-to-mid-2009. There was some hold-up in hammering out whether there would be a ground-level or elevated station house, and I'm not sure what they ultimately decided (my hunch is ground-level, as land acquisition+construction would probably still come out cheaper than building the foundations for and hoisting up a new station alongside an active rapid transit line). The $34 million sounds reasonable to me (perhaps even a bit low) given the site constraints and ever-ballooning construction costs, but maybe I'm just jaded.

[honte]

I am surprised that no one has posted a photo of the bright orange brick elevator tower at Chicago / Franklin yet. I went by there tonight and was quite surprised. It doesn't look half bad, although the size of the station is kind of overbearing.

Still, the exposed galvanized has me very worried. I gather they intend to leave it exposed?

[VivaLFuego]

Still, the exposed galvanized has me very worried. I gather they intend to leave it exposed?

Yeah, the whole Brown Line project went for unpainted galvanized steel in lieu of either stainless or painted. Alot of people disagree with this decision (mostly on aesthetic grounds), but I guess it was a key part of the cost-cutting to bring the Brown Line project back within budget since exposed galvanized is both cheaper to buy than stainless and cheaper to maintain than painted.

Hopefully the quality is decent and it doesn't start rusting horribly within a year...

[honte]

^ Thanks for the tip. I think it's a terrible mistake. It will give the stations a second-class, temporary quality unless it's done with great finesse.

The presence of higher-quality materials, such as the glazed brick and glass I saw last night might help lessen this, but the ratio of hot-dipped to other materials I saw looks way skewed in the wrong direction.

[ardecila]

While I'm currently really surprised and somewhat disappointed in CTA's choice, it could become a distinctive feature in time. The beautiful old railings on Ravenswood Branch stations were cast-iron and had little sunflowers in them. Since this type of detailing is fantastically expensive today, I'm glad the CTA did something unique to replace the old railings, instead of the ubiquitous stainless steel, even if they did it not as a design choice but as a value-engineering decision.

Of course, the downside to the galvanized is that they are more prone to corrosion. The zinc-oxide layer formed on the galvanized offers fairly good protection against rust, but if the railing gets nicked, say, by a snow shovel or large suitcase, or the tools of a CTA worker, then the zinc is removed and the underlying steel will begin to corrode.

Viva - A ground-level station house for platforms above a street is a rare configuration for Chicago. AFAIK, Cicero/Lake is the only one like it. This should be interesting; hopefully the CTA chooses somebody good for the design.

[VivaLFuego]

While I'm currently really surprised and somewhat disappointed in CTA's choice, it could become a distinctive feature in time. The beautiful old railings on Ravenswood Branch stations were cast-iron and had little sunflowers in them. Since this type of detailing is fantastically expensive today, I'm glad the CTA did something unique to replace the old railings, instead of the ubiquitous stainless steel, even if they did it not as a design choice but as a value-engineering decision.

Check out the new Montrose and Addison stations: They reused many of those old cast iron features in the stations (I think on the stairwells) and it actually turned out pretty nice.


Viva - A ground-level station house for platforms above a street is a rare configuration for Chicago. AFAIK, Cicero/Lake is the only one like it. This should be interesting; hopefully the CTA chooses somebody good for the design.
I believe CDOT is handling all contract awards for this project, but obviously CTA is part of the discussions on design criteria. In terms of newer ground-level station houses, the Pink Line stations generally turned out pretty elegant, so at this point I'm not too worried. If anything, this strikes me as an opportunity for some 'value capture', using the ground-level station house to actually build a more substantial structure with retail spaces and maybe even office/commercial space on a few floors above for added revenue (and trip generation). Assuming the stationhouse is located on that crumbly old gas station (SW corner I think?), it could only really hold something in the 4-5 story range anyway. I think most the Lake Street L stops from the mid-1990s are hidden gems, aesthetically, so hopefully Morgan carries that on.

[OhioGuy]

Check out the new Montrose and Addison stations: They reused many of those old cast iron features in the stations (I think on the stairwells) and it actually turned out pretty nice.

I agree. I think those stations were renovated reasonably well considering the cost restraints. I also have no problem with the galvanized. Plus there definitely are old features still remaining from the previous stations. In particular the canopy frames have been salvaged. And in some cases the old station houses are remaining as well. Damen & Sedgwick come to mind. So I really don't have any significant problems with how the brown line stations are turning out.

(I have noticed the Chicago Ave station and I'm not quite sure how I'll end up liking the look of that one...though I guess the renderings on the Chicago-l.org site look ok)

[pip]

About rehabbed stations. Look at the Green Line. They are great.

[Mr Downtown]

this strikes me as an opportunity for some 'value capture', using the ground-level station house to actually build a more substantial structure with retail spaces and maybe even office/commercial space on a few floors above for added revenue (and trip generation).

Is that permitted? Is there even a mechanism for FTA and CDOT to get in bed with a private developer? There must be a reason I can't think of a single US example of a rapid transit station being part of a new (nongovernment) development.

[Chicago Shawn]

I agree on the Sedgewick station, It was a fantastic job. The Chicago station is looking pretty good, although I hope the chain link fencing on the new Superior St entrance is only temporary. Although its a bit premature to speculate the final outcome, Fullerton and Belmont look very cheap. Looks like some significant VE occurred here when you look at the renderings vs the outcome thus far.

The Pink and Green line renovations look fantastic. The Pink Line stations are really spectacular given the budget constraints.

Now if you really want to suffer depression over station design, check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgiFJysMx4c

[Nowhereman1280]

Is that permitted? Is there even a mechanism for FTA and CDOT to get in bed with a private developer? There must be a reason I can't think of a single US example of a rapid transit station being part of a new (nongovernment) development.

Actually, I hear that the new Loyola Red Line station is going to be part of a new Loyola building including private stores and housing units as well as providing access to the Loyola Campus across Sheridan. One of the possible designs includes a building that straddles Loyola Avenue and the El forming a kind of tunnel around the tracks. Though I doubt that is the design that will be built.

[VivaLFuego]

Is that permitted? Is there even a mechanism for FTA and CDOT to get in bed with a private developer? There must be a reason I can't think of a single US example of a rapid transit station being part of a new (nongovernment) development.

There is, though it's pretty restrictive. Example: The new CTA headquarters building, which was developed by Fifield (or was it Smithfield? Whatever.) The HQ has retail space on the first floor, and was built with excess capacity on the office levels to be leased out (as far as I know, Floor 12 is still vacant in search of a tenant). I do know that FTA grant guidelines are the reason the HQ building was only 12 stories tall and no larger, but I'm not familiar with the intricate regulations controlling that.

[aaron38]

Now if you really want to suffer depression over station design, check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgiFJysMx4c

Yeah, there was a photo thread posted on those stations. The only thing missing is the violin quartet.

[Abner]

The Pink and Green line renovations look fantastic. The Pink Line stations are really spectacular given the budget constraints.


I think the Pink Line stations look great too, and with many of them they did a good job of incorporating the historic elements of the old stations, although I do wish the new canopies covered the whole length of the platform. They're nice to look at, but some of the stations with longer stretches of naked lightposts (like Damen) look kind of odd. It's nice that they managed to reuse some of the original canopies though.

[Dale]

I just perused the Brown Line website, and I must say that I'm impressed with what they're doing.

[MayorOfChicago]

Was this posted? How did I miss this?

1) Diversey Brown Line to open 3 months early with a temporary station on March 30th

2) Southport Brown Line to open upgraded station on March 30th

3) Belmont/Fullerton Stations to be reduced to 1 track southbound March 30th

4) Paulina Station to close March 30th

5) Wellington Station to close March 30th

6) CTA to start using 8-car Brown Line trains immediately upon closure of Paulina and Wellington on March 30th


A station opening early?? I'm amazed. Looking forward to seeing the 8 car trains too, it'll be good for people's mentality. Progress! They're cutting down the # of morning rush trains though, so capacity will be the same...

[OhioGuy]

Was this posted? How did I miss this?

Reply #2469 addressed this back in mid February. ;)

[emathias]

Also, the costs seem exorbitant... $34 million for construction? Why can we build huge luxury homes in the suburbs for $1 million, but a new station with far less square footage and cheaper finishes costs 34 times that?


I wish/think that the CTA could do it for less money, too, but a $1,000,000 home is built with the expectation of at most a dozen people using it regularly with a few dozen on a really busy night.

A transit station has to be built to accommodate a thousand times that many people using it every day, so while the finish of the materials may be lesser, the bones of them are much, much higher-end. A station also has to be built to withstand the elements of nature, while a million-dollar home can put one roof over everything so the majority of things in a million-dollar home don't have to be able to stand being exposed to nature.

The price of both steel and concrete have skyrocketed in the past 10 years primarily due to the global building boom spiking demand. China's part of that, but the rest of the world is building a lot, too.

Then there's the simple fact of competition. Only a few companies even bother to bid on CTA projects, whereas if you're building a house you have probably hundreds of general contractors to select from and they have thousands of tradespeople to bid out to. While escalating costs for steel, concrete and wood hit homebuilders and public works projects more or less proportionally, the lack of competition in public works bidding makes it harder to control costs because there just aren't a lot of bidders willing to compete on price.

At least that's my take. I'm sure there are other factors, but in my opinion those are the most significant ones.

[ArteVandelay]

Working around an active transit system, with specific work hours and non work hours also significantly impacts costs. While obviously work can be done underneath the elevated structure pretty much whenever, once work advances to track level, rush hours trains cannot be impacted. Consequently there is a significant loss or productivity that contractors must account for in there bids.

CTA specs also contain a slew of items to increase the quality of construction that serve to jack up the price. How effective some of these are is a different topic, but suffice to say that not to many houses are built with 6000 psi concrete, epoxy coated rebar, galvanized structural steel, 100% American made materials, 100% union labor etc. Obviously many of these requirements are actual federal requirements, not CTA requirements.

[MayorOfChicago]

Reply #2469 addressed this back in mid February. ;)


Ha, I went back to page 125 looking, I guess I missed it by 1 page.

I must have missed it the first time round since it was just a link...


I'm for some reason really excited about seeing the 8 car trains finally start running

[Chicago3rd]

I was worried that we would lose some of the character of our stations along the Brownline, but am so thankful for the ones that have been finished. Addison is great! Wilson is great! Have to say I am very happy with CTA's overall job on the brownline. I hope when we go back to 4 tracks next year that they CTA can keep the great timing it has now on three up! We all know the service got a hell of a lot better between Fullerton and Belmont ever since they took a 4th track out.

[pip]

CTA jockeys schedules to boost West Side service

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=28567

[Marcu]

^ About time.

[ardecila]

Working around an active transit system, with specific work hours and non work hours also significantly impacts costs. While obviously work can be done underneath the elevated structure pretty much whenever, once work advances to track level, rush hours trains cannot be impacted. Consequently there is a significant loss or productivity that contractors must account for in there bids.

CTA specs also contain a slew of items to increase the quality of construction that serve to jack up the price. How effective some of these are is a different topic, but suffice to say that not to many houses are built with 6000 psi concrete, epoxy coated rebar, galvanized structural steel, 100% American made materials, 100% union labor etc. Obviously many of these requirements are actual federal requirements, not CTA requirements.

Thanks for the overview... where does the rule about American-made materials come into play? For certain things (e.g. lumber) US products are cheaper, but for many materials, foreign-made products come in at a much lower price. Steel, glass, and several other materials could probably give CTA greatly reduced prices if foreign products were chosen.

Of course, the union labor requirement probably adds significant cost, too... but how much cheaper is it to hire non-union labor, where extensive training might be needed? Is non-union labor even available en masse in Chicagoland?

I'm generally in favor of unions, but I have some viewpoints on them that may provoke some off-topic argument, so I'll keep those to myself.

I imagine the problems with working on an active transit line also affect highways, where rebuilding costs are jacked up by having to keep the highway open - I drove the northern Tri-State yesterday, which is completely messy-looking, varying between 2 and 5 lanes with all sorts of crazy pavement changes and erratic temporary jersey barriers. All the lane changes over the course of construction (barrier placement, signs and lane painting) probably requires a whole dedicated crew.

[OhioGuy]

CTA jockeys schedules to boost West Side service

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=28567

I didn't see this posted yesterday, so I didn't know this was happening. Then this morning I looked at the ABC7 website and it had this heading, "CTA plans to close one branch of Blue Line." I screamed "WHAAAAAAAAT?" :haha:

Then I realized it was just the branch that's already served by the pink line (that didn't enter my brain for about the first 5-10 seconds) and I calmed down. ;)

[honte]

^ I didn't get it at first either.

[UChicagoDomer]

viva,

a couple of weeks ago, when i asked if there was anything in the works re: a south loop el stop, you mentioned off-hand a potential construction of an entrance at the Chinatown stop on Archer. was that speculation or is the CTA actively considering that?

additionally, the plan commission recently (i.e. january) considered a re-zoning request right at Clark and Archer for a 15-story hotel (175 rooms + 69 parking spaces) + ground floor retail. I don't know if it went through or not. and i also don't know whether the city considered seeking concessions from the developer, such as, oh, I don't know, improvements to the el stop?? is that something that chicago (like n.y.) bothers to do, or do station improvements not really ever factor into the zoning/variance calculus?

[ardecila]

The hotel project did go through, but I'm pretty sure that See Wong (the developer) will not be paying for any station improvements.

Wong bought the land from Metra, so the Chicago transit system is already getting several million dollars out of this deal. Of course, Metra isn't going to transfer the money to CTA.. *chuckle* It'll probably just go towards padding conductors' retirement benefits.

[VivaLFuego]

viva,

a couple of weeks ago, when i asked if there was anything in the works re: a south loop el stop, you mentioned off-hand a potential construction of an entrance at the Chinatown stop on Archer. was that speculation or is the CTA actively considering that?

Was considered as part of the overall station work as part of the Circle Line project. Who knows if/when that could happen. To my knowledge, no one is hot to build a north entrance at Cermak-Chinatown at this time...


additionally, the plan commission recently (i.e. january) considered a re-zoning request right at Clark and Archer for a 15-story hotel (175 rooms + 69 parking spaces) + ground floor retail. I don't know if it went through or not. and i also don't know whether the city considered seeking concessions from the developer, such as, oh, I don't know, improvements to the el stop?? is that something that chicago (like n.y.) bothers to do, or do station improvements not really ever factor into the zoning/variance calculus?
I've never seen the city or an alderman request transit improvements in exchange for density bonus etc, though some developers have volunteered to make transit improvements. It's really not something that's been on the city's radar, at least for most (all?) of my lifetime...

[UChicagoDomer]

Was considered as part of the overall station work as part of the Circle Line project. Who knows if/when that could happen. To my knowledge, no one is hot to build a north entrance at Cermak-Chinatown at this time...


I've never seen the city or an alderman request transit improvements in exchange for density bonus etc, though some developers have volunteered to make transit improvements. It's really not something that's been on the city's radar, at least for most (all?) of my lifetime...


my god, chicago is so second-rate when it comes to transit. that i have to spend the rest of my life in a city where i'm treated like a second class citizen because incompetent aldermen want their campaign war-chests and wallets padded is enough to induce mild depression.

why is it that charlotte, denver, and dallas (Dallas??!!!) can build miles of new rail and - in Dallas' case - overhaul their entire zoning codes to make them TOD-friendly, while commuters in chicago face gridlock and ugly strip malls no matter where they go or what mode of transportation they use?

[the urban politician]

why is it that charlotte, denver, and dallas (Dallas??!!!) can build miles of new rail and - in Dallas' case - overhaul their entire zoning codes to make them TOD-friendly, while commuters in chicago face gridlock and ugly strip malls no matter where they go or what mode of transportation they use?

^ Aren't you being a wee bit extreme here?

Have you noticed a difference between Charlotte or Dallas versus Chicago? I have--and the amount of TOD in existence in Chicago today is staggering compared to both of those cities combined times 10.

You guys in Chicago are way too damn pessimistic. Yeah, things are far from perfect, but you act as if everybody else has gotten it right and that you exclusively are living under the reign of morons. Hello--we live in America, people, and we have to accept that transit is simply not high on the list of our leaders' priorities and probably won't be for quite some time.

And lets be reminded that Chicago's central-area highrise boom of the past decade has been one of the greatest examples of TOD in the nation.

[VivaLFuego]

why is it that charlotte, denver, and dallas (Dallas??!!!) can build miles of new rail and - in Dallas' case - overhaul their entire zoning codes to make them TOD-friendly, while commuters in chicago face gridlock and ugly strip malls no matter where they go or what mode of transportation they use?

The Chicago zoning code rewrite basically made strip malls verboten in all but a single busines/commercial zoning classification (which is generally only in place on hopeless streets like Cicero or industrial wastelands, anyway). As strip-and-drive-through-blighted streets like Western, Ashland, Broadway, Irving Park, Lawrence etc gradually redevelop under the new zoning code, they will become much more 'urban' and ped-friendly in character. In many cases you can already see this transformation in action from the most recent building boom, though I suspect it will be another 1-2 boom cycles (perhaps another 20-25 years) before the transformation is 'substantially' complete. And even new stripmalls built under the new zoning code (you can see some examples on South Pulaski and South Cicero if you so desire) are an improvement, as stores still can't be set too far back from the street (many just have parking behind the retail, and still have front sidewalk entrances).

Our off-street parking requirement is still a transit-hostile joke, however. I won't argue against the notion that Chicago gov't and CDOT have generally been antithetical to transit interests, but for some time (certainly under Daley) it has at least become much more pedestrian- and bike-friendly...which is better than nothing, I suppose. The streetscape program since the mid-90s has done wonders for making some streets more friendly for bicyclists and pedestrians.

[aaron38]

Hello--we live in America, people, and we have to accept that transit is simply not high on the list of our leaders' priorities and probably won't be for quite some time.

$3 a gallon gasoline started changing a lot of minds, and $4 a gallon will change a lot more. The change will probably be sooner rather than later.

When a critical mass of people start using transit regularly because it's cheaper, they'll start screaming for it's improvement, and the politicians will take notice.

[VivaLFuego]

$3 a gallon gasoline started changing a lot of minds, and $4 a gallon will change a lot more. The change will probably be sooner rather than later.

When a critical mass of people start using transit regularly because it's cheaper, they'll start screaming for it's improvement, and the politicians will take notice.

No, they'll scream for more fuel-efficient cars and/or substitute energy sources for their cars. Do you remember huge increases in transit mode share from 1973-1980? If oil gets prohibitively expensive, people won't give up cars, they'll just give up oil-guzzling cars. The biggest driver of transit mode share is land use, and until the country starts running up against significant scarcity in developable land (whether naturally or by government urban growth boundary laws), transit will be a niche market for almost every city. That's not to say that well-funded transit can't obtain a somewhat improved mode share and provide many more rides, but the instructive comparison here is Europe, where transit is very well-subsidized but most European countries still have national transit mode shares in the 10-15% (obviously the major cities are a bit higher). Even in Europe, except for the urbanite population, transit is the exception. And of course, Euros have coped with their different cost structure with substantially more fuel-efficient cars.

[UChicagoDomer]

The Chicago zoning code rewrite basically made strip malls verboten in all but a single busines/commercial zoning classification (which is generally only in place on hopeless streets like Cicero or industrial wastelands, anyway).

has the re-write really made a noticeable difference?

see, e.g.

North Avenue Retail Strip Malls (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=W+North+Ave+%26+N+Clybourn+Ave,+Chicago,+I.L.,+USA&ie=UTF8&ll=41.914845,-87.651737&spn=0.007968,0.014484&z=16&layer=c&cbll=41.910847,-87.652555&cbp=1,270.7927237692203,,0,6.17267876168885)

Roosevelt & Canal Monstrosity (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=s.+canal+and+roosevelt+road,+chicago,+il&sll=41.914845,-87.651737&sspn=0.007968,0.014484&layer=c&ie=UTF8&ll=41.871207,-87.636609&spn=0.007973,0.014484&z=16&cbll=41.867211,-87.63735&cbp=1,287.6709616743564,,0,6.397168504761645)

did the "re-write" make single use verboten, or just suburban style strip malls. From a standpoint of TOD, bicycle use, or pedestrian friendly environments, there really is not a lot of difference (i.e. no one is going to walk to that Whole Foods on Roosevelt & Canal, and it's not a fun walk to the Whole Foods on North Ave.)

As to your second post re: increased transit subsidies, there doesn't appear to be any appetite for that in the federal government...

Replacing Transit with Toll Roads
The Department of Transportation under President Bush has placed an emphasis on market-based measures such as toll roads to alleviate congestion, and this has public transit advocates worried that the Federal government sees no role for transit.

Wash. Post article link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/16/AR2008031603085.html)
"When Democrats took control of Congress and stripped most earmarks from last year's federal budget, Peters took $850 million that would have been shipped to hundreds of municipalities and poured it into Urban Partnerships, a pilot program awarded to five cities on the condition that they test congestion pricing.
"The focus on toll roads alarmed the transit industry, which argues that public transportation is the best way to fight gridlock in cities. Industry leaders say the DOT has made it increasingly difficult for expensive rail projects to qualify for federal dollars. The number of major new rail and bus projects on track for federal funding dropped from 48 in 2001 to 17 in 2007, even as transit ridership hit a 50-year high last year and demand for new service is soaring."

and our Gov is too stupid to provide the state support necessary to secure the federal funding for N.E. Ill., so there goes that bright idea...

[the urban politician]

has the re-write really made a noticeable difference?

see, e.g.

North Avenue Retail Strip Malls (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=W+North+Ave+%26+N+Clybourn+Ave,+Chicago,+I.L.,+USA&ie=UTF8&ll=41.914845,-87.651737&spn=0.007968,0.014484&z=16&layer=c&cbll=41.910847,-87.652555&cbp=1,270.7927237692203,,0,6.17267876168885)

^ I believe that crap was built before the zoning rewrite

Roosevelt & Canal Monstrosity (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=s.+canal+and+roosevelt+road,+chicago,+il&sll=41.914845,-87.651737&sspn=0.007968,0.014484&layer=c&ie=UTF8&ll=41.871207,-87.636609&spn=0.007973,0.014484&z=16&cbll=41.867211,-87.63735&cbp=1,287.6709616743564,,0,6.397168504761645)

did the "re-write" make single use verboten, or just suburban style strip malls. From a standpoint of TOD, bicycle use, or pedestrian friendly environments, there really is not a lot of difference (i.e. no one is going to walk to that Whole Foods on Roosevelt & Canal, and it's not a fun walk to the Whole Foods on North Ave.)


^ Partly agreed, although if you compare the Southgate mall to the Dominick's ancored shopping center on the SW corner of Roosevelt and Canal, you see a great example that compares pre-and post-zoning rewrite development. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the city wanted all of Southgate mall's parking to be in a garage but Whole Foods demanded their own parking lot, thus the city caved and we got the configuration that we currently have.

[UChicagoDomer]

^ I believe that crap was built before the zoning rewrite



^ Partly agreed, although if you compare the Southgate mall to the Dominick's ancored shopping center on the SW corner of Roosevelt and Canal, you see a great example that compares pre-and post-zoning rewrite development. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the city wanted all of Southgate mall's parking to be in a garage but Whole Foods demanded their own parking lot, thus the city caved and we got the configuration that we currently have.

but it's all the same. neither the dominicks nor the whole foods makes anyone who will be populating the south loop in the next 5 years, including at the Roosevelt Collection next to the Target, want to walk their ass even .5 miles across train tracks, a river, and a parking lot just to buy some over-priced raw milk cheese. So the development is more (commercially) dense and the whole food's parking lot is smaller. big deal. no one is going to want to risk being plowed over by rush hour traffic just to traverse it. and even if one is on a bike, the bike ordinance won't be enforced.

so the "zoning re-write" seems like nothing more than an aesthetic touch-up to suburban-style retail jobs (visitors to whom i show the whole foods still have the same impression that they have of most other big-box development in chicago [maybe with the exception of Target at Clark]: cheap suburban strip mall) and not a reflection of a long-term policy shift toward pedestrian-oriented mixed use.

[the urban politician]

so the "zoning re-write" seems like nothing more than an aesthetic touch-up to suburban-style retail jobs (visitors to whom i show the whole foods still have the same impression that they have of most other big-box development in chicago [maybe with the exception of Target at Clark]: cheap suburban strip mall) and not a reflection of a long-term policy shift toward pedestrian-oriented mixed use.

^ You've got no argument here. I agree that it's just an aesthetic "touch up", but it's certainly better than nothing at all. Compare Southgate Mall to the bullshit on the SW corner of Roosevelt/Canal; can you tell me that it's not a huge improvement, at least aesthetically?

Will people still drive? Of course. It's amazing how much Chicago parallels New York in this way. Right acress the river from Manhattan, in parts of Queens and in Hoboken, you will see giant big-box stores like a Costco or Toys' R Us, much in the same way that you see parts of Chicago's downtown core being surrounded (in some places) by a big-box no-man's land. Even urban dwellers need their big-box fix, I guess..

[honte]

but it's all the same. neither the dominicks nor the whole foods makes anyone who will be populating the south loop in the next 5 years, including at the Roosevelt Collection next to the Target, want to walk their ass even .5 miles across train tracks, a river, and a parking lot just to buy some over-priced raw milk cheese. So the development is more (commercially) dense and the whole food's parking lot is smaller. big deal. no one is going to want to risk being plowed over by rush hour traffic just to traverse it. and even if one is on a bike, the bike ordinance won't be enforced.

I'm not following this. How is any of this the development's fault or the zoning's fault? Should they never build anything distant from a train station because people are too lazy to walk .5 miles? If they're not interested in "over-priced ... cheese" then they can walk 100 feet to the Jewel that wastes tons of prime space right along the elevated with surface parking. Tell me which development you like more?

And, FYI, I have several friends who do walk over that bridge to get to Whole Foods and other stores.

I agree the architecture is heinous aesthetically, but really, I don't see much wrong with the development side. The Canal frontage has lots of outdoor space (albeit configured in a bizarre way above the sidewalk) that seems to anticipate brighter days to come when there would be more activity on the street. I've already witnessed people sitting outside at the cafes on this perch, and really, it's a far better scene than what used to be there. Other good notes: The loading and ugly stuff is conducted below Roosevelt. They worked around the one existing building that has anchored the corner since the 1930s. Elevators are glass-enclosed so that you get a sense of activity. And so forth. Overall, it's a much more ideal planning process than what we usually get. I'm not sure why it irks you so much.

People love to rip on North / Clybourn, but as far as retail districts that cater to autos (and pedestrians) go, I think this is one of the better ones I've seen. I'm not talking about Coral Gables or some kind of ultra-posh stuff, but just the average to above-average market. North / Clybourn manages to maintain some semblance of a nice streetscape. It has diversity and visual interest in most places. The growth pattern feels organic. I find it hard to fault it, and as it continues to densify and redevelop (meaning loss of surface parking and more vertical growth) I like it more. If they implemented free shuttles that moved around in the area from retailer to retailer and circled back to the Red Line station, I think you would see tons of people using transit in this area and walking, and really enjoying themselves. But to expect retail in these neighborhood areas without any parking would be out of touch with reality.

[VivaLFuego]

^UCD,
Most of the schlock you criticize (rightfully so) was designed/approved/built before the zoning code re-write, which didn't take full effect 'til 2003/2004. Newer stuff: the Best Buy being built on Roosevelt, the large building on the SE corner of North/Sheffield, the new Whole Foods on Kingsbury (under construction), the new Dominick's at Chicago/Damen, etc. As far as I'm concerned, these new designs, from a form standpoint, do an excellent job of accomodating bike/peds and automobiles.

[ardecila]

The new Whole Foods on Kingsbury seems to have an interesting design. A quick google search took me to a rendering posted on flickr, and I learned that Gensler is architect. The building looks huge. Not too long ago, Kingsbury was really sleepy - now the industrial uses will subside there, and the clubs and retail will coalesce.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2411/2289607513_2aa3518459.jpg

[the urban politician]

^ WOW! Such an improvement over a gas station, eh?

Anyhow, I guess we've all gotten way off topic here, this being the Transit thread and all..

[Marcu]

and our Gov is too stupid to provide the state support necessary to secure the federal funding for N.E. Ill., so there goes that bright idea...

Our politicians in DC have secured funding for many projects. It's really up to Blagojevich to provide the matching funds to get these projects done.

[UChicagoDomer]

Our politicians in DC have secured funding for many projects. It's really up to Blagojevich to provide the matching funds to get these projects done.

sorry. i mis-wrote. i meant "Guv" not "Gov," in reference to Blagojevich, who will leave money on the table and not Durbin et al. who put it there.

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-cmap-24mar24,1,4158557.story



Transportation planning looks to 2040
Officials seek public input with an eye toward futureBy Richard Wronski | Tribune reporter
10:10 PM CDT, March 23, 2008


Planning officials, concerned with exploding population growth, haphazard development and unmet transportation needs, are hoping to formulate a new strategy to guide northeastern Illinois for the next 30 years.

To do it, they are encouraging the public to participate in a campaign called Go to 2040 to describe how they want the region to have evolved by that time.

The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, created by the Illinois legislature in 2005 to integrate land-use planning and transportation in the seven-county area, is kicking off the public participation effort Monday.

.........Go to 2040 will help northeastern Illinois deal with an estimated 2.8 million new residents and 1.8 million jobs in the next three decades, officials said.

.........The public can provide input on Go to 2040 at www.goto2040.org...

Maybe we should all just mass forward this thread in the suggestion box:D

[the urban politician]

^ Zzzz...

Another plan that nobody will heed

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/chi-cta-bus-tracker-webmar25,0,7708190.story

CTA to expand bus tracking systemBy Jon Hilkevitch | Tribune transportation writer
7:55 AM CDT, March 24, 2008


The CTA on Monday will announce the first expansion of its Bus Tracker system, which will enable riders to locate the whereabouts of all buses on a route and also help the transit agency reduce bus bunching.

Bus Tracker, which relies on Global Positioning System, currently operates only on the No. 20 Madison route.

At a 10 a.m. news conference, CTA officials will announce the phase-in of additional routes. The first routes are expected to be put on line later this spring.....................

[Chicago3rd]

....

Will they be managing their buses with this system too? I don't care about tracking (it was flawed in San Francisco.....tells you when the bus left the last station...with a tracker...but that doesn't mean they will be at your stop on time.).

[VivaLFuego]

Will they be managing their buses with this system too?
Short answer is yes. It will take some time and practice before the exact procedures are worked out. But the plan is to equip mobile supervisors and line managers with this real-time data. I still think the value of bus tracker is in reducing customer's perceived wait time and boosting the overall perceived value of their trip. In terms of actual by-the-numbers improvements in 'reliability', I think the answer is in enforcing on time departures, constructing the best schedules possible (inter-related, of course), and on-street traffic engineering under the purview of CDOT (signal priority, bus lanes, etc). Once a bus has left the terminal, there's not much in the transit agency's control to fix inconsistent headways outside of holding buses, thereby delaying those customers and decreasing the value of their trip. By the time an unacceptable gap in service has formed and a plan can be worked out to re-space the buses, the buses will be almost done running the route anyway.

[Chicago3rd]

Short answer is yes. It will take some time and practice before the exact procedures are worked out. But the plan is to equip mobile supervisors and line managers with this real-time data. I still think the value of bus tracker is in reducing customer's perceived wait time and boosting the overall perceived value of their trip. In terms of actual by-the-numbers improvements in 'reliability', I think the answer is in enforcing on time departures, constructing the best schedules possible (inter-related, of course), and on-street traffic engineering under the purview of CDOT (signal priority, bus lanes, etc). Once a bus has left the terminal, there's not much in the transit agency's control to fix inconsistent headways outside of holding buses, thereby delaying those customers and decreasing the value of their trip. By the time an unacceptable gap in service has formed and a plan can be worked out to re-space the buses, the buses will be almost done running the route anyway.

Preceived bunching at 8 a.m. on Sunday morning....no good reason for it. Would love to see bunching ended with this device. If it happens because of traffic and daily interruptions then hopefully CTA will be able to turn buses around quicker...make passenger trades and get back on schedule. Heard that the union has been against this for a long time.

If buses are bunched a supervisor will pull stop them and put the people on it and send the empty one aheard or turn it around to get it back on schedule.

[Neuman]

I posted the below in the Tribune Topix section in regards to the GPS tracking topic. Wanted this forums take on the cost associated with this project.


Does $24 million seem kind of high to anyone else? This kind of technology is found in many high end cell phones, but those cost, what $500 tops? So why the high price tag? How expensive is each unit? Whats the cost of installation per bus and the cost of linking it to the CTA'S website?

A GPS tracker costs (quick Internet search) roughly $500. Lets say installation of each unit is $1000. The CTA website says they have 2000 buses in their fleet. So that means....

2,000 buses x $1,500 per unit and installation = $3 million dollars.... So where is the other $21 million going? It doesn't cost $21 million to link a bunch of GPS trackers to a real time website!

Low Jack, the anti theft device cost $1,200... Its the same freaking technology!!! And from the story it doesn't seem like this will be on all 2000 buses the city runs, it sounds like half. So were paying $24,000 per bus for a GPS tracker...

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-railroad_mondaymar24,1,6850594.story?track=rss

Metra, Canadian National spar over rail line they both covet
By Richard Wronski | Tribune reporter
10:43 PM CDT, March 23, 2008

Metra and the Canadian National Railway Co. are at loggerheads over the railroad's $400 million plan to divert freight traffic around Chicago, a proposal that also puts suburbs at odds with each other and with the City of Chicago over train congestion and blocked railroad crossings.

In documents filed with federal regulators, Metra says Canadian National's plan has the potential for "major disruptive delays in commuter rail service, which would have devastating effects on the riding public," while the rail company vows to work with Metra to "reasonably address and accommodate its concerns."

Metra is asking regulators to impose several conditions on Canadian National's proposed purchase of the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway that Metra says are needed to protect its on-time service, schedules on current lines and future expansion............................

[Dale]

Chicagoans -

Ian Wright, British host of The Travel Channel's "America: the Wright Way", toured Chicago tonight. He took the el and seemed visably impressed. He remarked that it was cleaner and much more spacious than the Tube. And he liked the fact that it afforded an above-the-street view of the city.

[nomarandlee]

Chicagoans -

He remarked that it was cleaner and much more spacious than the Tube..

:sly: i have yet been to London but have seen many photo's and I have a hard time buying that. The one thing I it does have over the London system is air conditioning which I hear is brutal in summer in London.

[the urban politician]

^ I've ridden both. I think they are both equal in their cleanliness (frankly, I don't know what's up with a lot of you Chicagoans and your "the L is so filthy!" nonsense), but Chicago's train cars are definitely more spacious than London's, IMO.

[Dale]

^ I've ridden both. I think they are both equal in their cleanliness (frankly, I don't know what's up with a lot of you Chicagoans and your "the L is so filthy!" nonsense), but Chicago's train cars are definitely more spacious than London's, IMO.

It must be a Chicago thing, to diss your transit ... in contradistinction from the propensity of the Londoner to brag about theirs.

[emathias]

...
Does $24 million seem kind of high to anyone else? This kind of technology is found in many high end cell phones, but those cost, what $500 tops? So why the high price tag? How expensive is each unit? Whats the cost of installation per bus and the cost of linking it to the CTA'S website?...

I think you've under-estimated the cost of installation, as well as initial maintenance. There's also a fair amount of testing of the system involved. Plus, a $500 GPS tracker doesn't broadcast back.

The LoJack is not constantly broadcasting, it's just activated if the car is stolen, so while they use similar technology it's not exactly the same. And you said LoJack is $1,200, right? But you're only allowing $1,500 for the CTA's more robust, more flexible product?

Plus, if you consider LoJack to be like a Gateway PC, and what the CTA is getting to be like a dedicated Linux server purposed for a high-availability system, you kinda start to see the difference. A basic Gateway PC can be had for $500, but a solid, reliable server may run you 5 times that (maybe more).

They also have to be built to handle relatively rough conditions, and, I would assume, to broadcast at a higher average power than most cell phones to ensure a stable connection.

Finally, the central parts of the system, built to be reliable, would have to be fairly robust and that doesn't come cheap, and I don't know how much the software to tie them all together costs, but I do know that logistics software usually isn't cheap. Hiring people to administer the system doesn't come cheap, either.

Do I think $24 million seems high - yeah, at least a little. Do I think it's unreasonably high? No, I don't.

[VivaLFuego]

Does $24 million seem kind of high to anyone else?

No. I'm pretty sure I've already explained the cost components earlier in this thread, and I don't feel like rehashing it. You're vastly underestimating the complexity of the system. Alot more parts and labor are involved than buying a $300 part and plugging it in.

[Chicago3rd]

Does $24 million seem kind of high to anyone else?

One of the most idiotic things that CTA has to do by law is go with the "lowest" bidder. A great case in point...ever wonder why those stupid Electronic Bus identifiers at the top of the the front of the bus often don't work.....even on the newer buses? Well each time they go to purchase them they have to send out another bid...and they will more than likely end up with signs from a different company. That means different parts and different reasons for them breaking down as well as programming them. Does it make sense? We hate CTA for it...stupid CTA...but they are required to bid like that.

We need a best buy formula for everything CTA purchases.....best bang for the buck...short term along with long term...not "cheapest" short term horribly expensive long term.

As far as this system being over priced...guess I would have taken your points a little more seriously if you would have an exact comparision...from say other cities and their systems. Apples to apples. Plus.....do phone companies really keep track of your phones where abouts (all of them) and broadcast that out live?

[emathias]

...
Plus.....do phone companies really keep track of your phones where abouts (all of them) and broadcast that out live?

God, I hope not!

[emathias]

.....

I can't believe Metra might put a wrench in this. This is SO important to the freight rail movement in Chicago, and it would add a lot more to the local economy than the STAR line ever would ...

[VivaLFuego]

CTA just announced some significant service increases on several south lakeshore routes:
http://www.transitchicago.com/news/whatsnewA.wu?action=displaynewspostingdetail&articleid=110240

This improvement in frequency makes the CTA service ever more desirable than the parallel Metra Electric service, in which Metra apparently has little interest in beefing up. Particularly for South Shore residents who are stuck riding local all-stop trains downtown, the CTA express buses (particularly the #14 and #26) generally provide a faster option that probably picks them up closer to their front door. The #2 actually distributes people to/from major trip generators in west Hyde Park (the hospital and dense apartment blocks) who otherwise have a significant hike to Metra. The #6 closely parallels the Metra Electric and isn't any faster, but now runs with such good frequency that it is always a good default option that requires no trip planning and much quicker access time.

Exit question for you all: These CTA improvements, - Good thing or bad thing? Detrimental to Metra?

[nomarandlee]

I can't believe Metra might put a wrench in this. This is SO important to the freight rail movement in Chicago, and it would add a lot more to the local economy than the STAR line ever would ...

I agree, I just hope they are trying to get assurance and reasonable terms for their services and wouldn't go as far as trying to impede the sail. I also find Canadian National's take on the STAR line right on target and hopefully some pols will listen to them.

[Marcu]

One of the most idiotic things that CTA has to do by law is go with the "lowest" bidder. A great case in point...ever wonder why those stupid Electronic Bus identifiers at the top of the the front of the bus often don't work.....even on the newer buses? Well each time they go to purchase them they have to send out another bid...and they will more than likely end up with signs from a different company. That means different parts and different reasons for them breaking down as well as programming them. Does it make sense? We hate CTA for it...stupid CTA...but they are required to bid like that.

We need a best buy formula for everything CTA purchases.....best bang for the buck...short term along with long term...not "cheapest" short term horribly expensive long term.

As far as this system being over priced...guess I would have taken your points a little more seriously if you would have an exact comparision...from say other cities and their systems. Apples to apples. Plus.....do phone companies really keep track of your phones where abouts (all of them) and broadcast that out live?

Can't they just adjust the product specifications? Instead of putting out a proposal for "electronic bus identifiers" put one out for "electronic bus identifiers with [insert tech specs or warranty requirements]". Easier than changing the law.

[Abner]

Exit question for you all: These CTA improvements, - Good thing or bad thing? Detrimental to Metra?

Well some service is being reduced, so I'd call it service changes rather than improvements. The increase in frequency for the 6 is good, but I do kind of wonder why that bus has to make so many turns in Hyde Park--it seems like it would shave a few minutes off the trip to just stay on Lake Park and then go straight to Stony Island, rather than going over to Hyde Park Blvd. That would also make it more convenient for most people, since nobody lives east of Hyde Park Blvd. I'm sure there's a reason they do it that way though. Of course I'd rather just be able to take Metra...

[VivaLFuego]

Well some service is being reduced, so I'd call it service changes rather than improvements. The increase in frequency for the 6 is good, but I do kind of wonder why that bus has to make so many turns in Hyde Park--it seems like it would shave a few minutes off the trip to just stay on Lake Park and then go straight to Stony Island, rather than going over to Hyde Park Blvd. That would also make it more convenient for most people, since nobody lives east of Hyde Park Blvd. I'm sure there's a reason they do it that way though. Of course I'd rather just be able to take Metra...

I think the routing of the 6 is a combination of historical precendence (minor reason) and the fact that going down Hyde Park Blvd serves many, many more residents than Lake Park (major reason). When the major South Lakeshore service revisions were under way about 5 years ago, they had the X28 following the routing you suggest, but moved it to Hyde Park largely on account of increased demand for it there.

[Abner]

I think the routing of the 6 is a combination of historical precendence (minor reason) and the fact that going down Hyde Park Blvd serves many, many more residents than Lake Park (major reason). When the major South Lakeshore service revisions were under way about 5 years ago, they had the X28 following the routing you suggest, but moved it to Hyde Park largely on account of increased demand for it there.

Really, that's surprising. Hyde Park is at the edge of the neighborhood whereas Lake Park is closer to the middle, although still pretty far east. I guess the tracks plus the ugliness of Lake Park must detract a lot of people living east of them. Those buses just CREEP down Hyde Park.

The parallel bus service isn't that bad, but it kind of sucks that a lot of people living farther south sit through a 15-minute crawl along a local route before reaching the express portion. Also, it would really help tie the lakefront South Side neighborhoods together if you could take rapid transit between the neighborhoods, rather than only being able to get downtown from any given neighborhood. The shape of the lake makes it impossible to get between, say, Bronzeville and South Shore without taking two buses, but the Electric would allow for this very nicely.

[VivaLFuego]

Really, that's surprising. Hyde Park is at the edge of the neighborhood whereas Lake Park is closer to the middle, although still pretty far east. I guess the tracks plus the ugliness of Lake Park must detract a lot of people living east of them. Those buses just CREEP down Hyde Park.

The parallel bus service isn't that bad, but it kind of sucks that a lot of people living farther south sit through a 15-minute crawl along a local route before reaching the express portion. Also, it would really help tie the lakefront South Side neighborhoods together if you could take rapid transit between the neighborhoods, rather than only being able to get downtown from any given neighborhood. The shape of the lake makes it impossible to get between, say, Bronzeville and South Shore without taking two buses, but the Electric would allow for this very nicely.

Agreed on better connecting South Shore to other south side neighborhoods via transit. However, residents along the southern portion of the 6 can take the 26 during rush hours (or possibly the 14 any time of day, depending where they live) and bypass the Hyde Park portion, significantly speeding up their trip.

[Via Chicago]

from the Sun Times

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transportation/862231,station032608.article
Downtown CTA stop to get $67 mil. facelift

March 27, 2008
Recommend (4)

BY MARY WISNIEWSKI Transportation Reporter

The dingy and dimly lit L station at Grand and State is getting a $67 million face-lift, which will include new tiles, new lighting and a 2,000-square-foot expansion of the mezzanine.

The renovation is the first major update since the station was built in 1943. The design will be similar to previous Red Line subway station renovations at Chicago, Lake and Jackson.

The Chicago Department of Transportation wants to complete the work by early 2010. Federal money will cover about 80 percent of the cost, with about $1.4 million from the city and state funds making up the rest.

The Grand station is the Red Line’s ninth busiest, with more than 8,000 passengers a day. The upgrades will include new granite floors and stairs, three new elevators and a new escalator.

The station will be open to riders throughout the project, though some entrances and exits will be temporarily closed.

Traffic in a one-block radius will be affected starting next week through October. Grand Avenue will go down to two westbound lanes. State Street north of Grand will be cut to two northbound lanes and one lane southbound. Southbound traffic must turn west on Grand. State Street south of Grand will have one northbound lane.

Floyd Long, 27, a chef who commutes to Grand from the South Side, said he thought the money would be better spent elsewhere.

“The Red Line is perfect — the station looks fine to me,” Long said. “It’s the Green Line that needs it. Those stations are old.”

[OhioGuy]

Monroe, Clark & Division, and North & Clybourn all need face lifts as well - particularly the first two. And are they EVER going to get Washington finished? I never see any work being done there.

[Mr Downtown]

^Some of us are working to get these three stations preserved and restored, rather than remodeled. The state office of historic preservation is raising all kinds of spurious roadblocks, claiming to have "lost the file" several times.

[ArteVandelay]

And are they EVER going to get Washington finished? I never see any work being done there.

The work at Washington isn't actually to renovate the station, its work associated with the new Block 37 station. The existing stairway down to the blue line transfer tunnel was exactly where the new tracks are to cut across, so each stairway had to be moved out about 75-100 feet. When the station reopens it probably won't look much different, except perceptive people will notice that the stairs are in a different spot then they used to be.

All work is being performed inside a closed off area, so nothing is visible to passing trains.

[VivaLFuego]

^Some of us are working to get these three stations preserved and restored, rather than remodeled. The state office of historic preservation is raising all kinds of spurious roadblocks, claiming to have "lost the file" several times.

It'd be nice for at least one of the subways stops to be restored to something pretty close to original design (albeit with better/brighter light fixtures and maybe some tasteful, non-intrusive, darker-colored wall paneling at platform level to absorb sound and help hide brake dust soot), though I doubt it will happen. The glazed brick, Futura typefaces, and simple design have more aesthetic potential to my eye than the cheesed-up rehabbed stations, though I'd take the rehabbed stations over the dilapidated stalactite-ridden messes that are the current stops.

[emathias]

"It's the Green Line that needs it - those stations are old."

Which Green Line is he referring to? The one in Boston? I can't think of any Green Line stations that are even half as bad as the Grand stop on the Red Line.

[emathias]

^Some of us are working to get these three stations preserved and restored, rather than remodeled. The state office of historic preservation is raising all kinds of spurious roadblocks, claiming to have "lost the file" several times.

While I support the idea of preserving a lot of things in this city, I don't think I'd support preserving a subway station in its original form. Too small, too cramped, to old (as opposed to historic) feeling. Now, a remodel that used original typefaces and finishes I could get behind, but I think the form of the stations needs to be updated to reflect modern expectations when it comes to transit stations.

[honte]

^Some of us are working to get these three stations preserved and restored, rather than remodeled. The state office of historic preservation is raising all kinds of spurious roadblocks, claiming to have "lost the file" several times.

Thanks for your efforts. Sometimes I come across articles / comments that praise the old stations. Will let you know if I remember any of these or come across any others.

[Marcu]

Which Green Line is he referring to? The one in Boston? I can't think of any Green Line stations that are even half as bad as the Grand stop on the Red Line.

Do the green line stations (outside of the loop) combined even get as much daily traffic as the Grand red line station?

[VivaLFuego]

Do the green line stations (outside of the loop) combined even get as much daily traffic as the Grand red line station?

Yeah (certainly on the Lake branch, the South Main totals barely more than Grand/State), but the comment is still incomprehensible; the Green Line stations are almost all in very good shape, with the exception of a few on the south side which at most could benefit from a fresh coat of paint.

[Abner]

People still have this idea that the Green Line is empty all the time, but in 2007 the Lake branch alone had almost as many passengers as the Orange Line, and the same number as the Forest Park Blue Line. And ridership on the Lake branch is going way up, in contrast to most of the other lines. And the stations are certainly in very good shape.

[Taft]

People still have this idea that the Green Line is empty all the time, but in 2007 the Lake branch alone had almost as many passengers as the Orange Line, and the same number as the Forest Park Blue Line. And ridership on the Lake branch is going way up, in contrast to most of the other lines. And the stations are certainly in very good shape.

Historical reasons, I'd guess. When they closed the line for renovation, ridership was already low. Closing it decimated ridership. As ridership has climbed back up, public opinion has been slow in following.

Attitudes will change...

Taft

[VivaLFuego]

People still have this idea that the Green Line is empty all the time, but in 2007 the Lake branch alone had almost as many passengers as the Orange Line, and the same number as the Forest Park Blue Line. And ridership on the Lake branch is going way up, in contrast to most of the other lines. And the stations are certainly in very good shape.

The Lake Street branch is very successful, but almost entirely buoyed by stations from Central Avenue to Harlem (Laramie to California are still very low ridership). Ashland and Clinton got a recent bump in ridership once the Pink Line started running.

The South Main still has incredibly low ridership though; I think the riders-per-route-mile might even be a bit less than the Pink Line; it's close.

[Abner]

The Lake Street branch is very successful, but almost entirely buoyed by stations from Central Avenue to Harlem (Laramie to California are still very low ridership). Ashland and Clinton got a recent bump in ridership once the Pink Line started running.

The South Main still has incredibly low ridership though; I think the riders-per-route-mile might even be a bit less than the Pink Line; it's close.

From the Dec 2007 ridership report it looks like there's a decent but not vast dropoff east of Central (Cicero and Pulaski are still pretty respectable, but Central Park and California are very slow). It's too bad the city hasn't tried to encourage more integration with the Green Line among new developments in Bronzeville, but I guess redevelopment hasn't gotten that far west yet. The areas around the South Main are probably the emptiest places served by the el. I imagine that the long wait at the two spurs at the end probably holds down ridership on the line too.

I wonder how high Pink Line ridership will eventually climb now that rebuilding is done. East of Kedzie or so it is very dense, but a larger proportion of the population is not Loop-bound.

[OhioGuy]

Big day on the CTA today. Southport and Diversey reopened, while Paulina and Wellington closed. Additionally the three track service in the southbound direction has begun at Belmont & Fullerton.

I also noticed the CTA has a new design for the main page of their website. Their system map still needs to be updated though. It's been showing Montrose and Addision closed on the brown line, despite the fact they've been open for 4 months now. Not to mention several other stations are now open and/or closed.

[jjk1103]

The work at Washington isn't actually to renovate the station, its work associated with the new Block 37 station. The existing stairway down to the blue line transfer tunnel was exactly where the new tracks are to cut across, so each stairway had to be moved out about 75-100 feet. When the station reopens it probably won't look much different, except perceptive people will notice that the stairs are in a different spot then they used to be.

All work is being performed inside a closed off area, so nothing is visible to passing trains.

...this has probably already been covered, but I've lost track.......have they finished the excavation work on the superstation ? ...and have they finally decided if they are going to actually finish it ? ...or just take it to a point and leave it for a future date ?

[emathias]

...this has probably already been covered, but I've lost track.......have they finished the excavation work on the superstation ? ...and have they finally decided if they are going to actually finish it ? ...or just take it to a point and leave it for a future date ?

What would happen if they didn't create a station but just used it as a connection and created an "Airports Line" that through-routed the Orange Line to O'Hare? I can't imagine anyone would use it to travel between the airports, but it'd be an optional routing. Maybe there are other possibilities, too. Heck, if they used those west-bound portals to create a subway entrance for the Oak Park branch of the Green Line, you could move the Green Line off the Loop and run it through the subways, opening up some capacity on the Loop to increase service on other lines.

[OhioGuy]

Big day on the CTA today. Southport and Diversey reopened, while Paulina and Wellington closed. Additionally the three track service in the southbound direction has begun at Belmont & Fullerton.

I also noticed the CTA has a new design for the main page of their website. Their system map still needs to be updated though. It's been showing Montrose and Addision closed on the brown line, despite the fact they've been open for 4 months now. Not to mention several other stations are now open and/or closed.

I forgot about the Yellow line service beginning weekend service this past weekend as well. Hopefully the added service proves successful over the coming months.

[Chicago3rd]

Anyone notice a difference in loads on the incoming brownline today? I saw their 8 Car signs up yesterday.

[emathias]

Anyone notice a difference in loads on the incoming brownline today? I saw their 8 Car signs up yesterday.

Because of the change in the 3-track configuration, they're running fewer trains. The addition of the 8-cars, though, mean they're able to run the same number of total cars, though, so the loads should be about the same.

[jjk1103]

Because of the change in the 3-track configuration, they're running fewer trains. The addition of the 8-cars, though, mean they're able to run the same number of total cars, though, so the loads should be about the same.

.....I sincerely hope the plan is to run as many 8-car trains as 6-car trains so there is a 20% increase in service........if they just slow the train intervals and add 2 cars, then we just went through a lot of grief for nothing.....

[emathias]

.....I sincerely hope the plan is to run as many 8-car trains as 6-car trains so there is a 20% increase in service........if they just slow the train intervals and add 2 cars, then we just went through a lot of grief for nothing.....

Currently it's a temporary but necessary restriction because of reduced thorough-put caused by the three-track situation.

Once they're back to four tracks, they may run the same number of trains as before the project and with more cars each, but if ridership declines because of the economy declining (or any other reason) then they probably will run fewer trains but in an eight-car configuration at rush hour. It would save them some operational costs (theoretically, at least, with fewer operators required for the same total line capacity). It would also save them the cost of additional rolling stock.

But the capacity would be there, so it'd probably be used sometimes. The length in platforms could also open the possibility of alternative routes, like a Kimball-Midway or Kimball-Oak Park type routing.

[MayorOfChicago]

Anyone notice a difference in loads on the incoming brownline today? I saw their 8 Car signs up yesterday.

They're running 33% larger trains, but with 33% less total trains. Same capacity. You'd think it would be the same.

Unfortunately, people went to the spot on the platform where they always did, so the middle areas of the trains were crushingly crowded and most people south of Belmont weren't able to board. The front and end cars had a lot of free room though. I assume people will figure this out REALLY quick. I took the Brown Line, and immediately went to the very end of the platform, since I assumed people wouldn't think to go there. There was barely anyone in my car, but the front ones were at capacity. It seemed like a vast majority of people didn't know the trains were longer. I'm guessing the average rider couldn't tell you how long the cars were historically, let alone that they're longer now.

I don't know why people don't figure this out.......I never ever went to the middle of the brown line as it was. It was always full of lazy people who just stood right by the top of the stairs.