[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^^^ They are mutually exclusive in the eye's of the National Democratic party and that's what matters. Hopefully Obama will be closer to Clinton than the classic Democratic argument on this issue being from the University of Chicago, the bastion of free market economics.

The Democratic Party may be against privatizing large services but I don't think they have a unified position on more mundane apparatuses.

Well that further proves my point, The big three would have gone out of business long ago if the government didn't keep bailing them out (Chrysler) and holding off on increases in emissions standards. The Financial giants would never had made those risky loans had they been able to charge a decent interest rate (7 or 8%) to people with good credit. Instead the government price fixed the price of money (interest rate) to around 5-6% and the banks were forced to find people who were riskier to charge higher rates to. That was the real problem behind the subprime crisis, not just reckless investing, but reckless investing encouraged/caused by the artificially low interest rates forced by the government. Again the government's fault...

You write as though government intervention in both cases sealed their fate. But a bailout for automakers was not the cause of their troubles; they did it to themselves by failing to invest in capital improvements (e.g., to boost the quality of their products) and by focusing too much on fads (e.g., SUVs), both extremely short-sighted policies. And any way you slice it Wall Street bought into the real estate bubble with blind, zealous optimism, as though home prices had nowhere to go but up.

Certainly, the government exacerbated the problems in both industries, but to claim it is responsible for their downfall because of something as esoteric as, say, a couple of percentage points off an interest rate is an awfully fatalistic view for a self-described libertarian. Both industries had enormous agency in spite of federal intervention; both exercised it poorly.

I wasn't suggesting that they were mutually exclusive, but the Obama Democrats DO have both of these attitudes, which can be quite beneficial for the status-quo system of government-run transit authorities.

Like I said above, I'm not sure the Obama administration will include an all-out anti-privatization policy as part of its agenda. Obama's a pragmatist, not an ideologue, and where privatization has worked I imagine he will encourage it. I don't think anything about transportation over the next few years will be status quo, especially considering the eight years during which the status quo has developed.

[ChicagoChicago]

Folks,

I think some of you may be taking the ‘Obama connection’ for granted. Considering this city’s history of corruption, the last thing Obama, IMO, is going to do is grease the wheels for funding that the city of Chicago funked up.

At best, I see this coming out of a total infrastructure stimulus budget that could have been used elsewhere locally.

[lawfin]

Are there any currrent examples of succesful fully private public transport companies.....Chicago's history is replete with private "public" transport companies going bankrupt....and this in an era when PT was much more of a "main-stream" modality...

To me public transport is one of the classic public goods....its beneficial externalities are too diffuse to be fully captured by pure profit motive

I am unaware of current private companies that run succesful PT systems....but then again I would not consider myself very well versed in the topic, just a casual observer

[Attrill]

I think some of you may be taking the ‘Obama connection’ for granted. Considering this city’s history of corruption, the last thing Obama, IMO, is going to do is grease the wheels for funding that the city of Chicago funked up.


My optimism has nothing to do with Chicago connections or any special favors for Chicago. Obama has called for "the largest investment in infrastructure since the creation of the interstate highway system under Dwight D. Eisenhower" and Ray LaHood has been a consistent supporter of public transit for his entire career. The landscape for funding transit projects is about to drastically change for the better for all cities - not just Chicago. I think losing the money actually frees up Chicago to look at a larger scale project or alternatives to BRT that were previously considered too expensive.

[Mr Downtown]

Are there any currrent examples of successful fully private public transport companies..

None, with the possible exceptions of a few small Swiss tourist railroads, a couple of Japanese suburban railways that are part of big real estate conglomerates, and the Hong Kong MTR, which does a lot of real estate development around its stations and received its storage yard (immensely valuable real estate) for free.

Chicago's Wendella commuter service until recently could be considered one of the nation's only unsubsidized transport companies—but they couldn't resist taking a CMAQ grant a few years ago to buy their most recent boat.

[Nowhereman1280]

You write as though government intervention in both cases sealed their fate. But a bailout for automakers was not the cause of their troubles; they did it to themselves by failing to invest in capital improvements (e.g., to boost the quality of their products) and by focusing too much on fads (e.g., SUVs), both extremely short-sighted policies. And any way you slice it Wall Street bought into the real estate bubble with blind, zealous optimism, as though home prices had nowhere to go but up.


For the auto industries it wasn't that bailouts caused the problems, but rather that the bailouts sustained companies that should have gone under because, lets face it, they suck at doing business. For example, if Chrysler went under in the 80's because of their failure to plan ahead with their product line you bet Ford and GM would have been a little more nervous about building their business entirely around one type of auto.

In the Real Estate industry, none of this subprime crisis would have happend if the Fed didn't set interest rates. Interest rates over the past 5 years should probably have averaged 8-10%, but instead they averaged 6-7%, this means that, in order to get a decent 8-10% return, companies had to lend to subprime coustomers who they could charge the higher rate to. That is the often ignored fundemental cause of this crisis, not evil bankers, not predatory lending, not deregulation, none of that would have or could have happened the government did not operate under the mantra that "easy credit and low interest rates are fundamental human rights"...

[ardecila]

None, with the possible exceptions of a few small Swiss tourist railroads, a couple of Japanese suburban railways that are part of big real estate conglomerates, and the Hong Kong MTR, which does a lot of real estate development around its stations and received its storage yard (immensely valuable real estate) for free.

Chicago's Wendella commuter service until recently could be considered one of the nation's only unsubsidized transport companies—but they couldn't resist taking a CMAQ grant a few years ago to buy their most recent boat.

Are you exempting private jitney services because they run on roads paid for by government?

Privatized systems can work if the costs of construction and expansion are paid by government and the private company only needs to worry about operating expenses and minor capital costs (like customer improvements and basic maintenance).

I see nothing inherently wrong with this system... construction and expansion are one-time expenses. I think all of us would prefer one-time expenses over long-term tax increases, like the excruciating 10.25% sales tax. If the city didn't offer so many unique stores and restaurants, then commerce in the city would REALLY be in trouble, like so many other high-tax Rust Belt cities.

[Mr Downtown]

I actually don't know of any local jitney services in the US that meet insurance and driver licensing standards. Miami-Dade experimented in the early 90s with licensing and regulating jitneys, but that doesn't appear to have been a great success. So it's not clear that jitneys are profitable unless you allow them to cream-skim only the busiest routes and eliminate vehicle cost, insurance, and a good chunk of driver wages.

[arenn]

Given that most regulators are hostile to jitney's, this should come as no shock. A basic licensing and insurance requirement as part of a pro-jitney regulatory framework might not cost that much money.

One idea I've long considered worth exploration is the "every car a jitney" model where we effectively have paid ride shares to boost carpooling.

[Attrill]

Are you exempting private jitney services because they run on roads paid for by government?

Privatized systems can work if the costs of construction and expansion are paid by government and the private company only needs to worry about operating expenses and minor capital costs (like customer improvements and basic maintenance).

I see nothing inherently wrong with this system... construction and expansion are one-time expenses. I think all of us would prefer one-time expenses over long-term tax increases, like the excruciating 10.25% sales tax. If the city didn't offer so many unique stores and restaurants, then commerce in the city would REALLY be in trouble, like so many other high-tax Rust Belt cities.


But who pays for major maintenance? Rail maintenance is one of the main expenses for any transit agency and road maintenance is a big one for municipalities.

[emathias]

I ordered the Chicago Card Plus iGo card, mostly to see what it looks like since I'm a pretty avid fan of ZipCar.

Anyway, I thought it would be relatively slick, like a regular ChicagoCard Plus with a green color scheme and the added capability to use iGo. And, basically, it is, although the card quality is lower than the regular Chicago Card Plus, and the iGo component, rather than being integrated into the card, is a small circle about the size of a dime, taped (yes, taped) to the back of it. Okay, so it's not like scotch tape, but it's still basically tape, and the circle sticks out making that part of the card twice as thick.

Anyway, they also wrote my card info (by hand) under where the card was attached to the mailing, so when I removed the card, the adhesive tore that and I'll have to call in to get that number. Basically my first impression of it was pretty much summed up accurately by my younger brother's comment, "That's pretty ganky."

I haven't used it yet, but it's a lot more seat-of-the-pants than I'd have expected considering the advertising the press they're putting into it.

[ChicagoChicago]

^^^

That's pathetic. Your brother summed it up perfectly....ganky.

[Nowhereman1280]

ganky or janky?

[emathias]

ganky or janky?

take your pick, either applies, but my brother said "ganky"

[Attrill]

I go with janky (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jank).

[Nowhereman1280]

In any case I am seriously considering getting one of these (g)janky cards. What is your opinion of the iGo service? Do they have a yearly charge of any kind or can I just get a basic account and then use it to pick up a new shelf or something big from the store every couple months?

You can PM me if you want, don't want to distract this thread too much!

[emathias]

In any case I am seriously considering getting one of these (g)janky cards. What is your opinion of the iGo service? Do they have a yearly charge of any kind or can I just get a basic account and then use it to pick up a new shelf or something big from the store every couple months?

You can PM me if you want, don't want to distract this thread too much!

I thought about PM'ing you, but decided it's transportation-related so I'll just post it here:

When i-go first came to Chicago I used them for a while, but then had a billing dispute with them where they refused to even respond to me - not to my calls, not to my emails, not to my postal letters - that left such a bad taste in my mouth I stopped using them and used regular rental services (like Enterprise or Hertz, etc). Regular rental agencies are still usually better (though not always) for multi-day rentals than car-sharing services are.

Then ZipCar showed up on the scene and I went with them. I've been a happy ZipCar user ever since.

One thing ZipCar has done by introducing competition is improved i-go's service levels. It was ZipCar's idea to include miles with the rental - before them, i-go billed everyone for every single mile, which meant ZipCar and i-go expenses were essentially the same for most rentals at first. Since i-go started offering the option to include miles in the rate, i-go is now less expensive, HOWEVER, they don't have nearly as broad a selection of car models. ZipCar is also very responsive to my inquiries and gives hours to compensate for problems without too much hassle.

So, basically, if you want the cheapest option and don't care much about what car you're driving, and for a lower price are willing to put up with lesser service, by all means go with i-go. If, like me, you value good service and on the occasions you choose to drive rather than take the bus or "L" or Metra, like to have the option to drive a Volvo or a Mini Cooper or for more money a BMW - or for less money a Honda Civic, if that's your thing, or a Mazada 3 (I could keep going, the list is long), then go with ZipCar. Both have locations in most of the same places, although you'll want to check to see if one has more in the areas you think you'll use them more.

If you do choose i-go, they offer a number of plan options.
http://www.igocars.org/pricing

Their most basic one is $50 for the first year and $25 a year after that, plus hourly rental plus mileage with starts at $6/hr and $0.40/mile.

The next step up from that has slightly higher hourly rates, but includes mileage (150 miles per 24-hour period). Starts at $8/hr. I'm guessing most people go with this one.

Then there is a plan where you basically pre-buy three discounted hours each month but they don't carry over, and you get a reduced rate for other hours. And finally a plan where you pay $30/month to get a discounted hourly rate, which pays for itself if you use at least 8 hours a month.

For ZipCar, rates start at a little over $8/hr and go up to almost $14/hr (for the BMW 3-series cars). You can get up to a 15% discount on your miles if you pre-pay for some miles each month and depending on how much you pay you may or may not be able to carry those miles over for 1-3 months.

[VivaLFuego]

The startup/annual fees for I-go are reduced or otherwise waived (don't remember exactly) for college students, or at least people with .edu e-mail addresses. So that's another potential bonus in I-go's favor, depending on your situation.

[the urban politician]

I'm still shocked that the local press is essentially giving Daley a free pass on blowing $153 million. I mean, where the hell is the Tribune and Crains on this one?

Essentially, wasn't the whole reason for the parking meter deal to create a "stick" for a future "carrot" (that carrot being the BRT system)? So now there's just a stick..

I kind of wonder if it's too late to reverse the lease of the city's parking meters.

[Jibba]

^I, too, have been patiently awaiting any announcements about the BRT plan. I wonder, though, if the recent ubiquitous news about the budget deficit has anything to do with the lack of reported progress on it.

This is relevant to post here I should thing, and a small and satisfying sign of progress at any rate that I will certainly be making use of (the current lock-ups outside of the station are at point-blank range of the salt shooters from the plow trucks--really horrible on the components)--sheltered, in-station bike storage at the Damen Blue Line stop):

http://img65.imageshack.us/img65/9434/dsc069609510787qh2.jpg

[VivaLFuego]

Essentially, wasn't the whole reason for the parking meter deal to create a "stick" for a future "carrot" (that carrot being the BRT system)? So now there's just a stick..


Different initiatives - the BRT project was tied to downtown off-street parking fee increases, while the meter lease was an asset privatization deal.

[emathias]

I'm still shocked that the local press is essentially giving Daley a free pass on blowing $153 million. I mean, where the hell is the Tribune and Crains on this one?

Essentially, wasn't the whole reason for the parking meter deal to create a "stick" for a future "carrot" (that carrot being the BRT system)? So now there's just a stick..

I kind of wonder if it's too late to reverse the lease of the city's parking meters.

I think they're waiting to see if the Feds reconsider after the inauguration before they declare the money actually lost.

I personally think it was dumb to be willing to accept BRT money by agreeing to raise the cost of driving to downtown. I think limiting parking spaces and enforcing bus lanes in and too downtown is about the limit of what government should do to limit driving downtown. Like it or not, congestion and traffic are legitimately symbols of success if an area has a built-out infrastructure. If you have a two-road town and those roads are congested, you build more roads. But in a place like downtown Chicago or London or Manhattan, where all the logically necessary roads are in place congestion is just the price of success. In order to do more than that, you have to have so much inertia and so much resistance to companies relocating that charging fees will just be absorbed. Apparently - for now - London has that. Manhattan might be able to sustain that for a while, too. But I don't think Chicago has that - it's too spread out and while there is some premium on locating in the Loop it's not high enough to justify active discouragements from doing so. Keep the drivers coming AND find a way to bring in even more people. Easiest way to do that is increase densities near existing "L" and Metra stations. Second easiest way is to keep building out - with both offices and residences - the Central Area. Final way you do that is by improving the grade-separated transit options in the Central Area and adjacent-to-central-area neighborhoods so that the whole central area is tied together. Residential is cratered right now, which makes it the perfect time to work on the TOD zoning since there won't be any immediate impact to scare NIMBYs.

[Attrill]

Different initiatives - the BRT project was tied to downtown off-street parking fee increases, while the meter lease was an asset privatization deal.


The Federal Requirements made it impossible for NYC to get the money and now it looks like it made it impossible for Chicago too. I don't really see this as a big loss at this point tho'. We went for the money when it was hard to get any funding for transit, now we're expecting massive federal spending on infrastructure - we should just let this go and look at bigger plans.

[ChicagoChicago]

I'm still shocked that the local press is essentially giving Daley a free pass on blowing $153 million. I mean, where the hell is the Tribune and Crains on this one?

Essentially, wasn't the whole reason for the parking meter deal to create a "stick" for a future "carrot" (that carrot being the BRT system)? So now there's just a stick..

I kind of wonder if it's too late to reverse the lease of the city's parking meters.
When has the press EVER taken Daley to task for his screw-ups? There's a reason he continues to get re-elected without formidable challenge.

I've never seen anybody raise taxes the way he has and offer nothing for it, and still get re-elected without incident.

[the urban politician]

CTA chief: Bus rapid transit 'not dead' (http://www.suntimes.com/news/transportation/1377504,cta-ron-huberman-bus-rapid-transit-011409.article)
Recommend (1) Comments
January 14, 2009
BY MARY WISNIEWSKITransportation Reporter

CTA President Ron Huberman said the agency’s plans for bus rapid transit is “not dead” despite the recent loss of $153 million in federal funding.

Huberman said the CTA is continuing to lobby the U.S. Department of Transportation to get the funding, which was lost after the federal government refused to grant the city a 13-day extension to approve “congestion reduction” fees for downtown parking and deliveries.

Huberman said staff planning continues for bus rapid transit, which would give buses their own designated lanes during rush hour on certain streets, though the agency is not spending money on engineering.

“There’s a truly unique opportunity here in Chicago to get this done,” said Huberman. He could not provide a time table as to when the new administration may reconsider the grant.

Mayor Daley last week said he had tried to salvage the federal funding for Chicago but “inflexible” federal bureaucrats would not allow it.

[Busy Bee]

So a Metra train derailed?

[emathias]

When has the press EVER taken Daley to task for his screw-ups? There's a reason he continues to get re-elected without formidable challenge.

I've never seen anybody raise taxes the way he has and offer nothing for it, and still get re-elected without incident.

What general taxes has he raised? The most egregious tax increases of the past few years have been from other agencies, not the city.

[Haworthia]

So a Metra train derailed?

It was an Amtrak train that derailed:
Amtrak derailment at Union Station severely delays 3 Metra lines
The derailment Wednesday afternoon of two cars of an Amtrak train while departing the south side of Union Station severely delayed three Metra train lines during the afternoon rush and could have a major impact on Thursday morning's rail service, officials said.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-amtrak-derailment-15-jan15,0,6518214.story

[ChicagoChicago]

What general taxes has he raised? The most egregious tax increases of the past few years have been from other agencies, not the city.He’s raised property taxes, and the end all be all of all real estate taxes, the “transfer tax” associated with real estate sales, which are now paid by both buyers and sellers. He’s given his blessed approval of the county’s increase to the sales tax, and the city eventually added to it.

[Steely Dan]

^ this is not the general "let's bitch about how high taxes are" thread. if your comment does not in some way directly relate to a transit issue in chicagoland, then it doesn't belong in this thread.

and no, general bitching about mayor daley because you don't like his policies is not a directly related transit issue in chicagoland. please keep your commentary specific and on-topic

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

I'm surprised nobody has posted this yet:

http://www.transitchicago.com/news/default.aspx?ArticleId=2274

CTA Announces Increased Ridership in 2008

1/14/2009

CTA Has Now Achieved Ridership Increases in 10 of the Past 11 Years

The CTA today announced that 2008 combined bus and rail ridership increased by 26.8 million rides, a gain of 5.4 percent over 2007 ridership, for a total of 526.4 million rides. It is the highest ridership level since 1992 and the highest single year ridership gain in 34 years.

“The slow zone elimination effort, progress of the Brown Line capacity expansion project and adjustments to provide more efficient service have improved our customers’ day-to-day experience on CTA and are directly related to the growth in ridership despite the struggling economy,” said CTA President Ron Huberman. “New buses, and cleaner vehicles and facilities are helping attract new customers and influencing existing customers to ride more.”

“The healthy growth of ridership in 2008 reflects the fact that our commitment to improving transit is being recognized by our customers despite some of the inconveniences that go with making those improvements,” said Chicago Transit Board Chairman Carole Brown. “In the long run we are improving our system for our customers and providing service while that work is underway.”

Ridership increased 4.5 percent on weekdays in 2008, averaging 1.68 million daily boardings. Ridership also increased by 7.3 percent on weekends and holidays, showing that many customers are not only riding CTA for their daily commutes but also for their travel needs outside of traditional working hours.

Bus ridership recorded the largest surge with a total of 328.2 million rides provided for the year, an increase of 18.9 million rides, or 6.1 percent higher compared to 2007. CTA made great strides in improving bus reliability over the past 12 months. Ridership increased more than 12 percent on bus routes where reliability improvements were made. In addition, riders along the north lakefront corridor heavily contributed to the growth in bus ridership as many switched to nearby bus service as an option to avoid the congestion caused by three-track train operation at the Belmont and Fullerton stations.

As a convenient option for riders impacted by three-track operation, the #147 Outer Drive Express saw a 15 percent increase in ridership. With the resumption of four-track service in December at Belmont and Fullerton, CTA expects that some bus riders may migrate back to the rail system this year.

Rail ridership increased by 4.1 percent compared to 2007, recording a total of 198.2 million rides provided for the year, an increase of 7.9 million rides over the previous year. Rail ridership in 2008 was at its highest point since 1968.

Ridership increased on all eight rail lines in 2008. Contributing to the increased rail ridership for the Blue Line’s Dearborn subway and O’Hare branch was the completion of the slow zone elimination work which allowed trains to return to normal speeds. Slow zone elimination work was also performed on the North branch of the Red Line and on the Brown Line providing customers with faster travel. In addition, renovation work was completed on six Brown Line stations and CTA introduced eight-car train service during morning and evening rush periods which helped to boost ridership numbers.

The only significant drop in rail ridership was at those stations closest to O’Hare, largely due to the decline in air travel throughout the year. Ridership was slightly down at Midway station however Midway serves as a major connection to bus service. The Yellow Line reported a 21 percent increase in ridership as a direct result of the addition of weekend service. Pink Line ridership also continued to grow, increasing by 12 percent over 2007. The Pink Line has almost doubled its ridership in a four year period.

I wonder what numbers were like for November and December when oil prices tanked? They would be the best indicator of what we can expect going into '09, I think.

[ChicagoChicago]

So anyway...

The SB Brown and Purple lines are still backing up during the morning rush hour. A guy in my building got off at Merchandise Mart and I got off at Clark/Lake on the Purple line. We both walked to our building at Lake & LaSalle (200 N LaSalle). He had time to get coffee and held the elevator for me. What a time saver the Purple line reroute has been…

[ardecila]

That's not a Brown Line problem per se, I don't think - it's more of a Loop problem. The CTA has an ongoing project to replace the signaling system with something modern and computerized; this should wrap up sometime in 2010, according to the CTA website.

The current signaling system on the Loop was installed in the 1970s, a period of declining ridership.

[VivaLFuego]

^ They often back up at the peak of the peak south of Clark Junction all the way to the loop, as well, particularly in the outbound direction. The combined headway is now very short, and it's very difficult if not impossible to evenly space the trains on their way out of the loop now that the two lines are coming through Tower 18 from different directions with 3 other lines also vying for space through the junction. I don't know any details about the loop signal project; I imagine it will help somewhat, but the only way to really ensure smooth operations all around would entail reducing the number of trains going through the junction, particularly those making the slow 10-15mph turning movements (straight movements can be taken at 35 mph). This could be achieved either by simply reducing the number of trains on all loop lines to the minimum possible to meet demand, or by creating some new through-route lines e.g. connecting Midway-Kimball, which would probably introduce a whole other set of problems.

[ChicagoChicago]

It really wasn't a problem until the Purple line started running on the inner track in the loop, which happened on Dec 28th. At that point, CTA did two things that I think caused the problem. They started running brown line and purple line trains more frequently, and rerouted the purple line trains. Obviously, it's going to take a train longer to hang a left at tower 18 than it would to go straight. That's half the problem. The other half though, is the frequency of trains. The trains seem less full in the mornings too.

[ardecila]

As long as we're discussing potential re-alignments, what if the Green Line used the Douglas Line instead of the Lake Street Line? The Brown Line would then use both sides of the Loop, crossing itself at Lake/Wells and continuing on to Oak Park. Orange and Purple would continue to make the full circuit of the Loop.

[jpIllInoIs]

^Ardecila, That would make more sense if the Brown/Pink lines merged. Both use the elevated tracks around the Loop.

[ChicagoChicago]

As long as we're discussing potential re-alignments, what if the Green Line used the Douglas Line instead of the Lake Street Line? The Brown Line would then use both sides of the Loop, crossing itself at Lake/Wells and continuing on to Oak Park. Orange and Purple would continue to make the full circuit of the Loop.

I think the main problem with that is the lack of ridership on the pink line compared to the brown line. It would likely substantially over-capacitize the current pink line.

[schwerve]

I think the main problem with that is the lack of ridership on the pink line compared to the brown line. It would likely substantially over-capacitize the current pink line.

I've always thought the best option would be to through route both the pink and orange lines to the brown so alternate trains on the ravenswood branch would go to either midway or douglass. the brown (kimball-douglas) would still make the full revolution around the loop but wouldn't have to make a turn at the clark junction and the orange (kimball-midway) would run the south and west branches (opposite the green; again running straight through the junction). that would certainly help congestion in the loop and add connectivity to the system.

[ardecila]

^^ That actually makes sense. Instead of alternate trains, though, it should be only every third train that uses the Douglas Branch. Pink Line has about 30,000 riders per day, Orange has 60,000, and Brown has 90,000.

The downside is that
a) your Kimball-Midway route wouldn't serve the whole Loop,
b) it's confusing, and
c) that would be an absolute terror to render on a map.

[schwerve]

^^ That actually makes sense. Instead of alternate trains, though, it should be only every third train that uses the Douglas Branch. Pink Line has about 30,000 riders per day, Orange has 60,000, and Brown has 90,000.

The downside is that
a) your Kimball-Midway route wouldn't serve the whole Loop,
b) it's confusing, and
c) that would be an absolute terror to render on a map.

while that's true the kimball-midway wouldn't serve the whole loop its not as if you couldn't transfer at roosevelt to the red/green to get there.

[OhioGuy]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,6424065.story

Plans under way to add Skokie Swift stop at Oakton, possibly in Evanston too
Ground to be broken next year for Oakton Street station
By Emily S. Achenbaum | Chicago Tribune reporter
11:01 PM CDT, August 14, 2008


........The plans are for adding up to two new stops on the line, better known as the Skokie Swift. Officials at the Chicago Transit Authority also are deciding whether to make permanent the weekend service, which began on a trial basis in late March.

A new stop already has been approved for Oakton Street in downtown Skokie. Village officials plan to meet Aug. 27 to review a design for the station. Village spokeswoman Ann Tennes said if the design is approved, details will be finalized by the end of this year and ground will be broken sometime next year. Tennes said an opening date for the station hasn't been set.

A second new stop is in the talking stages for Evanston. Public Works director John Burke recently announced the state's Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Committee had included a proposed study of a stop there on a list of projects to receive federal funding next year. In a statement, Burkesaid the city seeks a $220,000 federal grant to decide the best location for a stop on Evanston's south side, possibly at Ridge, Asbury or Dodge Avenues............
click on link for rest of story

click on link for rest of story

Any word yet on when they'll begin construction this year on the Oakton station?

[Abner]

^^ That actually makes sense. Instead of alternate trains, though, it should be only every third train that uses the Douglas Branch. Pink Line has about 30,000 riders per day, Orange has 60,000, and Brown has 90,000.

The downside is that
a) your Kimball-Midway route wouldn't serve the whole Loop,
b) it's confusing, and
c) that would be an absolute terror to render on a map.

Also that Pink needs more frequency than one third of the Brown Line's frequency, and Orange probably needs more than two thirds. Especially during off-peak hours--you'd either be greatly increasing the frequency of Kimball trains or cutting Douglas trains to like every half hour or 40 minutes. That's not rapid transit.

I don't understand exactly what any of these realignments would accomplish. You could get a one-seat ride from Kimball to Midway or whatever instead of the trivial inconvenience of stepping off the train at Washington/Wells, but how much is that worth? If you were going to try to link up lines by ridership, wouldn't it possibly make more sense to have a Lake-Loop-Midway route and a 63rd-Loop-54th/Cermak route, and leave the Brown Line out of it? Even then, unless you increased frequencies on the Douglas-South Side route, you'd have ridiculously long headways on the two 63rd St. branches.

[schwerve]

Also that Pink needs more frequency than one third of the Brown Line's frequency, and Orange probably needs more than two thirds. Especially during off-peak hours--you'd either be greatly increasing the frequency of Kimball trains or cutting Douglas trains to like every half hour or 40 minutes. That's not rapid transit.

I don't understand exactly what any of these realignments would accomplish. You could get a one-seat ride from Kimball to Midway or whatever instead of the trivial inconvenience of stepping off the train at Washington/Wells, but how much is that worth? If you were going to try to link up lines by ridership, wouldn't it possibly make more sense to have a Lake-Loop-Midway route and a 63rd-Loop-54th/Cermak route, and leave the Brown Line out of it? Even then, unless you increased frequencies on the Douglas-South Side route, you'd have ridiculously long headways on the two 63rd St. branches.

well the initial discussion was about how to ease congestion in the loop, this being, in my view the easiest way in that you'd reduce the number of trains in the loop and remove all but the purple line express from making a turn at the clark junction. I don't know if its realistic in terms of train frequency but I picked this idea up off of the final train routing schematics from the circle line proposals.

[Mr Downtown]

"Clark Junction" is at Roscoe and Clark, near Wrigley Field.

"Tower 18" is the crossing/junction at Wells and Lake.

[Tom Servo]

they should re-build that station at clark/roscoe.

[arenn]

My plan to reduce congestion on the Loop L.

#1 - Build a flyover at Clark Jct (relieves northbound congestion, necessary to add more Brown/Purple runs).

#2 - Reallocate frequencies from trains with lower ridership to higher ridership. For example, replace a half empty six car Green Line train with another 8-car Brown Line that is jammed to the gills.

#3 - Spot construction to enable selected Brown Line trains to be routed through the State St. subway, which is under-utilized. I'm not sure how the trackage connects to the south, but it would be a great is if this could be through-routed with the Orange Line to take even more runs off the Loop. Otherwise, the backup is to investigate through-routing with the Green Line south branches.

#4 - Replace State/Lake and the three stations on the east side of the Loop with two superstations. Shift the platforms for Clark/Lake to the east to reduce queuing problems at Tower 18.

#5 - Signal upgrades and operations reviews at Tower 18 and Tower 12 to look for other possible improvements.

If all else fails, bring back spacer boards!

[the urban politician]

Interesting little article, but I like this segment:

Windy City White House (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?articleId=31202)
By: Paul Merrion January 19, 2009

Sources in Chicago Democratic circles say Robert Rivkin, former general counsel of the Chicago Transit Authority and now deputy general counsel of Chicago-based Aon Corp., could be named to a high-level position under Mr. LaHood. Mr. Rivkin's wife, Cindy Moelis, who worked with first lady Michelle Obama at City Hall in the 1990s, is said to be going to work in the White House.

^ We'll see if this translates into anything..

[schwerve]

#3 - Spot construction to enable selected Brown Line trains to be routed through the State St. subway, which is under-utilized.

I don't think its physically possible to put more trains in the state st. subway at peak hours (3-7 minute headway), somebody with better knowledge can answer more completely.

[arenn]

Whether the CTA can pull it off or not is another question, but the physical capacity of the line would support greater frequencies. Heavy rail runs on greater frequencies in many other cities. The CTA's signals may require upgrading for this, however.

[Abner]

The Circle Line would be routed through the State St. subway, so presumably somebody had the idea that it would be doable. Unlike the Loop, there aren't any tricky junctions except at the north end. Routing something through State St. would also have the benefit of increasing off-peak frequency along what should be the most heavily trafficked section of the el system.

However, I'm pretty sure that there's no "exit" from the subway on the south, just a junction north of the Chinatown stop that allows trains coming from the south to switch onto the Loop tracks and vice versa. So the Red Line can run elevated, but the Brown Line can't run in the subway (unless it turns into a Dan Ryan train).

[schwerve]

The Circle Line would be routed through the State St. subway, so presumably somebody had the idea that it would be doable.

that's the thing, my understanding was that the dirty little secret of the circle line was that you couldn't put any more trains in the state street subway and the only way it could work was if you built the clinton-larabee subway to route the red line.

[ardecila]

This is all just a big fantasy right now, of course...

But I think the State Street Subway could in fact handle more trains if the interference between Brown and Red at Clark Junction were alleviated with a flyover. This would allow CTA to better coordinate the trains on the North Main Line and allow for a more complex system of train movements. IIRC, the flyover was considered as part of the current Brown Line project, but it was found to be not cost-effective, and the demolition it would require would not be popular in the community. (It would also increase the amount of noise exponentially.)

[ardecila]

Interesting little article, but I like this segment:

Windy City White House (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?articleId=31202)
By: Paul Merrion January 19, 2009

Sources in Chicago Democratic circles say Robert Rivkin, former general counsel of the Chicago Transit Authority and now deputy general counsel of Chicago-based Aon Corp., could be named to a high-level position under Mr. LaHood. Mr. Rivkin's wife, Cindy Moelis, who worked with first lady Michelle Obama at City Hall in the 1990s, is said to be going to work in the White House.

^ We'll see if this translates into anything..

Valerie Jarrett was CTA President for quite awhile, and now she is Obama's Senior Adviser (this is the position that Karl Rove held under Bush, if that gives you an idea of the significance).

There's definitely plenty of Chicago in Obama's administration, and there's even a handful of ex-CTA personnel within the administration. I really hope this will translate into funding for the CTA, and with the prospect of a new, more level-headed governor down in Springfield, the future looks sunny.

[arenn]

However, I'm pretty sure that there's no "exit" from the subway on the south, just a junction north of the Chinatown stop that allows trains coming from the south to switch onto the Loop tracks and vice versa. So the Red Line can run elevated, but the Brown Line can't run in the subway (unless it turns into a Dan Ryan train).

I don't know the exact state of the tracks there myself. But as with the flyover at Clark Jct, some track construction might be required to link the subway with the elevated, or to build a turnback track.

[emathias]

that's the thing, my understanding was that the dirty little secret of the circle line was that you couldn't put any more trains in the state street subway and the only way it could work was if you built the clinton-larabee subway to route the red line.

The busiest the State Street subway currently gets is 3 minute headways. I think modern signals could get that number quite a lot lower, which is probably why they're updating the signally throughout the subways.

That said, I think the Clinton Street subway should be built regardless.

[emathias]

Also that Pink needs more frequency than one third of the Brown Line's frequency, and Orange probably needs more than two thirds. Especially during off-peak hours--you'd either be greatly increasing the frequency of Kimball trains or cutting Douglas trains to like every half hour or 40 minutes. That's not rapid transit.

I don't understand exactly what any of these realignments would accomplish. You could get a one-seat ride from Kimball to Midway or whatever instead of the trivial inconvenience of stepping off the train at Washington/Wells, but how much is that worth? If you were going to try to link up lines by ridership, wouldn't it possibly make more sense to have a Lake-Loop-Midway route and a 63rd-Loop-54th/Cermak route, and leave the Brown Line out of it? Even then, unless you increased frequencies on the Douglas-South Side route, you'd have ridiculously long headways on the two 63rd St. branches.

They would enable through-routing, which is more efficient than round-the-loop routing.

Current Brown Line operations run about 192 trains a day. Combined Orange and Pink line operations run about 266 trains a day, which are surprisingly balanced across the two.

So, running both to Kimball would probably work. If you maintained all pink and orange trains, cross-the-day average frequency for the Kimball route would rise from about 9 trains per hour to 12 an hour. Y
ou could probably trim a few Pink and Orange trains during rush hour, when the numbers add up the fastest, but you would probably be making a high off-hours frequency for the Brown Line. Your other option would be to only route the Pink Line through at rush hours and circle the Loop the rest of the time.

[emathias]

...
However, I'm pretty sure that there's no "exit" from the subway on the south, just a junction north of the Chinatown stop that allows trains coming from the south to switch onto the Loop tracks and vice versa. So the Red Line can run elevated, but the Brown Line can't run in the subway (unless it turns into a Dan Ryan train).

There are two south portals from the State Street subway to the non-subway routes. There is the one just before Chinatown/Cermak that it normally uses now to connect to the Dan Ryan, and there is one just after Roosevelt that was the original portal which connects to what is now the Green Line. That second portal is what could be used to route the Brown Line through the State Street subway to the Orange Line (or the Green Line).

Another, unrelated, routing - if you're building things - would be to complete the west-bound portal from the Dearborn Street subway and run the Green Line through the Lake Street subway, turning onto Dearborn subway and then using the new Block 37 connector to connect to the State Street subway and up the Roosevelt portal to the Green Line tracks. It would put into use the "airport connector" under Block 37. Then the City could focus on an airport express as part of a West Loop Transportation system under Clinton utilizing mostly Metra routes, which would be faster and put people closer to the Metra stops. Part of that, too, could be to through-route more Metra routes, which would enhance the efficiency of Metra routing. Coupled with a subway loop created with a Clinton Street subway and the extra routing possible with a Clinton Street subway, and a Circle Line, the central area would be set for decades of growth. Bloomingdale Trail's ROW could also be dug under the river and routed into either the State Street or new Clinton subways, adding central area train frequency while drawing in more west neighborhoods, and the Pink Line routing could be changed to go west through the South Loop connecting with the N/S routes there.

These are big ideas with big price tags, but coupled with appropriate TOD zoning they would set up the Central area and surrounding neighborhoods for decades of a type of growth making cars a luxury and not a necessity, putting Chicago into the same league as any international city for transit purposes.

[arenn]

The Green Line is already through routed. However, my experience is that it is rarely filling cars to capacity. I usually board at Clark/Lake outbound in the afternoons. A lot of times, Green Lines that go by have actual seats available and I don't recall ever seeing a time you couldn't get on. Contrast with the over-jammed Ravenswood. I think there's actually room to reduce headways on the Green Line if necessary at peak of the peak. Those precious slots need to go to full trains.

The beauty of my Brown Line-Orange Line through routing is that it uses the State St. subway, thus taking runs off the Loop completely so that you can still run decent headways there on all lines.

[Abner]

They would enable through-routing, which is more efficient than round-the-loop routing.

Current Brown Line operations run about 192 trains a day. Combined Orange and Pink line operations run about 266 trains a day, which are surprisingly balanced across the two.

So, running both to Kimball would probably work. If you maintained all pink and orange trains, cross-the-day average frequency for the Kimball route would rise from about 9 trains per hour to 12 an hour. Y
ou could probably trim a few Pink and Orange trains during rush hour, when the numbers add up the fastest, but you would probably be making a high off-hours frequency for the Brown Line. Your other option would be to only route the Pink Line through at rush hours and circle the Loop the rest of the time.

I suppose the question would be whether the benefits (higher frequency on the Kimball line, more efficient routing through the Loop) would be worth the cost of the extra service on the Kimball line. I don't ride the Brown Line that much so I'm agnostic on that question. I can see how through-routing the Orange Line would be more efficient, but is it that big a deal for Pink? You'd still go all the way around the Loop, it would just mean replacing one turn (at Tower 18) with a straight line.

Just because this one hasn't been mentioned yet and we may as well throw around all the possibilities, has anyone thought about using the Block 37 connection to split Red and Blue into a Howard-O'Hare line and a Forest Park-95th line? These lines would be a little more balanced in their ridership patterns. Admittedly this is almost certainly a crappy idea.

[schwerve]

but is it that big a deal for Pink? You'd still go all the way around the Loop, it would just mean replacing one turn (at Tower 18) with a straight line.

the only way to really ensure smooth operations all around would entail reducing the number of trains going through the junction, particularly those making the slow 10-15mph turning movements (straight movements can be taken at 35 mph).
.

[nomarandlee]

There are two south portals from the State Street subway to the non-subway routes. There is the one just before Chinatown/Cermak that it normally uses now to connect to the Dan Ryan, and there is one just after Roosevelt that was the original portal which connects to what is now the Green Line. That second portal is what could be used to route the Brown Line through the State Street subway to the Orange Line (or the Green Line).

Another, unrelated, routing - if you're building things - would be to complete the west-bound portal from the Dearborn Street subway and run the Green Line through the Lake Street subway, turning onto Dearborn subway and then using the new Block 37 connector to connect to the State Street subway and up the Roosevelt portal to the Green Line tracks. It would put into use the "airport connector" under Block 37. Then the City could focus on an airport express as part of a West Loop Transportation system under Clinton utilizing mostly Metra routes, which would be faster and put people closer to the Metra stops. Part of that, too, could be to through-route more Metra routes, which would enhance the efficiency of Metra routing. Coupled with a subway loop created with a Clinton Street subway and the extra routing possible with a Clinton Street subway, and a Circle Line, the central area would be set for decades of growth. Bloomingdale Trail's ROW could also be dug under the river and routed into either the State Street or new Clinton subways, adding central area train frequency while drawing in more west neighborhoods, and the Pink Line routing could be changed to go west through the South Loop connecting with the N/S routes there.

These are big ideas with big price tags, but coupled with appropriate TOD zoning they would set up the Central area and surrounding neighborhoods for decades of a type of growth making cars a luxury and not a necessity, putting Chicago into the same league as any international city for transit purposes.

I put together an MSN map with almost precisely as you described. One thing I have trouble with was figuring out where a Bloomingdale Line should turn south to head back downtown. Any ideas?

[emathias]

I put together an MSN map with almost precisely as you described. One thing I have trouble with was figuring out where a Bloomingdale Line should turn south to head back downtown. Any ideas?

I've had basically three ideas on what to do with a Bloomingdale subway connection:

1) Drive it to Clybourn and have it merge with the State Street subway.

2) Drive it to Clybourn and run it under the State Street subway until Larrabee where it'd turn south to become the Clinton subway.

3) Two routing no one in their right mind would propose (so of course I have to mention them), which is to run it under Armitage to Lincoln, or up Racine to Fullerton, then for either of those to Clark, Delaware and Fairbanks/Columbus to McCormick Place (and maybe eventually south). With this routing, instead of it being a CTA-style rail line, it could be a re-imagining of the Metra Electric service into rapid transit a la a super "Gray Line" implementation.

[Attrill]

I've had basically three ideas on what to do with a Bloomingdale subway connection:

1) Drive it to Clybourn and have it merge with the State Street subway.

2) Drive it to Clybourn and run it under the State Street subway until Larrabee where it'd turn south to become the Clinton subway.

3) Two routing no one in their right mind would propose (so of course I have to mention them), which is to run it under Armitage to Lincoln, or up Racine to Fullerton, then for either of those to Clark, Delaware and Fairbanks/Columbus to McCormick Place (and maybe eventually south). With this routing, instead of it being a CTA-style rail line, it could be a re-imagining of the Metra Electric service into rapid transit a la a super "Gray Line" implementation.

I think merging at Clybourn would make the most sense, and a stop at the existing Metra station would be great. Pushing the circle line out a bit to align more with Western and the Bloomingdale line seems more useful than the existing plan. Unfortunately the Bloomingdale line is pretty well on its way to becoming a park, so I think the chances of that happening are pretty slim.

[the urban politician]

Ahhh, a Chicago transit thread.

All talk and no action.

Great ideas but no money to implement them.

You gotta love the mental masturbation that goes on around here..

[pip]

^yeah but have you rode on it lately. It is actually working. Busses and trains - okok before everyone jumps on me, from my experiences but remember I don't own a car and take the CTA somewhere about everyday. I don't mind going across town and taking the bus because the busses are now reliable. The CTA is starting to work.

[Abner]

The new hybrid buses are a major breath of fresh air. Smooth suspension, good lighting, decent acceleration. Only problem is we're still stuck with the NABI articulated buses for a long time.

I think the system might soon be in good enough shape that it would make sense to start thinking about expansion again. At least they've gotten the incredibly lengthy process to apply for federal funding going on the Red Line extension and Circle Line.

[pip]

^NABI articulated buses

those are the freakin' worst pieces of junk and I'm no bus expert but I do know that much. Never buy from them again!

[emathias]

Ahhh, a Chicago transit thread.

All talk and no action.

Great ideas but no money to implement them.

You gotta love the mental masturbation that goes on around here..

Name a single thread on this whole set of forums that has actual action by the writers ... :-)

[Attrill]

Ahhh, a Chicago transit thread.

All talk and no action.

Great ideas but no money to implement them.

You gotta love the mental masturbation that goes on around here..

I definitely understand what you're saying, but for the first time in years there is actually a chance of some large scale transit projects getting Federal funding. Besides, I think Burnham said something about thinking this way once - I don't see it as a bad thing to hold onto a bit of that.

[ardecila]

I think the system might soon be in good enough shape that it would make sense to start thinking about expansion again. At least they've gotten the incredibly lengthy process to apply for federal funding going on the Red Line extension and Circle Line.

It's not incredibly lengthy. You just need to get your guys in Congress behind it and you can get funding within 2-3 years, whenever the next highway bill comes up.

[schwerve]

I think the system might soon be in good enough shape that it would make sense to start thinking about expansion again.

the system still needs ~6 Billion to get to a "state of good repair" so while some expansion might be on the docket let's not get ahead of ourselves because northside riders don't have a slow zone problem anymore.

[lawfin]

I'm surprised nobody has posted this yet:

http://www.transitchicago.com/news/default.aspx?ArticleId=2274



I wonder what numbers were like for November and December when oil prices tanked? They would be the best indicator of what we can expect going into '09, I think.

I wonder what the average weekday boarding looked like for the rail component?

[nomarandlee]

Don't remember seeing this posted....

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transportation/1381166,smart-rta-cards-chicago-transit-011509.article

'Smart' bank card could be ticket to ride Metra, CTA, Pace

New concept would allow commuters 'smart card' option

January 15, 2009

BY MARY WISNIEWSKIStaff Reporter

Metra, CTA and Pace riders could skip buying tickets and instead use a “smart” bank or credit card to pay for fares on all three transit systems, under a concept being examined by the Regional Transit Authority.

“This would be the way we integrate the three service boards,” said RTA Chair Jim Reilly. Reilly said this technology would cut costs for transit agencies, by eliminating the need for employees to handle cash and sell tickets.

The card would contain a computer chip that allows the user to pay for rides. The card could also be used for other purchases, like groceries.

The CTA is already exploring the idea of using cards like this to pay for bus and L fares.

“It’s all still in the early stages. We’re in the process of soliciting proposals for this type of technology,” said Wanda Taylor, CTA spokeswoman.

The London public transit system has moved to this type of payment system, according to Leanne Redden, RTA senior deputy executive director of planning and regional programs.

New York City Transit is testing a pilot program at 30 subway stations on the Lexington Avenue line, according to Paul Korczak, project operations manager, who addressed the RTA board Thursday. The program allows users to tap their cards against a turnstile reader to gain access to trains.

The cards could encode rider information, such as whether or not they qualify for a reduced fare.

Banks are interested in supplying the all-in-one cards, since a card used for transit is then often used for other types of purchases.

It could be easier for the CTA, which already has converted many riders to using Chicago Cards instead of cash, to make the transition to smart bank cards. The transition would be more difficult for Metra, which doesn’t take ordinary credit cards to buy tickets and passes, which must be checked individually by conductors on the trains.

A spokesperson for Metra was not immediately available for comment.

Pace spokesman Patrick Wilmot said that the suburban bus service is “very supportive” of the concept.

Redden said it would not be necessary for a person to have a bank account or qualify for a credit card to use smart transit cards — they could be bought like gift cards in $10 or $20 increments and loaded with cash as needed. It would also be possible to combine the transit function with other types of cards, like those used for food stamps.

Another possibility would be to include the technology in cell phones.

A major obstacle to starting a universal smart card payment system is that money is needed to change ticket collection systems, and the state is still waiting for a capital bill to pay for new projects.
..

[ardecila]

I like the idea if they can actually set up a decent transfer system between Metra, CTA, and Pace.

[emathias]

the system still needs ~6 Billion to get to a "state of good repair" so while some expansion might be on the docket let's not get ahead of ourselves because northside riders don't have a slow zone problem anymore.

Actually, North Side riders are STILL the only side of the city with significant slow zones, so please avoid implying that "the CTA hates the South Side."

North Main is over 20% slow, all of the Purple Line and the Purple Express tracks are over 20% slow. And the majority of those slow zones are the middle or the slowest rating out of three slow zone speeds listed in their report.

On the South Side, the only portion of a line that's over 20% is the Englewood branch of the Green line, affecting all of two lightly-used stops (combined ridership for those two are lower than all but two single Red Line north main stops).

The Dan Ryan portion of the Red Line is just over 10% slow, however 90% of those slow zones are the 35mph variety - the fastest of the "slow zones" defined by the CTA - so the impact is even less than half as compared to the north main portion.

Slowest branch overall is the Englewood one on the Green Line (two stops long).

After that, though, the next three slowest are the Purple Express, North Main, and the Purple Line in Evanston.

Conversely, NONE of the six fastest lines are North Side lines - Pink Line, Green - Jackson Park branch, Lake Street branch, State Street subway, Dearborn subway and the Orange Line.

If anything, the CTA has focused on downtown, first, and then a fairly well-distributed set of projects in the neighborhoods, but giving the least amount of focus on the extremities fo the system. That may not be perfect, but it is pragmatic and roughly fair to their ridership.

[schwerve]

Actually, North Side riders are STILL the only side of the city with significant slow zones, so please avoid implying that "the CTA hates the South Side."

I was implying the converse, the north side hates the CTA. that the impression of the state of the system in the collective consciousness is directly proportional to the north side commute, nothing more nothing less.

[arenn]

The CTA has clearly invested in its system in inverse order of ridership. First the Green Line, then the Douglas, then the Ravenwood. Meanwhile the North Main, the crown jewel of the system, has received limited upgrades. Strange investment policy if you ask me.

[Abner]

The CTA has clearly invested in its system in inverse order of ridership. First the Green Line, then the Douglas, then the Ravenwood. Meanwhile the North Main, the crown jewel of the system, has received limited upgrades. Strange investment policy if you ask me.

I sympathize, but they also went in order of age and dilapidation. The Green Line came first because it was super old, super slow, and super dangerous. The Douglas branch was the same story. Those lines would have had to get shut down if they weren't fixed. The North Main is now the most antiquated line, but that probably wasn't the case before the other lines got rehabbed. (The basketcase, I guess, is the Blue Line, which was in way worse shape than its age would suggest.)

[ardecila]

From RedEye

Flight of the Clybourn
There are CTA bus routes running all over this fair city. Why then is there no dedicated bus route for Clybourn Avenue, some riders have asked. Fact: There was a Clybourn bus route, but it was discontinued in 1997 due to low ridership, Taylor said.

But the route could be back in business. The CTA recently received approval for a pilot program to provide service along Clybourn, Taylor said, adding that a start date is not yet available.

A Clybourn bus would be nice, especially with all the growth that has occurred on that corridor since the route was deleted. It will have to navigate the clusterf*ck that is North/Clybourn, though....

[emathias]

From RedEye
A Clybourn bus would be nice, especially with all the growth that has occurred on that corridor since the route was deleted. It will have to navigate the clusterf*ck that is North/Clybourn, though....

Clybourn is difficult most of its way. It only runs from Division to Belmont. I can see why it was dropped. But, I think if it were properly connected it could become used enough to justify.

If I were creating the route, I'd probably run it from the Belmont Blue Line stop, south along Clybourn to Larrabee to Chicago to Kingsbury to Grand and then south on Wells to Van Buren and back north on Franklin/Orleans to Grand. That way you'd serve that whole part of western River North that is radically different than it used to be and could benefit from a direct route to the commercial area along Clybourn, as well as a tie-in to the financial district. Alternately you could also have it go east on Jackson to Grant Park, as a useful route for the north areas to get to Grant Park, or South Loop Residents who don't like the subway to get to the Clybourn commercial areas.

[pottebaum]

CTA's Huberman eyed for public school chief

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-huberman-chicago-schools-24jan24,0,2306701.story

[ChicagoChicago]

CTA's Huberman eyed for public school chief

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-huberman-chicago-schools-24jan24,0,2306701.story

I'd prefer to keep him at the head of the CTA. I think he's done a great job so far. Long way to go though.

[emathias]

I'd prefer to keep him at the head of the CTA. I think he's done a great job so far. Long way to go though.

I completely agree. There's still a lot to do, so I hope he gets left there for at least another couple years. It may not be his first choice, but I think he's really done a lot, and could do even more if he stuck around. We should import a new schools chief, IMO

[Abner]

Does Huberman have relevant education experience? I think there's a big difference between running the CTA and running the schools. Running the CTA seems to be mostly about efficiency and sound decision-making--relatively transferable skills--whereas running the schools seems to require more substantive knowledge about education (not necessarily through teaching--Duncan has never been a teacher). The CTA's performance has improved drastically during Huberman's tenure--though I realize that some of those gains are at the expense of future income--but I think the schools should be managed by someone who combines executive ability with deep knowledge of education. Hopefully the federal climate will change enough that whoever heads the CTA for the next few years won't have to put the agency into as much debt to keep it from falling apart.

[arenn]

Huberman is awesome. I think he'd do great at CPS - however, it will be a big blow to the CTA. I wonder, though, whether Huberman might not have wanted out of the CTA. He's doing the Lord's work over there, but there's a limit to what can be accomplished unless the region decides to up its commitment to transit funding, which doesn't appear to be in the cards. That must be very frustrating to Huberman.

[VivaLFuego]

Irrespective of the particulars of the personalities/qualifications, I can't say it would be a good thing to send the CTA bureaucracy into another round of turmoil with complete turnover in the executive ranks, reorganization of responsibilities, and revision of company goals/strategy. Such things are inevitable with a change in administration, and periodically necessary, since after a while the deficiencies of one administrative regime can come to light in serious ways (e.g. track maintenance under Kruesi). But an organization in constant tumult will always be chasing its tail and unable to engage in anything resembling actual business strategy in terms of transforming business operations and employing long-term plans to restructure costs & revenues, and adapt service to the constantly changing environment. This sounds jargony, but people who've spent time working in either government agencies or public corporations with high visibility (visibility which comes with the imperative for new blood to "quick! do something!") probably know what I'm getting at about the sort of morale-killing, productivity-clamping turmoil inherent with the drastic change that follows a new chief executive.

I guess my point being, even regardless of the merits/criticisms of Huberman's tenure at CTA, the transit organization would suffer some major setbacks as it retools with a new batch of administrators. Depending on what CPS's problem is (if it is management/organizational/financial in nature), Huberman could do a lot of good there, but from what I've seen I'd say he hasn't quite finished the job of transforming CTAs operations into something more viable long term that isn't just limping from one crisis to the next, though he's made some progress.

[Abner]

Crain's and Chicago Public Radio are reporting that the Huberman choice is confirmed:
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/news.pl?id=32751

I agree with Viva. Daley could have given us only one humongous, critical agency with a new chief executive, and now we will have two. How much credibility can Huberman present at CPS if people are going to think that Daley will keep bouncing him around?

[alex1]

are performance metrics now coming to a CPS school near you?

seriously, seems that Carol Brown would be a good replacement. She's been as transparent as any public official has been in Chicago in my lifetime.

I'm not at all saddened by this news. Huberman will have the most important job of his life ahead of him. I'm curious to see if his approach is holistic rather then just test driven.

[whyhuhwhy]

I'm curious to see if his approach is holistic rather then just test driven.

How would one measure academic performance objectively "holistically?"

[Attrill]

How much credibility can Huberman present at CPS if people are going to think that Daley will keep bouncing him around?

He will have credibility because people know he has Daley's ear.

I think Carol Brown would be an excellent chice as a replacement, and would continue to build on what Huberman has accomplished.


How would one measure academic performance objectively "holistically?"

Retention rates, graduation rates, number of students continuing on to college, employment after graduation, etc... Basically real life things.

[VivaLFuego]

I think Carol Brown would be an excellent chice as a replacement, and would continue to build on what Huberman has accomplished.


Not sure why she'd take the pay cut / demotion. She was a banker with Lehmann and landed at Mesirow, I believe, which I assume is only temporary before she moves back up to the big leagues.

[alex1]

How would one measure academic performance objectively "holistically?"

it seems to me that in recent years, an emphasis has been put in teaching to the test vs. looking at broader ways to improve education. We've begun to place an emphasis on things like charter schools in recent years but I'm not sure they're the solution. They are helping bring the teacher unions in line to some degree and will eventually lead to breaking down tenure rules, which IMO is vital to a better CPS.

But the bigger question will be how do you improve student achievement? Involved parents helps an immeasurable deal but what happens when you can't count on parent involvement? what do you do in a school systems when the parents are many times the problem?

Not to mention that longer range plans need to be addressed. At some point, the school system will again begin to gentrify. How will that be done smoothly? What steps will be taken to update the curriculum and how will technology influence the way children learn?

When it comes down to it, telling some kids to memorize the details of a picture is a lot less useful then having them break down why the details in the picture were chosen.

[emathias]

it seems to me that in recent years, an emphasis has been put in teaching to the test vs. looking at broader ways to improve education. We've begun to place an emphasis on things like charter schools in recent years but I'm not sure they're the solution. They are helping bring the teacher unions in line to some degree and will eventually lead to breaking down tenure rules, which IMO is vital to a better CPS.

But the bigger question will be how do you improve student achievement? Involved parents helps an immeasurable deal but what happens when you can't count on parent involvement? what do you do in a school systems when the parents are many times the problem?

Not to mention that longer range plans need to be addressed. At some point, the school system will again begin to gentrify. How will that be done smoothly? What steps will be taken to update the curriculum and how will technology influence the way children learn?

When it comes down to it, telling some kids to memorize the details of a picture is a lot less useful then having them break down why the details in the picture were chosen.

Take this to a seperate, NON-TRANSIT thread, please.

[alex1]

Take this to a seperate, NON-TRANSIT thread, please.

or just ignore it and get back to the topic. I'm just answering a question.

perhaps the discussion should have focused on who's next in line for CTA boss...

[Attrill]

Not sure why she'd take the pay cut / demotion. She was a banker with Lehmann and landed at Mesirow, I believe, which I assume is only temporary before she moves back up to the big leagues.

Yeah - it looks like she is interested in heading to Washington (http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1371296,CST-NWS-ctabrown11.article).

The linked article has a good example of why I think her name keeps popping up as the possible replacement:

At board meetings, Huberman and Brown sometimes seem like an old married couple, even finishing each other's sentences.

[arenn]

The CTA needs a strong chairman/president combo. The great thing Huberman brought was his operational and organizational change capabilities. We need someone else in that mode running the CTA, someone who is going to stay the course with Hubeman's program and won't feel the need to send things off in a different direction just to put his stamp on things. The Chairman needs to be out there getting the politics and funding right to get the game changed. Two different interest areas if you ask me.

[honte]

^ I vote for VivaLFuego

[schwerve]

^ I vote for VivaLFuego

2nd-ed

[emathias]

I hear the governor may be needing a job here soon, maybe he'd be interested ...

*ducks* :haha: :P