[MayorOfChicago]

From this: http://egov.cityofchicago.org:80/city/webportal/portalContentItemAction.do?blockName=Transportation%2fI+Want+To&deptMainCategoryOID=&channelId=0&programId=0&entityName=Transportation&topChannelName=Dept&contentOID=536961838&Failed_Reason=Invalid+timestamp,+engine+has+been+restarted&contenTypeName=COC_EDITORIAL&com.broadvision.session.new=Yes&Failed_Page=%2fwebportal%2fportalContentItemAction.do&context=dept

It seems like CTA station exit and entrance closures will be temporary. However, they are less than clear in their language, IMO.

I don't think so. I read all that as well trying to figure out the final sketches of the area and what was going to be the finished product.

If you walk down Grand in front of Rock Bottom and look where the entrance use to be, you'll see absolutely no clue that there has ever been an entrance on that spot - at all.

It's all brand new nicely finished concrete, completely reconstructed street, curb, gutters and sidewalk. This is a finished product, not temporary.

Across the street on the East side you also have this brand new concete and reconstruction - but you'll find a subway entrance has been built into the sidewalk as well.

[ardecila]

CTA Oakton Street Station, Schematic Design

http://www.skokie.org/images/Downtown%20Swift%20Station%20Rendering.jpg

[ardecila]

I don't think so. I read all that as well trying to figure out the final sketches of the area and what was going to be the finished product.

If you walk down Grand in front of Rock Bottom and look where the entrance use to be, you'll see absolutely no clue that there has ever been an entrance on that spot - at all.

It's all brand new nicely finished concrete, completely reconstructed street, curb, gutters and sidewalk. This is a finished product, not temporary.

Across the street on the East side you also have this brand new concete and reconstruction - but you'll find a subway entrance has been built into the sidewalk as well.

My guess is that the entrance is being relocated, either around the corner on State Street or further west on Grand. The station renovation project involves the expansion of the mezzanine into sidewalk vaults as well as virgin dirt... logically, if the mezzanine is getting bigger, then the entrances would need to shift outward as well.

[Mr Downtown]

http://www.skokie.org/images/Downtown%20Swift%20Station%20Rendering.jpg

^Boy, that's $14 million worth of station, all right!

And the renderer couldn't even get the typeface right for the signage.

[intrepidDesign]

:previous:

Man that thing is ugly, welcome to ye ole train station. Here (http://theurbanophile.blogspot.com/2009_08_01_archive.html)is a great posting by The Urbanophile about the importance of compelling design when it comes to train/bus stations/subway entrances, etc.

[emathias]

I don't think so. I read all that as well trying to figure out the final sketches of the area and what was going to be the finished product.

If you walk down Grand in front of Rock Bottom and look where the entrance use to be, you'll see absolutely no clue that there has ever been an entrance on that spot - at all.

It's all brand new nicely finished concrete, completely reconstructed street, curb, gutters and sidewalk. This is a finished product, not temporary.

Across the street on the East side you also have this brand new concete and reconstruction - but you'll find a subway entrance has been built into the sidewalk as well.

That's true, but on the east side, the street is wider. If the sidewalk on the southwest side maintained an entrance at this point, Grand might be down to 1 lane. I think it's possible that they will keep that entrance there once they're done with the northwest side.

We should all email feedback@transitchicago.com (mailto:feedback@transitchicago.com) and ask them/tell them we want the SW entrance to remain. And maybe also email Ald. Reilly (mailto:office@reillyforchicago.com)

[arenn]

Again, we're treated to a retro design, this one gothic inspired. I getting more puzzled by the day as Chicago's leadership must know what is going on in competitor cities around the design of public space.

[ardecila]

Skokie is in charge of the design of the new station, not CTA. CTA simply places signage and staffs the station.

[k1052]

CTA Oakton Street Station, Schematic Design

http://www.skokie.org/images/Downtown%20Swift%20Station%20Rendering.jpg

They can't be serious....

[Dr. Taco]

lol, i like it. I like it better than the SOM stuff on the blue line anyway...

[arenn]

At least it seems to have a canopy.

[Busy Bee]

http://www.sj-r.com/high-speed-rail/x393147061/Joliet-center-part-of-statewide-rail-push

Joliet center part of statewide rail push

By TIM LANDIS
THE STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER
Posted Sep 16, 2009 @ 11:30 PM
Last update Sep 17, 2009 @ 06:04 AM
JOLIET —


Springfield’s concerns with high-speed rail service and increased freight train traffic are part of a much larger rail-improvement push in Illinois involving hundreds of millions in state and federal dollars.

The biggest push, by far, is in the Chicago region.

The Union Pacific Railroad broke ground this month on the $370 million Joliet Intermodal Terminal, which promises to create 6,900 to 7,400 full-time jobs and an increase in annual freight capacity equivalent to 500,000 cargo-ship-sized containers.

As plans stand, some of that increased freight traffic would use the Third Street corridor in downtown Springfield.

“Right now, there’s probably about 2,000 tradespeople out there working. There’s probably more earth-moving machines on that property than any project in the Midwest,” said John Greuling, president and CEO of the Will County Center for Economic Development.

Greuling said the Will County group first learned of the Union Pacific construction about four years ago, though the goal of making Joliet a hub for one of the nation’s largest “inland ports” is part of much more ambitious long-term plan.

“We are marketing ourselves as part of the global supply chain. … It’s a pretty aggressive plan we’ve been working on for eight years,” said Greuling, who added that six other major rail carriers will use the Joliet facility.

____________________________________

About the Union Pacific Joliet Intermodal Terminal

* Estimated cost: $370 million; joint project of the UP and CenterPoint Properties, a California-based investment company that specializes in development of industrial real estate and transportation projects.

* Location: 785 acres five miles south of Interstate 80 and seven miles east of Interstate 55.

* Construction schedule: First phase scheduled for completion in June 2010. Facility then will expand based on demand.

* Capacity: Annual capacity equivalent to 500,000 ocean-going containers; four 8,000-foot tracks capable of handling 107 “double-stack” rail cars; six 8,000-foot tracks to sort cars by destination; six tracks in a car staging area; more than 3,400 parking spaces for trailers and containers; four cranes and two mobile-packers to load and unload freight cars.

Source: Union Pacific; city of Joliet.

__________________________________

More

http://www.sj-r.com/high-speed-rail/x393147061/Joliet-center-part-of-statewide-rail-push

[VivaLFuego]

We should all email feedback@transitchicago.com (mailto:feedback@transitchicago.com) and ask them/tell them we want the SW entrance to remain. And maybe also email Ald. Reilly (mailto:office@reillyforchicago.com)

Realistically, given this project is already at nearly twice the original budget, I doubt any design changes whatsoever are feasible at this point. I guess at most it speaks to the need for at least some public involvement in the early design stages to avoid obviously detrimental steps like this.

[the urban politician]

http://www.sj-r.com/high-speed-rail/x393147061/Joliet-center-part-of-statewide-rail-push

...

“Right now, there’s probably about 2,000 tradespeople out there working. There’s probably more earth-moving machines on that property than any project in the Midwest,” said John Greuling, president and CEO of the Will County Center for Economic Development.

^ Wow, I'd love to take a drive out there just to see that massive construction site.

It's great to see more job-creating infrastructure being created in the southern half of the metropolitan area. Anything to help balance things out...

[Busy Bee]

One would think that additional CTA stations in Skokie would b in keeping with the Insull era station at Dempster, not a yellow birdcage. And can we put those shepard hook lights to sleep already? They look like what the early 90's sounded like.

[bnk]

http://marquettetribune.org/2009/09/17/news/rail-jk1-jm2-mn3

Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee commuter rail moves ahead

By Tim Seeman. Published September 17, 2009.

The absence of a functional regional transit authority did not discourage members of the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission from presenting a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a proposed commuter rail connection between the cities of Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee Wednesday.

The research found that overall, potential adverse environmental effects throughout the areas affected by the proposed railroad would be minor. Most of the stations and tracks the proposal would use already exist, said Ken Yunker, executive director of SEWRPC.

The proposed line would run 14 trains per day between Milwaukee and Kenosha, stopping in several municipalities in between. It would also allow for transfers to the existing rail connection between Kenosha and downtown Chicago, Yunker said.

...

[SkokieSwift]

Anyone know the exact location of the Oakton station? I know it's going to be west of the tracks and north of Oakton, but how far north?

[VivaLFuego]

Anyone know the exact location of the Oakton station? I know it's going to be west of the tracks and north of Oakton, but how far north?

Island station (i.e. in between the tracks) north of the street. I believe the platforms will be 4 cars long (Skokie Swift currently only ever runs 2 car trains), but obviously the station is designed so that the platforms could be easily extended to 6 or 8 if somehow needed in the future. There is a little signal hut just north of Oakton that I dont think is being moved, so the platform doesn't start until north of that (you can see it from Google Maps aerial).

I know at one point there was talk of a walkway on the north end for an auxiliary entrance/exit at Searle Parkway but I'm not sure if that's being built now or just being left as a 'hook' in the design for future construction. I would guess it's not being done now since it would also require removing/relocating a track crossover which would be an unnecessary expense given the expected ridership level for the forseeable future. In happier economic times there was some talk of a midrise TOD on the triangular parcel at Skokie Blvd and Searle which could potentially have paid for transit improvements in exchange for a density bonus, but I assume that proposal is dead as a doornail for the time being.

[ardecila]

I honestly don't think the design is that bad. Obviously, there could be so much more done, but it seems to be a station with generous platforms, a full canopy, and a large sheltered/interior area. It gets the fundamentals right, even if the style is not to your liking.

[OhioGuy]

Yeah, I don't find the station all that bad either. It looks more spacious than similar surface stations near the end of the brown line. And the yellow coloring certainly keeps with the color theme of the line. Ultimately I'm just happy that there will be a station serving downtown Skokie (well technically the station's a few blocks east, but close enough....).

[the urban politician]

The proposed line would run 14 trains per day between Milwaukee and Kenosha, stopping in several municipalities in between. It would also allow for transfers to the existing rail connection between Kenosha and downtown Chicago, Yunker said.

...

^ This is some exciting stuff.

Of course, I'm not sure who would use this "transfer" at Kenosha to Metra.

Anybody from SE Wisconsin headed to Chicago would almost certainly use Amtrak's Hiawatha train

[emathias]

^ This is some exciting stuff.

Of course, I'm not sure who would use this "transfer" at Kenosha to Metra.

Anybody from SE Wisconsin headed to Chicago would almost certainly use Amtrak's Hiawatha train

Not if they wanted to visit Evanston.

[SkokieSwift]

Island station (i.e. in between the tracks) north of the street. I believe the platforms will be 4 cars long (Skokie Swift currently only ever runs 2 car trains), but obviously the station is designed so that the platforms could be easily extended to 6 or 8 if somehow needed in the future. There is a little signal hut just north of Oakton that I dont think is being moved, so the platform doesn't start until north of that (you can see it from Google Maps aerial).


Thanks for the info. I was concerned it was going to be too far north of Oakton.

The station looks decent, and I'm really excited that downtown Skokie will finally have a stop. Hopefully it will spur more development in the area.

[the urban politician]

Not if they wanted to visit Evanston.

^ I guess, but I doubt that visiting Evanston justifies a KRM to Metra transfer on a commuter line.

It's silly, really, to take a train to Evanston from Wisconsin--most people would drive.

Downtown Chicago is different. Parking in downtown Chicago garages is an exercise in money disposal

[VivaLFuego]

^ This is some exciting stuff.

Of course, I'm not sure who would use this "transfer" at Kenosha to Metra.

Anybody from SE Wisconsin headed to Chicago would almost certainly use Amtrak's Hiawatha train

The transfer would be fairly lightly used, but those who would use it would be people traveling between intermediate stops, e.g. going to Great Lakes Naval Station, Lake Forest, North Chicago/Abbot, Waukegan, etc. not all the way to downtown Chicago. The UP-N is unique among Metra lines for how many trip generators are spread along the route.

The analogous situation would be the Purple Line Express compared to Metra - Evanston residents would generally commute to downtown via Metra, but the Purple Express serves a major role in connecting bi-directional worker/resident flow between Evanston and Lakeview/Lincoln Park as well, for which Metra doesn't suffice (might be surprised at the number of people taking the Purple Express north from Belmont in the mornings and south from Davis/Howard in the evenings).

[ardecila]

I hope, once the KRM is built, Metra comes to an agreement with the Wisconsin transit agency (as yet unformed) to run through service with limited stops. If it was priced properly, it wouldn't compete with the Hiawatha, but it would offer a transit option to people heading to Evanston or Great Lakes or Waukegan from Wisconsin without the inconvenience of a transfer in Kenosha.

[denizen467]

(link to blog main page) http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/article.pl?page_id=2308


Seedy el stations to get $10M fed fix-up
Posted by Greg H. at 9/18/2009 4:22 PM CDT on Chicago Business

Some of the Chicago Transit Authority's seediest el stations are in for a $10-million fix-up, U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin reports.

In a statement, the Illinois Democrat said the fiscal 2010 transportation funding bill approved by the Senate includes $10 million for projects on Red Line stations from Sheridan north to Jarvis.

Eligible work includes improved lighting, signage and windbreaks; new escalators, benches and public-address systems, and better landscaping and bicycle amenities.

The stations are among the oldest in the CTA system, with some not having received any significant work since before World War II.

The $10 mil. won't go far . . . but it's a start. The CTA had no immediate comment, and it was not clear whether the federal funds will be matched by state and/or local monies, as is usually the case with transit projects.

Mr. Durbin also announced that the CTA is in line for $2 million for very preliminary work on the CTA's proposed Circle Line in the central area of the city.

[ardecila]

The problem that makes station renovations so expensive is ADA compliance. Basic maintenance like painting, retiling, and replacing light fixtures is all really cheap stuff. Don't get me wrong, there's a huge value in having ADA compliance in the system, it's just that it's so expensive to retrofit older stations in a dense environment.

I hope the $10M is able to strip those stations of their grime. Some pigeon-proofing might also be a good idea to help keep the stations looking nice.

[Busy Bee]

^Don't forget not enough competition in the bidding pool.

[ardecila]

^Don't forget not enough competition in the bidding pool.

Doing major reconstruction on an active transit line, in an active station, with auto and pedestrian traffic below is never easy. Only a few firms have the necessary expertise to manage the staging of such a job. True, this often leads to errors in judgment - like how the Oakton station is ridiculously overpriced. The only precedents that contractors have to go off of for that bid are previous station construction jobs for the CTA, most of which involved urban lines with little to no on-site storage and frequent trains. Oakton, on the other hand, has plenty of breathing room, since plans include demolition for an adjacent bus turnaround and kiss/ride that will, before paving, offer plenty of on-site storage. If the station comes in under budget, it may go towards gold-plated fixtures or towards padding the contractors' salaries.

Fortunately, the small-ball renovations that this $10m will fund are easy things that can probably be done in one weekend by any joe-schmoe contractor, if the station is closed temporarily. Replacing light fixtures and installing windbreaks? C'mon, I could do that in a weekend. Too bad I'm 900 miles away and not a union member. Most of the cost here is going to materials and not labor - CTA has to install fixtures that withstand weather and vandalism. The only marginally complex bit are escalators, but I'm assuming that refers to replacements at Loyola, Granville, and Bryn Mawr, not new escalators in stations that don't currently have them.

[VivaLFuego]

More than likely, for $10 million spread across several stations, the work will be done in-house by CTA facilities maintenance, and their labor hours would get charged to the capital grant rather than the CTA operating budget.

[emathias]

One random note on an upcoming CTA project that has received little publicity: renovation of Cermak-Chinatown on the Red Line. The primary purpose of the project is a reconstruction of the Cermak stationhouse to repair damage from the truck crash a couple years ago and add an elevator to make the station ADA compliant. However, an added bonus is that in order to aid in construction phasing, CTA will construct an auxiliary entrance on the north side of the station at Archer, which will make the station more attractive to: (a) some South Loopers (b) shoppers heading to and from the China Place/Chinatown Square mall, (c) riders transferring from the #62.

Project is mostly funded with Stimulus/ARRA money.

Since no one replied to my timing question about this, I emailed the CTA to see if they would tell me. Here's their response:

Thank you for your inquiry.

We are currently in the process of getting our building permits and expect to start construction by the end of the year.

We hope this information is helpful.

[Chicago Shawn]

Connecting Midway to Ford City

The Orange Line Extension Project would extend the transit line from the Midway Station at the Midway International Airport to approximately 76th Street near Ford City. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared to evaluate environmental, social, and economic impacts of the construction and operation of the proposed project.

Public and agency input is important. This site will keep you informed about the proposed project, the planning process, and opportunities for public input and participation.
What's New

Scoping Meeting (What's this?)

6 to 8 p.m.
Monday, September 21, 2009

Hancock College Preparatory High School
4034 W. 56th St.
Chicago, IL 60629

----------------------

I don't recall if this has been posted. I will not be able to go tonight, perhaps someone who is free can attend.

[VivaLFuego]

Now that the "Alternatives Analysis" is complete, which resulted in a "Locally Preferred Alternative," the "Scoping" stage is the first round of public outreach for the "Environmental Impact Study."

After the multi-phase EIS comes 100% design & engineering (I think EIS includes preliminary/10% D/E so that more concrete cost/timeline estimates are done before bidding out the full design and construction work).

[the urban politician]

^ So how much longer do these meetings, studies, and more meetings drag on before shovels hit the dirt?

[ardecila]

The meetings now are dealing with specifics; station design elements, noise mitigation, the precise track alignments down to the inch, etc.

The earlier meetings were to identify which plan would best serve the need - although it seems to be merely a formality, since the LPA is always obvious from the beginning of the Alternatives Analysis.

To answer your question, I believe construction on all 3 projects will begin in about 2-3 years, assuming funding comes through in the next transportation bill, and assuming we win the Olympics (CTA's completion date for all 3 lines is 2016, which reeks of Olympic optimism to me...)

[emathias]

The meetings now are dealing with specifics; station design elements, noise mitigation, the precise track alignments down to the inch, etc.

The earlier meetings were to identify which plan would best serve the need - although it seems to be merely a formality, since the LPA is always obvious from the beginning of the Alternatives Analysis.

To answer your question, I believe construction on all 3 projects will begin in about 2-3 years, assuming funding comes through in the next transportation bill, and assuming we win the Olympics (CTA's completion date for all 3 lines is 2016, which reeks of Olympic optimism to me...)

Except that none of the proposals are anywhere near any of the Olympic venues. I really don't understand the CTA's love of building rail lines in lower-density areas that will likely never significantly increase in density, instead of adding support for already-dense and getting denser areas closer to the core. Making better use of Metra capabilities is a much better regional strategy for outlying neighborhoods than extending lines that are already relatively underused. Reinforcing the central area with additional lines will lead to better overall usability and usage more than extending existing lines farther and farther out will.

[sammyg]

^ This is some exciting stuff.

Of course, I'm not sure who would use this "transfer" at Kenosha to Metra.

Anybody from SE Wisconsin headed to Chicago would almost certainly use Amtrak's Hiawatha train

If it connects to 2 different systems, I'm sure Amtrak would consider placing a stop on the Hiawatha to allow commuters from both KRM and Metra to transfer over, much like they do in New Jersey and Connecticut.

[Steely Dan]

If it connects to 2 different systems, I'm sure Amtrak would consider placing a stop on the Hiawatha to allow commuters from both KRM and Metra to transfer over, much like they do in New Jersey and Connecticut.
in theory that sounds all well and good, but the ROW that amtrak's hiawatha runs on is about 4 miles west of the ROW that metra's UP north line (and maybe the KRM someday) runs on, ie. they don't meet up at any easy and convenient transfer point, they'd first have to create a new kenosha station on the hiawathe ROW and then they'd have to run some kind of shuttle bus service between the two stations to allow someone to transfer between amtrak and metra/KRM. i would hazard a guess that the demand for such transfers might be too small to support a shuttle bus service.

[VivaLFuego]

I really don't understand the CTA's love of building rail lines in lower-density areas that will likely never significantly increase in density, instead of adding support for already-dense and getting denser areas closer to the core.

I have some semantical nitpicks. In terms of new trackage and operating ROW that CTA built as a result of CTA initiative (i.e. not federal earmarks), recent projects have included:

1) restoring the Paulina Connector
2) Block 37
3) the Dan Ryan connector subway

...all focused on the Central Area, no? And the only New Start that was arguably advanced solely due to CTA pressure (rather than outside political will) is the Circle Line.

Stuff like the Orange line and the expressway median lines were built by the city then turned over to the CTA for operations. Red Extension is Jesse Jr's pet, and Orange Extension is Lipinski's, and Yellow is the one considered most "iffy" because it doesn't have a powerful enough champion to quash any opposition or ignore any cost effectiveness measures.

In fact, CTA owning and advancing major system expansions is a very recent development historically, occurring only in the Kruesi years when his knowledge of and contacts in the Washington transportation bureaucracy meant CTA was the best equipped local agency to own such projects. It may seem minor, but I think differentiating amongst bureaucracies (and how each of those separate bureaucracies are funded and staffed) is important in understanding why things are the way they are.

[emathias]

...
1) restoring the Paulina Connector
2) Block 37
3) the Dan Ryan connector subway
...

I accept your point about different agencies, although it sort of goes to a larger issue of a lack of coordinated long-term planning. To your other points:

1) While this is a Good Thing as it's a portion of the Circle Line, it didn't really add any new service for downtown, did it? It did increase frequency of service on the Douglas Branch, as well as for the Ashland and Clinton stops on Lake, but it did so at the expense of rush hour capacity in the Loop and I think overall it hasn't really enhanced mobility downtown significantly, if at all. If it ends up being a precursor to the Circle Line, or even just a station at Madison, great, but in and of itself it's not so exciting.

2) This isn't even completed, and there are no plans for it to be completed, and even if it was completed, it wouldn't add much new service. Although, I would LOVE to see the CTA create the Lake Street portal and route Green Line trains through the subway instead of over the Loop, which would free up capacity on the Loop during rush hour. I would think with the new signals and switches, that would be doable without causing too much chaos in the Red and Blue Line schedules. I actually think a West Loop express to the airports would make more sense, and that building a double-cross between the Blue and Red under Block 37 would have been a lot more valuable in the long term, and opened up some interesting Red/Blue routings.

3) You're citing a 20-year-old project that created no new service and allowed the CTA to better match ridership between branches to save costs as evidence of downtown investment? This is another one of those "could be helpful" things that, at present, isn't really adding much benefit for the central area per se.

For the cost of the Orange, Yellow and Red Line extensions, you could make a lot of progress on the the Clinton Street Subway and West Loop Transportation Center, both of which benefit downtown and outer neighborhoods. Or even revive the much-needed West Loop/Streeterville/McCormick Place portion of the 1968 Central Area Transit Plan. Either of those would not only benefit the Central Area, but would create potential for tie-ins for expanded rail service in a number of neighborhoods. If the Central Area Transit Plan portions I mentioned had been built in the 1970s, we'd now be talking about expanding the McCormick branch to Hyde Park, and maybe punching the Streeterville Branch north to Fullerton. But those aren't even options now, because of the lack of vision when it was first (and second and third) considered.

Most of the outlying neighborhoods in Chicago are built to a density that works very well with buses. It just amazes me that we're spending billions of dollars to enhance rail service in areas where existing bus service is either adequate or capable of being made adequate with far less expensive projects. I don't have a problem with the projects, per se - I am always glad to see more rail routes - and if the region had figured out how to do those AND build new routes in the central area, I'd have zero complaints. But if we can only invest in one or the other I think it's just plain mismanagement to invest in rail solutions in relatively low-density areas while doing nothing beyond generating constantly-changing plans for the densest, most economically critical portion of the city.

[ardecila]

Well, it's not like the projects don't have a decent rationale. The 95th Terminal station is indeed overcrowded, and heavy pedestrian and vehicular traffic there slows down operations. Roseland, Auburn-Gresham, and West Pullman (and Altgeld Gardens) are all areas of transit dependence with a convenient ROW linking them all.

Bus congestion is also an issue with the Orange Line's Midway terminal, which was supposed to go to Ford City from the start, but got cut back (the destination signs on Orange Line trains have had a Ford City label for years).

Of course, full-blown line extensions are far more expensive than rebuilding the terminals to better manage large numbers of pedestrians and buses.

[VivaLFuego]

^emathias, I don't disagree with your reasoning, but remember, WLTC and the ever-changing downtown circulator are and always have been City of Chicago projects, not CTA projects :)

[ardecila]

Isn't that the whole gist of his post? If CTA was really interested in improving service downtown through capital spending, then they would have jumped on board with these projects.

The fact that city government is pushing these projects with little to no reciprocation by CTA is evidence of how at-odds their respective goals are.

[VivaLFuego]

Isn't that the whole gist of his post? If CTA was really interested in improving service downtown through capital spending, then they would have jumped on board with these projects.

The fact that city government is pushing these projects with little to no reciprocation by CTA is evidence of how at-odds their respective goals are.

No - my point is that's simply not how it works. Of course CTA staffers attend meetings at the City about CDOT projects, and city staffers attend meetings at CTA HQ about CTA projects. It's not like there isn't constant exchange of information, updates, input, insight, and so forth for any of these initiatives. I'm not sure what you mean by "jumping on board" or "reciprocation" - it has much more to do with City Hall wanting to own any and every capital improvement downtown, with the exception of when CTA's ownership allows it to tap different funding sources (i.e. CTA paying for the subway track renewal projects via bonding and stimulus funds vs. CDOT taking decades to rebuild downtown subway stations with formula-based CMAQ grants from the Feds).

If anything, I think the entire weird arrangement is just an argument in favor of *gasp* regional-level planning. But the one thing everyone agrees on is that RTA isn't equipped to spearhead these projects (and besides, RTA power is now skewed heavily towards the suburbs, the city would lose out in such an arrangement). Meanwhile CMAP (formerly NIPC and CATS) still struggles immensely to be taken seriously and listened to because of its relatively low visibility and general lack of binding decision-making power, though CMAP would be the best agency to handle conducting and prioritizing the planning studies for large capital projects before handing off design/construction to the actual operating agency e.g. CTA, IDOT, and so on.

[OhioGuy]

Residents protest Yellow Line extension (http://www.pioneerlocal.com/skokie/news/1788891,skokie-yellow-line-hearing-092409-s1.article)

September 24, 2009
By MIKE ISAACS misaacs@pioneerlocal.com

Skokie Mayor George Van Dusen urged the CTA to drop its plans to build a train station in the Niles North High School parking lot as the terminus of an expanded Yellow Line.

Van Dusen still maintains that some kind of public transit expansion in Skokie is needed to address future roadway congestion, but he now agrees that the CTA should abandon the Niles North plan, which the CTA has labeled the locally preferred alternative.

The mayor made his statement at Wednesday's CTA town hall meeting at Oakton Community Center after hours of heated testimony from a room of 300 interested persons. More than 50 of those citizens spoke, most of whom lambasted the plan and expressed incredulity that the CTA and the mayor even entertained the idea in the first place.

The concerns identified Wednesday night by residents included security, student safety, the likelihood of drawing more people from outside the high school to the campus, additional noise and the possibility of more criminals taking the train to appear at the nearby courthouse. And a smattering of the “not in my backyard” objections.

High school parents Wednesday said that the Niles North principal delivered an automated phone call message to all school parents urging them to come to the meeting and express their concerns.

By the time many finished impassioned pleas to scrap the plan, the mayor went on record for the first time to support them.

“I think we've all heard the sentiment of the residents, and I would urge the CTA to reconsider the Niles North alternative,” Van Dusen said to thunderous applause. “The residents I think have articulated reasons why they are so concerned. I can't express it any better than they have.”

While Van Dusen said that the Niles North plan should be scrapped, he said it's imperative that the village and the CTA prepare for expanded transportation to the Old Orchard area.

The CTA Board voted in August to support extending the Yellow Line tracks 1.6 miles north with elevated train tracks that would end in the Niles North parking lot with a bus terminal.

Under the plan, which has been estimated to cost as much as $270 million, the tracks would head northbound along abandoned railroad tracks from Dempster to Golf Road. At Golf, the alignment would curve east and parallel the east side of the Edens Expressway. The CTA, as part of its plan, also wants to build a parking garage that would be shared by high school and public transit drivers. The extension would open in 2016.

The Dempster Street station would be completely rebuilt to accommodate greater activity. Van Dusen would like the CTA to consider two other finalists for CTA recommendation. One would extend the Yellow Line but end the tracks west of the Edens, a plan many residents booed at Wednesday, while the other was a rapid bus transit system.

Projections show that roadway traffic in the future will increase 25 percent, the mayor said. “That will be strangulation. It will deter economic development.”

Van Dusen said that ridership on the Swift is 18 percent higher than the Brown Line. And developers interested in coming to Skokie often ask whether the Swift will be extended, he said. “We've got to find a way to extend it. There is an appetite if rapid transit is convenient and affordable to use.”

The mayor had pushed for an expansion of the Yellow Line, commonly called the Skokie Swift, from Dempster Street to downtown Skokie and to the Old Orchard area for years. While an Oakton Street downtown Skokie station is being built, expanding the line north — to Westfield Old Orchard, National-Louis University, the Skokie courthouse, the Illinois Holocaust Museum and Education Center and Skokie Hospital has always been more controversial.

But the CTA's official support for the Niles North plan this summer ramped up the controversy.

“I don't think that if I had a child going into Niles North in six years, that I'd be very happy to know that they'd be willing to put a parking lot in my child's school let alone a major CTA line with drop-off,” said high school parent Gabriela Tidhar. “I don't think there's any school in the state or the North Shore that has a parking garage probably due to safety and security reasons.”

Despite repeated requests from CTA officials to hold the applause, citizens throughout the night gave loud support to speaker after speaker who challenged the Niles North plan. CTA officials did not respond to the speakers, but a spokesman before the hearing said that the plan is not set in stone.

Although the CTA held two public hearings prior to the CTA Board vote to support the plan, residents had to deliver questions by writing them on cards.

At the first hearing in 2008, before the plan for a Niles North station was developed, a CTA spokesman said most people who submitted cards supported expanding the Yellow Line to the Old Orchard area. But no more than two or three people voiced support for the plan at Wednesday's meeting.

Skokie Village Trustee Randy Roberts kicked off public comments by embracing an expansion of the Yellow Line.

“I'm here tonight to speak in favor of the expansion of the Skokie Swift,” Roberts said, “although I want to say from the beginning that I'm not wedded or committed to this specific alternative that the CTA has chosen. I think this is the biggest public works project in the history of the village. The economic development to our village, the lessening of traffic congestion and the reduction of environmental pollution would make us a first-class village.”

He was followed by parent Debra Yampol who also supported an expansion.

“We don't drive and we're not in a position to be buying a car,” Yampol said. “To have a way where (students) can get to school and sleep a little bit longer, get home a lot faster, have a much more direct route to me is a really positive thing.”

But these first two speakers proved to be the exception. Even if the CTA abandons the Niles North plan, many residents still oppose a Yellow Line expansion along the same route because they say trains would travel too close to many homes in five different neighborhoods.

“The concerns of the Yellow Line extension that we heard here tonight are so many and they're so obvious that we should also be addressing another concern,” said Marda Dunsky, who has helped organize and mobilize opponents of the plan.

“How did we get here? How did this happen? How has this gotten this far with so few residents knowing the details of the proposed expansion and with the CTA Board having already approved it?”

Parent Lisa Lipin called the plan “a dangerous and unwise proposition for our community.” Lipin said the combination of student and public transit parking poses safety and legal questions since part of the plan is to run a bus from school grounds to the courthouse.

“The Illinois criminal code prohibits registered sex offenders from coming 500 feet of a school as well as a park,” she said.

Opponents of the plan have also been urging Niles Township High School District 219 to take a strong position against it.

Superintendent Nanciann Gatta Wednesday said the locally preferred alternative is not District 219's preferred alternative.

“We have extremely limited space on the Niles North campus,” which is attended by 2,200 students, she said. “The site is landlocked and we're already challenged by inadequate parking for staff and students and a very confined area to accommodate school buses and other vehicle access.”

Parent Irma Katz asserted there are other spaces in the Old Orchard area that would be more appropriate for a train station than on Niles North property.

The CTA recorded all comments Wednesday night and will accept written comment through much of October before releasing a report either in late 2009 or early 2010. Whether the CTA will abandon the proposal for a Niles North High School station was left unclear by the end of the spirited meeting.

I personally support the extension of the yellow line to Old Orchard...

[ardecila]

I do too, but CTA needs to build the station closer to the mall, for cripes' sake. Extend the line 2 blocks further east from the current (planned) terminal, to place the station on Old Orchard property. I know the mall management doesn't want it on their property, but it makes the most sense there, and there's always eminent domain.

[VivaLFuego]

Based on that meeting, my ideal outcome at this point would be to eminent domain the school parking lot, bulldoze it, then just pull the plug on the entire project and sell the land for redevelopment specifying that the only allowable uses as part of a responsive bid to buy the land include an adult book superstore / strip club megaplex, halfway house, methadone clinic, or some combination thereof.

Or just kill the project now and stop wasting anybody's time and money. Either way.

[the urban politician]

^ Yeah, I mean if they don't want mass transit then to hell with it.

As they say, be careful what you wish for...

Will they regret this decision in 20-30 years? I know some people in Georgetown, Washington DC regret blocking a station in the DC Metro when it was being built in the 60's/70's.

Anyhow, this means one less competitor for other projects such as the Orange/Red Line extensions, Carrol Ave subway, Monroe Transitway, Airport Express, etc etc (projects that I'm more interested in seeing get done anyhow).

[Chicago Shawn]

Yeah, to hell with it. Any other alternative will cost more, or will be just a waste of money. Screw it, they deserve their plight when traffic grid-locks their community in the future. Plenty of other uses for that money.

I am actually considering a personal boycott of all Skokie businesses. If they don't want "dirty and dangerous" public transit riders arriving in their community, then I guess they don't want the additional sales tax revenue from them.

[VivaLFuego]

I am actually considering a personal boycott of all Skokie businesses. If they don't want "dirty and dangerous" public transit riders arriving in their community, then I guess they don't want the additional sales tax revenue from them.

:tup:

Wait, you mean people other than registered sex offenders on their way to court use public transit?

What haven't you told us, Shawn??!!

[Nowhereman1280]

Wow, I never realized that Skokie is straight up racist and classist, not even trying to veil their discriminatory opinions. They are basically saying "I don't want the yellow line because 'inner city' (aka black) people might get a job here and commute out. Everyone knows that means that they will rob our children." Thanks for being completely ignorant Skokie.

[LaSalle.St.Station]

Shouldn't the cta's first priority be to expand to non service areas of Chicago first ? and then expand into the burbs?

[Mr Downtown]

^CTA is not a city agency. It's an independent municipal corporation whose service area includes about three dozen Cook County suburbs. The constant funding problems and friction between city and suburbs about "our transit system" and "their transit system" has prompted CTA in recent years to see the inner suburbs as a particularly important constituency.

[the urban politician]

^CTA is not a city agency. It's an independent municipal corporation whose service area includes about three dozen Cook County suburbs. The constant funding problems and friction between city and suburbs about "our transit system" and "their transit system" has prompted CTA in recent years to see the inner suburbs as a particularly important constituency.

^ All the more reason why Chicagoland badly needs a unified mass transit agency, on the order of NYC's Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

CTA/Metra/Pace all wrapped in one.

[bnk]

:previous:

Thought that was the goal of the RTA

http://www.rtachicago.com/images/welcometorta.gif
http://www.rtachicago.com/CMS400Min/uploadedImages/CTA-sm-logo(2).gifhttp://www.rtachicago.com/CMS400Min/uploadedImages/Metra-sm-blue(2).gifhttp://www.rtachicago.com/CMS400Min/uploadedImages/Pace-sm-logo(2).gif

http://www.rtachicago.com/

[the urban politician]

^ Seems like RTA has failed.

The State needs to want to do this. So far all we've seen is mere piddling, piffling, and misdirection--a theme that defines how Illinois & Chicago leaders and their citizens have generally tended to address their mass transit problems.

[Busy Bee]

Maybe SNCF can come in and run it. :)

[Mr Downtown]

You think all is sweetness and light between the MTA and NYCTA?

It's the eternal battle between basing service levels on who's paying for it and basing service on who's using it. It's a constant battle, worldwide, and in each city the pendulum first swings one way, toward having a big unified agency, and then swings the other way, toward breaking it up into smaller operating agencies. Thirty years later, it swings back the other way.

[Via Chicago]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/autocorner/chi-getting-around_28sep28,0,2989765.column
Eisenhower Expressway expansion project is the next big thing

About seven miles could get wider from Mannheim Road to Cicero Avenue

After promises for years that studies were in the works, preliminary engineering is finally under way for the Eisenhower Expressway expansion project, the next huge highway reconstruction planned for the Chicago area.

Several years of intensive planning, and more than $1 billion in cold cash, will get the job done.

If this still entails demolishing entire city blocks in Forest Park, Oak Park, Chicago, etc...Im truly dead set against this.

[Busy Bee]

Meanwhile, until the widening of the Eisenhower moves forward, IDOT has budgeted $45.1 million to resurface it in 2010 from the Reagan to the Kennedy Expressway ( Interstate Highway 90/94).

I'm no transportation planner or a financial wunderkind, but does this sound like an efficient use of money if a billion dollar overhaul is just a few years down the road?

[ardecila]

About the interim resurfacing - I'm not sure whether it's good or bad. $45.1 million is about the same as the recent Edens resurfacing, both in total cost and in cost per mile. Fixing potholes is nice, but the cost to society in terms of additional congestion might vastly exceed the benefits of the project, especially if it is followed by a more total rebuild soon after. Then again, it seems that the more costly rebuild project will only start west of Central, whereas the cheaper resurfacing will cover the entire highway, including the parts within city limits... so the two projects would be complementary, not redundant.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/autocorner/chi-getting-around_28sep28,0,2989765.column


If this still entails demolishing entire city blocks in Forest Park, Oak Park, Chicago, etc...Im truly dead set against this.

I doubt it. From Mannheim to 1st Ave, there's already enough room to add lanes between the two frontage streets (Harrison and Bataan) but the grassy slopes would be turned into retaining walls. The only demolitions would be around exit ramps, where additional space would be needed. My guess is that some exits would be removed permanently and the remaining ones would be rebuilt with a higher capacity, possibly as SPUI (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-point_urban_interchange)s.

Through Forest Park and Oak Park, I'm assuming IDOT plans to take over some railroad land, either from CTA or CSX. CTA reserved space for express tracks back in the 50s, but has never used it. CSX owns the freight tracks (known as the Altenheim Subdivision) but virtually nobody uses them now that Canadian National has shifted their trains to the EJ&E in the outer suburbs.

Without too much costly construction, the freight line could be turned into a set of express and possibly HOT lanes between Central and Des Plaines. Really, all you'd have to do is rip up the rails and ties, level the gravel, and pour concrete over the top, as well as installing ramps at both ends.

I guarantee you that any demolition that takes place will be a few isolated parcels, and on the small scale that's being discussed, any historic structures can be re-located. The apartment blocks in Oak Park (which I assume are what you have in mind) are in no danger.

[jpIllInoIs]

I think your are on the money ardecila. The CSX rail is suddenly in play now that CN is moving their freight to the EJE. In fact the CREATE planners have cancelled all of the improvements scheduled for this track length section under the original CREATE plan. HOV lanes would be perfecvt for that stretch of road.

[VivaLFuego]

In the past, Chicago successfully fought off the feds trying to ram HOV lanes down our collective throats (particularly for the Kennedy reconstruction and a lesser extent the Stevenson reconstruction, but I assume the question came up for every other highway project as well), with the argument that it doesn't make sense to subsidize the cannibalization parallel rail transit service.

That said, I'd be fine if the added lanes are HOT lanes so they generate some revenue.

[Via Chicago]

I guarantee you that any demolition that takes place will be a few isolated parcels, and on the small scale that's being discussed, any historic structures can be re-located. The apartment blocks in Oak Park (which I assume are what you have in mind) are in no danger.

Yea, thats the general area Im thinking of. How do you see them adding another lane without taking that land, though? A lot of OP business located along the expressway were feeling pressure the last time this was brought up several years ago, some to the extent that they relocated. I dont see how anything has changed.

[Haworthia]

I guarantee you that any demolition that takes place will be a few isolated parcels, and on the small scale that's being discussed, any historic structures can be re-located. The apartment blocks in Oak Park (which I assume are what you have in mind) are in no danger.

I hope you are right. The Oak Park Conservatory is one of my favorite parts of Oak Park and I've heard it mentioned that this would have to be demolished if the expressway is widened.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3109/2779339210_6a1fb6c429.jpg
From "Men In Black" on flickr.

I know the expansion needs to be done; Austin to Manheim is such a bottle neck, but places like this are simply irreplaceable.

[VivaLFuego]

It generally seems doable without wanton acquisition assuming all parties (IDOT, USDOT, etc.) agree to exceptions to design standards through Oak Park. The one area of concern that I have trouble envisioning is right at Oak Park Avenue, where it's tricky to visualize how two lanes could be added without property acquisition on at least one side of the ROW, unless, again, the design standards are relaxed such that the expressway has no shoulders for a short stretch. Even with such design exceptions to save buildings, I'm not sure of the impact on ramp geometry for the interchange at Harlem 1/2 mile to the west - I assume the project would also seek to do anything possible to eliminate the left side ramps.

I'm no transportation planner or a financial wunderkind, but does this sound like an efficient use of money if a billion dollar overhaul is just a few years down the road?

Since the project is still in preliminary engineering, it's unlikely major construction could start within the next 4 years anyway, and as others have pointed out, resurfacing from Austin to the Circle is warranted regardless and not part of the widening/reconstruction in the western portion. The flipside as ardec shrewdly notes is the cost imposed by any construction in terms of congestion and lost travel time - such impact will really depend on how they phase the construction. The pavement west of Harlem is in pretty rough shape and probably couldn't make it more than a few years anyway. Besides, using vaguely-planned-but-indefinite-and-unfunded-future-reconstruction as an excuse to defer maintenance usually results in negative outcomes, viz. many CTA stations (remember when Wilson was going to be rebuilt in the early 1990s, when Howard was going to be rebuilt in the mid-1980s, when Randolph/Wabash and State/Lake were going to be rebuilt any number of times over the past 25 years, etc.).

Anyone else notice how multiple agencies are conducting multiple planning studies in the same corridor? Whose project "wins" when it comes time for funding?

[Chicago Shawn]

Eisenhower Expressway expansion project is the next big thing

About seven miles could get wider from Mannheim Road to Cicero Avenue

After promises for years that studies were in the works, preliminary engineering is finally under way for the Eisenhower Expressway expansion project, the next huge highway reconstruction planned for the Chicago area.

Several years of intensive planning, and more than $1 billion in cold cash, will get the job done.

Ridiculous. For that same $1+ Billion we could have the Blue Line extended way west of the current terminus. This widening will not do a damn thing to solve the congestion issue, it will only move a higher traffic volume further east where it will slam into circle interchange and cause even larger delays than what already occurs. Of course then come the cries to reconfigure Circle and spend another near $1 billion. Circle cannot occupy any larger of a footprint than it all ready has and any reconfigurations will require very costly relocation of bridges and construction of expensive flyover ramps.

I really hope demolitions in Oak Park can be kept to a minimum. I don't want to see one more inch of that community raped further by that open scar known as the Ike. I am not warm to the idea of possibility using the CSX right of way either, as this will shrink or eliminate a option for moving trains through our region, and freight traffic is still expected to grow significantly. We might really need those tracks in the future.

[emathias]

Ridiculous. For that same $1+ Billion we could have the Blue Line extended way west of the current terminus. This widening will not do a damn thing to solve the congestion issue, it will only move a higher traffic volume further east where it will slam into circle interchange and cause even larger delays than what already occurs. Of course then come the cries to reconfigure Circle and spend another near $1 billion. Circle cannot occupy any larger of a footprint than it all ready has and any reconfigurations will require very costly relocation of bridges and construction of expensive flyover ramps.
...

Actually, I think that once this is completed any cry for re-engineering of the Circle interchange could be deflected into a serious conversation about the Crosstown Expressway and/or transit line.

[Attrill]

Someone posting on Chicagobus.org (http://forum.chicagobus.org/topic/1796-5000s-arrive/) has seen the new 5000 cars being delivered at the Skokie shops - hopefully we'll see them being tested soon!


Dreyday -
Good eye. The first two prototype cars of the new 5000s were indeed delivered today. They will be tested extensively at Skokie, but probably won't go out onto the actual system until after the next pair arrives and is tested, and they can be sent out as a four-car consist.

[ardecila]

Yea, thats the general area Im thinking of. How do you see them adding another lane without taking that land, though? A lot of OP business located along the expressway were feeling pressure the last time this was brought up several years ago, some to the extent that they relocated. I dont see how anything has changed.

The rail line is now in play. That's what has changed. Land acquisition from residents and small businesses is a very tricky game in today's courts, and it could lead to years of delay and millions in legal fees.

A major corporation like CSX, on the other hand, owns and must maintain a rail line that they don't use, and now nobody else will pay them to use it, either - CN was the only significant user of the line. It's a far better deal for CSX to just sell the line for cash - I would expect a major corporation to make rational decisions like this, unlike homeowners and small businesses who have emotional connections to their property. It's great in the long run - IDOT doesn't have to pay to reconstruct the complex rail bridge over the expressway just east of Des Plaines, and the rail line north of the Ike can be turned into a great trail linking Franklin Park and Oak Park/Forest Park.

Trust me, if there is an avenue by which IDOT can gain additional land without taking homes and businesses, they will make that choice.

[ardecila]

Someone posting on Chicagobus.org (http://forum.chicagobus.org/topic/1796-5000s-arrive/) has seen the new 5000 cars being delivered at the Skokie shops - hopefully we'll see them being tested soon!

Someone on that page mentioned that all the bells and whistles have been cut - these will basically just be 3200s with longitudinal seating. However, some other dude posted some grainy videos that show an incredibly smooth and quiet accel/deceleration - it reminded me of the DC Metro or Boston or something. I hope they perform that well on our crappy tracks. I also hope they go for a different paint scheme - or at least, some KIND of paint scheme. The stainless steel is about as timeless as it gets, but even it is beginning to get old. I'm actually happy when I see an ad-wrapped railcar, since it's so much more exciting and joyous than a standard one.

[left of center]

Of course then come the cries to reconfigure Circle and spend another near $1 billion. Circle cannot occupy any larger of a footprint than it all ready has and any reconfigurations will require very costly relocation of bridges and construction of expensive flyover ramps.


the Circle is in serious need of repair, though. After the I-35W collapse in Minneapolis, Popular Mechanics ran an article listing the ten most dilapidated pieces of infrastructure in the US, and the Circle not only made the list, but headlined it.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/transportation/4257814.html

[Mr Downtown]

A picture of the 5000s posted by sprout78 at Chicagobus.org:

http://i36.tinypic.com/15x95dd.jpg

[Chicago Shawn]

the Circle is in serious need of repair, though. After the I-35W collapse in Minneapolis, Popular Mechanics ran an article listing the ten most dilapidated pieces of infrastructure in the US, and the Circle not only made the list, but headlined it.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/transportation/4257814.html

It certainly is, and its already handling traffic amounts exceeding the design capacity. Any more traffic volume heading to it will require a complete re-engineering of it during a rebuild, and with the land constraints that will probably mean a very expensive stack interchange with high flyover ramps. I"m sure it would look cool if something like that was built, but it will be very pricey.




Reminder....

Circle Line Alternatives Analysis Study - Screen 2 Analysis


Screen 3 Open House Presentations

The Chicago Transit Authority invites the public to open houses on preliminary Screen 3 findings and recommendation of a locally preferred alternative, which will conclude the Alternatives Analysis study for the Circle Line. Previously in Screen 1 and Screen 2 of the Alternatives Analysis study, CTA presented an assessment of transit improvement options which included a selection of transit vehicle types and potential corridors for a Circle Line.

The Screen 3 public open houses are scheduled as follows:

UIC Molecular Biology Research Building
900 S. Ashland Avenue
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.

Bucktown/Wicker Park Public Library
1701 N. Milwaukee Avenue
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.

Benito Juarez Community Academy
2150 S. Laflin Street
Thursday, October 1, 2009
6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.

Presentation will begin at 6:15pm. All venues are accessible to people with disabilities.
-------------------------------



I will be going to the meeting tonight and will report back the additional info.

[VivaLFuego]

Display boards for "Screen 3" of the Circle Line "Alternatives Analysis" are posted, with a "Locally Preferred Alternative":

http://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/planning/CTA_Circle_Line_-_Screen_3_Display_Boards.pdf

[Mr Downtown]

^Hmmm. The Circle Line becomes the U Line.

http://i36.tinypic.com/2u5al41.png

[schwerve]

that's going to be phase 2.

http://www.chicago-l.org/plans/images/CircleLine/PhasingPlan.jpg

no direct linking, copy and paste.

[arenn]

Based on that meeting, my ideal outcome at this point would be to eminent domain the school parking lot, bulldoze it, then just pull the plug on the entire project and sell the land for redevelopment specifying that the only allowable uses as part of a responsive bid to buy the land include an adult book superstore / strip club megaplex, halfway house, methadone clinic, or some combination thereof.

I realize you jest on this point, but if I'm not mistaken, they can't use federal funds to adversely affect school property, much less use eminent domain. It's a protected use.

Clearly, Old Orchard Mall is a more logical terminus than Niles North. It might not seems like a big deal, but that extra walk in not very pedestrian friendly conditions isn't good.

[arenn]

You think all is sweetness and light between the MTA and NYCTA?

It's the eternal battle between basing service levels on who's paying for it and basing service on who's using it. It's a constant battle, worldwide, and in each city the pendulum first swings one way, toward having a big unified agency, and then swings the other way, toward breaking it up into smaller operating agencies. Thirty years later, it swings back the other way.

One particular city I'm aware of that is studying a major transit expansion is evaluating an interesting notion I like a lot, if it is politically doable. Funding would be based on percentage of projected benefits regardless of where the transit service actually was. Turns out econometric analysis shows much of the benefit of transit actually accrues in places where there isn't much direct service.

[ardecila]

Not sure what to say about this Circle Line LPA... I guess it squares with that "phasing plan" that CTA made under Frank Kruesi, but it doesn't feel significant enough, and it will just ADD congestion to the North Main Line. Is it supposed to run north to Howard? If so, then maybe it should just become a full-time extension of the Purple Line. Calling it "Circle Line" isn't even correct, anymore, since it won't make a circle.

And honestly? Who is going to make a big U? North Side riders could easily transfer from Brown or Red to Pink in the Loop and get to the IMD faster than with this half-assed alternative. This probably won't save any time for South Siders, either, and they already must make one transfer to get to the IMD. It really only benefits people coming up the Orange Line and heading to the West Side - not a huge percentage of riders, I guarantee.

I guess my last point is that we can't count on the FTA's continued largesse. If Obama were to be replaced by a Republican, the likelihood of later phases of the Circle Line drops considerably. Then again, at the glacial pace that CTA moves on these expansion projects, we might not even get the benefit of Obama on this half-assed line.

[VivaLFuego]

One particular city I'm aware of that is studying a major transit expansion is evaluating an interesting notion I like a lot, if it is politically doable. Funding would be based on percentage of projected benefits regardless of where the transit service actually was. Turns out econometric analysis shows much of the benefit of transit actually accrues in places where there isn't much direct service.

Conceptually interesting but seems politically impossible given the number of model assumptions required to estimate user benefits. Heck, even with structured funding, service boards here aren't politically able to continuously scale service levels according to available funding, which was part of the original intention of tying structured funding to a revenue source that is a proxy for economic activity and thus transit demand (sales tax). I simply can't fathom a political situation, in back-patting horse-trading Chicago of all places, that would allow an agency to establish service levels based on the outputs of nebulous economic models, considering agencies can't even allocate service or set service levels by any technical means at the systemwide scale to begin with. Policy decisions in our political context are made by somehow compromising the many irrationally-derived gut feelings of many stakeholders, rather than based on considered expert analysis of real-world data - so creating an even more technical framework for funding and service allocation feels like a non-starter in my opinion.

Clearly, Old Orchard Mall is a more logical terminus than Niles North. It might not seems like a big deal, but that extra walk in not very pedestrian friendly conditions isn't good.
I imagine a big part of the thinking was cost, both in terms of land acquisition (under the mistaken hope that Skokie would happily cooperate with the project, considering Westfield is not cooperating and such acquisition would probably mean initiating eminent domain or massively overpaying) and simply minimizing route length at any opportunity to meet cost-effectiveness guidelines, as I'm pretty sure this is already a marginal extension based on demand modeling to begin with (single-track, etc.). Again, at this point I hope the project just dies, since Skokie has demonstrated it's clearly not ready to be serious about this. They can feel free to try again in 10-15 years when they're ready to do some legwork in enabling an option they'd want, rather than just complain.

[left of center]

whatever they do with the Circle Line, they definitely need a stop for Madison/united Center.

That being said, i hope they eventually choose the Ashland alignment, funneling the circle line into the State Street subway. Makes much more sense in my book. Another track split off the main line would cause more backups, ala the Brown Line split, and that section of the L is overcongested as it is.

[ardecila]

^^ You bring up a HUGE point that I missed - there ABSOLUTELY needs to be a United Center station. There's really no excuse for its absence - I plan to write an angry comment card to that effect. If they want any riders at all on this half-assed thing, build a place for Bulls and Hawks fans to get off for the game.

CTA should also build a full junction near Ashland/Archer, so inbound Orange Line trains can go from Midway to the Dearborn Street Subway or the Lake Street Line - this would come in handy during track closures and such.

[emathias]

I'm glad I didn't go to the Circle Line meeting (I was planning to go, but then decided to go have some delicious pupusas at the El Salvador restaurant on Archer with a friend of mine). I don't know if I could have held in my intial reaction when I saw these online, which was to boo and hiss.

Seven years of "planning" and their only official proposal is to build a little chunk of elevated track and further postpone the largest part of what would actually make this a "Circle" Line? If they could make decisions, they could take advantage of the slack real estate market and buy some land, or preserve corridors.

I also thought it was just plain weird to expand the boundaries, regardless of feedback. It was interesting to see an actual map from the CTA with a Kimball-Jefferson Park proposal, though.

This whole thing has just turned into nonsense. I'm really disheartened.

[VivaLFuego]

^^ You bring up a HUGE point that I missed - there ABSOLUTELY needs to be a United Center station. There's really no excuse for its absence -

Between a United Center stop versus a Blue Line transfer station at Van Buren, I would guess offhand that the latter provides much more bang-for-the-buck in terms of annual user benefits and improved regional accessibility. I suppose in theory one could build both, but it seems like overkill considering how sparsely built the area is at the moment. As someone who goes to a lot of Blackhawks games, I don't feel like United Center is particularly poorly served by public transit - it's not as great as Wrigley or the Cell obviously, but the #19 and #20 are fine for trips from downtown, and the Green and Blue lines aren't exactly the longest walk - or at least not long enough to warrant dropping ~$30+ million on a new station at Madison.

Now, if Wirtz and Reinsdorf announced plans to redevelop their fields of parking into a mixed-use neighborhood in conjunction with a new L stop, that would change things, but since they have zero intention of doing so...

Seven years of "planning" and their only official proposal is to build a little chunk of elevated track and further postpone the largest part of what would actually make this a "Circle" Line? If they could make decisions, they could take advantage of the slack real estate market and buy some land, or preserve corridors.

I also thought it was just plain weird to expand the boundaries, regardless of feedback. It was interesting to see an actual map from the CTA with a Kimball-Jefferson Park proposal, though.

"Environmental Review" (which, for intents and purposes, means "neighborhood veto power") tends to doom new elevated lines, while cost dooms new subway lines. In the current environment, an outcome like this was probably inevitable - there's simply no way to build the northwestern portion of the "Circle" unless an elected official rams through an elevated line (to meet cost effectiveness) or spends political capital with a massive earmark for a subway. Remember, even the 2nd Ave Subway was so expensive as to be of marginal 'cost-effectiveness', and the WMATA extension to Dulles would have died until enough politicians got involved to clarify that the rules in place wouldn't be strictly adhered to and the line would be built regardless. Considering that all of the CTA New Starts are more heavily dependent upon federal funds and less dependent on local funds than most other major transit construction projects nationwide (such as LA, Denver, Houston, NYC) since there is no local funding source in place for expansion let alone enough for maintenance, the sad truth is that the projects are thus even more at the mercy of federal cost-effectiveness requirements.

[Via Chicago]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/chi-morgan-street-el-city-zone-3sep30,0,3277050.story

CTA: New stop expected to open in 2011 in West Loop

Green, Pink lines getting another Chicago Transit Authority station

By Emma Graves Fitzsimmons Special to the Tribune
September 30, 2009

Residents, commuters and businesses in the West Loop, which has undergone a transformation from primarily a manufacturing district 15 years ago to a vibrant neighborhood with condos, town homes, arty shops and hip bars, are looking forward to a new elevated train station. Allyson Holleb, owner of a handbag shop near the proposed Chicago Transit Authority station at Lake and Morgan Streets, hopes it will bring even more people to the neighborhood. Construction could be a nightmare, she said, but it would be worth it to get a station.

"It should bring more business," she said on a recent evening as she sat behind the counter at the Bess & Loie store. "People are coming to know the neighborhood more, and this can only help."

The new stop will be on the Green and Pink lines between the Clinton and Ashland stations, which are more than a mile apart. City officials expect construction to begin later this year or early next year, and they hope the station will open in 2011. The city opened bids for the project last week. The project's cost is projected between $35 million and $40 million, officials said. The city has secured $8 million in federal funds through the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program, and the rest will come from tax increment financing...

[k1052]

I'm glad I didn't go to the Circle Line meeting (I was planning to go, but then decided to go have some delicious pupusas at the El Salvador restaurant on Archer with a friend of mine). I don't know if I could have held in my intial reaction when I saw these online, which was to boo and hiss.

Seven years of "planning" and their only official proposal is to build a little chunk of elevated track and further postpone the largest part of what would actually make this a "Circle" Line? If they could make decisions, they could take advantage of the slack real estate market and buy some land, or preserve corridors.

I also thought it was just plain weird to expand the boundaries, regardless of feedback. It was interesting to see an actual map from the CTA with a Kimball-Jefferson Park proposal, though.

This whole thing has just turned into nonsense. I'm really disheartened.

It's Phase 2 and the next easiest/expensive after restoring the Paulina Connector.

Phase 3 is going to take a MASSIVE wad of cash since it has to be subway, involves totally reworking North/Clybourn into a major transfer station, and rerouting the Northside Main through it. It's going to need a patron saint (or two) to secure funding.

[nomarandlee]

I also thought it was just plain weird to expand the boundaries, regardless of feedback. It was interesting to see an actual map from the CTA with a Kimball-Jefferson Park proposal, though.

This whole thing has just turned into nonsense. I'm really disheartened.

Back up, where did you see that? Direct me to this map please. :)

[ardecila]

Yea, the Alternatives Analysis recommends putting a Kimball-Jefferson Park Corridor into long-term plans for the CTA, as well as a few BRT corridors and a "Pink Line-Midway Connection".

Viva - I don't dispute that the Pink/Blue transfer station would be a better use of money, but I'd rather see CTA cut Roosevelt than Madison. The UC is a hefty walk from the Medical Center station or Ashland/Lake - putting a closer station would make transit much more convenient and possibly decrease the profitability of those parking lots.

Roosevelt, on the other hand, would be adjacent to one of the largest empty tracts in the city, with no hope of redevelopment due to the IMD's shitty planning - and it's only 2 blocks from Polk. The only advantage is the transfer to the #12, but that's not a reason to build a station when one already exists 2 blocks away.

[the urban politician]

This new Circle Line proposal looks like crap. Forget the whole thing.

It's a worthless line, as is the Yellow Line extension.

Why are we building train lines in parts of town that have no chance whatsoever of becoming denser? What do you think, that those Alderman way out on the west and southwest sides will let a damn thing get built if it's not 50% affordable with a ground level institute for the poor and blind included? That, of course, without mentioning that developers don't want to go out there anyhow because of the scary "black and mexican gangsters" who will certainly terrorize their new neighborhoods.

Shoot, they're building strip malls next to some stops.

Why don't we focus on building transit where people actually will appreciate its existence. You know, like that subway under Carrol Ave which gives city residents equal convenient access to west loop jobs that suburbanites currently enjoy. That sounds like a good idea. That busway taking people to Streeterville/Navy Pier--another good idea.

The more I think about it, the more I realize that Chicago doesn't need to expand its rail system radially any further, nor will this Circle Line in its current configuration accomplish much other than be a prime example of worthless investment for generations to come.

[OhioGuy]

Extend the brown line from Kimball to Jefferson Park and build the Clinton Street subway... I'd be quite happy for those two projects to happen. Extensions of the red, orange, and yellow, while I certainly support, take a back seat in particular to my interest in seeing the brown line extended to connect with the blue line (and maybe actually run brown line trains to O'Hare). It seems to me the only option for the 2 mile extension would be tunneling to Jefferson Park. The neighborhood is too tightly formed to make room for either an at-grade or elevated westward extension of the line. Stations at Pulaski and Elston would make sense between Kimball and Jefferson Park.

[the urban politician]

^ Oops, I meant "Clinton Ave" subway, not Carroll Ave

[nomarandlee]

Why don't we focus on building transit where people actually will appreciate its existence. You know, like that subway under Carrol Ave which gives city residents equal convenient access to west loop jobs that suburbanites currently enjoy. That sounds like a good idea. That busway taking people to Streeterville/Navy Pier--another good idea.

The more I think about it, the more I realize that Chicago doesn't need to expand its rail system radially any further, nor will this Circle Line in its current configuration accomplish much other than be a prime example of worthless investment for generations to come.

I agree. When I first came to this site I was pretty enthusiastic about every major project and I basically have only become so about a few now. Namely the Clinton Ave. subway and CREATE, and to a lesser extent some form of WLTC (or Union reconfiguration) and Carroll Ave transit. All the others are a bonus or even potential boondoggles.

[emathias]

Back up, where did you see that? Direct me to this map please. :)

Page 8 of this (http://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/planning/CTA_Circle_Line_-_Screen_3_Display_Boards.pdf).

Or page 16 of this (http://www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/planning/Circle_Line_-_Screen_3_Presentation_9-29-09.pdf).

[whyhuhwhy]

Ridiculous. For that same $1+ Billion we could have the Blue Line extended way west of the current terminus. This widening will not do a damn thing to solve the congestion issue, it will only move a higher traffic volume further east where it will slam into circle interchange and cause even larger delays than what already occurs. Of course then come the cries to reconfigure Circle and spend another near $1 billion. Circle cannot occupy any larger of a footprint than it all ready has and any reconfigurations will require very costly relocation of bridges and construction of expensive flyover ramps.

I really hope demolitions in Oak Park can be kept to a minimum. I don't want to see one more inch of that community raped further by that open scar known as the Ike. I am not warm to the idea of possibility using the CSX right of way either, as this will shrink or eliminate a option for moving trains through our region, and freight traffic is still expected to grow significantly. We might really need those tracks in the future.

The Circle interchange is going to have to be reconstructed soon regardless. Have you driven on it lately? It is literally falling apart.

As for the Eisenhower, this is a project that needs to be done. There should not be true bottlenecks of any kind on either highways or trains in a region that is a primary transportation hub like Chicago. You should be for fixing all bottlenecks, including CREATE. As it stands right now people just guzzle fuel sitting in line waiting on either side of that 4 to 3 to 4 lane ridiculous bottleneck that is the Eisenhower. There is a ton of unused rail tracks around that area too as other people have mentioned.

[whyhuhwhy]

Very dissapointing map of the "Circle" line. No one is going to use that thing if it is just a U. They need to do it and do it right which means going all out. Hey at least they are talking about it. Now let's get the Olympics and start getting some funding for Transit. BTW the post earlier about connecting the Brown to the Blue through Jefferson Park sound like a fantastic idea.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Check out this website (http://www.themobilegarden.org/) detailing "Mobile Garden," a project spearheaded by Joseph Baldwin that seeks to add "a garden on a flatcar that is attached to and travels with the regular transit service."

http://www.themobilegarden.org/content/webtrain.jpg

Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=37178751892&ref=ts)

[Tom In Chicago]

^OK. . . without having the time to read through the - what I can only assume is ridiculous - material. . . this seems to be the dumbest thing I've ever seen. . . on par with those nano-tube nutcases who want to build a space elevator. . .

. . .

[trvlr70]

Check out this website (http://www.themobilegarden.org/) detailing "Mobile Garden," a project spearheaded by Joseph Baldwin that seeks to add "a garden on a flatcar that is attached to and travels with the regular transit service."

http://www.themobilegarden.org/content/webtrain.jpg

Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=37178751892&ref=ts)

Retarded. It will end up one big ashtray.