[Mr Downtown]

I'm understand that CTA looked at QR and a couple of similar codes, but the targets would not fit in the available space on the sign blades, and it's not yet clear which particular flavor of them will become a widespread standard.

[Nouvellecosse]

Union Station Intermodal Center

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/1844/unionintermodal.jpg

This could turn out right, or it could turn out wrong. I'd love it if they built something like Kennedy Plaza in Providence... they do a great job of blending in historic architecture, and reconciling the opposing natures of a public plaza and a bus terminal.Why are there red Toronto streetcars?

[ardecila]

Because the designers wanted to suggest the possibility of light-rail platforms in the future, and Google's 3D Warehouse happens to offer a free model of the Toronto streetcars.

Chicago doesn't have any streetcars or trams currently, so it's not like there's a more accurate model they could use.

I do agree that the positioning of the streetcars in the image is a bit odd, but as I said - it doesn't represent an actual design, just a future concept.

[Nouvellecosse]

Interesting. At first I wondered if Chicago was planning to buy the old units when Toronto's new ones arrive lol!

I've never heard of the 3D warehouse before; I'll have to check it out.

[the urban politician]

Would it be a boondiggle?

Please refer to my angry rant (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=64082729#post64082729) at SSC in response to a suburban style development, including a gas station, proposed adjacent to the Garfield stop on the Green Line.

Considering this, as well as that worthless 'Metropolis' development near another L stop on the South Side, on top of the already suburban shopping development that has pervaded the south side near the Red line (87th St, I believe), in addition to the obvious failure in getting any sort of dense, mixed-use projects to come to fruition (47th St projects which are basically hanging onto life), let me ask this question:

Why are these areas served by heavy rail? If you're seriously going to acquiesce while some developer puts a gas station and a ocean of parking near a heavy rail stop, then why are you trying to extend that heavy rail into a part of town that clearly will not support dense development?

The Orange Line is yet another example of what I'm talking about. Especially closer to Midway, it has had the marvelous effect of supporting strip center after strip center development, with perhaps a few decent projects popping up as one gets closer to downtown.

I leave this as an open ended question to anyone out there: why extend the Red Line, given all of this?

[ardecila]

It all depends on your view of transit. The stations on the Dan Ryan Red Line and the Orange Line don't anchor New Urbanist transit villages, but they DO have substantial ridership. The South Side is full of transit-dependent, low-income people who do, in fact, ride buses to the train. The 87th Street bus is the busiest line in the city, and many of those riders are transferring to the Red Line.

The Dan Ryan Red Line has an average ridership of 5,118 boardings per station per day. The Brown Line has an average of 2,346 boardings per station per day. Which one serves the denser, more urban part of the city?



Granted, the South Main Line (Green Line) has an average of 1052 boardings per station per day, and is arguably a huge waste of resources. But even this bolsters my point about the counter-intuitiveness of transit service - two lines serve the same corridor, and the one in the expressway median has higher ridership.

Among transit-dependent populations like the one on the South Side, it doesn't matter whether there's a dense, walkable environment surrounding transit stops. In fact, creating a dense walkable environment is probably not possible without gentrification. The rents charged on the South Side aren't able to justify the cost of new construction without significant subsidy - and I doubt you want your stations surrounded by dense buildings full of Section 8 tenants.

I see where you're coming from, but I just don't think it's possible to generate the kinds of development you're looking for around transit stops on the South Side, given the economic conditions down there. Even those retail developments are often quite challenging to pull together, since the developer not only has to convince the banks to lend in an impoverished area, but he also has to convince the retailers to serve that area.

I'm all for putting in transit-oriented zoning restrictions in areas closer to downtown or the lakefront that are likely to gentrify - areas where significant new residential construction is likely in the next 15-20 years. But further south is just too much. If anything, these areas should have as many restrictions removed as possible, to try and generate some spontaneous economic activity that might be stifled otherwise.

[the urban politician]

It all depends on your view of transit. The stations on the Dan Ryan Red Line and the Orange Line don't anchor New Urbanist transit villages, but they DO have substantial ridership. The South Side is full of transit-dependent, low-income people who do, in fact, ride buses to the train. The 87th Street bus is the busiest line in the city, and many of those riders are transferring to the Red Line.

The Dan Ryan Red Line has an average ridership of 5,118 boardings per station per day. The Brown Line has an average of 2,346 boardings per station per day. Which one serves the denser, more urban part of the city?

Granted, the South Main Line (Green Line) has an average of 1052 boardings per station per day, and is arguably a huge waste of resources. But even this bolsters my point about the counter-intuitiveness of transit service - two lines serve the same corridor, and the one in the expressway median has higher ridership.

^ While true, there is more to seeing the value in heavy rail than just transit ridership.

When I look at the return on this investment, I think about "what will this expensive infrastructure generate in the form of real estate development for this part of town?" I would argue that you can get developers to build that kind of crap (gas stations, strip centers, etc etc) even without the transit investment. So why make the heavy rail investment at all?

For example: if Developer A is going to build a strip center at the intersection of x and y that is designed to be automobile-friendly and pedestrian hostile, and you can get it without the infrastructure investment, then why spend hundreds of millions of dollars extending a heavy rail line to that intersection if that very same developer would end up building that exact same project anyway?

And that ties to my analogy of extending the Red Line. Generating a few extra thousand rides cannot possibly be the only incentive to extending that line, considering the cost. If there is no real estate investment of the type that CANNOT happen without that line extension, then what's the point?

[ardecila]

That kind of logic doesn't work politically. The mission of the CTA is not to generate land development, it is to provide affordable transportation to the residents of the city. CTA has a market on the Far South Side that is currently underserved by transit in proportion to its population and its level of transit dependence.

I don't like certain aspects of the plan - UP's insistence that the line be built outside of their ROW is complete bullshit, and CTA should fight them in the courts and in the press. Why should hundreds of Chicagoans have to lose their homes for a new transit line when a corridor already exists, and it has open land? Such a move might also lower the land acquisition costs of the line substantially, thereby increasing its cost-effectiveness and likelihood of Federal funding.

One big reason why the strip center is being built at Garfield is because of its easy access from the Dan Ryan, and because there's so much open land. Ditto for Metropolis up at 40th. The Red Line extension won't be running through urban prairies, or along an expressway. Of the station sites chosen, only one has major open land available for redevelopment (Michigan/115th). CTA has already noted that site's possibility for TOD, and has initiated a planning process. IIRC, they mentioned a grocery store, which would be a welcome addition to the neighborhood. But, since the project is being publicly planned, you have every right to attend the meetings and to voice your disapproval.

[k1052]

Railing from riders has Metra rethinking UP North schedule
Evanston customers complain about fewer trains, overcrowding

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-metra-changes-mind-0923-20100922,0,1485363.story



What a bunch of whiny people. Ever heard of the Purple Line?

[emathias]

What a bunch of whiny people. Ever heard of the Purple Line?

I would guess that UP-N and the Purple Line largely serve different central area markets. People for whom the Purple Line is faster probably already take it. And for those for who it isn't (primarily people in the West Loop), the time difference can be nearly 50%.

A big part of UP-N selling point is that they provide better service than the CTA Purple Line does. So of course people are going to complain when that higher level of service is reduced. Plus, probably very few UP-N riders are truly transit-dependent, so it's in Metra's best interest to keep people from defecting to cars, even moreso than it is for the CTA.

[k1052]

I would guess that UP-N and the Purple Line largely serve different central area markets. People for whom the Purple Line is faster probably already take it. And for those for who it isn't (primarily people in the West Loop), the time difference can be nearly 50%.

A big part of UP-N selling point is that they provide better service than the CTA Purple Line does. So of course people are going to complain when that higher level of service is reduced. Plus, probably very few UP-N riders are truly transit-dependent, so it's in Metra's best interest to keep people from defecting to cars, even moreso than it is for the CTA.

I have little sympathy for an affluent suburb with redundant rail links to downtown being temporarily inconvenienced for a major infrastructure project that will only ensure that continued level of access for decades to come.

Certainly taking the Purple Line isn't optimal for some of those riders but it would still faster than making the drive (as threatened in the article) at rush times.

[ardecila]

Can somebody make these North Shore people aware that $80 million is all it will take to maintain uninterrupted service during construction AND give Metra a third track to allow for future expansion?

I'm sure the $80 million would magically materialize from somewhere, with all the influential people who ride that train.

[denizen467]

I have little sympathy for an affluent suburb with redundant rail links to downtown being temporarily inconvenienced

9 years is "temporary" ?

[k1052]

9 years is "temporary" ?

Yes, unless they want to have the line shut down for a couple years to complete the work faster or go with ardecila's suggestion for another 80M.

You can't do this kind of work on an active rail line without compromising schedules. Maybe CTA will revise the routing of the Purple Line to speed operations and pick up some of these customers.

[Baronvonellis]

I don't understand why it takes so long to rebuild a rail bridge. IDOT rebuilds road bridges all the time with traffic going over them. They are currently rebuilding the Lawrence ave bridge over I-90 and it only takes a year with all the traffic going over it. They completely rebuilt miles of expressway recently in only a couple years with cars going over it every second. This rail bridge is only 100 ft long too. It should only take a weekend to replace. Take out the old bridge and pop in a new one.

[VivaLFuego]

nevermind.

[Mr Downtown]

^What do you mean by "this rail bridge?" Metra is replacing 22 bridges on the UP-North line in the city. At the same time, they're elevating the track grade to increase clearance, and spreading the track centers at UP's insistence.

http://i55.tinypic.com/2yuhe21.png

On the Bi-Level

[denizen467]

^ Buttload of work. I think Metra has failed, though, in its PR mission with the public: Why don't they just say they are rebuilding X thousand feet, or X miles, of track? All newspaper articles refer only to the number of bridges, and don't mention improvements in vertical clearances or horizontal clearances. People would appreciate the scale of the project a little more rather than just envisioning magical "pop-the-bridge-out" teams swooping around the northside.

Some sexy renders wouldn't hurt either, of what people can expect to replace all the ancient viaducts / vehicle underpasses. Complete with happy families with strollers out for an evening walk along Ravenswood, etc.

[Baronvonellis]

Oh I see now. Every article I've read about it just says they are replacing the bridges and nothing else. It didn't say anything about redoing and realigning all the miles of tracks along that length too. Metra should of said all that they are going to do. I don't have the inside info like you guys seems to do.

Are they rebuilding or changing all the viaducts as well?

Why do they have to spread the track centers?

Metra hasn't been very clear about this to the public.

[Busy Bee]

^Wishful thinking, but maybe they're making room in between the tracks for future catenary;)?

[Mr Downtown]

Are they rebuilding or changing all the viaducts as well?

I'm not sure what you mean by "viaducts." Every place where the railroad crosses above a street is getting a new through-girder bridge to span the street.

I'm unclear on the rationale for the wider track centers, but I suspect it's a UP systemwide standard. So they're insisting on it here even though there are no curves where freight trains might meet and tilt due to speed, and even though it's unlikely they'll ever carry enormous windmills or pressure vessels through here on flatcars.

[denizen467]

^Wishful thinking, but maybe they're making room in between the tracks for future catenary;)?
Does catenary require more spacing?

Mr Downtown, as far as carrying wide-load cargo, presumably they could just do it at nighttime and have all the clearance they want without worrying about passing trains?

The $64k question here is, spreading the tracks is largely meaningless unless ... they're going to do it all the way to Zion or Kenosha or wherever. So, are there plans, beyond the theoretical, to rebuild further dozens of miles?

[Mr Downtown]

Catenary would only require more spacing if you put the line poles between the tracks.

Day or night, it's absurd to ever again expect any freight operations along the Shore Line, at least south of Highland Park. The line into Ogilvie is a cul-de-sac. Any freight to or from Proviso moves via the New Line. That's what makes me think the UP is just saying "oh, there's no reason for it; it's just our rule." Same as they're doing with the C&EI down in Roseland.

[Baronvonellis]

"Viaducts" I mean the elevated hilly embankment that the tracks sit on. I don't know what that's called. Are they changing that part or just the tracks? I still don't quite understand why they are doing this for an 8 year inconvenience. It's hardly a temporary thing. I think they should wait for more money if they can't do it quicker with the resources they have. At that rate it would take 100 years for them to redo all the track to Milwaukee. I kind of like the old bridges. They look really cool with the old rivets, just need a paint job or something.

Are the bridges really in that bad a shape? What's really going on with this project? There's thousands of these bridges all over Chicago that look the same. If so why aren't they replacing more of them if it's a safety hazard. I still don't get it.

[VivaLFuego]

Of course there are capacity constraints elsewhere as well, but it's a shame the new viaducts aren't being built to allow for future (re-)installation of a third track.

[ardecila]

"Viaducts" I mean the elevated hilly embankment that the tracks sit on. I don't know what that's called. Are they changing that part or just the tracks? I still don't quite understand why they are doing this for an 8 year inconvenience. It's hardly a temporary thing. I think they should wait for more money if they can't do it quicker with the resources they have. At that rate it would take 100 years for them to redo all the track to Milwaukee. I kind of like the old bridges. They look really cool with the old rivets, just need a paint job or something.

Are the bridges really in that bad a shape? What's really going on with this project? There's thousands of these bridges all over Chicago that look the same. If so why aren't they replacing more of them if it's a safety hazard. I still don't get it.

The embankments are just fine. They're not retained like the Red/Purple Line is, and the weeds and trees prevent most erosion. They really don't need a whole lot of maintenance, and they're good pretty much forever, unless they begin to subside.

It's the bridges that need replacement, because they're decaying and because replacing the bridges en masse is the easiest way to add clearance to the roadways below.

Since Metra is switching to a through-deck girder design, the plate girder between the two tracks will stick up 5-6 feet, and it will be fairly wide. This may require an increase in the track spacing to make sure the girder doesn't intrude on the train's clearance envelope.

[denizen467]

^ I think I understand what you mean though I'm not sure what a "plate" girder is. But more relevantly, is the upshot that they will build no viaducts having supporting columns between roadway lanes or between roadway and sidewalk?

Also, how do you know all this stuff ?

[Mr Downtown]

^I don't think there are currently any viaducts on this line with center columns (except the special situation at Lincoln/Addison). Can you think of one? As far as I can tell, the current bridges all are through-deck girders, so the track centers wouldn't need to change on that account. I would imagine that the new bridges will have slightly deeper girders on the sides and will span from abutment to abutment without the piers next to the sidewalk as you currently have at Leland.

[OhioGuy]

Would love to see them do something to the Addison/Lincoln bridge to make it less overbearing. It's a hulking unattractive behemoth.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3403/3495083685_cd0a186d85_o.jpg

[Busy Bee]

Paint would be a start, but that must be WAY tooo hard and expensive.http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/images/smilies/koko.gif

[Baronvonellis]

It looks like the bridges south of Montose already have girders that stick up higher and don't have column supports on the side walk. Perhaps, they are newer.

Irving Park and Clybourn have column supports in the middle of the street.

[denizen467]

Paint would be a start, but that must be WAY tooo hard and expensive.http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/images/smilies/koko.gif
There is an interesting solution to this situation in Evanston at the 5-way intersection of Ridge, Green Bay, and Emerson: After trouble with graffiti, the sides of the giant viaduct were covered with fabric. Presumably it's a quasi-temporary solution, but it really was carried out rather well.

[the urban politician]

CTA Red Line sets sights on South Side extension (http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/traffic/ct-met-getting-around-0927-20100926,0,5288541.column)

Some excerpts:

Mixed-use retail and affordable-housing complexes, grocery stores and pharmacies, banks, bookstores, ice cream shops, parks, local activity centers and many other ideas were offered during a "visioning session" for the Red Line extension held this month at St. John Missionary Baptist Church, which is several blocks from the proposed 116th Street station. During the meeting, participants worked with architects and other experts.

"The community is looking for a good store, a bakery, a shoe shop, a place to buy fruits and vegetables and a neighborhood bank — all things that people in other parts of the city take for granted," said Phyllis E. Palmer, who lives near 130th Street and attended the session at St. John.

../..

The CTA has moved up the proposed Red Line extension to 130th Street to its No. 1 priority among major capital improvement projects.

../..

The Red Line extension represents precisely the kind of project Congress prefers to fund. It fits the bill as a true "new start" project, not simply a rebuilding of an existing line. It provides much-needed transportation options to low-income, minority communities that historically have been bypassed when it comes to investment in infrastructure.

Plus, the economic possibilities of transit-oriented development offer the chance to turn around blighted neighborhoods, while attracting middle-income workers from the suburbs to spend money at businesses likely to sprout up near planned park-and-ride facilities along the extended Red Line, officials said.

The project is considered a strong contender for major funding in the next multiyear federal transportation spending bill that Congress will begin working on after the November elections.

Visit link for full article

^ Good news here. However, after seeing what is planned near the 55th street stop (Food4Less, gas station) I am becoming less and less hopeful of any "transit oriented development" despite what these architectural planners are presenting at these "visioning sessions", as described in the article.

[migueltorres]

Would love to see them do something to the Addison/Lincoln bridge to make it less overbearing. It's a hulking unattractive behemoth.


I would love something like this in Chicago

http://home.rebstech.com/wp-content/uploads/home-design-1-the-high-line-park-by-diller-scofido--renfro.jpg

[bnk]

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2010/09/daley-hopes-asian-investors-will-bet-on-high-speed-rail-to-downtown.html

September 27, 2010

Daley hopes Asian investors will bet on high-speed rail to downtown

Share | Posted by Hal Dardick at 12:11 p.m.

Mayor Richard Daley returned from his trip to Asia convinced foreign investors might put up the money to pay for fast, high-end rail service from O’Hare International Airport to downtown.

“I think they are very interested — China, Korea, Japan, the Middle East — yes,” Daley said today when asked if business people he met in China and South Korea might fund the effort. “There are many, many interests. You have to have a high-speed train from the international airport downtown. What that would do is that would rebuild our commercial market and our hospitality industry.”

Before leaving on the trip, Daley said looking for rail financing for the effort was one reason he was headed overseas

....

Daley repeatedly noted that it took him seven minutes to get from the airport to near downtown in Shanghai. “Just think, it’s seven minutes, they can get almost to downtown,” he said. “Seven minutes. That is unbelievable.”

...




http://www.suntimes.com/news/cityhall/2749698,daley-high-speed-rail-092710.article

Daley: Chicago needs high-speed train from downtown to O'Hare


September 27, 2010

BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter

Mayor Daley is back from his week-long trade mission to China and Korea more convinced than ever that Chicago needs a high-speed train from downtown to O’Hare Airport and that there’s enough interest from foreign investors to make it happen.

“They’re all interested. … Everybody’s interested. ... They want to design it. They want to build it, operate and maintain it … with people working here,” Daley said Monday ...


...

In 2008, the CTA mothballed plans for express trains to O’Hare and Midway amid more than $100 million in cost overruns on the super-station that was supposed to be built downtown beneath Block 37.

At the time, Daley said he would search for a private partner to complete the station.

His latest plan — announced just weeks before he chose political retirement over the quest for a seventh term — is far more ambitious.

It calls for private investors to complete the station, lay the separate track down the Kennedy Expy. needed to make the trains express and to run the system in exchange for premium fares.

On Monday, Daley noted that his entourage hopped on a high-speed train at the Shanghai airport and arrived at a stop just outside downtown seven minutes later.

“You have to have a high-speed train from your international airport to downtown. ... That will rebuild our commercial market and our hospitality industry,” he said.

“Great cities have [a] high-speed train from the airport downtown. ... Once you make that contact from the airport downtown, it keeps building your downtown businesses, jobs and taxes, and that’s what you have to have.”

[Busy Bee]

And how is NY's High Line like the active commuter railroad bridge at Addison & Lincoln?

[Busy Bee]

Sounds like Daley has seen the light and will realize there is no way you can accomplish rapid high speed operations by a ridiculous passing system on the Blue Line. The airport train requires non-CTA ROW and Stansted Express style operations.

[the urban politician]

Daley repeatedly noted that it took him seven minutes to get from the airport to near downtown in Shanghai. “Just think, it’s seven minutes, they can get almost to downtown,” he said. “Seven minutes. That is unbelievable.”


^ :multibow :thrasher:

That would be so incredible if Chicago were to achieve anything close to this

[Marcu]

Paint would be a start, but that must be WAY tooo hard and expensive.http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/images/smilies/koko.gif

I believe that this bridge is slated to be replaced in the next 5 years. It's part of the ongoing UP-N bridge replacement project being discussed. In other words you won't see any paint.

[Marcu]

^ Good news here. However, after seeing what is planned near the 55th street stop (Food4Less, gas station) I am becoming less and less hopeful of any "transit oriented development" despite what these architectural planners are presenting at these "visioning sessions", as described in the article.

The best we can hope for is proper zoning so that eventually something transit oriented can be built. At this point, there is not enough spending power in those communities to be able to dictate any kind of building form or land use standards.

[bnk]

Probably old news....

http://www.japantoday.com/category/business/view/nippon-sharyo-receives-us-order-for-160-rail-cars

Nippon Sharyo receives U.S. order for 160 rail cars

Sunday 26th September, 04:42 AM JST

TOKYO —
Nippon Sharyo Ltd has jointly received an order with Sumitomo Corp for 160 rail cars from a U.S. train operator worth around 48 billion yen, the major rail car maker’s largest ever export order. The two companies will deliver the rail cars to Chicago-based Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corp from 2012 through 2015.

They plan to conduct final assembly of the double-decker rail cars with around 140 seats in the United States, the manufacturer said, adding it will consider building a plant there to raise the ratio of local production.

[Busy Bee]

This is the railcar order that will kill off the rest of the StLC Highliners - unfortunately they will look just like the ones that were delivered a few years ago. The Highliners were much paraded for their modern design and were really great looking cars when they were new in the orange and dark brown/black ICRR livery. The new electric bi-levels as you know look just like a standard 40 year old Metra gallery car except equipped with pantographs on the roof. One giant step back IMO.

http://www.railroad.net/articles/railfanning/metra/media/metra_06.jpg
railroad.net (http://www.railroad.net/articles/railfanning/metra/media/metra_06.jpg)


We'll miss you Highliners:

http://www.davesrailpix.com/ic/jpg/ic087.jpg
daverailpix.com (http://www.davesrailpix.com/ic/jpg/ic087.jpg)

[VivaLFuego]

The existing zoning code is plenty "transit friendly" around just about every transit station, particularly along the south branch of the Green Line. Near the Green line, commercial streets are almost universally zoned for relatively dense (FAR 2.2+) mixed-use, and nearby residential streets are zoned for multi-family (at generally 3-4 units per city lot, which adds up quick if it's fully built out as in the north side). The issue there is that in practice, the bulk of development just makes an end run around the zoning, either as a "Planned Development" or through a zoning change to the C2 auto-oriented commercial zoning to allow the gas stations, drive-thru fast food, and strip malls that constitute economic development in those neighborhoods.

That said, existing zoning in most of West Pullman and Roseland is decidedly less transit-oriented than that farther north in Grand Boulevard, Englewood, Woodlawn, etc., with most far south side residential zoning being for small-lot single family houses and commercial zoning generally only allowing ~2 story buildings.

[ardecila]

^ :multibow :thrasher:

That would be so incredible if Chicago were to achieve anything close to this

Shanghai has a maglev for an Airport Express. It cost the equivalent of $1.33 billion dollars - and that's with virtually no land acquisition costs and low, low Chinese labor prices.

Here, the same thing would easily cost upwards of $6 billion to find an ROW and build a guideway durable enough for a Chicago winter.

I'm just hoping we can get investors to fund $100-200 million for upgrades to the Metra NC-S to allow O'Hare express trains and an extension/redesign of the O'Hare People Mover.

[ardecila]

I am happy that CTA is putting the Red Line Extension at the top of the priority list... it has a compelling narrative behind it, unlike the somewhat ho-hum, value-engineered, watered-down one-station extensions to the Orange and Yellow Lines.

It provides transit service to poor areas that are fairly dense, so ridership should be respectable. It has the potential for a big park-and-ride off the Bishop Ford at 130th.

The line's design also seems to be in line with its projected ridership - it's not like the Circle Line, where the massive cost of a subway is balanced against only moderate ridership gains.

If the line is successful, it can be used as a tool to pitch further rail expansion in the city. Since the Orange Line was successful, I fully expect this similar project to succeed as well.

[sammyg]

As great as extending the Red Line is, I'd rather see them restore the express buses that got cut last year, like the X9, X80 and X49.

Of course, that's not how funding works, but if there was a way to do it, it would be great.

[Nexis4Jersey]

How many Metra Expansions do they have planned? 4-8? Ikno here there restoring alot of lines , is it the same there?

[denizen467]

I believe that this bridge is slated to be replaced in the next 5 years. It's part of the ongoing UP-N bridge replacement project being discussed. In other words you won't see any paint.

No it is not part of that project. The Addison/Lincoln viaduct is very conspicuously omitted. The first phase is 11 bridges north of there and the second phase is 11 bridges south of there.

[VivaLFuego]

How many Metra Expansions do they have planned? 4-8? Ikno here there restoring alot of lines , is it the same there?

In terms of new routes, the only 2 on the drawing board are:
1) the SES (SouthEast Service) through Chicago Heights and Crete: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SouthEast_Service_%28Metra%29 This would be roughly a "restoration" albeit with different routing on the city/terminal end

2) the STAR Line: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburban_Transit_Access_Route_%28Metra%29 which suburban politicians seem to love and everyone else just scratches their head.

The other major expansions planned are on the UP-W and UP-NW lines, projects which are primarily capacity expansions via signalling, trackwork, and yard expansions to provide greater levels of express service and more frequent peak period service.

[the urban politician]

If a privately funded express train from O'Hare to downtown is ever built, I will eat my underwear.

Let that be known.

[denizen467]

^ Even if it's just 1 or 2 bypasses along the Kennedy? What if they do zero construction and just outfit the B37 terminal and run 45-minute-ride premium railcars? Please let it be known.

[LaSalle.St.Station]

Does anyone have a diagram of Metra Electric's existing operational right of way under Millenium Park and Illinois Center? Is it still feasible to run transit cars up to the river ?

[denizen467]

Not sure about what's at the bottom of 1IC and 2IC, but theoretically it could snake up the Beaubien alignment all the way to the river.

[Mr Downtown]

Don't forget that the existing Metra Electric tracks extend almost all the way to South Water.

In the early 70s, space was supposedly saved for a future subway station on the lower level of Illinois Center, though I've never checked exactly where. A similar easement was put in the Cityfront Center PD (because I remember Chicago Dock & Canal demanding a sunset date on that). These anticipated an alignment under Stetson, though, for the Monroe Distributor subway. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Central_Area_Transit_Plan#Distributor_Subway)

[Busy Bee]

Miesian architecture aside, Illinois Center is such a miserable failure when it comes to urban design. Horrible circulation, bad juxtaposition/interaction between buildings and drab and uninviting grounds. It was really a product of its era. I wish a more urban friendly [mega]development could occur that pulled people from the corner of Mich and Wacker (either side of 333Mich) instead of walled them out - and yes a rail station entrance at that corner would be fantastic.


PS - anyone have an image of that old rendering of the proposed Illinois Center back in the 20's before the crash killed it?

[bnk]

Can this be right...??? http://www.ceosforcities.org/pagefiles/DrivenApartXSFINAL.pdf

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-09-28/news/ct-met-chicago-traffic-congestion-20100928_1_compact-cities-congestion-urban-sprawl

Your commute could be worse

Chicagoans spend less time in rush-hour traffic than any other major city, report says


September 28, 2010|By Jon Hilkevitch, TRIBUNE REPORTER

Phil Velasquez, Chicago TribuneA new study has found that commuters travel shorter distances to work in the Chicago region on average compared with residents of other metropolitan areas in the U.S., resulting in less time wasted in morning and evening rush-hour traffic here than any other major city.

The report by the nonprofit group CEOs for Cities does not downplay the negative impact that traffic congestion causes to the economy and to the quality of life across northeastern Illinois.

But it points out that weak or nonexistent land-use policies in many other regions of the country, resulting in urban sprawl, carry a higher price, including longer commuting times between home and work.

The report's ranking of mobility in 51 cities found that Chicago-area residents spend the least time in rush-hour travel. In Chicago and some of the other best-performing cities — including New Orleans, New York, Portland, Ore., and Sacramento, Calif. — commuters typically spend 40 fewer hours a year in peak-hour travel than the average American, the report said.

In metro areas with the worst urban sprawl — including Nashville, Detroit, Indianapolis and Raleigh, N.C. — residents spend as much as 240 hours per year in rush-period travel on average because commuting distances are much longer, said the report, which was produced with the support of the Rockefeller Foundation.

...

[ardecila]

I don't think the results of that study are impossible. Although we have one of the smallest highway lane-miles per capita of any major city, we have a massive transit system, second only to New York in terms of daily ridership.

While the highway/arterial system is terrible at serving suburb-downtown commutes, it meets the needs of suburb-suburb commutes quite nicely. The major transit system meets the needs of the heavily concentrated traditional commute into the city.

More importantly, CEOs for Cities didn't start as part of the Texas Department of Transportation, so it doesn't produce studies that advocate more and more highways in response to increased population.

[ardecila]

Can somebody make these North Shore people aware that $80 million is all it will take to maintain uninterrupted service during construction AND give Metra a third track to allow for future expansion?

I'm sure the $80 million would magically materialize from somewhere, with all the influential people who ride that train.

Looks like I called it (sort of).

Metra press release from today:

UP North bridge project postponed, original schedule to be reinstated Oct. 3 (http://metrarail.com/metra/en/home/utility_landing/newsroom/newsroom/up_north_bridge_projectpostponedoriginalscheduletobereinstatedoc.html)

UP North bridge project postponed, original schedule to be reinstated Oct. 3

Feedback from riders and communities along the Union Pacific North line regarding recent schedule changes has prompted Metra to postpone the project to rebuild 22 bridges on the line until next spring and reinstate the line’s original schedule with a two-track operation starting Sunday, Oct. 3.

Metra’s new Union Pacific North schedule will begin Sunday, October 3. The new schedule can be viewed here (http://metrarail.com/metra/en/home/utility_landing/newsroom/newsroom/up_north_bridge_projectpostponedoriginalscheduletobereinstatedoc.html).

Metra changed the UP North schedule on August 22 in order to accommodate an unprecedented plan to use a single track for inbound and outbound trains in the construction zone. Metra would not normally have taken the drastic step of using a single track, but that approach is more economical than trying to maintain a two-track operation and we felt our limited resources required us to attempt to make it work.

But while we made a good-faith effort to use that approach, our riders made it clear that the new schedule was not meeting their needs. And while we tried to address that schedule’s deficiencies, it was not possible to fix the problems in one area without adversely affecting other areas.

We will now revert to the schedule that had been in use before August 22. And we are exploring engineering options that provide for maintaining a two-track operation when construction resumes in the spring.

I can only assume the postponement means an engineering change, which could mean a reinstatement of the third track. Metra quoted a cost difference ($80 million) to Aaron Renn of keeping the third track, so clearly they had already considered the possibility with some detail.

Of course, it's also possible that Metra will find another avenue to keep two tracks through the construction zone. Logistically, however, it will be much more complicated unless they reduce the track centers, which would allow for the possibility of a third track in the future.

[denizen467]

^ Nice call.

Presumably they can improve the schedule a lot by just shortening the length of the single-tracking. I think it was going to be single track from the construction zone all the way to Clybourn or Ogilvie or something, but if they allow for a switchover closer to the construction zone, they can bunch fewer trains.

[jpIllInoIs]

Looks like I called it (sort of).


I can only assume the postponement means an engineering change, which could mean a reinstatement of the third track. Metra quoted a cost difference ($80 million) to Aaron Renn of keeping the third track, so clearly they had already considered the possibility with some detail.

Of course, it's also possible that Metra will find another avenue to keep two tracks through the construction zone. Logistically, however, it will be much more complicated unless they reduce the track centers, which would allow for the possibility of a third track in the future.


If your right Ardecila then I take back all of the bad things that I have said about you.....;)

[M II A II R II K]

The Combined Cost of Housing & Transportation in the Chicago Metropolitan Region


Full PDF Report: http://www.cnt.org/repository/DAHB.pdf

Until recently, most discussion of housing affordability has focused exclusively on home prices, leaving out the second largest expense for most households: the cost of transportation. The resulting lack of clear information about the full costs associated with housing location has motivated inefficient development and spurred the “drive ’til you qualify” movement of households away from the city center in search of lower cost housing. In the last several years, the dramatic increase in foreclosure rates, often concentrated in remote exurbs, and the equally dramatic spike in gasoline prices around the country have revealed the vulnerability of households that choose locations based on an incomplete and often misleading understanding of the true costs.

- For nearly ten years, the Center for Neighborhood Technology has worked to bring transparency to the cost of location through an Affordability Index that
gives both housing and transportation costs at a neighborhood level. Thanks to support from the Searle Funds at The Chicago Community Trust, which
provided lead financial support for Driving: A Hard Bargain, CNT is able to offer a model for how H+T analysis can inform and guide regional planning. In
cooperation with the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), the Chicago region’s metropolitan planning organization, CNT has produced this
customized analysis incorporating detailed, local datasets provided by CMAP and recommendations for sustainable growth targeted to municipal, regional
and state entities.

- While the Chicago metropolitan area is known as a relatively affordable place to live, with a reasonably priced housing market and the second largest public transportation system in the U.S., the region has not been spared the recent turmoil in energy and real estate markets and has struggled to meet demand for affordable housing and transportation. Faced with rising gasoline prices, over 70,000 new foreclosures in 2009 and congestion costs estimated by the Metropolitan Planning Council of approximately $7.3 billion per year, Chicago must plan for a future in which needs for low- and moderate-income housing are met, and families have access both to varied transportation options and clear information about their costs. An expected 27% increase in the region’s population, from 8.6 to 10.9 million residents between 2010
and 2040, and the considerable and increasingly well-recognized cost of carbon pollution mean that the decisions made today about housing location and transportation development are all the more important.

- This analysis of Housing and Transportation (H+T) costs in the Chicago region represents a major step toward sustainable development by revealing the true costs of living in the region and providing a comprehensive tool for understanding how burdens placed on families, public agencies and the environment can be minimized. The analysis will directly impact Chicago’s future development as a decision-making tool employed by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) for its Go to 2040 plan and policies. The information presented in this report will also allow households to make more informed choices about where to locate and will enable communities to recognize development opportunities that provide truly affordable and sustainable housing and transportation options.

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/10/union-station-upgrade-air-conditioning-more-restrooms.html

Union Station upgrade: Air-conditioning, more restrooms
October 4, 2010 12:05 PM | No Comments

The elegant but often-sweaty Great Hall of Chicago Union Station will be air-conditioned by next summer,and other improvements including more restrooms at track level are being added as part of a $40 million rehabilitation project announced today.

The new passenger-friendly amenities are intended to update the 85-year-old historic station at a time that Amtrak ridership has grown more than 40 percent in the last 12 years, officials said.

"This project is going to be part of the revival of passenger rail," said Tom Carper, chairman of the Amtrak board. Seating in Amtrak's boarding lounges at Union Station will be expanded to 950 seats, which is almost double the existing capacity, officials said.

The work, scheduled for completion in late 2012, will be followed by redevelopment of Union Station's headhouse building to include retail businesses..........

-- Jon Hilkevitch

More in link

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/traffic/ct-met-getting-around-1004-20101003,0,1688636.column

Daley says Chicago is ready for a super-fast train

Jon Hilkevitch
11:28 p.m. CDT, October 3, 2010

........But Daley said investors in China, South Korea, Japan and the Middle East are interested in designing, building and operating such a bullet train for Chicago.

........But Rodriguez said the CTA will explore other technologies beyond the heavy rail system that the authority has operated since its inception. One idea that interests him is a high-tech crosstown rail line running north-to-south across the entire city, perhaps on Cicero or Western avenues, above the traffic.

"Why not look at a monorail or some other system that would basically avoid the congestion on the streets?" Rodriguez said. "That is one of the things I would like to pursue to get north to south connected."

There's another consideration for Chicago when looking at the Chinese model. For the high price to build and maintain the Shanghai maglev, passengers are taken only part of the way to their destinations.

Because so much distance is required to accelerate and brake, the maglev train doesn't serve downtown Shanghai. It runs from the airport to the terminus of one of Shanghai's conventional subway lines on the edge of the city, where passengers must transfer to a slower train, or a taxicab, to reach downtown.

The distance between downtown Chicago and O'Hare is only about 15 miles. Such a short distance makes it difficult to justify the cost of the maglev system and its limitations in providing direct service..........

More in link

[Busy Bee]

A monorail? Is he joking? How about conventional heavy rail, like you know, the kind you already operate and have tons of experience with. Just put it up on a modern concrete elevated structure or sink it in a trench. It worries me we have officials actually using the word monorail when talking about transit aspirations. This isn't 1970. Conventional heavy rail is proven for high ridership rapid service. Monorail is not. The monorail would be a silly solution, not to mention a technological boondoggle. Yeah, give us the Mid-city transitway, just give it to us in the form of conventional CTA heavy rail or Paris RER style EMU's. Steer clear of the monorail route, its pure Futurama fantasy for a reason.

[the urban politician]

^ That's what happens when you replace the CTA chairperson every 2 years.

[ardecila]

Well, I could see a Vancouver-style light metro along Cicero, if it somehow posed a substantial cost savings over traditional heavy-rail.

People like to think of monorails as futuristic, but they haven't really been futuristic for 40 years. We've already been there, done that, and discovered that monorail technology has numerous drawbacks and practical problems. Tokyo is really the only place where they've made monorails work as a serious transport mode...

[wrab]

Rodriguez talking monorails has me questioning his competence to run the CTA. Maybe he meant elevated?

[emathias]

Monorails would be ok IF there was no rational way to need to route from the monorail routing to the existing rail routes.

In other words, if running a line over Cicero would never need to also turn east onto the Green or Blue lines, then a monorail is a big impovement over a bus route, and if it doesn't need to merge with existing rail, then what's the problem?

[ardecila]

Well, monorail technology is still very proprietary - every company produces a different, very specialized system. There aren't any standards or regulations, so CTA would essentially be tied to a single manufacturer forever, when track needs replacing, vehicles need replacing or major maintenance, etc.

For practical everyday purposes, CTA would need to train a whole crew in the maintenance and repair of monorail systems. This increases CTA's payroll, which adds quite a bit to the operating budget. A new heavy-rail line could just use the existing crews to perform maintenance and repair jobs.

It also gets quite complex and costly if you ever want a network instead of just a single line - switches on a monorail system are massive things that require a lot of complex machinery. Imagine sliding a huge concrete beam 9-10 feet to the left and sliding in another beam. A traditional rail system just uses frogs, little metal pieces that can be moved fairly easily with small motors.

Even light rail would be a better choice than monorail - light-rail systems are fairly common around the world, so there are standard construction practices, plenty of trained technicians available, and plenty of manufacturers to work with.

Really, the only advantage of a monorail system is aesthetics (due to a narrower guideway), noise (rubber wheels on concrete are quiet), and a slightly lower construction cost, because of simpler construction. In the long run, I doubt the advantages amount to anything, which is why monorail systems haven't taken over the world.


Most of those advantages would be a moot point along the Cicero corridor. Cost reduction measures would probably force the transit line onto the BRC viaduct two blocks east, where the narrower guideway of a monorail would confer no aesthetic advantage. Tracks on an earthen viaduct that are properly fastened to the track bed don't generate much noise, either, especially on straight segments - look at the Orange Line at Western or Kedzie. The construction cost would be reduced anyway, since the land acquisition costs would be small and there wouldn't be the nightmare of drilling piles down the center of Cicero.

[Remy_Bork]

I have to say that excites me a lot as a transit enthusiast, despite the silliness of the monorail suggestion.

I assume that they talk about the rail corridor east of Cicero whenever they mention that mid-city line. The city is covered with rail rights-of-way that could potentially be used as new lines if there was ever some decent money for them.

I especially think about that Bloomingdale line that runs through Humboldt Park being converted into a CTA branch. The park idea is kind of nice but seems like a waste when the valuable right of way could be put to transit use.

Does anybody have or know of any other reuse ideas similar to that one?

[the urban politician]

I still think the best place for a circumferential, mid-city line is along Ashland.

The Ashland corrider, for the most part, is pretty well built up, has seen a lot of new development, and seems to have the density to support it.

Western, on the other hand, is a lost cause IMO. It has already succumbed to the needs of the automobile and I suspect it would be far too difficult to turn things around. How are you going to redevelop all of those strip malls and auto dealerships into denser, pedestrian-oriented businesses? Not gonna happen.

And don't tell me that introducing a mass transit line will change that. I have yet to see any evidence that the Orange Line led to denser, transit-oriented development with the exception of a stop or two closer to downtown (and one can argue that those developments would have happened any way).

[M II A II R II K]

Chicago Red Line Extension Moves Forward as Some Push Cheaper Alternative


http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/10/04/chicago-red-line-extension-moves-forward-as-some-push-cheaper-alternative/

Last week, the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) announced that it had received $285,000 in planning money from the federal government to pursue a draft environmental impact study on the extension of the Red Line rapid transit corridor south to 130th Street. The agency says that this project, which will bring rail transit service to the city’s southeastern border, is its top priority.

Inhabitants of the city’s far South Side have for years complained that they are left out of the rapid transit system, which was extended along the Dan Ryan Expressway to 95th Street in 1969. Their community is the city’s poorest but residents suffer from long travel times to reach the Loop downtown. Decades of plans have suggested lengthening the route further south, but to no avail; in recent years, the CTA has primarily focused its capital funds on the renovation of the older parts of its network.




http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Chicago-South-Side.jpg

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/10/l-station-to-take-harold-washingtons-name.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ChicagoBreakingNews+%28Chicago+Breaking+News%29&utm_content=Google+Reader

'L' station to take Harold Washington's name
Jon Hilkevitch October 6, 2010 11:22 AM

...The CTA board voted Wednesday to change the name of the Library-State/Van Buren rail station to the Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren station.

...That it took this long for the CTA to adopt the change "is a form of racism," Blakemore said. "They are trying to deny a group of people their legacy."

[Segun]

Its already the longest CTA announcement by far so now its:


the next stop is Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren

doors open to the left at Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren

this is Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren

transfer to Red Line trains at Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren

Doors closing.

I think by that time the train has left.

[the urban politician]

That it took this long for the CTA to adopt the change "is a form of racism," Blakemore said. "They are trying to deny a group of people their legacy."

:rolleyes:

Stupidity

[Nowhereman1280]

:rolleyes:

Stupidity

People as stupid as this Blakemoore person are why racism exists. If everyone were just a little less moronic then we wouldn't have these problems...

[Chicago Shawn]

...That it took this long for the CTA to adopt the change "is a form of racism," Blakemore said. "They are trying to deny a group of people their legacy."

Or how about the fact it costs $19,000 to replace the signs, that doesn't have anything to do with it? Nope of course not, its just racism. Just like how your eligible for free rides on that same system, yup so much discrimination.

What a F****** retard. And how much money are you donating to this cause Mr. Blakemore? I know I'll be paying for it with reduced service if the operating budget needs additional trimming next year.

[ardecila]

I'm equally upset with the CTA for stubbornly NOT optimizing the station name. "Washington Library" would have done the trick. They could drop the "Harold" part and drop the "State/Van Buren" part.

DC seems to get along perfectly well naming their downtown stations after landmarks instead of streets and intersections. Even in Chicago, we have "Merchandise Mart". We don't call it "Kinzie/Wells".

[ChicagoChicago]

...The CTA board voted Wednesday to change the name of the Library-State/Van Buren rail station to the Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren station.


Jesus Christ...Could they have made the name longer?

[OhioGuy]

They should have just gotten rid of the library portion and simply called it State/Van Buren. I don't want to see the el turn into something similar to the DC Metro with its ridiculously long station names.

[Thundertubs]

They should have just gotten rid of the library portion and simply called it State/Van Buren. I don't want to see the el turn into something similar to the DC Metro with its ridiculously long station names.

U Street/Cardozo/African-American Civil War Memorial is the clunkiest station name ever, especially considering that the memorial is tiny and not even near the station.

How about just U Street?

[10023]

U Street/Cardozo/African-American Civil War Memorial is the clunkiest station name ever, especially considering that the memorial is tiny and not even near the station.

How about just U Street?

Because everything in DC has to be a tribute to some interest group or another so that the politicians that propose said tributes can garner favor with said interest groups.

[ardecila]

So... CTA submitted an application for RTA funding to consider a Blue Line West Extension along 290/88.

This won't be a Federally-required Alternatives Analysis Study (required for New Start funding) but it will give CTA a direction to pursue.

I'm not sure whether this is a good idea or not. Providing transit to the I-88 employment corridor is a good idea, but running CTA's existing Blue Line trains to Oak Brook or Lisle is problematic, and the travel times would not be competitive. Hopefully the study will address the possibility of building express tracks between Forest Park and the Loop.

Extension of CTA’s Blue Line west from the Forest Park terminal is included in CMAP’s GOTO 2040 Major Transportation Capital Projects, as a project recommended for accelerated project development. The Blue Line West Extension was also included in RTA’s Cook‐DuPage Corridor Study’s final Action Plan as a project for further study. The project involves extending the Forest Park Branch of the Blue Line further west along or near the I‐290 and I‐88 corridor into Central DuPage County. While the proposal extends as far as Lisle, an initial strategic extension to Oak Brook may take advantage of existing development patterns.

The project improves connections to Pace routes operating in Western Cook and eastern and central DuPage Counties. It would also interface with the proposed “J‐Line”. The Cook‐DuPage Corridor Study identified significant reverse commute and inter‐regional trips that would be served by the project.

The project is consistent with subregional plans: In addition to being recommended in the Cook‐DuPage Corridor Study, transit centers in a number of locations in the corridor (including Oak Brook and Yorktown Mall in Lombard) are recommended in the DuPage Area Transit Plan. The Village of Maywood in its 2008 Comprehensive Plan update sought to extend the Blue Line to First Avenue as either a terminal location or part of a larger extension to the western suburbs.

edit.. also found this in CTA's October President's Report...

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/3271/ctatt.jpg

[denizen467]

Has anyone seen that there is new illumination on the Wabash el supports at its intersections with cross streets -- a white (maybe LED) light has been placed inside the steel columns a couple yards above the ground, shining downwards. It's a rather nice addition though it's been carried out in a kind of half-baked way. Hopefully it's just the first step in something more ambitious.

[Mr Downtown]

^The one at Jackson & Wabash SWC went in about a year ago, presumably as the finishing touch in the Wabash Streetscaping project. I keep forgetting to look at the other corners to see how many were installed.

[bnk]

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2010/10/regional-planners-unveiling-vision-for-chicago-region-today.html#tp
by Blair Kamin

October 13, 2010

Regional planners unveil vision for Chicago area in 2040

Share | Regional planners on Wednesday unveiled their vision for the Chicago area's future, calling for a new emphasis on fixing existing roads, raising the state gas tax to fund road maintenance and transit, and increasing the Chicago region's share of the state's road funding pie.

Called Go to 2040 and based on almost three years of research and public hearings, the plan was released by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, a little-known agency that is responsible for land-use and transportation planning in the seven-county Chicago area.

...

[ardecila]

I found this little tidbit when I was searching for an update on the South Shore's expansion plans.

South Shore passenger service hit by electric rate hikes, recession (http://www.chestertontribune.com/Northwest%20Indiana/927104%20south_shore_passenger_service_hi.htm)
By PAULENE POPARAD
9/27/2010

In other business, from the audience Richard Watkun asked what the status is of the proposed West Lake extension that would bring South Shore tracks to Lowell and/or Valparaiso. “Has that become a dream that will never happen?” he asked.

[General manager Gerald] Hanas said a stumbling block is no local funding for the project. A new approach could be joint planning on a possible southeast extension of Metra service in Illinois that could save money with a coordinated NICTD project, Hanas explained.

Hanas probably just pulled this out of his ass, but if the SouthEast Service were to somehow be combined with the South Shore's Lowell corridor, that would be ideal. I'm envisioning a line running south from Chicago to Chicago Heights, then eastward to Dyer and then south to Lowell.

Politically, it could get the support of two states in Washington, which would be good, and it wouldn't run all the way out to effing Beecher, as in the current Metra plan. The Indiana side is already more developed. On the downside, it would lose the support of Will County, which wouldn't get any new service. (It could, potentially, be bundled with a Metra Electric extension to Peotone or Kankakee to appease Will County.)

Plus, it wouldn't require the electrification of further trackage in Indiana. That was always a flaw in the original plan - the freight railroads in Indiana refused to allow overhead wires to be strung above their tracks, so the South Shore would have had to buy dual-mode locomotives and coaches or - more likely - just run diesel-powered trains all the way up to Millennium Station. A dual Metra-NICTD train could be operated into LaSalle Street Station without sending polluting and inefficient diesel trains up the lakefront corridor, which will become all-electric in just a few years.

Unfortunately, it wouldn't solve the pressing problem, which is to find a local share of the cost. Indiana voters rejected the creation of a NW Indiana transit district that would have collected a sales tax to build the original lines, and many Indiana residents were skeptical about the usefulness of those lines. Illinois residents probably have a more clear understanding of the benefits of rail, but the state government is still massively broke.

[Busy Bee]

Whatever the routing, I still think we should be striving for electric operation. Good grief, this is the 21st century. The use of diesel to haul passenger trains should be diminishing, not expanding.

[ardecila]

Although one or two freight railroads have considered electrification, the freight industry overall is pretty resistant. This isn't Europe or Asia where the government owns the lines...

[Busy Bee]

Well if South Shore's Indiana line didn't operate under third-world catenary maybe they'd be more ambitious about expanding electric operations.

[ardecila]

^ This is true... but you can hardly expect them to run a first-class operation on a third-world budget.

If there was more support for expansion, then perhaps NICTD could build electrified lines along some of the abandoned rights-of-way in NW Indiana. There's a nice one that goes to Crown Point. That would get into the billions, though, like Colorado's plans.

Of course, there hasn't been a mad housing boom in Indiana, and the development that is there is very scattered, making it difficult to serve with a single rail line.

[pip]

im going to give props again to the CTA for it's cell phone text arrival times. I use it every time I go to the bus. Every single time, unless the bus is 'due' meaning almost there and I can see it. All my regular stops I have stored in my phone. It's also kinda easy to figure out as they appear in numerical order. 'R' for resfresh! haha the tracker says the bus arrives in 4 minutes, after 2 or so I refresh - why I don't know but I do.

[VivaLFuego]

Electrification for the sake of electrification won't be a convincing argument for public investment. On a per-passenger-mile basis, the capital cost of building and maintaining the electricity infrastructure for commuter rail would be far less efficient than diesel-electric locomotives. The other argument is in air quality, which had a lot more sway ~80 years ago compared to today. If service were on a half-hourly or more basis, electrification could start to make sense from a cost efficiency standpoint, but absent that any capital investment could be much more effectively spent elsewhere.

[emathias]

Netflix has a 1976 movie (I think it was a made-for-TV movie) called "Million Dollar Rip Off" that was set and filmed in Chicago about some con artists who plot to steal fare from CTA stations. The plot has them taking $1.5 million dollars from just 3 stations. That seems like an implausibly high amount of cash from CTA fares in the early 70s, but what do I know ...

Not a great film, but nice to see mid-70s Chicago and the CTA, and it stars Freddy Prinze (Sr.)

[Chicago Shawn]

The work crews at Grand and State shifted the plywood barriers this week on the Mezzanine level, exposing the finished parts of the station. Its looking very nice and it already feels more spacious. Not quite sure if its worth $67 million yet, but it is looking pretty good thus far. The stairs to the street include ramps for bicycles constructed out of polished black granite, with little bicycle symbols inscribed into it.

[spyguy]

Congress Parkway improvement starts Oct. 21 (http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/cdot/provdrs/street/news/2010/oct/congress_parkwayimprovementstartssoon.html)

Quick refresher:
• Narrow and reduce lanes to provide wider sidewalks to accommodate heavier pedestrian traffic and landscape improvements, and decrease the crossing distance of intersections
• Interconnect traffic signals and install countdown pedestrian timers to improve the flow of vehicles and pedestrians through intersections
• Modify a State Street median to facilitate vehicles turning onto eastbound Congress Parkway
• Maintaining bicycle lane connection across Congress Parkway at Plymouth Court and adding bicycle parking
• Landscaped, irrigated medians with pedestrian refuge areas
• Install 20 in-ground planters and seating areas with decorative pavers, 57 above ground landscaped planters, and 71 new trees.
• A LED decorative lighting system, including freestanding fixtures in the median and lineal fixtures attached to decorative metal trellises and the viaduct walls under One Financial Place

[Mr Downtown]

^Yikes. I remember the winter they tried to do the Wabash streetscaping. Snowfalls would shut things down for weeks at a time, forcing pedestrians to navigate tenuous plywood bridges that couldn't be shoveled properly, and the quality of the concrete work suffered in a lot of places.

[ardecila]

Fortunately, Congress is the least busy street (http://www.chicagoloopalliance.com/pdfs/PedFINALreportDec08_ExeSummary.pdf) in the Loop for pedestrians. That's a big reason why the streetscaping is needed. CDOT might just close off whole stretches of sidewalk at a time.

I understand your point about winter work, though. It's a sad fact that we have a long and cold winter in Chicago, and unless we want all improvements to come to a halt, construction will have to continue into the winter.

[Busy Bee]

Wouldn't be much of an issue material wise if we didn't rely so much on concrete. I'd love it if the entire CBD of Chicago received paver sidewalks and granite curbs. Concrete just doesn't match the high quality environment nor does it hold up to weather and wear. But, I realize I'm dreaming - pragmatism will always when out, and concrete 99% of the time is the most affordable solution - and it looks good for a few years.

[denizen467]

Speaking of Congress, is the Congress Bridge slated for completion this year or next?
Also, looking further westwards, is the Eisenhower resurfacing finished?