[Remy_Bork]

In the 90s they ripped out over a mile of the green line in Woodlawn with the bizarre idea that it would help the area's development. It actually killed a lot of the ridership on the line as a whole because it made transfers much more difficult. As anyone who's been around there can see, it's been less than a success.

Something that also makes a big difference in ridership is that the southern portion of the red line and both outer parts of the blue line were rebuilt in highway medians in the 50s and 60s, putting them in a kind of dead zone when it comes to transit oriented development.

I've been thinking recently of ways these stations could be retrofitted a bit to make them more appealing to pedestrians. Platform screen doors could block out a lot of the wind and noise that make them so uncomfortable, as well as allow them to be heated in the winter. If some kind of enclosed hallways could be built that would allow people to walk to the stations without feeling that they're on top of a busy highways overpass that might help too.

These seem like reasonably cost effective solutions that could bring in more riders and propel some nearby development. On the blue line at least, many of those stations are more than due for an overhaul.

[lawfin]

^^^Wholeheartedly agree about the highway median L stops......not a solution to spur local transit use it seems....more a foreboding excercise in how not to make a system usable

[pip]

mid 1970's video ride on the CTA Redline from North/Clybourn to Howard. I am wondering why after Belmont the Redline train goes to the outside track where the Purple Line Express of today is.
kNCwYUSQLM8

Brown Line Loop to Paulina
Sw55pNfY3gw

Purple Line Evanston to Wilson and what! A CTA train faster than Metra!
g4Hbj94E2ys

Polk to Jefferson Park Blue Line. Trains were only two cars long, wow. But on all the videos those trains sure seemed to move along well
NJ-ZOoVfikg

Part 1:
From Sox/35th Redline towards the Loop and to Ashland. it doesn't go underground?? It stays elevated much like I think the Orange Line does when approaching the Loop today. the train loops through the Loop and after Clark/Lake goes directly west where the Green Line does today.
Mf1Vaw_k_4A

Part 2:
Ashland to Harlem/Lake and back to downtown.
CAFtYWmun5E

95th st to downtown. Again different route than today it appears
vZ0MxenAVRc

Jackson Park/63rd st to the Loop. This line no linger exists I assume
KIIqvEkwXpA

[ardecila]

Before 1993, the Green Line ran Oak Park-95th and the Red Line ran Howard-63rd/Jackson Park. They switched in 1993 after a short subway connector was built between Cermak/Chinatown and Roosevelt.

[OhioGuy]

An Open Letter to Gabe Klein (http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/elevating-chicago/2010/12/an-open-letter-to-gabe-klein.html) (soon-to-be former director of the DC Department of Transportation)

Elevating Chicago
Ted Rosenbaum on 12.08.10 at 9:59 PM

You may not have heard, but we're gonna have a new Mayor here next year. You joined Mayor Fenty's staff in Washington halfway through his term and accomplished a ton. Imagine getting in at the start of a new mayor's term (our first new Mayor in over 2 decades!) and having nearly free reign, since the new Mayor's priorities will likely be on reducing crime and improving the school system.

Although actual policy statements have been rare thus far in the campaign, everyone agrees that the Mayor's office needs to become more open. You helped bring DDOT into the 21st century by actually establishing a twitter presence, opening data sets to the public, and more--CDOT needs that kind of reform badly.

You can be the first great Transportation Commissioner here since... well, it's been a damn long time. We've had repeated turnover in the job in recent years as Mayor Daley tires of each new placeholder. While they've all mostly moved the ball forward on incremental reforms, it's only been at the whim of a Mayor whose attention is obviously divided. So while we have a bike plan (which DC's now almost dwarfs when you consider the disparity in size between the cities themselves), and a Central Area Action Plan, and even a few Streetscape plans, no one has laid out the grand vision that Chicago needs to become a city that works for everyone--not just drivers--once again.

[VivaLFuego]

mid 1970's video ride on the CTA Redline from North/Clybourn to Howard. I am wondering why after Belmont the Redline train goes to the outside track where the Purple Line Express of today is.


Thanks for posting these.

Addison used to be a side-platform station before being rebuilt as an island platform int he 1990s --- so North-South B trains would switch the outside tracks to serve Addison, then switch back to the inner tracks. This was the result of how the Northwestern Elevated was first built and operated (inner express tracks, outer local tracks), and Addison was a "local" stop.

Looks like there was also some track or station work farther up the North Main when the video was shot, too.

[Busy Bee]

edit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[Busy Bee]

Great idea courting Gabe Klein for the CDOT or CTA - he's worked wonders in DC. He's a real visionary in trasnport and thoroughly understands urbanism - something that I'm not sure can be said about any local transport agency. He's really on par with leadership you'd find in progressive European cities and is exactly who I'd like to see at the helm in Chicago.

[emathias]

...
And a line that too bad was destroyed....would be nice if they could rebuild it and tie it in with a new major north - south line
**Humbolt Park line image**

Given that development is spreading west from wicker park into humbolt this line would be useful today

I agree. I don't blame the Bloomingdale Trail group, but I also think they're wrong and that the embankment there shouldn't be turned into a park.

If I were king of the world (or Chicago transit anyway), what I'd propose is creating a McCormick Place-Streeterville subway that then followed Clark to Armitage, then west and jogging back south to meet the Bloomingdale embankment. If built in conjunction with the proposed Circle Line subway near Ashland, it would greatly enhance transportation between Humbolt Park and Lincoln Park and everything in between.

Below is a map where the new yellowish markings are how I'd use the Bloomingdale ROW. The Orange Markings are other officially proposed (or at least mentioned in official documents) extensions or lines.

Map by CTA. Edits by myself.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5248/5246525667_7421e0c93e.jpg

[Tex17]

Absolutely Not! Especially given that this parcel is about 1000 feet from a subway stop (less than 5 minute walk) on the Red line and within about a 10 minute walk if 2 more L stops on the Brown line. Additionally there has been talk of a new Brown line stop at / near Division which would be literally about 160 feet away from this parcel.


So to your point that better too much parking...absolutely not. I do not know if your name portends from whence you have come but urbanity in Chicago is decidedly different in Chicago than in Texas....and in a parcel such as this one we do not need to coddle the auto as it has perhaps some of the best transit connectivity outside Manhattan!

Well, sure you can take the public transportation. It just seems to me that you can still choose to take whether or not there's a place to park. (For instance, you might take the Red Line to your office for work, but then take your car to go grocery shopping or visit your friend in Lawndale, before picking up your grandmother at the nursing home to take her to her salon appointment or something.)
It you don't have a place to park your car, you're effectively forced to take public transportation, whether it suits your particular needs at the time or not.

[Mr Downtown]

the new yellowish markings are how I'd use the Bloomingdale ROW.

Except the unused part ends at Pacific Junction (1800N/3800W). West of there it's an active Metra line.

[emathias]

Except the unused part ends at Pacific Junction (1800N/3800W). West of there it's an active Metra line.

I actually intended to end the line sooner, but accidentally drew it too far.

Nonetheless, another way to use that would be to electrify that Metra Line and run the Metra Electric lines north through a subway to Streeterville and along the same alignment. Could be a northern extension of Mike Payne's Gray Line proposal.

[nomarandlee]

I've been thinking recently of ways these stations could be retrofitted a bit to make them more appealing to pedestrians. Platform screen doors could block out a lot of the wind and noise that make them so uncomfortable, as well as allow them to be heated in the winter. If some kind of enclosed hallways could be built that would allow people to walk to the stations without feeling that they're on top of a busy highways overpass that might help too.

These seem like reasonably cost effective solutions that could bring in more riders and propel some nearby development. On the blue line at least, many of those stations are more than due for an overhaul.

I've thought of that as well. It would be nice to see them put up some windbreaker panels opposite that of the platforms in order to break up the loud noise winds that invade the platforms. The only downside of that I presume is the difficulty in keeping the panels clean of the accumulated exhaust. Also in the summer the winds help keep the platforms a bit cooler and if you blocked the outside air they could become sweltering in the summer. It would be a fair trade off though I think.

[lawfin]

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5248/5246525667_7421e0c93e.jpg

I like it....just wondering the orange dotted line are official proposals....I see the circle line dots and the ford city dots and mid-city dot......what are those orange dots just west of current orange line that look like they would be traveling n-s through pilsen or so? Have not heard of that.


My one criticism is I just have a fantasy of essentially a city long subway at Western running from asbury all the way south to at least 63rd where it would tie in with a green line extension or perhaps even have that tie in and continue it south to loop into the the redline extension to 130th

[emathias]

...
what are those orange dots just west of current orange line that look like they would be traveling n-s through pilsen or so? Have not heard of that.

That's the Clinton Street subway, which is part of some iterations of the West Loop Transportation Center.

My one criticism is I just have a fantasy of essentially a city long subway at Western running from asbury all the way south to at least 63rd where it would tie in with a green line extension or perhaps even have that tie in and continue it south to loop into the the redline extension to 130th

Ok. Not sure how that's a criticism, though. :-)

[lawfin]

That's the Clinton Street subway, which is part of some iterations of the West Loop Transportation Center.



Ok. Not sure how that's a criticism, though. :-)
Point taken....any educated guess as to how much your plan would cost to implemented....would it be primarily subway or above grade?

I have never been able to find an estimate of how much a Western subway would cost?

[ardecila]

I've thought of that as well. It would be nice to see them put up some windbreaker panels opposite that of the platforms in order to break up the loud noise winds that invade the platforms. The only downside of that I presume is the difficulty in keeping the panels clean of the accumulated exhaust. Also in the summer the winds help keep the platforms a bit cooler and if you blocked the outside air they could become sweltering in the summer. It would be a fair trade off though I think.

You could design a system of louvers that would open in the summer and close in the winter. The mechanisms, and the glass itself, would be various forms of durable plastic to avoid rusting from the salt mist and moisture in the expressway.

Alternately, you could build a glass partition down the middle of the platform (glass for security reasons). Passengers would just stand on the leeward side of the wall from the wind until the train comes, at which point they could go through one of several portals in the wall. Next-train signs would eliminate the need to peer down the tracks.

I'm used to Cumberland, where most people wait in the stationhouse (but inside the faregates) during poor weather, and when they see the train approaching, they head down the stairs/escalator to the platform. The transparency of those stationhouses leaves that open as a possibility, unlike more closed-off stations on the elevated lines or in the subways.

[emathias]

Point taken....any educated guess as to how much your plan would cost to implemented....would it be primarily subway or above grade?

I don't know. Based on costs from other projects in Chicago and other cities, here are some costs that are probably at least reasonable starting points:

Clinton Street Subway: from Division to 18th Street
Approximately 3.5 miles of subway: $1.4 billion
Maybe 5 individual stations: $500 million
One long platform between Ogilvie and Union stations: $200 million
1 1/2 complex integrations with Blue Line: $300 million
TOTAL: $2.4 billion

Circle Line: Elevated connection to Orange, Subway to Red
Approximately 1.5 miles elevated (to Orange): $150 million
1 new elevated station constructed with structure: $25 million
Approximate 3 miles subway (to Red): $1.2 billion
Maybe 4 individual subway stations: $400 million
1 complex integration with Red Line: $200 million
TOTAL: $1.975 billion

Brown Line to Blue Line
Approximately 1.8 (Montrose) - 2.2 (Lawrence) miles subway: $720 million to $880 million
OR 2 miles elevated (alley just south of Lawrence): $200 million
Maybe 2 individual subway stations: $200 million
OR 2 elevated stations: $50 million
1 complex integration with Blue Line: $200 million
OR complex elevated integration: $100 million
TOTAL: $350 million to $1.28 billion

Mid-City Transitway (along Cicero)
Approximately 11.5 miles elevated/existing embankment mix: $1.1 billion
Maybe 18 elevated stations: $450 million
1 complex integration with Blue Line: $200 million
TOTAL: $1.75 billion

Bloomingdale/Streeterville/McCormick
Approximately 3.8 miles rehab embankment (Bloomingdale) + extension: $380 million
Maybe 8 embankment/elevated stations: $200 million
Approximately 5.5 miles subway: $2.2 billion
Maybe 12 subway stations: $1.2 billion
Highrise proximity/nimby extra cost: $500 million
2.5 miles at-grade: $125 million
Metra conflicts engineering fixes: $150 million
Maybe 4 at-grade/below-grade stations: $160 million
TOTAL: $4.915 billion

ALL PROJECTS HIGHEST TOTAL:
$12.32 billion

Putting this into perspective, this is less than the cost of New York's Second Ave Subway, and less than Boston's Big Dig, and about three times what LA will spend on one single extension of the Wilshire subway from downtown to UCLA. It's also less than the cost of expanding O'Hare.

I have never been able to find an estimate of how much a Western subway would cost?

I've never seen a serious consideration of a subway under Western, probably mostly because most of Western is not dense enough to even come close to supporting the cost structures of subway work.

[Nowhereman1280]

I have never been able to find an estimate of how much a Western subway would cost?

Way too much when you could just build elevated tracks a few blocks to the east along Ashland/Ravenswood which already has right of way for most of its length. The line I envision would beging at Howard and then jump over a block or two onto the Ravenswood Metra tracks. Follow along those with plentiful stops in Andersonville and Ravenswood. Then when you get to Lawrence, it skips over a half block or so and shares the tracks with the Brown line N/S segment allowing ample transfer stops (much like Fullerton and Belmont stops). After that it merges back up with Metra until you hit the northbranch where it would go subway to meet up with the Blue Line Divison stop. Further south it could either remain subway or reemerge near United Center and join up with the Pink Line N/S tracks. After the Pink Line turns West it would continue south and terminate after crossing the canal at the Orange Line Ashland Station. Now that would be a relatively cheap and extremely effective new line. So many awesome, undeserved, extremely dense neighborhoods would have greatly enhanced service and you would hardly have to build any new ROW.

Additionally, if you really really want a line further west a second new N/S line could be built along the already existent North Branch of the river. This would be a simple ROW for a brand new line and would require very little emminant domain. In fact one could feasibly run the tracks low enough near the river that all the existing bridges would be overpasses and the noise/unsightliness of an elevated structure would be eliminated in favor of an all "ground level" set of tracks. Such a line could potentially begin at purple line terminus in Wilmette and share a transfer with the Yellow Line at McCormick and Howard and the Brown Line at Francisco. This would serve parts of the city that are currently transit deserts. Might get some pushback from park advocates, but the river itself is fenced of from the parks along it for the vast majority of its length because its a hazardous, polluted, channel that no one really wants to get near.

[VivaLFuego]

Additionally, if you really really want a line further west a second new N/S line could be built along the already existent North Branch of the river. This would be a simple ROW for a brand new line and would require very little emminant domain. In fact one could feasibly run the tracks low enough near the river that all the existing bridges would be overpasses and the noise/unsightliness of an elevated structure would be eliminated in favor of an all "ground level" set of tracks.

Or, as long as we're dreaming here, we could do like the Germans....

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2764/4461144975_826628af19_z.jpg
Wuppertal Schwebebahn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuppertal_Schwebebahn), photo mine

[Nowhereman1280]

:slob: :slob: :slob:

So sexy!!! I am going to build that in Chicago once I make my first billion... :D

[emathias]

I don't know. Based on costs from other projects in Chicago and other cities, here are some costs that are probably at least reasonable starting points:
...
ALL PROJECTS HIGHEST TOTAL:
$12.32 billion
...

I forgot to mention that all that new track would require additional rolling stock. If we treat the new track miles as route miles, proportionally we'd need at least 315 more rail cars to support added service. That probably means a couple more rail yards - I have no idea what those cost.

The rail cars themselves would cost about $470 million based on the costs of the new 5000-Series cars on order.

After all that, there would of course be the additional operating costs. Even assuming that the costs of new service would be partially offset by reductions in some bus service and maybe some balancing away from existing lines (for example, the Clinton Subway may generate new ridership, but it would also at least partly take some ridership from the existing Brown, Purple and Red Lines), we'd still be talking about increasing the number of stations by 1/3. The cost of operating a station doesn't change much with demand, so that would pretty much be an instant 30-35% increase in stations-related expenses. The full cost of track maintenence would take years, maybe even a decade to be fully realized, but as the track aged it would add to the costs of maintenance. It's about a 30% increase in track amounts, so track maintenance costs would increase proportionally. And then there's the cost of the train operators.

Labor takes up about 70% of the CTA buget. The CTA is already robbing from the infrastructure budget to meet operating needs. Only if the economy stages a fairly robust recovery over the next few years would it be able to even consider adding more than small amounts of service.

One thing does support this sort of plan, though - the ratio of CTA rail to CTA bus ridership has changed fairly dramatically recently. For a long time, rail ridership was about 1/2 of bus ridership. For the past two years, however, the ratio is closer to rail being 2/3 of bus ridership.

Based on the 2011 budget proposal, adding the tracks I estimated for in my first post would result in an increase in operating expense minimally:

Security: +$10 million
Power: +$10 million
Scheduled Transit Operations positions: +333 positions
STO labor costs: +$36 million
Non-STO labor costs: +$52 million (extrapolated from current ratios)
Material: +$10 million
TOTAL: approximately $118 million in additional operating expenses

IF (a big if) ridership and fare revenue increased at a proportion of new stations, 45 new is 31.25% added to the existing 144 stations, then rail ridership/revenue would increase by 31.25%. If that happened, and rail started from a base of 40% of all ridership, then ridership/revenues would increase by 12.5%. That would mean about $65.4 million in additional fare revenue. Advertising revenue would also go up some, probably only at the same ratio, though, so maybe an extra $2 million, tops. So that means all that extra track work would yield about $67.4 million in extra revenue. With increased costs of $118 million, leaving a shortfall of $50.6 million annually.

Now, that's well within the mandated farebox recovery ratio, which is good - that means that it would overall improve the efficiency of the agency. It also doesn't include any of the potential bus savings, although I think that would likely be at most about $20 million a year in savings, at most. Either way, you're left with a structural deficit of several percent of the budget that would need to be paid for somehow.

The CTA is estimating that a "normal economy" would yield nearly $100 million a year in more tax revenue, but most of that would be offset by stopping taking money out of the infrastructure budget. The portion that isn't, will soon have to go to catching up the funding of employee pensions.

Which leaves us with having to find a new tax source - a source on top of whatever source we'd have to find to support the infrastructure build-out to begin with.

Now, over the long haul, if the city aligned zoning with the new stations so that average ridership per station was higher than the system average for the new stations, these numbers could look better. But the per-station average would have to be nearly 80% higher than the current system average for the operating costs to be fully covered by new ridership. That seems highly unlikely.

I suppose the easiest way to fund that difference would be through Cook County property taxes. If City residents alone took on $60 million a year in additional property taxes, we'd be looking at something along the lines of $5/month per household (yes, per household, not per person - it'd be about $2 per person per month). That seems reasonable and politically doable to me. If we included all of Cook county, that'd probably drop to $3/month, although I don't know if politically we could get the whole county to participate.

Of course that's just for the operating costs. To fund $12+ billion worth of infrastructure, that's over $4,000 per man, woman and child in Chicago. If the Feds paid half of the cost and we spread the costs over 40 years (10 years of construction with 30-year bonds), with inflation and interest we'd probably be looking at something in the range of $90/year per man, woman and child for the next 40 years. For the "average" household in the city, that'd be something like $25/month in extra taxes. Is that a lot to swallow? Yeah, probably, but if the City were serious about building out an improved rail infrastructure it might be politically possible. Another option would be to create micro-TIF districts around the new stations and funnel 100% of those property taxes into the infrastructure coffers. That would be a interesting test of the power of TOD, and it would force the City to better align appropriate zoning with Transit infrastructure because it would be dramatically more transparent if they lost tax revenue due to poor zoning choices.

[emathias]

:slob: :slob: :slob:

So sexy!!! I am going to build that in Chicago once I make my first billion... :D

Ok, Mr. Wayne ... :)

[Nowhereman1280]

You bet your ass I will, but I won't get distracted by any of that superhero shit...

[a chicago bearcat]

I don't know. Based on costs from other projects in Chicago and other cities, here are some costs that are probably at least reasonable starting points:

Clinton Street Subway: from Division to 18th Street
Approximately 3.5 miles of subway: $1.4 billion
Maybe 5 individual stations: $500 million
One long platform between Ogilvie and Union stations: $200 million
1 1/2 complex integrations with Blue Line: $300 million
2 integrations with Red Line track: $200 million
TOTAL: $2.6 billion

Circle Line: Elevated connection to Orange, Subway to Red
Approximately 1.5 miles elevated (to Orange): $150 million
1 new elevated station constructed with structure: $25 million
Approximate 3 miles subway (to Red): $1.2 billion
Maybe 4 individual subway stations: $400 million
1 complex integration with Red Line: $200 million
1 integration with Orange Line track/bridge over river: $200 million
1 subway to elevated portal: more than $300 million
TOTAL: $2.7 billion

Brown Line to Blue Line
Approximately 1.8 (Montrose) - 2.2 (Lawrence) miles subway: $720 million to $880 million
OR 2 miles elevated (alley just south of Lawrence): $200 million
+ at least 75 Property Acquisitions: at least 100 million
2 flyovers: $400-500 million
2 individual subway stations: $200 million
+ at least 10 Property Aquisitions: at least 50 million
OR 2 elevated stations: $50 million
+ at least 20 Property Aquisitions: at least 100 million
1 complex integration with Blue Line: $200 million
OR complex elevated integration: $100 million
at least 1 transition from at-grade to elevated/subway: 100-300 million
TOTAL: $1.1-$1.7 billion

Mid-City Transitway (along Cicero)
Approximately 11.5 miles elevated/existing embankment mix: $1.1 billion
Easements: $100-500 million
Approx 8 Rail Yard Flyovers: $1-2 billion
Maybe 18 elevated stations: $450 million
1 complex integration with Blue Line: $200 million
6 less complex transfer integrations: $.75-1.25 billion
TOTAL: $3.6-4.75 billion

ALL PROJECTS HIGHEST TOTAL:
$11.75 billion

Edited

This Mid-City Transitway quote can't include the easement costs or the flyover costs of an alignment along the rail line parallel to Cicero, but if it is a Cicero overhead street alignment, you'll have to add quite a lot of street improvement costs. Because the Mid-City would rely on transfers in order to match the RTA's desire for a fully integrated transit system, there would be additional transfers to the Green Line, Forest Park Blue Line, Pink Line, Orange Line, & 2 Metra Lines.

I'd personally construct the entire Mid-City as a Light Rail line, running from Old Orchard to Ford City, it would connect most lines, without sharing much right of way & would carry ridership more akin to a light rail project anyway. The cost savings of switching to LRT would likely fund a line up to the former right of way of the Skokie Valley Line, part of the old North Shore Line.

The Brown Line extension in the alley just south of Lawrence would require to acquisition of nearly every property bordering the south side of the alley between Kimball & the Edens, as well as large & recently redeveloped properties West of the Edens. Not to mention a complete redesign of the Kimball yards, or a reconfiguring of Kimball ave to gain adequate clearance under the tracks during their ascent.

There is no doubt both of these projects could be done, but their execution would be much more complex than dictated by the above costs.

I'll post a proposed transit map including these connections sometime today.

[ardecila]

I know that you're doing a pure thought exercise, but I'm not sure I see a need for three in-city circumferential rail corridors.

I would prefer to do a BRT line for the Mid-City Transitway. A BRT line could be located on Cicero itself, in the ROW of the Belt Railway, or some combination of the two. It could be in the railway corridor and then detour to meet existing rail stations, saving the expense of transfer bridges and making the system more user-friendly.

Buses could board the line at any point and speed to any other point, so direct O'Hare-Midway services could coexist with "local" services and "limited" services.

Laying reinforced concrete pavement is much cheaper than laying rails and ballast, and there's no power distribution or signaling systems to worry about. CTA could also recoup costs by opening the busway to authorized private operators to run specialized regional services (Van Galder, for example).

The cost savings over heavy rail would be tremendous, even more than LRT. You could put the savings toward an Inner Circumferential line on the Indiana Harbor Belt (DMUs).

[a chicago bearcat]

The debate between LRT & BRT will go on forever, I've yet to see a BRT system that delivers on its promises in North America, & most LRT routes have not had significant changes in land uses to match the successes of European Light Rail systems. I just think that the combination of rail ROW & multimodal connections of any proposed Mid-City transitway, would benefit from using rail technology.

I'm having trouble posting the map of a routing system which would utilize the oft-proposed transit wet dream investments. Creating added connectivity & attempting to maintain additional capacity evenly throughout the system, while providing new services to take advantage of underutilized sections of rail.

I'll try to figure out how to post it the most clearly tomorrow, but the basic routes are

Purple: Linden to Cottage Grove via State St. Subway
Orange: Linden to Ford City Mall via State St. Subway
Yellow: Old Orchard to Ford City Mall via Ashland Corridor
Red: Howard to 130th via Clinton Ave. Subway
Brown: O'Hare to Ashland/63rd via State St. Subway
Pink : Jefferson Park to 54th/Cermak via Loop
Green : Jefferson Park to Harlem via Loop
Blue: O'Hare to Forest Park via Dearborn Ave. Subway

This matches most lines with similar ridership on the opposite side of downtown, eliminates crossings in the loop. It adds express lines & some new transfer stops, which would cost significant money, but could change ridership patterns drastically, & potentially reduce crowding on trunk lines.

whoap, figured out my mistake

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l275/archijake/SkyscrapercityTransitRouting2050.jpg

the map looks northside centric, because the transit system is northside centric, along with population, street activity etc. There is no way this system could work though, until the other lines weren't running 2 car trains at times that the brownline runs 6 car trains. I just liked the exercise of attempting to create different single line connections, such as the Northwestern to U of C Purple line, stopping at almost every major university other than UIC along the way, essentially a university line. A yellow line which ferries passengers swiftly across the city, from Skokie to Midway, but likely at limited frequencies, while providing connections promised by the circle line, without circling. Lastly, a direct O'Hare connection via rail from the most heavily frequented CTA stations.

[emathias]

...
map and description
...

I'm very jealous of your mapping skills. I love maps - I have maps all over my walls at home.

[Busy Bee]

How about an extension of the Forest Park Blue Line to Maywood, Bellwood and Hillside. I can't understand why this is has never been a major priority. Seems to me to be a large transit riding population with many neighborhoods just as dense as the west side. The line could terminate with a large intermodal center at the three way intersection of the Tri-State, the 88 Toll and the Eisenhower. Such a location with quick and easy interstate access would guarantee substantial kiss and ride and parking lot commuters.

[lawfin]

The debate between LRT & BRT will go on forever, I've yet to see a BRT system that delivers on its promises in North America, & most LRT routes have not had significant changes in land uses to match the successes of European Light Rail systems. I just think that the combination of rail ROW & multimodal connections of any proposed Mid-City transitway, would benefit from using rail technology.

I'm having trouble posting the map of a routing system which would utilize the oft-proposed transit wet dream investments. Creating added connectivity & attempting to maintain additional capacity evenly throughout the system, while providing new services to take advantage of underutilized sections of rail.

I'll try to figure out how to post it the most clearly tomorrow, but the basic routes are

Purple: Linden to Cottage Grove via State St. Subway
Orange: Linden to Ford City Mall via State St. Subway
Yellow: Old Orchard to Ford City Mall via Ashland Corridor
Red: Howard to 130th via Clinton Ave. Subway
Brown: O'Hare to Ashland/63rd via State St. Subway
Pink : Jefferson Park to 54th/Cermak via Loop
Green : Jefferson Park to Harlem via Loop
Blue: O'Hare to Forest Park via Dearborn Ave. Subway

This matches most lines with similar ridership on the opposite side of downtown, eliminates crossings in the loop. It adds express lines & some new transfer stops, which would cost significant money, but could change ridership patterns drastically, & potentially reduce crowding on trunk lines.

whoap, figured out my mistake

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l275/archijake/SkyscrapercityTransitRouting2050.jpg

the map looks northside centric, because the transit system is northside centric, along with population, street activity etc. There is no way this system could work though, until the other lines weren't running 2 car trains at times that the brownline runs 6 car trains. I just liked the exercise of attempting to create different single line connections, such as the Northwestern to U of C Purple line, stopping at almost every major university other than UIC along the way, essentially a university line. A yellow line which ferries passengers swiftly across the city, from Skokie to Midway, but likely at limited frequencies, while providing connections promised by the circle line, without circling. Lastly, a direct O'Hare connection via rail from the most heavily frequented CTA stations.

Thanks

Anhy way you could provide a clickable version that would allow us to zoom in?

[Remy_Bork]

Hey, as long as we're sharing our future CTA maps, I thought I'd post one I made up on google.

I'm sure it's not as well thought out as yours in certain respects. My main idea was to provide rail transit to everywhere within the city limits. Obviously it's extremely ambitious, but I think it would be nice to have a plan that focuses on eventually covering the whole city with a transit grid. I tried to follow existing rail corridors wherever possible.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?hl=en&ie=UTF8&msa=0&msid=206571574806789731113.0004657d2130a0e1d1329&t=h&z=10

[a chicago bearcat]

Thanks

Anhy way you could provide a clickable version that would allow us to zoom in?

working on it

I have it in PDF form, is there a way to attach it that way?

[lawfin]

working on it

I have it in PDF form, is there a way to attach it that way?

The only way I know how on this forum is to link to the pdf via a hyperlink; consequently your pdf would need to be hosted on a server some where accessible to internet

[a chicago bearcat]

The only way I know how on this forum is to link to the pdf via a hyperlink; consequently your pdf would need to be hosted on a server some where accessible to internet

Free PDF hosting for those interested provided by
http://freepdfhosting.com/upload.php


http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l275/archijake/SkyscrapercityTransitRouting2050.jpg
Link to Map (http://freepdfhosting.com/37c38b995d.pdf)

You can see at closer inspection that my map making skills are quite lacking. Also forgive that I forgot to alter a few wrongly colored station names & stops from previous iterations. I'd also love feedback on all aspects of how this system might function, where deficiencies might exist, how to improve the concept, & what other new services could be provided.

one such idea? Rush Hour Brown & Purple Line Loopbound service to supplement existing service, which is just what the trains currently do.

[Busy Bee]

Totally unrelated, but this photo of Dearborn Station was recently posted on the fantastic Shorpy.com (http://www.shorpy.com) and is so stunning I just have to post it:

Dearborn Station, Chicago, 1910

http://www.shorpy.com/files/images/4a24000a.jpg
http://www.shorpy.com/files/images/4a24000a.jpg

Sure wish they would have reconstructed that gorgeous roof.

[Mr Downtown]

There's a possibly apocryphal story that Mayor Thompson jokingly scolded the firefighters for saving so much of the building. The architecture was always rather eccentric and by 1922 was probably considered hopelessly old-fashioned.

http://i55.tinypic.com/15poadk.jpg
Chicago Daily News Collection, American Memory Project, The Library of Congress

[ardecila]

How about an extension of the Forest Park Blue Line to Maywood, Bellwood and Hillside. I can't understand why this is has never been a major priority. Seems to me to be a large transit riding population with many neighborhoods just as dense as the west side. The line could terminate with a large intermodal center at the three way intersection of the Tri-State, the 88 Toll and the Eisenhower. Such a location with quick and easy interstate access would guarantee substantial kiss and ride and parking lot commuters.

Who said it's not a priority?

An extension to Oak Brook has been seriously discussed for several years now. The extra room in the Eisenhower median would potentially allow for express service to compensate for the long trip.

Soon, IDOT will move forward on their study of the Eisenhower widening. That study is also investigating potential corridors and ridership for Blue Line service.

[Mr Downtown]

The extra room in the median is only between California and Halsted.

Serving Oak Brook and similar destinations is a job perfectly suited to a busway, so that there's not a long walk from the train station to the office building. Some of the old CA&E right of way next to the Maywood Court House might be used, but most of that is now part of the Prairie Path.

[k1052]

The extra room in the median is only between California and Halsted.

Serving Oak Brook and similar destinations is a job perfectly suited to a busway, so that there's not a long walk from the train station to the office building. Some of the old CA&E right of way next to the Maywood Court House might be used, but most of that is now part of the Prairie Path.

There appears to be sufficient room along the entire row to add express track, signals would have to be relocated and some of the clearances from bridge supports will be tight but it looks doable.

[ardecila]

The extra room in the median is only between California and Halsted.

You mean Laramie? I'm sure the clearances could be worked out.

Further westward (as I keep mentioning) the CSX's Altenheim Sub (the freight line) is used very infrequently, and the trains that do use it will diminish gradually in the coming years.

I'm sure CSX would part with it for the right amount, and IDOT will need to buy it if they want to avoid costly and unpopular property takings through Oak Park for the widening project. Oak Parkers have been the main opponents, so appeasing them is crucial to the whole effort. However, the land available is more than what is needed for two additional lanes. That leaves room for the express tracks.

Serving Oak Brook and similar destinations is a job perfectly suited to a busway, so that there's not a long walk from the train station to the office building. Some of the old CA&E right of way next to the Maywood Court House might be used, but most of that is now part of the Prairie Path.

Sure, let's do a busway. No suburban leader will take it seriously. Buses in the suburbs (i.e. Pace) are pretty much a long-running joke. CDOT has, so far, been the only agency to seriously consider busways, both along the lakefront, in the Carroll Street corridor, and on numerous other corridors.

The Elgin-O'Hare project is considering both a busway and LRT for its transit component, but the fact that LRT has not yet been ruled out tells me that the politicians driving the process won't settle for less than a sexy new rail line. The busway even has a built-in funding advantage, in that it can be funded entirely with highway dollars, while an LRT would need to seek an FTA grant.

[BorisMolotov]

Totally unrelated, but this photo of Dearborn Station was recently posted on the fantastic Shorpy.com and is so stunning I just have to post it:

If you view the picture full size, you can see a very racist Gold Dust billboard advertisement on the far right

[VivaLFuego]

edit
.....
.

[Beta_Magellan]

Serving Oak Brook and similar destinations is a job perfectly suited to a busway, so that there's not a long walk from the train station to the office building. Some of the old CA&E right of way next to the Maywood Court House might be used, but most of that is now part of the Prairie Path.

At least for downtown commutes, a busway would probably be more useful in retaining existing riders than capturing new ones. I have a hard time imagining a lot of west suburbanites catching a bus to transfer to the Blue Line. It’s also worth noting that most (if not all) the busways I’ve seen proposed—mainly in various Cook DuPage Corridor study documents (http://www.rtams.org/rtams/planningStudy.jsp?id=56) aren’t exclusive busways, but HOV lanes with ramps to off-line bus stations. There’s also the issue of Oakbrook Center being several miles west of Forest Park. True, jobs are more dispersed and some bus shuttles would be necessary, but it would make more sense to have a rail station and transit center anchoring those routes at Oakbrook Center rather than way off at Forest Park. Just looking at the area from Google Maps, it also looks like with some improvements to the pedestrian environment and increased density a lot of Oakbrook Center jobs could be put within easy walking distance of an elevated terminal around Spring and Harger (also from the Cook DuPage study).


Originally posted by ardecila
The Elgin-O'Hare project is considering both a busway and LRT for its transit component, but the fact that LRT has not yet been ruled out tells me that the politicians driving the process won't settle for less than a sexy new rail line. The busway even has a built-in funding advantage, in that it can be funded entirely with highway dollars, while an LRT would need to seek an FTA grant.

From what I understand the busway’s eventually supposed to be part of the big J-Line, which connects looks to me like it connects most the big employment centers without ever touching anyplace with decent residential density—I remember seeing someone comment on its absence in Go To 2040 and CMAP basically replying “could you at least try the route out before we spend hundreds of millions on grade-separated bus lanes in the suburbs?” Elk Grove wants to do some major redevelopment around a combined Elgin-O’Hare highway and transit corridor, and I got the impression that the idea was to extend the Blue Line through O’Hare and then along the new expressway median before heading north to Woodfield. I saw their presentation at a conference (sorry, can’t find it online) and was blown away by the ambition—it made me think of something out of China. That said, I don’t think the prospects of coordinating transit expansion with the O’Hare expansion are all that good.

Speaking of which, from what I understand that route mainly came on the radar because of the STAR Line taking advantage of the Jane Addams median, which is pretty much a perfect example of “sexy” rail. The northwest corridor report (http://www.rtams.org/reportLibrary/132.pdf) gave a busway excellent marks, putting its ridership basically on-par with the heavy rail alternative (and both ranked higher than light rail). Maybe they were being overoptimistic about the bus, but this makes sense to me—jobs really start fanning out in all directions around O’Hare, and the Rosemont CTA station seems close enough to serve as a good anchor for this. Also, since there would be multiple routes feeding into the busway, there would be higher frequency for on-line busway stations, and there were enough bus routes to allow for skip-stop operation, increasing speeds.

Of course, no one in the suburbs would ever think of riding a bus, no matter how convenient. And everyone loves Metra. And thus we get what’s essentially a slightly less frequent light rail line running clunky FRA-compliant DMUs down the middle of a highway from an awkwardly placed Metra station near O’Hare to somewhere outside Joliet. And even though we’re only stuck with it in long-range planning world, the fact that it’s assumed to eventually be funded means that everything still has to be planned around it.

[ardecila]

Wow, you seem very knowledgeable for only your second post. :cheers: Welcome to SSP!

Just looking at the area from Google Maps, it also looks like with some improvements to the pedestrian environment and increased density a lot of Oakbrook Center jobs could be put within easy walking distance of an elevated terminal around Spring and Harger (also from the Cook DuPage study).

Yeah, the area in back of the mall is fairly leafy and green, and the streets are narrow. With some sidewalks and some increased density, it could be a nice little TOD node, directly feeding into the mall. I've heard concerns about the ride quality - would people really want to ride a bumpy L car all the way from Oak Brook to the Loop? Maybe they could get better rolling stock somehow.

From what I understand the busway’s eventually supposed to be part of the big J-Line, which connects looks to me like it connects most the big employment centers without ever touching anyplace with decent residential density....

I got the impression that the idea was to extend the Blue Line through O’Hare and then along the new expressway median before heading north to Woodfield. I saw their presentation at a conference (sorry, can’t find it online) and was blown away by the ambition—it made me think of something out of China. That said, I don’t think the prospects of coordinating transit expansion with the O’Hare expansion are all that good.

China, or at least DC. If Elk Grove wants to be ambitious about TOD, that's great. As a 1960s planned community, they don't really have a downtown, so more power to them.

The J-Line is a good idea, but it needs to tie into Metra better than it does, so that you can access the system from suburban downtowns. You're right - it seems like a good way for city-dwellers to get to suburban office parks, but it wouldn't do much else.

[Mr Downtown]

The most obvious way to serve Oak Brook would be with a bus line every few minutes from Elmhurst Metra to Hinsdale Metra via various Oak Brook destinations.

[ardecila]

That's a great short-term solution, although I'm still not sure it will entice a North Sider to take a three-transfer transit trip to their Oak Brook office job. Out in Barrington, I know the Pace shuttle to Prairie Stone isn't very well-used, even though the transfer is usually perfectly timed. This is possibly because the UP-NW line is inconveniently-placed for many North Siders.

Honestly, I don't know what Pace planners are thinking most of the time. It seems like they're trying to overlay a network-type system over a suburban environment that isn't dense enough to support it. The bus routes should focus on tying existing areas of employment density and residential density into the Metra system.

I'm not too sympathetic to the arguments that Pace should serve transit-dependent populations, especially because numerous people have now demonstrated that a basic used car and gas are affordable for all but the poorest individuals. Scarce transit dollars should be spent where they will generate the most ridership (and thereby take the most cars off the road, decreasing congestion and emissions).

[Mr Downtown]

PACE is three different systems. There are the legacy local-service lines, most notably the former Nortran and West Towns networks, which serve towns such as Highland Park and LaGrange and Joliet and Harvey where local routes are pretty important as part of the safety net for those who cannot drive. Then there are the feeder buses taking suburbanites to the Metra stations. And finally there are the experiments done with express routes to help reverse commuters get to suburban employment centers.

I'm puzzled by your assertion that the transit-dependent should be told to buy cars while we chase after fickle discretionary riders. A car on the road is a car on the road, and the experience in LA and dozens of other "new-rail" cities has been that we spend $30 per new rider trying to attract middle-class professionals to sexy new trains, while inexpensive modest improvements to bus service produce huge ridership gains among the working class and recent immigrants.

It's just not smart spending to build a rail line to some single terminus in Oak Brook that's a half-mile or more from actual office entrances. Cumberland on the O'Hare line is about the best layout we could ever wish for in a suburban office park on a rail line—yet only a tiny number of those office workers arrive on the Blue Line.

[ardecila]

PACE is three different systems.

Three systems? Hmmm....

See, this is the stuff that confuses the hell out of people. These are three different types of service, performing different functions, that Pace has attempted to whitewash and unify into a half-assed "network".

If the services were differentiated clearly, perhaps many riders wouldn't be so intimidated by the system. Visual communication is your specialty - surely you know what I'm talking about.

I'm puzzled by your assertion that the transit-dependent should be told to buy cars while we chase after fickle discretionary riders.

If the ridership data supports bus service to a given destination, be it an apartment complex, industrial park, or office campus, I'm supportive. It just often seems to me that Pace buses are running empty trying to serve poorer areas of the suburbs, when I know they would have a decent number of users if they simply ran lots of office-park feeder shuttles to major rail stations. That's because the office-park shuttles would be simply tying more destinations into existing rail corridors that already have a high number of users. Most Pace service, as far as I can tell, is like stringing two crumbs together with a rope - not the best use of rope, and who cares if the two crumbs are connected?

Metra is intuitively easy to understand. CTA is a bit more complex, but it makes sense too.

But I find it absolutely absurd to expect anyone to understand, let alone utilize, the Pace system. The suburbs are not uniformly dense enough to support transit service, and they do not have the convenient rational grid of streets that the city does. Since I can't understand the pattern in Pace's routes, I can't begin to consider its effectiveness. I can only go by anecdote and personal experience - both of which have been miserable.

[Busy Bee]

Pace should look to Viva by Toronto for a model that they should follow. That system is awesome and looks fantastic - which of course is something that eludes so many US transit - seemingly complete aloofness over the connection between image(fleet design, technology, integrated branding, station and stop infrastrucutre) and ridership appeal.

[VivaLFuego]

ardec,

I think you've more or less identified the various factors that define the impossibility of Pace's mission.


Pace should look to Viva by Toronto for a model that they should follow. That system is awesome and looks fantastic - which of course is something that eludes so many US transit - seemingly complete aloofness over the connection between image(fleet design, technology, integrated branding, station and stop infrastrucutre) and ridership appeal.

While I agree that the branding should certainly be emulated (or at least taken more seriously as part of transit's overall identity), the biggest difference is that Pace's travel market is much more likely to have free parking at their place of employment, so people are much less tolerant of the multi-leg commute trips that are a fact of life in Toronto. If you've got free or nearly free parking at the destination, the transfer penalty alone is likely to eliminate most of transit's competitiveness for middle class travelers, before even getting into travel time considerations.

[Beta_Magellan]

Wow, you seem very knowledgeable for only your second post. :cheers: Welcome to SSP!


Many thanks—although a lot of that knowledge comes from being a long-time lurker. ;)

I think Pace has been trying to improve their image lately—I’ve seen their new paint scheme on the Edens and it looks pretty slick, although I also saw that the bus was stuck in traffic with me, which is not so slick. If metro Chicago upgraded their shoulders for buses and emergency vehicles it would certainly help with this problem, but the research I’ve seen about shoulder-riding buses is that they’re better at retaining passengers than attracting new ones.

Pace is looking into signal priority and improved stops (at wider spacing) along Milwaukee and Cermak between Berwyn and Oak Brook. The latter makes a lot of sense—you go through a couple of denser, highly walkable suburbs to a major employment center only a couple of miles away—but I can’t think of any other corridors are as lucky geographically. Niles wants to couple bus improvements with pedestrian improvement and redevelopment along Milwaukee, but though you have to give them credit for leveraging a pretty small investment in transit for all they can, in the end it will still probably lead to a marginal improvement in transit ridership.

Still, I wonder if the lines in inner-ring suburbs could be marketed as a “frequent network” with minimum frequencies of fifteen minutes, limited stops (quarter-to-half-mile spacing in most cases), and on some corridors signal priority. Since the grid’s pretty strong in the older suburbs, it would be fairly legible and could serve as an improved feeder to Metra and the outlying CTA stations. And even though its riderhsip would be weak by Chicago standards, it might be on-par with systems in mid-sized cities. I wonder…

[BVictor1]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/traffic/ct-met-getting-around-1227-20101226,0,7521354.column

Change of direction for Wacker project
North-south rehab will be more focused than east-west reconstruction

Jon Hilkevitch
Getting Around
9:42 p.m. CST, December 26, 2010

[QUOTE]People who drive, walk, ride a bus or pedal a bicycle in downtown Chicago might want to mark December 2012 on their calendar as the completion date for the next Wacker Drive reconstruction project.

But before you do that, make a big red circle around Monday, Jan. 3, and maybe add a few exclamation points or scribble an unhappy face.

Picking up where the last Wacker project left off eight years ago, demolition will begin in one week, weather permitting, to rebuild the 55-year-old section of Upper and Lower Wacker from Randolph to Monroe streets, according to the Chicago Department of Transportation./QUOTE]

[brickhugger]

Jumping in for the first time here, but hopefully not the last.

Here is my proposal:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_yxxaxxHmgH0/TRosoq0CK_I/AAAAAAAAASM/tkDAgblOZHU/s1600/cta.jpg

(Apologies for the quality: I'm having issues with adobe right now).

Key points:
1) I split off the Circle line from a new line on Western, that turns east on Howard and runs to Howard and Sheridan. I think trying to combine them creates the worst of both worlds.
2) A new subway aunder Cicero, from Old Orchard to Blue Island.
3) A much smaller Circle line (North Ave, Michigan, Cermak, and Halsted), that serves the high density core.
4) East-west shuttles from Halsted to the Lake on Chicago, Grand, Monroe, Cermak, and Roosevelt. The goal is that most (if not all) of the core is within 1/4 mile walk of a subway station.
5) Extension of the Green line east and west, and the Brown line west to Jefferson Park.
6) New east-west subways on Fullerton, 47th (east from Western), and 86th Street.
7) COnstruction of a high-speed rail express between the Loop (Block 37 station), O'Hare, and Midway (with a possible transfer station at Jefferson Park).
8) transfer stations at all connection points between CTA and Metra, starting with the Davis Street Station in Evanston.


This is not a cheap proposal(!), but it has the benefit of flexibility; lines can be easily(!!) added as money and interest permit. Even if just(!) the two main north-south lines and the circle line were built a significant portion of the City would be significantly better served by rail transit.

There are some other improvements that could be made, if money is no object :jester: :

--Put the existing elevated lines underground
--Put a roof and walls around the highway stations, with sliding doors to the trains. those stations could be heated/cooled as weather permits
--A superstation at Monroe and the River, combining the Monroe Shuttle, Amtrak, and Metra. It would be a 1 block walk in either direction from the shuttle to the other trains, but it would be underground and heated, and would be the one link between the three downtown.
--I suppose a north south line could be built on Austin from the Blue line station to the north city limits.

Ok; my two cents worth. critique away! :whip:

[OhioGuy]

Chicago's transportation infrastructure weakening (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-city-transportation-20101223,0,4933742.story)

Next mayor faces challenges for funds for CTA, O'Hare, roads

By Jon Hilkevitch, TRIBUNE REPORTER
5:23 p.m. CST, December 23, 2010

Wacker Drive near Lake Street in downtown Chicago offers a panorama of an incredible transportation metropolis that huge numbers of people rely upon every day, yet often take for granted.

Cars, buses, trucks, taxis, bicyclists and pedestrians use both levels of Wacker to crisscross the downtown. Water taxis and other boats do the same by plying the Chicago River under a series of elegant drawbridges that accommodate vehicle and foot traffic.

CTA trains cross the Lake Street elevated rail bridge over the river, and trains circle the Loop tracks before fanning out across the city and into neighboring suburbs. Where the river bends south, Metra commuter and Amtrak long-distance trains can be seen crossing Clinton Street as they enter and leave downtown train terminals.

Above it all, airliners serving two uniquely different Chicago airports paint contrails over the Windy City skyline. Just out of view to the west are some of the busiest expressways in the U.S. and miles of railroad tracks used by more than 500 freight trains a day operating through the city.

The mayors of many big cities, and presumably the candidates vying to become Chicago's next mayor, would crave the opportunity to preside over the rich variety of transportation assets found in Chicago. But on closer inspection, they would be worried that so much of the aging infrastructure here — from roads and bridges to the CTA — is deteriorating rapidly. The public funding available isn't nearly enough to maintain a state of good repair, let alone expand the transportation system to improve traffic flow, make Chicago more attractive to businesses and nurture an intangible that defines a great city: livability, transportation experts say.

[i_am_hydrogen]

CTA to test train tracker in January

By: Lorene Yue December 30, 2010

(Crain's) — The Chicago Transit Authority is launching a test of its train tracking system next month.

The system will give arrival times at all 144 el stations via a website. Riders choose one of the eight rail lines and then a specific station to find trains arriving within a 15-minute window.

Read more: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20101230/NEWS10/101239992/cta-to-test-train-tracker-in-january#axzz19d9X101i

[Steely Dan]

^ can't wait. i absolutely adore bus tracker. i've found it to be reliably accurate and it has been extremely helpful in those "should i wait for a bus or just hop in a cab" situations. train tracker will hopefully do just the same.

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagonewscoop.org/renovated-l-platforms-require-costly-repairs-as-wood-planks-deteriorate-after-2-years/

Renovated L Platforms Require Costly Repairs as Wood Planks Deteriorate After 2 Years
By PATRICK REHKAMP and ROBERT HERGUTH December 30, 2010

Wooden L platforms that were rebuilt over the past few years as part of the $530 million Brown Line renovation are already deteriorating at some stations.

Officials with the Chicago Transit Authority began noticing the decaying wood in August 2008 — two years after the first stations were completed, the C.T.A. said.

Since then, about $300,000 has been spent replacing an estimated 10,000 square feet of Southern yellow pine decking at eight Brown Line stations — Chicago, Sedgwick, Armitage, Diversey, Montrose, Rockwell, Francisco and Kedzie — according to records and interviews.

[Nowhereman1280]

What did they not use pressure treated wood?

[Busy Bee]

Why are they still using wood at all? Forget purity, who cares if the decking is a composite that will actually last?

[ardecila]

I'm not quite sure. Wood is historically used for the platforms. It can also last a very long time.

My guess is that pine was the cheapest option - plus, it's been used successfully on many other stations. Cedar would have been great, but it's more expensive. Same goes for composites like Trex or Azek.

[Mr Downtown]

Wood, I think, has the best traction under ice and snow without needing the structural support required for concrete.

[Baronvonellis]

Chicago Sucks!!! Here's an idea why don't they not ticket my car for being in one spot for more than 7 days. No, it's not abandoned I just went on vacation for 10 days and I don't have a garage to park it in. Then they give me tickets for it being more than 12 inches from the curb which it wasn't. It was right against the curb. Then they send me a letter in the mail saying that since I abandoned my car would I like to give them my title to it as well so they can junk it. How about not giving out harassing tickets to tax paying citizens of the city. I had current registration and city stickers and was parked in a legal spot.

This was the worst welcome home I can get. I am seriously thinking about moving to Florida now to get away from all this Chicago BS.

[the urban politician]

Chicago Sucks!!! Here's an idea why don't they not ticket my car for being in one spot for more than 7 days. No, it's not abandoned I just went on vacation for 10 days and I don't have a garage to park it in. Then they give me tickets for it being more than 12 inches from the curb which it wasn't. It was right against the curb. Then they send me a letter in the mail saying that since I abandoned my car would I like to give them my title to it as well so they can junk it. How about not giving out harassing tickets to tax paying citizens of the city. I had current registration and city stickers and was parked in a legal spot.

This was the worst welcome home I can get. I am seriously thinking about moving to Florida now to get away from all this Chicago BS.

^ Are you sure that they don't require the curb to be clear a few hours per week for street cleaning?

I would definitely contest any tickets if you think their claims are false. Yeah, I can imagine why you'd be annoyed.

Keeping a car in a big city is a hassle. That's something one has to accept. If the inconveniences of car ownership are enough to make you move to Florida, then you really should consider leaving.

[pip]

Chicago Sucks!!! Here's an idea why don't they not ticket my car for being in one spot for more than 7 days. No, it's not abandoned I just went on vacation for 10 days and I don't have a garage to park it in. Then they give me tickets for it being more than 12 inches from the curb which it wasn't. It was right against the curb. Then they send me a letter in the mail saying that since I abandoned my car would I like to give them my title to it as well so they can junk it. How about not giving out harassing tickets to tax paying citizens of the city. I had current registration and city stickers and was parked in a legal spot.

This was the worst welcome home I can get. I am seriously thinking about moving to Florida now to get away from all this Chicago BS.

the reason i moved away from Boston was the time the price vehicle registration went up annually by $3.

[Haworthia]

^^^^ It's rough parking on the street, no denying it. I've payed my fair share of tickets, including two $50 tickets within 25 minutes of each other. I was parked when they were scheduled to do street cleaning. I was lucky I moved my car before they could tow it which would have happened with ticket # three. If I ever live within the city limits again, I'll either give up having a car or pay for a permanent spot. Definitely incentive to take public transit.

Hope you can fight some of those tickets.

[ChiTownCity]

^I just park in the garage....

[VivaLFuego]

Chicago Sucks!!! Here's an idea why don't they not ticket my car for being in one spot for more than 7 days. No, it's not abandoned I just went on vacation for 10 days and I don't have a garage to park it in. Then they give me tickets for it being more than 12 inches from the curb which it wasn't. It was right against the curb. Then they send me a letter in the mail saying that since I abandoned my car would I like to give them my title to it as well so they can junk it. How about not giving out harassing tickets to tax paying citizens of the city. I had current registration and city stickers and was parked in a legal spot.

This was the worst welcome home I can get. I am seriously thinking about moving to Florida now to get away from all this Chicago BS.

It stinks, but if it makes you feel better, basically every big city has abandoned vehicle laws, some even stricter than Chicago's (like 2-3 days) --- the difference is lackluster enforcement, and Chicago's budget situation has provided incentive the past couple years to be incredibly stringent about any and all possible parking violations. A few years ago it generally wasn't an issue to leave a car for weeks at a time on the street, but the last year it's gotten much tougher, especially if you're in a high visibility area.

[Baronvonellis]

I'm definitely going to fight them. I knew about the law but last year I parked in the same spot for 10 days over Christmas time and they didn't bother it then. This time though it was covered in a mountain of snow so it was much more noticeable. The same cop wrote all the tickets I got. So, I'm sure he saw it there everyday.

I didn't know they were so strict with the abandoned vehicle law. I could see if it was there for a month, but 7 days isn't that long. Perhaps a warning after 7 days. Do you think I have a chance to contest it? I wasn't abandoning it. I was just gone on vacation for a few days. I don't have a garage. My landlord doesn't want people parking cars behind our building for some reason.

[ardecila]

I went past the Oakton station site in Skokie today. No pictures, but there were several crews out doing utility relocation and so forth.

They're also pouring the curb bumpouts for the stationhouse and auxiliary entrance at Morgan.

[OhioGuy]

I went past the Oakton station site in Skokie today. No pictures, but there were several crews out doing utility relocation and so forth.

They're also pouring the curb bumpouts for the stationhouse and auxiliary entrance at Morgan.

Finally some news that the station construction is actually moving forward. I was looking on the CTA's website about a month or two ago in search of any updated information on the station, but I wasn't able to find anything new. Same for Village of Skokie's website. The Chinese can probably build 1000 km of high speed rail in less time than it's taken to get the Oakton station rebuilt.

[OhioGuy]

^^ Having said that, I now was able to locate a PDF news release (http://www.egovlink.com/public_documents300/skokie/published_documents/News/2010/Week%20of%20October%2011/PR-Yellow%20Line%20Construction%202010.pdf) on Skokie's website dating from October 14th.

October 14, 2010
For Immediate Release
Public Information Division

Construction Begins for the Yellow Line Oakton Street Station

Construction began this week on the CTA Yellow Line Oakton Street Station in Downtown Skokie. Construction of the “Kiss ‘n Ride” facility is expected to be complete in late fall 2011, and the Chicago Transit Authority estimates some 1,200 boardings will occur at the stop each day.

The station will cost approximately $20 million to construct, with the Village of Skokie funding $6 million and an additional $14 million coming from federal funds. The new station is adjacent to the Illinois Science + Technology Park (IS+TP) in Downtown Skokie. The new station is anticipated to increase the
attractiveness of the IS+TP by directly connecting Downtown Skokie and
Chicago.

Two renderings of the station (PDF) (http://www.egovlink.com/public_documents300/skokie/published_documents/Downtown%20Website/CTA%20Oakton%20Station.pdf)

[Haworthia]

Speaking of station construction, anyone know anything about a Morgan St. station for the Greenline? Has anything started yet?

[Beta_Magellan]

Can’t say I care much for the Oakton Station (though I do like the black-on-yellow signage)—I’d like something crisp and modern would work better at that site—I’m imagining something like the renovated Dan Ryan stations, but at grade level. The station also looks awfully big for something to only needs to berth two-car trains. Oh well, I can’t stand most Metra stations’ cutesy architecture either.

It’s good to hear they’re getting some work done—I would imagine utility relocation would be a big deal for any work on the Yellow Line. There’s often so much invisible work to be done in any major public work—our agencies really should do a better job of explaining to the public what’s going on and why, so the impression that nothing ever happens (which was my first reaction while passing Oakton a few months ago) can be avoided.

[chiguy123]

Speaking of station construction, anyone know anything about a Morgan St. station for the Greenline? Has anything started yet?

Yes. They have the street closed off and a rendering on Morgan.

Who else is excited about the bus only lanes through the loop? I think those are supposed to be started early this year. I know when I took the #56 out of the west loop from old job to Wicker Park it was a complete madhouse on Madison during rush hour. A dedicated bus lane should definitely help.

[lawfin]

I've got no problem with the higher rates downtown...but this is nonsense

Man Gets Ticket While Paying $5 For One Hour Of Parking Downtown (VIDEO)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/05/man-gets-ticketed-while-p_n_804807.html

[the urban politician]

I've got no problem with the higher rates downtown...but this is nonsense

Man Gets Ticket While Paying $5 For One Hour Of Parking Downtown (VIDEO)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/05/man-gets-ticketed-while-p_n_804807.html

^ Ugh.... I'd be pissed if I was that guy

[ardecila]

Who else is excited about the bus only lanes through the loop? I think those are supposed to be started early this year. I know when I took the #56 out of the west loop from old job to Wicker Park it was a complete madhouse on Madison during rush hour. A dedicated bus lane should definitely help.

The design will be started early this year for the "Central Transitway" and the Jeffrey bus lanes. There's no word on when construction will start, though.

[Mr Downtown]

Train Tracker (http://www.transitchicago.com/traintracker/) is live.

Red/Purple Modernization project has a website (http://www.transitchicago.com/rpmproject/) (and a logo). Scoping meetings to be held the last week of January in four North Lakefront locations.

[Thundertubs]

Train Tracker (http://www.transitchicago.com/traintracker/) is live.


Does anyone know if it is available for smartphones yet? I looked on the Droid market, but did not find.

[Haworthia]

Does anyone know if it is available for smartphones yet? I looked on the Droid market, but did not find.

I don't think there are any specific apps for the train tracker, but I suggest checking out the website CTA Tattler, which has a review of the tracker.
http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/cta-tattler/2011/01/cta-train-tracker-beta-review.html

Hope that's helpful.

[emathias]

Does anyone know if it is available for smartphones yet? I looked on the Droid market, but did not find.

CTA hasn't made the data available to developers yet (http://www.transitchicago.com/traintracker/help.aspx#devs). The developer for TreKing has previously promised to incorporate the rail data as soon as it's available, though.

Until then, there is a mobile website (http://www.transitchicago.com/mobile/traintracker.aspx). I have a link for it from the main screen on my android phone (G2).

[M II A II R II K]

City exploring slimmer, trimmer roads


January 9, 2011

Jon Hilkevitch

http://www.chicagotribune.com/images/logoSmall.png

Read More: http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/traffic/ct-met-getting-around-0110-20110109,0,377920.column

Like a bulging waistline, Chicago streets have gotten fat over the years, growing wider from curb to curb to handle more vehicles. With that additional girth, traffic-related dangers have expanded, too, especially for pedestrians and transit riders trying to cross busy streets and bicyclists sharing the road with cars and trucks. Sidewalks, meanwhile, often have been narrowed to accommodate more traffic lanes.

The unfortunate upshot is that the high priority placed on accommodating vehicles over other forms of transportation has in many cases backfired. The extra lanes have produced, at best, only short-term improvements in traffic flow due to the ever-increasing number of vehicles.

But a more inclusive approach to traffic management is starting to take root here, as city transportation officials prepare to launch the largest local experiment of its kind to slim down streets. It's called a "road diet." The battle of the bulge will be waged on an approximately one-mile stretch of Lawrence Avenue in the Lincoln Square neighborhood.

The existing four lanes on Lawrence (two lanes in each direction) between Western and Ashland avenues will be trimmed to three vehicle lanes — a single lane in each direction with a center continuous left-turn lane, according to the design under way at the Chicago Department of Transportation.

Removing one lane in each direction will make room for wider sidewalks to foster a more welcoming experience for pedestrians. In addition, a designated bike lane in each direction will be striped. In-street islands will be built along crosswalks to create a safe haven for people crossing streets. Other amenities will be added, including more than 150 trees, better lighting, benches and even enough space for sidewalk cafes, officials said.

It creates a picture of a place where people would want to shop and enjoy a good meal, instead of dart through as fast as possible, and a possible template for similar projects elsewhere in the city, officials said.

"The changes planned for Lawrence will help the development of more street life and make that section a place that pedestrians want to be," said Luann Hamilton, a deputy transportation commissioner responsible for creating new projects. "Now Lawrence has a cold feel to it, unlike the atmosphere around Lincoln Square where Lawrence intersects Western."

Construction of the new streetscape could begin as early as next year, pending funding from the city, state and federal governments, officials said. Elements of the road-diet concept have been used at about 10 other locations across the city, mainly on neighborhood streets rather than a major arterial such as Lawrence.

.....

[Busy Bee]

Great news! Chicago's streets need to be rethought for the 21st century.

[Steely Dan]

I'M IN LOVE WITH TRAIN TRACKER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i took the train this morning instead of my bike due to the weather, and i can't tell you how nice it is to know when then next purple line train is gonna arrive because sometimes it seems like the gap between trains can stretch up to 25 minutes when the CTA is up to it's usual tricks of totally fucking up everything that it does.

well, at least they got train tracker right. kudos, CTA, on a job (rarely) well done!

[ardecila]

Riders demanded it and they delivered. I think CTA is fairly responsive to the public on a large scale (although obviously some individual employees are not).

[M II A II R II K]

It can be even better if they make their CTA app for mobiles have access to the system to know what train is coming or how long a delay is without having to actually enter the system. In addition to just having pre-planned bus schedules to look up in the app.

[Mr Downtown]

^Huh? Train Tracker optimized for mobile devices. (http://www.transitchicago.com/mobile/traintracker.aspx)

[Steely Dan]

^ yeah, i've had no problems using train or bus tracker with my i-phone. well, not any problems beyond AT&T's truly craptacular service network.

[emathias]

It can be even better if they make their CTA app for mobiles have access to the system to know what train is coming or how long a delay is without having to actually enter the system. In addition to just having pre-planned bus schedules to look up in the app.

The CTA doesn't write mobile apps. They provide data feeds and an API for any and all developers to use. As I stated above, the CTA has explicitly said that for this early Beta version, they are not adding the train tracker data to their developer data feeds or API until they have it working smoothly.

And your comment about "just having pre-planned bus schedules" makes no sense, since bus tracker uses live GPS data and not schedules.

Are you sure you know what you're talking about?

[M II A II R II K]

My app only has the schedule info for busses, but then there are no bus trackers for our system, subway has them though.

[pottebaum]

Indeed! I haven't really used train tracker during the day when wait times are pretty short, but it was definitely useful last weekend at night!

[chiguy123]

From the Tribune:

Ridership with Chicago Transit Authority down less than 1 percent in 2010

CHICAGO (AP) — Chicago Transit Authority officials say ridership was down less than 1 percent in 2010, despite the weak economy and cuts in bus and train service.

The Chicago Tribune reports that the agency gave 516.9 million rides in 2010. That is 4.7 million more than projected for the year, but 0.8 percent less than the year before.

CTA President Richard Rodriguez says the news is encouraging, especially when considering the impact of the recession.

Rodriguez says bus ridership was down 4 percent last year. The agency reduced bus service by 18 percent in 2010 because of budget cuts.

Meanwhile, train ridership was up more than 4 percent. Rail service was cut by 9 percent.

[ardecila]

Red/Purple Modernization project has a website (http://www.transitchicago.com/rpmproject/) (and a logo). Scoping meetings to be held the last week of January in four North Lakefront locations.
http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/7176/rpmodernizationproject.jpg

There's been a debate (http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/cta-tattler/2011/01/scoping-meetings-next-step-in-red-purple-line-modernization-project.html#more) about this on the CTA Tattler website. CTA's identified 6 options, ranging from least to most ambitious.

1. No Action Alternative: Maintains the status quo. It includes the absolute minimum repairs required to keep the lines functional. This alternative is used as a basis for comparison for the other alternatives.
2. Basic Rehabilitation Alternative: Provides strategic mix of repairs, rehabilitation and replacement for a useful life of 20 years. All stations would receive a basic level of ADA compliance.
3. Basic Rehabilitation with Transfer Stations Alternative: Same as Basic Rehabilitation Alternative plus the addition of transfer stations at Wilson and Loyola.
4. Modernization 4-Track Alternative: Provides modern amenities at station, increases speed of service, includes new transfer stations at Wilson and Loyola and major repairs, reconstruction and new construction would extend the useful life to 60-80 years.
5. Modernization 3-Track Alternative: Similar improvements as Modernization 4-Track Alternative except with 3-tracks in the North Red Line area and no reverse-commute express service. Includes many of the same station amenities with less right-of-way acquisition.
6. Modernization 2-Track Underground Alternative: Similar improvements as Modernization 4-Track Alternative except with a 2-track subway between Belmont and Loyola and a 2-track elevated between Loyola and Howard.

Additional details were given in the comments. Alternatives 4 and 5 would entail a total reconstruction of the decaying solid-fill viaduct as a concrete aerial structure, and possible closures of South Blvd, Foster, Jarvis, Thorndale, and/or Lawrence, in conjunction with the opening of new entrances at nearby stations.

Alternative 6 would build a subway between Belmont and Loyola with a portal just north of Belmont, then running underneath Sheffield/Sheridan to Broadway, then up Broadway to Loyola where it would return to aerial structure. New stations would be built at Addison, Irving Park, Wilson, Foster, Bryn Mawr, Glenlake, and Devon.

I assume cost estimates will be given at the community meetings a week from now. If a two-track subway costs less than a new 4-track elevated, that may be a smart choice. The paring-down of stations and the smoother alignment might result in enough of a speed boost to offset the loss of express service. The life expectancy of an underground concrete subway structure is also extremely long - Chicago won't have to worry about rebuilding the damn thing in another century.

CTA might come up with new alternatives after they receive comments, too. I'd like to see them price out an option with a shorter subway between Belmont and Lawrence to eliminate the Clark Junction conflicts and the dead-man's-curves at Sheridan.

[denizen467]

^ Exciting stuff.


If a two-track subway costs less than a new 4-track elevated, that may be a smart choice.

Is that realistically conceivable?

Incidentally, I can't picture riding the el to Wrigley and the climbing out of a subway station ... the elevated station is such a part of the Wrigley environs. Even just the rumble as heard from the ballpark. How about a portal around 3800 North...?

[ardecila]

Is that realistically conceivable?

Possibly. A 4-track elevated built to modern standards would be enormously wide at stations. The property takings alone could get into the hundreds of millions. What do you do in Edgewater and Rogers Park where there are high-rises or mid-rises directly abutting the tracks?

A TBM-bored subway is relatively inexpensive. The bulk of the cost usually comes from the stations, which are typically done through cut-and-cover method. The cut-and-cover is very expensive in a dense city where you must re-route traffic, move utilities, deny access to adjacent buildings, and prevent the ground from collapsing around the dig site.

Nowadays, though, there are large-bore TBMs where you can fit two tracks and platforms into the round tunnel in a stacked arrangement, avoiding the high cost of cut-and-cover. The platforms exit out to escalators and elevators in a shaft built under a lot next to the street. Conceivably, CTA could even recover some of its costs by partnering with developers to build atop the access shaft.

Here's a graphic from a Barcelona subway currently under construction. The shaft wouldn't be nearly this expansive and the tunnel wouldn't be nearly as deep, but you get the picture (even if you can't read Catalan).

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/9084/barcelonapp.jpg

[lawfin]

Perhaps I am misunderstanding...why would they close Lawrence?

IS the subway in addition to the L or is it to replace the L between Belmomt / Loyola

[Chicagoguy]

I love this idea...I think it would be nice great to have an extended subway all the way up to Loyola. But I do think it would be weird to be going north on the Redline and to come above ground for 3 stops and then tunnel right back under? If that is the case why not just extend the tunnel to connect with the existing one?

[Nowhereman1280]

If we are getting into talk of building a 2 track elevated and 2 track subway, then we may as well just separate the purple line and the red line and run a subway up Clark from just north of Belmont to Howard. I mean at that point you may as well use it as an oppurtunity to expand the service area of the system. can you imagine how useful it would be to have alternating stops along the current red line ROW and along Clark Street? I mean the new stations they would build along the subway would be perfect for Clark Street:

Addison, Irving Park, Wilson, Foster, Bryn Mawr, Glenlake, and Devon... Those are all almost perfectly placed to service the Clark Street Corridor. They are so perfect it almost makes me think that might be the plan. God can you imagine how awesome Andersonville would be with Subway stops at Foster and Bryn Mawr?

[schwerve]

A TBM-bored subway is relatively inexpensive. The bulk of the cost usually comes from the stations, which are typically done through cut-and-cover method. The cut-and-cover is very expensive in a dense city where you must re-route traffic, move utilities, deny access to adjacent buildings, and prevent the ground from collapsing around the dig site.
[/IMG]

Its my understanding TBMs are a significant disadvantage when dealing with ground which requires significant reinforcement, Chicago's soil being one. The bulk of the machine itself makes reinforcement extremely difficult and thus the operation is slow and unproductive. I say this generally but don't know the particulars of how deep they'd be digging or the exact characteristics of the ground therein.

[ardecila]

If we are getting into talk of building a 2 track elevated and 2 track subway

No, no... the 2-track subway would replace the elevated completely. The elevated would be torn down afterward.