[nicksplace27]

Why would that be necessary?

It would save a significant amount of time; something like 6 minutes.

[untitledreality]

CTA seems dreadfully afraid of structural failure on their steel viaducts. To reduce the loading on the steel, they pitched a staggered side platform design for Morgan until the engineers told them it would be cheaper just to beef up the steel.
In the case of a Cermak Green, it could just be that they do not have the width available for a fully ADA compliant station without going staggered. While Morgan had the luxury of building out over sidewalks, the Cermak Green abuts private property, so creating a station within the narrow gap between tracks is crucial to keep costs down.

[ardecila]

^ I'm curious about how the ADA standards are construed. As far as I know, ADA concerns clear space around obstacles, and you could remove platform obstacles pretty easily, apart from vertical access. Set the platform up like Harlem or Cumberland with a box around the tracks and platform which supports the canopy and signage. Enclose the box to avoid the need for platform windbreaks. Suspend everything else from the canopy.

Yes, this would add cost, but you're also cutting the length of the station in half. This doesn't leave as much platform room for waiting passengers but it does provide a platform free of obstacles.

[ardecila]

It would save a significant amount of time; something like 6 minutes.

I don't know about 6 minutes, but it's probably the single biggest thing you could do to speed up Red and Purple trains, other than removing slow zones. On a 40-minute trip, cutting 2 or 3 minutes is a pretty big improvement.

Edit: Okay, the scheduled Red Line time (http://www.goroo.com/goroo/showScheduleForm.htm?sb=CTA_RAIL&type=full&route=Red%20Line) from Wilson to Addison is 5 minutes. This includes a station stop at Sheridan. The thing is, trains rounding these curves must slow dramatically when there is another train on an adjacent track. Given the frequency and the overlap of Red and Purple trains, this happens pretty often. I know this personally, having ridden the Red Line daily for several months. Let's say it adds two minutes of delay over the scheduled time. A properly-designed high speed curve with a new Sheridan station would eliminate the delay and maybe shave a minute or two off of the scheduled times through the corridor for a total savings of three-four minutes.

My preferred solution, of course, would be to sink the North Main Line into a Sheffield subway through Wrigleyville, which would grade-separate Clark Junction, provide a new high-capacity subway station at Wrigley/Addison, and eliminate the Sheridan curve. North of Irving Park, the tunnel would curve westward to the current alignment and return to the elevated. The problem is accommodating all four tracks. I don't know if it's possible to dig a four-track tunnel with anything other than cut-and-cover.

[OhioGuy]

Thought I'd post some recent photos of the new Morgan Street station under construction on the Green/Pink line. It's scheduled to open probably sometime this summer (btw, these aren't my photos):

First two from Zol87 (flickr):
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7034/6474277485_c16a1f3708_z.jpg

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7018/6474276477_fdbf62e3c4_z.jpg

Last six from CurbedChicago (flickr):
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6227/6389516567_18cbfa3f2c_o.jpg

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6216/6389516731_09fdefe723_o.jpg

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6112/6389516535_80bb38593a_o.jpg

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6102/6389516667_d5cec295f7_o.jpg

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6036/6389516287_25d053ebd8_o.jpg

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6236/6389516623_a8ea265faa_o.jpg

[OhioGuy]

New Skokie CTA station could open by March (http://triblocal.com/skokie/2011/12/29/new-skokie-cta-station-could-open-by-march/)

Trib Local Skokie
By Brian L. Cox Special to the Tribune
Thursday at 7:46 p.m.

http://triblocal.com/skokie/files/cache/2011/12/new-cta-stop-12-28-11.jpg/460_345_resize.jpg

Fred Schattner is excited about the new traffic lights at Skokie Boulvard and Searle Parkway that were turned on in mid-December.

The light was installed to help direct traffic from Oakton Street CTA Yellow Line station when it opens, a $20 million project that officials say will be a boon to downtown Skokie.

For Schattner, the village’s director of engineering, the light is a sign that the new station will soon open.

“That was a big achievement,” he said. “It was kind of a complicated project because it’s interconnected with the CTA train and it’s also interconnected with Oakton and Skokie Boulvard. It’s an added piece to the puzzle.”

A roof was recently added to the station, and interior work is now underway.

The station will likely open in March – if not sooner.

“With inspections and tests it’s hard to predict an exact date,” Schattner said.

The CTA station is being built on a village-owned vacant lot at the northwest corner of Searle Parkway and Skokie Boulevard. The CTA estimates that 1,200 people will board the train at that stop each day. The Village of Skokie is contributing $6 million, with federal funds picking up the rest of the cost.

“Some people don’t know there’s two station houses,” said Schattner. “The north station house and the south station house.”

The stop is adjacent to the 23-acre Illinois Science + Technology Park, which some hope will make Illinois an economic engine for biosciences such as nanotechnology.

Village officials hope the CTA stop itself will help make the neighborhood an economic engine.

“There is a buzz in the community on this project,” Schattner said. “People drive by and see it. It’s really impressive looking and it’s great to have a downtown stop. It’s not a shoebox of a station. It’s really catching people’s eye.”

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ I have to say I'm pleased with how the canopy has turned out. I thought it was going to be all fugly pomo and that's actually a pretty cool, modernish design for the shelter.

[VivaLFuego]

Do I recall correctly that the plan for streetscaping and a road diet to make Oakton a bit less pedestrian-hostile is on indefinite hold?

[ardecila]

I don't know about indefinite hold. Skokie was so anxious to put it in that they did a trial version last summer with paint and cones. I'm sure the trial revealed issues that need to be addressed in the final design, and as always, finding the funding is a challenge. I never heard that Skokie was shelving the plan, though.

The few times I drove through there during the trial period, traffic seemed to be flowing smoothly.

The Oakton station looks great, although the paint is pretty yucky, and I was hoping for a translucent roof.

[Hayward]

Here's some lousy photos I took of the Halsted Bridge. As you can see, it's not finished but you can drive / walk across it.

http://www.umich.edu/~ifmuth/20120105construction5.jpg

http://www.umich.edu/~ifmuth/20110105construction6.jpg

http://www.umich.edu/~ifmuth/20110105construction7.jpg

http://www.umich.edu/~ifmuth/20110105construction8.jpg

[ardecila]

I don't know about indefinite hold. Skokie was so anxious to put it in that they did a trial version last summer with paint and cones. I'm sure the trial revealed issues that need to be addressed in the final design, and as always, finding the funding is a challenge. I never heard that Skokie was shelving the plan, though.


Looks like I spoke too soon; the village is shelving the plan. :hell:

Residents bitched to the village council about increased traffic on their side streets, but the data collected by the study specifically showed that there were no major increases in traffic. "Surely if you narrow a road, that traffic has to go somewhere, right? Well, gosh darnit, it's not gonna go in front of MY house!"

Surprisingly, though, all the businesses and landowners along Oakton were strongly in support of the road diet. I guess they were unable to sway the neighborhood residents.

All is not lost, though - Skokie was planning to fund the road diet and other streetscape improvements out of a TIF that is set to expire. Without the road diet, Skokie is freed up to make other, more extensive improvements to the downtown streetscape. No word on what those might be but they will have a large budget to work with so we might get something pretty nice.

[chicagopcclcar1]

The thing is, trains rounding these curves must slow dramatically when there is another train on an adjacent track. Given the frequency and the overlap of Red and Purple trains, this happens pretty often. I know this personally, having ridden the Red Line daily for several months.

I am a former motorman and CTA "L" trains are operated around curves without any bearing at all to other trains on other tracks or trains operated on other tracks in opposite direction.

The only exception is when there are personnel on the right of way, workers, track walkers, etc. Then only one train at a time can pass those track level workers, straight track or curved, with the Loop bound train given preference. There was a lot of track reconstruction at Sheridan this past year with personnel on the right of way, and that is what you might have experienced.

David Harrison

[ardecila]

^ Ah that might be it.

[chiguy123]

January 17, 2012
Mayor Emanuel Opens Newly-Renovated Grand Avenue Red Line Station

The article also talks about plans for the following new stations:

Clark/Division
Cermak Green Line Station
Washington/Wabash Loop Elevated Station

http://www.cityofchicago.org/content/city/en/depts/mayor/press_room/press_releases/2012/january/mayor_emanuel_opensnewly-renovatedgrandavenueredlinestation.html

[ardecila]

Clark/Division

This $86.6 million subway renovation project includes the construction of a brand new 6,300 square-foot mezzanine for the Clark/Division Red Line subway station. It will be the first new mezzanine to be constructed since the Red Line subway was originally built in the 1940s. In addition to the new mezzanine at LaSalle, the original Clark mezzanine and platform will also be completely renovated and brought up to current CTA standards.

The project highlights include: energy efficient lighting; new fare collection equipment; granite floors; state-of-the-art communication and security equipment; new signage; new enclosed stairs and escalators; and new wall and ceiling architectural finishes. The renovation of this station will upgrade the deteriorated an out-of-date facility and enhance the station’s appearance and operation.

Construction of the new mezzanine and platform at LaSalle Street will begin in March and will be completed in 24 months. Than the 12-month renovation of the existing platform and mezzanine at Clark Street will begin, with the entire project completed by March 2015.

Cermak Green Line Station

This $50 million TIF-supported project consists of the design and construction of a new elevated CTA station at Cermak on the Green Line. The station, located in the two mile-stretch between the existing Roosevelt and 35th/Bronzeville stations will provide much needed access to rapid transit for neighborhood residents and businesses. The new station will be ADA-accessible and have station house facilities located at grade level. The platform will be a center-island configuration for an eight-car train with canopy coverage for six cars. The station will also include an auxiliary exit to the north side of 23rd Street.

The design work will begin in March with construction set to begin by February 2013. The 18-month construction project is expected to be complete by July 2014.

This station, which will allow another access point to McCormick Place, is expected to provide a significant boost to the convention industry and help facilitate conventioneers getting downtown quickly and affordably.

Washington/Wabash Loop Elevated Station

The planned $75 million Washington/Wabash elevated station will replace two separate century-old stations on Wabash at Randolph and Madison. The new station will be located along Wabash Avenue south of Washington Street.

The fare controls, stairs, escalators, elevators, electrical, security and communications rooms will be on the mezzanine level. The station will be entirely new and will meet ADA standards with new elevators from the street to mezzanine and platform levels. The platform capacity will be enlarged from the existing 7’-6” width to 10’ to 13’ widths.

Final design work will begin in May, with construction scheduled to begin in April 2013. The project is expected to be complete by September 2014.



This seems like a crappy time to make a big public announcement. Illinois' whole allotment of CMAQ funding is in jeopardy. I guess the city could fund these things with bond revenue and then pay back the bondholders with the CMAQ when it is restored in a few years. That still puts the city on the hook for the interest, though.

6300sf is pretty spacious for the new Clark/Division mezzanine, especially for a secondary entrance. Here's hoping the city doesn't push forward with the crappy Disney design they've been using.

I do like that all three will open periodically in 2014. We're gonna have a good couple of years here in Chicago. In 2012, we get openings of Grand, Oakton, and Morgan. In 2013, we get the Jeffrey and Central BRT and probably some other stuff.

[Nowhereman1280]

Just a random thought, but what does everyone think the best alternative to the disney tile is? There has to be an ultra modern, sexy, material that resists grime and graf better than the crappy tile.

Gorilla Glass? Too expensive?
Polished stone? Too expensive?
Ceramic alternatives? Ugly? Expensive?
Metals? Too easy to dent?

[k1052]

yay to the long overdue Washington-Wabash station and getting that side of the loop down to two stations finally

hopefully they are thinking about redoing State/Lake soon which is downright dangerous during some rush periods and special events downtown

[ardecila]

^^ State/Lake, if renovated, needs to include a direct transfer to the Red Line. You could just build an enclosed stairway in the median of State that directly connects the two mezzanines with no street access. Handicapped access would be trickier, but you could probably embed an elevator in one of the adjacent buildings (Page Bros. or 190 N. State).

Just a random thought, but what does everyone think the best alternative to the disney tile is? There has to be an ultra modern, sexy, material that resists grime and graf better than the crappy tile.

Gorilla Glass? Too expensive?
Polished stone? Too expensive?
Ceramic alternatives? Ugly? Expensive?
Metals? Too easy to dent?

I saw this at Museumsquartier in Vienna. All of that city's metro stations are organized on a 1m grid, so wall panels, floor panels, and ceiling panels can all be mass-produced easily. Each station uses different materials, and individuality is achieved using different configurations on the 1m grid, artwork installations, and sometimes display cases set into the wall.

I believe Gorilla Glass is for consumer electronics. This particular glass material (spandrel glass) would be great for Chicago because of its large panel sizes.

-Installation costs are cheap since there are relatively few pieces.
-Since it directly adheres to the concrete wall behind, or to sheetrock, it won't shatter like a window would.
-Broken panels should occur rarely if at all, and they can be swapped out easily because the panels are so big, with little or no visual difference over the original panels.
-The smooth, reflective surface is easy to clean, will not stain even after decades of use, and the reflective quality makes the cramped underground spaces feel larger.

Plus, the spandrel glass is pretty similar in concept to the original Vitralite of the Initial System stations, so it's an historical homage.

http://farm1.staticflickr.com/42/77545970_d54c16806c_z.jpg
flickr/Ronja (http://www.flickr.com/photos/80696165@N00/77545970/)

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3581/3375674794_c0be99e9f9_z.jpg
flickr/andynash (http://www.flickr.com/photos/andynash/3375674794/)

[J_M_Tungsten]

^^^That would be slick.

[Nowhereman1280]

Gorrila Glass is primarily going to be used in consumer electronics, but there is no reason why it can't be applied elsewhere once prices for it drop far enough. The problem right now is that it is expensive. The benefits of gorrila glass is that it is almost impossible to crack, chip, or scratch which means etchers and every day damage would be foiled.

The station you posted is gorgeous, but how to they prevent etchers from going to town on it?

[MayorOfChicago]

I don't know about 6 minutes, but it's probably the single biggest thing you could do to speed up Red and Purple trains, other than removing slow zones. On a 40-minute trip, cutting 2 or 3 minutes is a pretty big improvement.

Edit: Okay, the scheduled Red Line time (http://www.goroo.com/goroo/showScheduleForm.htm?sb=CTA_RAIL&type=full&route=Red%20Line) from Wilson to Addison is 5 minutes. This includes a station stop at Sheridan. The thing is, trains rounding these curves must slow dramatically when there is another train on an adjacent track. Given the frequency and the overlap of Red and Purple trains, this happens pretty often. I know this personally, having ridden the Red Line daily for several months. Let's say it adds two minutes of delay over the scheduled time. A properly-designed high speed curve with a new Sheridan station would eliminate the delay and maybe shave a minute or two off of the scheduled times through the corridor for a total savings of three-four minutes.

My preferred solution, of course, would be to sink the North Main Line into a Sheffield subway through Wrigleyville, which would grade-separate Clark Junction, provide a new high-capacity subway station at Wrigley/Addison, and eliminate the Sheridan curve. North of Irving Park, the tunnel would curve westward to the current alignment and return to the elevated. The problem is accommodating all four tracks. I don't know if it's possible to dig a four-track tunnel with anything other than cut-and-cover.

6 minutes!? That's about as long as a train takes to go from Sheridan halfway down to Fullerton. From the time I see the train coming into view as it enters the curve into the station going southbound until the time we clear the curve leaving the station is normally a minute.

How would you same more than 10-12 seconds by straigthening out Sheridan? The trains come around the curve and directly into the station. Then leave the station directly into another curve. They're certainly not going 55mph when they do this. I take Sheridan every single day, and I don't see how the trains would be sped up that much between those two curves on either end of the station if they were smoothed out a bit more. Not to warrent spending millions and tearing down fairly decent buildings.

If any curve slows you down, it's the double curve on the Brown/Purple at Halsted and North. Even then, many motormen take those curves at very high speeds. Sometimes the people in the cars are all thrown around as the train charges through both curves.

[ardecila]

I never said 6 minutes. I thought it was excessive too. I don't think 2 minutes of savings is unrealistic though. Plus, removing the tight curves reduces noise in the neighborhood and reduces wear on the railcars. For the Red Line, which has no other such tight curves anywhere, this is important.

There are various alignment options CTA could consider to smooth the curve, and if designed properly they could minimize demolitions. My preferred alternative would be to construct the station at a 15-degree angle (instead of pure east-west or 45 degrees). This would use up some of the backyards/detached garages of the homes on Irving Park (only one demolition, on the west end) and some of the ugly 1-story buildings around Sheridan/Dakin. Only two residential properties would be seized - the Irving Park home at 1045 W. and the 3-story building at 3934 N. Sheridan.

Presumably the new viaduct would be concrete and therefore substantially quieter than the existing shrieking steel structure. CTA could probably also design the new station such that the PA announcements and door-closing bells would not be heard off of the platform. The rebuilt stations at Belmont and Fullerton are much better neighbors than, say, Armitage due to the quieter structure. If you stand beneath the tracks at Fletcher, it's almost peaceful.

[ardecila]

Clark/Division - New LaSalle Mezzanine
Looks like Rahm hates the Disney look too. :cheers: This wavy thing is gonna become a common motif. We already have it at Millennium Station.

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/614/clarkdivision2.jpg

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/4734/clarkdivision1.jpg


Washington/Wabash
More waves. The new station will preserve views of the Wabash architecture with no exterior walls. Waiting passengers will freeze.

http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/1160/wawa3.jpg

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/6050/wawa2.jpg

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/5188/wawa1.jpg


Cermak
No renderings of this one. Looks like disabled people will need to use the ramp instead of an elevator. This will save a boatload of money for the city.

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/8720/cermak1.jpg

[Mr Downtown]

Then how can that new Cermak station possibly cost $50 million?

It's some structural steel, some metal stairs, and a concrete platform on stringers. How can it cost three times as much as an entire friggin' Walmart?

[ardecila]

Beats me. There are plenty of vacant lots nearby that can be used for staging. Maybe they need to do intensive repairs to the steel viaduct?

I don't really know how they can maintain ADA compliance with a platform that's no wider than the one further south at 35th. A more rigorous application of ADA is what gave us the wide platforms at Belmont/Fullerton - unless that was just a convenient excuse to get more funding in order to build properly-sized transfer platforms.

[ardecila]

I rescind my remarks about the staggered platform. Apparently the platform will be a conventional center-island one, with more than the required 6' of clearance between obstacles and the platform edge.

I also failed to note that there will be an elevator, which will be installed at the north end of the platform. The ramp will provide handicapped access to the south end of the platform.

I'm glad the CTA isn't spending a boatload of money building a station twice as long as what is required. I'm not glad that the CTA is spending a boatload of money more than they should to build this station.

[orulz]

Presumably the new viaduct would be concrete and therefore substantially quieter than the existing shrieking steel structure.

Steel viaducts can be made to be pretty quiet if they have a ballasted deck rather than ties directly affixed to the steel substructure...

[lawfin]

Sorry I am a little confused here is there going to be a new entrance to the division / clark red line stop at Lasalle? So will one be able to enter the subway at Lasalle and division instead of walking over to clark? I am assuming the entrane at clark will remain as well?

[VivaLFuego]

Then how can that new Cermak station possibly cost $50 million?


It's probably an all-in cost, not just the construction contract value --- so it would include planning, design, construction management, construction, and owner (CDOT/CTA) staff time billed to the project, all escalated to year of expenditure dollars.

I'll have to check, but there may be some infrastructural work (utilities, structure, track, signals) bundled into the project as well that aren't directly tied to the station but make sense to do as part of the same project.

[Nowhereman1280]

Then how can that new Cermak station possibly cost $50 million?

It's some structural steel, some metal stairs, and a concrete platform on stringers. How can it cost three times as much as an entire friggin' Walmart?

Well for one thing, because it's not a Walmart, but rather a train station. Walmarts and other box buildings like that are dirt cheap to build. They are all pre fabricated and basically come as kits that they just slap together. A custom designed, fabricated, and erected train station that needs to be built around the operation of an active, electrified, rail line is going to be just a wee bit more expensive.

[ardecila]

Steel viaducts can be made to be pretty quiet if they have a ballasted deck rather than ties directly affixed to the steel substructure...

Theoretically, yeah, but the 110-year-old South Main elevated structure isn't built to carry hundreds of tons of ballast.

Sorry I am a little confused here is there going to be a new entrance to the division / clark red line stop at Lasalle? So will one be able to enter the subway at Lasalle and division instead of walking over to clark? I am assuming the entrane at clark will remain as well?

Yes, new entrances along LaSalle. I don't know yet whether the stairs will be on the east side or west side of LaSalle, but the west side would be more convenient for people walking over from Wells or ParkSide.

[emathias]

...
Yes, new entrances along LaSalle. I don't know yet whether the stairs will be on the east side or west side of LaSalle, but the west side would be more convenient for people walking over from Wells or ParkSide.

It would obviously be a lot cheaper to only put them on the east side of Lasalle, but for the price they're paying I hope they can manage to put them on all four corners of Lasalle.

I would guess they'll build out the Lasalle entrance first so they can shut down the Clark entrance while they rebuild it, similar to how they staged the Cermak (Red Line) project.

[Nowhereman1280]

Thank god for the new design of these stations. I don't think I can stomach another cartoon rendition of our skyline. The bright red wall is a good idea that will help keep this underground space looking lively and is a massive improvement over the current mezzanine. I hardly feel bad seeing the moderne interior go if its being replaced by something that is at least respectable such as this.

[untitledreality]

I hardly feel bad seeing the moderne interior go if its being replaced by something that is at least respectable such as this.
Are you cool with this for the platform?

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Jg3UfIH6EXY/TxiXM5TzVQI/AAAAAAAAAJM/P_erdeGDYjc/s720/Clark%252520and%252520Division%252520Platform.jpg

It sure would have been nice if they carried the modern look throughout the station down to the platform instead of the tacky PoMo vibe.

[Hayward]

Then how can that new Cermak station possibly cost $50 million?

It's some structural steel, some metal stairs, and a concrete platform on stringers. How can it cost three times as much as an entire friggin' Walmart?

You'd be surprised how expensive canopies and railings can get.

[ardecila]

Are you cool with this for the platform?

It sure would have been nice if they carried the modern look throughout the station down to the platform instead of the tacky PoMo vibe.

They probably will. Making renderings takes awhile and I'm pretty sure CDOT doesn't employ a dedicated CG guru. The picture of the Lake platform was just included to give an idea of how the platform will look when all the improvements are made. If I had to guess, CDOT will probably still use the mosaic tiles on the ceiling (since it's a proven material) but in a simpler pattern or a solid color.

[OhioGuy]

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/6050/wawa2.jpg

A clear glass-like roof? Won't it be covered with bird shit within a couple of days? I doubt they'll be able to keep it particularly clean.

[pip]

^My thoughts too

[J_M_Tungsten]

Lol good point! Also, I wonder what the weight limit on the roof is, that snow can get awfully heavy, although I'm sure they factor that into the design.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

I really dislike the waves.

[emathias]

Are you cool with this for the platform?
...
It sure would have been nice if they carried the modern look throughout the station down to the platform instead of the tacky PoMo vibe.

I actually think the center platforms like that are fine. They're not avant guard or anything, but the smaller tile avoids the pre-school look of the larger tiles, and the stainless steel and granite are contemporary enough to at least look modern institutional and not really tacky.

[Hayward]

They could have done that wave thing beneath the arches as well. Instead of the waves flowing parallel to the tracks, they could have just done them perpendicular and done that slot light between wave segments.

I don't mind the tile barrel vaults though. They hide the grime and they do brighten up the station.

No matter what materials or how much lighting you use, you're never going to get Chicago's subways to achieve ultimate great design. The lack of visual connection between mezzanine and platform, low ceilings, and columns everywhere will allow certain problems to perpetuate. Crime, vandalism, crowding, increased cost of labor for security and maintenance, etc.

[untitledreality]

I really dislike the waves.

Same here. I would greatly prefer a planar flying carpet style canopy than this wave garbage.

[Nowhereman1280]

I actually don't mind the mosaic barrel vaults either. I have no problem with historical designs if they are done right. Using real mosaic tiles is a traditional building style and the extra expense of the small tiles is worth it. It's the cartoonish crap a la Chicago Red Line that I hate.

A clear glass-like roof? Won't it be covered with bird shit within a couple of days? I doubt they'll be able to keep it particularly clean.

I dunno, the glass can stay pretty clean if it's got enough slope that the grime can be washed away by the weather. There might be a little shit building up on top of the waves, but I'm sure it will be fine.

If they are going to cover the tracks with anything it should be glass so the passengers can admire the beautiful architecture while they wait.

[MayorOfChicago]

We finally get a new station, they're spending $50,000,000 on it (Cermak), and they're putting it less than 1,000 feet away from another train station!!! The Chinatown Red Line is literally a block away! You could run from station to station in less than 1.5 minutes!

What's the purpose? There are plenty of other things I'd spend $50 million on...

[emathias]

We finally get a new station, they're spending $50,000,000 on it (Cermak), and they're putting it less than 1,000 feet away from another train station!!! The Chinatown Red Line is literally a block away! You could run from station to station in less than 1.5 minutes!

What's the purpose? There are plenty of other things I'd spend $50 million on...

I kinda wish that instead of spending $50 million on one new station they'd spend $100 million and put a jog in the Green Line east over Cermak to Indiana, the south to what Google Maps calls "Service Dr" and/or 24th Place. The lots affected by both turns at Cermak are either vacant or used for parking, so you could put in fast curves, and on the south end of the run there appears to be space for fast turns, too.

Doing that you could provide *direct* access to McCormick, while still having good service for the surrounding area. It'd be about 3/4 of a mile of new track, and one station and since it would be new track, there wouldn't be train interference. I'd think they could do that all for not much more than $100 million since the Douglas rebuild was 5 miles of track and 8 stations for about $480 million within the past 10 years, all done while maintaining active service most of the time. Twice as much money compared to just a new station, but a lot more functionality. Seems like a good deal to me.

[emathias]

I was looking at the CTA's open data sets today.

1993 was the worst year in many decades for ridership on the CTA's 'L'. It bottomed out as a result of population loss and continuous service slashing. Since then, however, there's been a strong upward trend in 'L' ridership and if December's numbers come in where I think they will, then ridership for 2011 will have been nearly 63% higher than in 1993. 1993 was also the year the Orange Line opened for service (the most recent totally new line here in Chicago, the one that goes to Midway Airport), but it is only responsible for about 20% of that growth.

Oddly (well, not so oddly if you know the history, but odd just looking at the numbers), 'L' ridership trends aren't mirrored in bus ridership trends, so the overall worst year for CTA bus+'L' ridership, 1997 was the worst. Since then total ridership has risen 20%, although 95% of that gain was with the 'L' and only about 5% of it was gains in bus ridership. Until bus ridership starts growing again, it will be a while before we get back to the 703 million riders the CTA peaked at in 1979. Of course if gas prices spike again over the next few years (without destroying the economy) it would certainly support the same conditions that pushed 1979 to such historic highs. Certainly, getting to the low-to-mid 600 millions that were typical in the early-to-mid 1970s could happen again.

[the urban politician]

Certainly, getting to the low-to-mid 600 millions that were typical in the early-to-mid 1970s could happen again.

^ I doubt we'll see this until Chicago's city population begins to rise again. Likely much growth in mass transit ridership must have been occuring on Metra over the past few decades. Plus, with the growth of suburban job centers, a lot of mass transit ridership has been replaced with auto trips to office parks.

[emathias]

^ I doubt we'll see this until Chicago's city population begins to rise again. Likely much growth in mass transit ridership must have been occuring on Metra over the past few decades. Plus, with the growth of suburban job centers, a lot of mass transit ridership has been replaced with auto trips to office parks.

All of the numbers I quoted were CTA-only.

'L' ridership is now probably close to the highest it's ever been since WWII. Bus ridership is holding steady. We really don't need the city at large to gain population, we just need people to repopulate the parts of the city near 'L' stations that have lost a lot of population. Some of the places hit bottom and are starting to regain population. Also, it's important to remember that the majority of ridership is and always has been adults, and that the adult population of Chicago today is higher than it was in 1950.

I think you might be surprised what the addition of relatively few miles of new track coupled with a few new stations and a city focused on actually encouraging dense development near low-use 'L' stations.

Overall, the Chicago 'L' has the 3rd-highest ridership of any metro-style system in the U.S., but that number drops to 5th if you include Canada. And on a riders per mile basis, we're not even in the top 10 measured by riders per mile.

Right now the average station has a few over 4,200 riders per weekday and yet 87/141 (61.7%) of the stations have fewer riders than that. 45 stations have fewer than half that.

Is it possible to dramatically increase ridership at stations by investing in both the stations themselves and the area around them?

Absolutely yes. The population of the City as a whole has really very little to do with ridership - the structure of the population, both demographically and geographically is far more significant, and the getting people to consider it a safe option is perhaps the most important part.

Can the City and the CTA together improve ridership with some investment and development guidelines? Absolutely yes. The Pink Line/Douglas Branch doubled its ridership between 2001 and 2011 with the renovation, even as most of the neighborhoods it serves lost population and were very hard-hit by the recession which reduced work commuters. The Blue Line O'Hare branch increased ridership by 22% with no population growth and very little direct involvement by the city except for working to improve crime statistics in the areas served by it (the City didn't intend that the crime reduction improve ridership, but that has been a side effect because it encouraged the continued expansion of the gentrification of Wicker Park and Bucktown areas). The Brown Line ridership rose over 27% between 2001 and 2011. I think the population in that area has been fairly stable, but even if it did rise some I *know* it hasn't risen by 27%. Even in Evanston you can see what does and doesn't work. The Purple Line ridership in Evanston has slightly increased - about 5% or so, but most of the stations have lost ridership. The ones that have gained are the ones like Dempster and Davis that have seen new TOD built near them.

On the other hand, the Orange Line has risen less than 1% - it's essentially flat over the past ten years. Why? Because nearly no TOD has occurred around it. I'm not familiar enough with those wards to know who the Aldermen are or why development hasn't been better encouraged there, but I can't remember the last time I heard about any major projects along that corridor. There are a number of places where major residential or commercial development could take place, and there are a few places where new stations would enhance the usefulness of the line and thereby encourage more ridership - but until those happen, it's likely to stay stagnant. If we accept your cop-out that general population has to increase to increase ridership, then there will be no incentive to actually take the steps that actually do work and have worked elsewhere in Chicago to increase ridership.

The South Branch of the Green Line is another good example. The area around it essentially bottomed out in the late 1990s, early 2000s, and in the Bronzeville areas you started getting some gentrification. And what do we see? We see strong ridership growth in every station from 35th through Garfield except for 51st, which lost about 3%. The east and west branches south of there have lost ridership, however they didn't see any investment until the end of the decade. There has started to be some investment along both recently, and if the CPD continue to get crime under control in those areas I expect to see ridership numbers come up in those areas in the next ten years. Englewood in particular could see some really strong growth if crime there comes down. It's just over 20 minutes to the Loop on the Green Line from there, it has nice parks and good expressway access, and many bungalows and 2-flats or inexpensive development sites within walking distance of the two stations. If it started to turn around, the CTA could re-open the Racine stop, too. Granted, it has a ways to go, but look how far Wicker Park came in 20 years. Even in ten years, Division/Damen/Western stops on the O'Hare branch increased ridership by nearly 45% just from gentrification and really very little brand new development. Total populaiton within walking distance of those stations was about stable. It increased in some blocks, decreased in others for what balances out to a slight increase - but nowhere near a 45% increase in population.

So while, yes, increased population growth for Chicago would probably help increase the CTA's numbers faster, there are plenty of things that don't require overall population growth in order to spur ridership increases. It really is mostly as simple as getting residents to feel like it's a safe, clean alternative and making sure that new, dense development is encouraged near the existing stations.

[the urban politician]

^ Thanks for explaining that, emathias. Very informative post

[Mr Downtown]

I am curious as to the path the redline takes between north and clybourn and clark division....does it follow clybourn? if so maybe a redline stop at division makes sense as well

Yes, the subway runs under Clybourn and Division. But a station at Clybourn & Division would only be about 1200 feet from the one at LaSalle & Division.

[Steely Dan]

Study points to Asbury for possible Yellow Line station
By Jonathan Bullington TribLocal reporter
Today at 12:33 p.m.

A study group has identified Asbury Avenue just north of Howard Street as the best location for a new CTA Yellow Line station in Evanston.

Evanston officials presented the findings of a feasibility study during a public meeting Tuesday night at the city’s Levy Senior Center. And while they think an Asbury station makes the most sense, officials reminded residents that much needs to be done before it is built.

“The goal coming out of the feasibility study is not so much to eliminate other sites,” said city engineer Paul Schneider. “It’s what’s the site we feel most comfortable presenting that could be funded.”

Officials estimate that an Asbury Avenue station could cost about $23 million to build, and $900,000 annually to operate. Acquiring federal dollars, which Schneider said could potentially cover about 70 to 80 percent of the building cost, would require “a bit of a sales job” to convince the feds of the station’s merits and growth potential.

full article: http://triblocal.com/evanston/2012/01/25/study-points-to-asbury-for-possible-yellow-line-station/

[lawfin]

Yes, the subway runs under Clybourn and Division. But a station at Larrabee & Division would only be a few hundred feet from the one at LaSalle & Division.

Thanks. I forgot about the new entrance at Lasalle. However I am not sure of the technical jargon...maybe catchment area or whatever...but a stop at clybourn / division may be able to pull from some of that development nearer the river than an entrance at Lasalle which i think would still pull from mostly the gold coast etc.

anyhow it was us a thought.....do you know has there been any discussion of a brown line stop verus a redline stop

[lawfin]

Study points to Asbury for possible Yellow Line station
By Jonathan Bullington TribLocal reporter
Today at 12:33 p.m.

A study group has identified Asbury Avenue just north of Howard Street as the best location for a new CTA Yellow Line station in Evanston.

Evanston officials presented the findings of a feasibility study during a public meeting Tuesday night at the city’s Levy Senior Center. And while they think an Asbury station makes the most sense, officials reminded residents that much needs to be done before it is built.

“The goal coming out of the feasibility study is not so much to eliminate other sites,” said city engineer Paul Schneider. “It’s what’s the site we feel most comfortable presenting that could be funded.”

Officials estimate that an Asbury Avenue station could cost about $23 million to build, and $900,000 annually to operate. Acquiring federal dollars, which Schneider said could potentially cover about 70 to 80 percent of the building cost, would require “a bit of a sales job” to convince the feds of the station’s merits and growth potential.

full article: http://triblocal.com/evanston/2012/01/25/study-points-to-asbury-for-possible-yellow-line-station/
Great!!! I have been arguing for this for years; I think ridge could use on too though; the pop density in the area is generally ~ 15,000 / sq mile near western and near ridge is north of 20,000 / sq mile even 30, 000 sq mile

[Hayward]

Thanks. I forgot about the new entrance at Lasalle. However I am not sure of the technical jargon...maybe catchment area or whatever...but a stop at clybourn / division may be able to pull from some of that development nearer the river than an entrance at Lasalle which i think would still pull from mostly the gold coast etc.

anyhow it was us a thought.....do you know has there been any discussion of a brown line stop verus a redline stop

Unlikely. Not enough population in that area to justify another red line station. Technically that location (Clyborn and Division) has lost a ton of population from decades of project clearing. The new development is incapable or replacing these losses, just because any development isn't all that big and lacks density.

It's in the better interests of the entire Northside to shorten the length of time it takes to get from downtown to the Northern neighborhoods. An additional stop would be inconvenient and serves no benefit to any departing passengers, just the population immediately near the stop

It also wouldn't be a prudent use of funds. Building a subway station is expensive, but just think of how many stations you could repair / cleanup / renovate with those funds. So there would be tremendous public opposition.

A brown line stop is much more practical. It fills in a long gap between Chicago and Sedgwick, and is closer to a destination location (Division St Bars and Rush Street). I'd certainly board a brown line train at Division rather transfer at Fullerton, even if it means additional time at Armitage, Wellington, etc

[le_brew]

We finally get a new station, they're spending $50,000,000 on it (Cermak), and they're putting it less than 1,000 feet away from another train station!!! The Chinatown Red Line is literally a block away! You could run from station to station in less than 1.5 minutes!

What's the purpose? There are plenty of other things I'd spend $50 million on...

For that matter, the entire Green Line is within blocks, in either direction, of the Red and the Blue Line(s). Recall when the Green was closed for two years, and there were demolition whispers?--results were community outcry.

From a planning standpoint, I had always thought the funding to rebuild an obsolete transit line could have been put to better use. (Then again, I still think EL, in general is an antiquated concept, so who am I?)

Outside the box thinking is not gonna happen in this era.

[untitledreality]

For that matter, the entire Green Line is within blocks, in either direction, of the Red and the Blue Line(s). Recall when the Green was closed for two years, and there were demolition whispers?
Thank god they didn't get the line demolished. It is an invaluable asset towards rebuilding the South and West sides of this city. You can argue that having the Blue and Red nearby is repetitious, but a neighborhood line is much more attractive than mass transit relegated to the middle of a godforsaken freeway that has greatly diminished potential for catchment density due to being swallowed by roadways.

Also... hasn't this city learned by now that once you demolish a mass transit line that it never comes back? Why remove value infrastructure that cannot ever be replicated for its inflation corrected cost?

[emathias]

Thank god they didn't get the line demolished. It is an invaluable asset towards rebuilding the South and West sides of this city. You can argue that having the Blue and Red nearby is repetitious, but a neighborhood line is much more attractive than mass transit relegated to the middle of a godforsaken freeway that has greatly diminished potential for catchment density due to being swallowed by roadways.

Also... hasn't this city learned by now that once you demolish a mass transit line that it never comes back? Why remove value infrastructure that cannot ever be replicated for its inflation corrected cost?

I agree. Although I wish the Red Line ran over Canal and/or Normal or along those rail yards instead of the middle of a highway.

It's too bad the South Side has depopulated so much, there are a few places that adding rail service would be intersting if the densities could support it. That rail ROW just south of 49th St, the ROW between Western and Damen, the ROW along 75th just to name a few.

[ardecila]

Great!!! I have been arguing for this for years; I think ridge could use on too though; the pop density in the area is generally ~ 15,000 / sq mile near western and near ridge is north of 20,000 / sq mile even 30, 000 sq mile

Hopefully they consider this when planning the Western BRT.

The current 49 bus has to be split into south, main, and north portions because going the whole distance would require the drivers to work a shift longer than the union permits. With BRT, the three lines can be stitched together again since the run times are much shorter.

What I'm getting at is, a rider could board the Western BRT at Asbury and ride it to the Medical Center. It might even be faster than going by rail, which currently requires three trains.

[untitledreality]

I agree. Although I wish the Red Line ran over Canal and/or Normal or along those rail yards instead of the middle of a highway.
Agreed. I feel that the experiment of running a subway line down a expressway median has proved itself to be a measurable failure by now. But, we're stuck with what we got and efforts should be made to best utilize it. Whether that means looking to develop high density nodes surrounding stations or simply improving bus connections it is something that should be researched as a blank slate when concerning the Dan Ryan.

It's too bad the South Side has depopulated so much, there are a few places that adding rail service would be intersting if the densities could support it. That rail ROW just south of 49th St, the ROW between Western and Damen, the ROW along 75th just to name a few.
There are quite a few available options in the south side, but working them into a system could provide troublesome when you are dealing with such a patchwork or ROW. I have recently pondered the merits of a Westward extension of the Green line, how beneficial it would be to push it either two miles to Kedzie accessing the Chicago Lawn area, or just going for broke and extending it to the Midway terminus of the Orange Line.

The Chicago/West Lawn neighborhoods are dense, established neighborhoods that require fairly lousy commutes on the CTA to get downtown. Providing an option to either connect to the Orange and head downtown or a single ride on the Green for a transit poor area would be hugely beneficial in my eyes.

Back to the mention of the depopulated South side... with all of the University of Chicago's holdings in Washington Park it could be interesting to see how that area transitions when the school decides to start any sort of build out. The area around the Garfield station could densify quite rapidly.

[OhioGuy]

Also... hasn't this city learned by now that once you demolish a mass transit line that it never comes back? Why remove value infrastructure that cannot ever be replicated for its inflation corrected cost?

I still wish the Humboldt Park line could be rebuilt, but obviously that's never gonna happen. :(

[emathias]

...
I have recently pondered the merits of a Westward extension of the Green line, how beneficial it would be to push it either two miles to Kedzie accessing the Chicago Lawn area, or just going for broke and extending it to the Midway terminus of the Orange Line.
...

Under Richard J., well before the Orange Line, there was talk of extending the Green Line to Midway.

[Nowhereman1280]

Study points to Asbury for possible Yellow Line station
By Jonathan Bullington TribLocal reporter
Today at 12:33 p.m.

A study group has identified Asbury Avenue just north of Howard Street as the best location for a new CTA Yellow Line station in Evanston.

Evanston officials presented the findings of a feasibility study during a public meeting Tuesday night at the city’s Levy Senior Center. And while they think an Asbury station makes the most sense, officials reminded residents that much needs to be done before it is built.

“The goal coming out of the feasibility study is not so much to eliminate other sites,” said city engineer Paul Schneider. “It’s what’s the site we feel most comfortable presenting that could be funded.”

Officials estimate that an Asbury Avenue station could cost about $23 million to build, and $900,000 annually to operate. Acquiring federal dollars, which Schneider said could potentially cover about 70 to 80 percent of the building cost, would require “a bit of a sales job” to convince the feds of the station’s merits and growth potential.

full article: http://triblocal.com/evanston/2012/01/25/study-points-to-asbury-for-possible-yellow-line-station/

I don't get why they don't just start sending every other or every third Red Line train on to the end of the Yellow. I assume the platforms are too short? At this point they may as well since they are adding so many stations.

I still wish the Humboldt Park line could be rebuilt, but obviously that's never gonna happen. :(

Oh God yes, fuck the Bloomingdale Trail, refit that shit with an EL line so the huge areas of Logan Square and Humbolt Park have access to downtown. That would spark a massive boom in Humbolt Park as it is an amazing area with really terrible transit access.

[untitledreality]

Under Richard J., well before the Orange Line, there was talk of extending the Green Line to Midway.

I did not know this, thanks for the heads up, I'll have to research it a little to see exactly what they were proposing.

[daperpkazoo]

I don't get why they don't just start sending every other or every third Red Line train on to the end of the Yellow. I assume the platforms are too short? At this point they may as well since they are adding so many stations.



Oh God yes, fuck the Bloomingdale Trail, refit that shit with an EL line so the huge areas of Logan Square and Humbolt Park have access to downtown. That would spark a massive boom in Humbolt Park as it is an amazing area with really terrible transit access.

Yellow can only accommodate 2-car trains. I'm sure someday that will be expanded to 4 or something, but I can't see it going all the way up to 8.

Up in the Twin Cities, all (most) of our old rail ROWs were purchased by the county regional railroad authorities back in the 70s and 80s with the intent of using them for future transitways. Of course, they all have bike paths down them now, but since they're owned by the RRAs, it's a much easier process to narrow the bike paths to put in transit.

Is the Bloomingdale Line wide enough to fit both heavy rail and pedestrian paths? I would guess yes, but they wouldn't want trains too close to the edge since parts of the viaduct don't look all that stable and some buildings overhan it slightly?

[untitledreality]

Is the Bloomingdale Line wide enough to fit both heavy rail and pedestrian paths?
No, not at all.

I have to disagreed with Nowhereman, I think that using Bloomingdale ROW as a linear park will be more beneficial that using the same stretch as a Blue Line spur. At its furthest you would make it to Lawndale which would only be a 1.8mile expansion with maybe three additional stations and it would not displace the North Ave bus.

I know it would be vastly more expensive, but using the original Humboldt Branch alignment has possibilities to expand indefinitely westward, accessing a much larger pool of residents.

[lawfin]

No, not at all.

I have to disagreed with Nowhereman, I think that using Bloomingdale ROW as a linear park will be more beneficial that using the same stretch as a Blue Line spur. At its furthest you would make it to Lawndale which would only be a 1.8mile expansion with maybe three additional stations and it would not displace the North Ave bus.

I know it would be vastly more expensive, but using the original Humboldt Branch alignment has possibilities to expand indefinitely westward, accessing a much larger pool of residents.

I agree with this completely. And you get to keep the benefit of the Bloomingdale trail. Really think a HP line should be considered.

[emathias]

I did not know this, thanks for the heads up, I'll have to research it a little to see exactly what they were proposing.

From 1973: http://www.chicago-l.org/plans/1995plan.html

That plan also included one of the few actual proposals to link what are now the Blue and Brown Lines along Lawrence.

[Nowhereman1280]

No, not at all.

I have to disagreed with Nowhereman, I think that using Bloomingdale ROW as a linear park will be more beneficial that using the same stretch as a Blue Line spur. At its furthest you would make it to Lawndale which would only be a 1.8mile expansion with maybe three additional stations and it would not displace the North Ave bus.

False, there is more than enough ROW to extend a Bloomingdale Trail line to Narragansett or perhaps ever further. Just have the EL tracks sandwich the existing freight lines. You'd just have to build a viaduct where it intersects with those other tracks to keep it grade separated from the active rail lines. Basically you could have it terminate at Brickyard and serve a huge swath of the city that has only limited Metra service right now.

[untitledreality]

False, there is more than enough ROW to extend a Bloomingdale Trail line to Narragansett or perhaps ever further. Just have the EL tracks sandwich the existing freight lines. You'd just have to build a viaduct where it intersects with those other tracks to keep it grade separated from the active rail lines. Basically you could have it terminate at Brickyard and serve a huge swath of the city that has only limited Metra service right now.

I just believe there is simply not enough room to add two tracks as well as outboard stations to make a continuation along that line feasible.

On top of that, once you pass West of Kostner that rail line path is smack in the middle of an industrial corridor that diminishes access for residents, would be unattractive/desolate and has no direct connection to a retail corridor. Oh, and you would still have to operate the North Ave bus.

While building out this ROW for mass transit may be cheaper, I have reservations whether it would be remotely as successful as a line following the original Humboldt Branch/North Ave alignment.

[untitledreality]

From 1973: http://www.chicago-l.org/plans/1995plan.html

That plan also included one of the few actual proposals to link what are now the Blue and Brown Lines along Lawrence.

I appreciate the link.

Interesting about the Brown Line extension to the Blue, that is something that I had been casually researching as well, having the Brown run down the Lawrence corridor and terminating at the Jefferson Park Transit Center. It would be a huge benefit to Albany Park and Mayfair in addition to providing a great link to OHare for Northsiders.

[ardecila]

Yellow can only accommodate 2-car trains. I'm sure someday that will be expanded to 4 or something, but I can't see it going all the way up to 8.

Not true. Dempster has short platforms but Oakton and any future stations must be designed to either accommodate 8 cars from the start or be sited such that platform extensions would be inexpensive later (ie straight track, 0.5% grades max, no obstacles like overpasses or tunnel mouths.

[k1052]

Not true. Dempster has short platforms but Oakton and any future stations must be designed to either accommodate 8 cars from the start or be sited such that platform extensions would be inexpensive later (ie straight track, 0.5% grades max, no obstacles like overpasses or tunnel mouths.

The increased focus of adding stations on the Yellow Line naturally leads into the question of why not route it downtown where people are actually going. The Purple Line tracks from Howard to Belmont aren't exactly swamped with traffic on a daily basis.

[ardecila]

There are lots of questions, though. Should the Yellow Line trains terminate downtown, or continue to another destination? If they do terminate, how is that accomplished? There's not a ton of capacity on the Loop - it's pretty much maxed out unless something else changes. You could run it through the subway, but where does the train stop and turn around?

I like nowhereman's idea of routing alternate or 1/3 of Red Line trains to Skokie, but you'd need a big reorganization at Dempster both to berth 8-car trains and to set up a proper terminal with two tracks and a crossover. Would this service run 24 hours, or cut off at Howard after midnight? How do you communicate/brand this complex info to make it simple for passengers to understand?

How would Skokie feel about having a direct link to the South Side in their community, especially after the CTA's well-known role in the recent wave of flashmobs? They already went apeshit over the Old Orchard extension, because somehow having an L station next to a high school is an invitation to muggers, rapists, and pervs. Modern transit networks are built around the idea of crosstown trips, but the problem in Chicago is that we don't like the people who live across town. This is one of the reasons that through-routing for Metra has always died quickly and quietly, and why Philly is still having huge issues with their through-routing.

[k1052]

There are lots of questions, though. Should the Yellow Line trains terminate downtown, or continue to another destination? If they do terminate, how is that accomplished? There's not a ton of capacity on the Loop - it's pretty much maxed out unless something else changes. You could run it through the subway, but where does the train stop and turn around?

I like nowhereman's idea of routing alternate or 1/3 of Red Line trains to Skokie, but you'd need a big reorganization at Dempster both to berth 8-car trains and to set up a proper terminal with two tracks and a crossover. Would this service run 24 hours, or cut off at Howard after midnight? How do you communicate/brand this complex info to make it simple for passengers to understand?

How would Skokie feel about having a direct link to the South Side in their community, especially after the CTA's well-known role in the recent wave of flashmobs? They already went apeshit over the Old Orchard extension, because somehow having an L station next to a high school is an invitation to muggers, rapists, and pervs. Modern transit networks are built around the idea of crosstown trips, but the problem in Chicago is that we don't like the people who live across town. This is one of the reasons that through-routing for Metra has always died quickly and quietly, and why Philly is still having huge issues with their through-routing.

Start with a rush express service like the Purple Line and run it on the Red Line routing starting at Belmont. Take it all the way downtown and go up the 13th St incline to effect a turnaround (motorman walking to the other end of the train) and head back north. Expense and physical changes required would be pretty minimal.

[lawfin]

Realistically I would get rid of the Yellow line all together. Use any fund and savings to upgrade service on dense areas in the city where transit makes more sense. What does the yelllow have 5500 -6000 riders a day. I bet it is by a considerable margin the most expensive CTA line per rider in the system. I'd do the same with the purple hell ridership on that has plummeted over the years & the route already has good metra access. Again use the savings in the system that serves areas with the density that warrants fixed rail. Or use the purple as an inner city express service...limited stop

[emathias]

The increased focus of adding stations on the Yellow Line naturally leads into the question of why not route it downtown where people are actually going. The Purple Line tracks from Howard to Belmont aren't exactly swamped with traffic on a daily basis.

The biggest issue is probably congestion at the Clark Junction just north of Belmont. That intersection with the Brown Line is already close to capacity.

[ardecila]

Realistically I would get rid of the Yellow line all together. Use any fund and savings to upgrade service on dense areas in the city where transit makes more sense. What does the yelllow have 5500 -6000 riders a day. I bet it is by a considerable margin the most expensive CTA line per rider in the system. I'd do the same with the purple hell ridership on that has plummeted over the years & the route already has good metra access. Again use the savings in the system that serves areas with the density that warrants fixed rail. Or use the purple as an inner city express service...limited stop

Evanston is just as dense as Chicago and, in fact, denser than many parts of Chicago. We all know Metra provides crappy service. It's a shorter trip time to downtown but off-peak, the trains only run hourly.

Plus, Metra provides terrible access to any North Side destinations between Evanston and downtown (the stations at Lawrence and Lunt are not huge centers of activity).

[VivaLFuego]

The Purple Express serves an interesting function --- its core markets are actually:

(1) home-work commuting between Evanston and the north side neighborhoods of Lincoln Park and Lakeview, and
(2) supplementing Brown Line capacity into/out of downtown with an additional routing distribution option.

This makes it a very productive service, in terms of the number of trips served per car-mile operated, because it is well used in both directions during both peak periods --- which is striking because most "express" transit services tend to suffer from low productivity because their demand is so one-directional and a vehicle has to go all the way there then all the way back to serve demand, spending much of the time empty.

A relatively small percentage of Purple Line riders use it from Evanston all the way to downtown, at least during rush hours when the Metra schedule is decent.

[lawfin]

Evanston is just as dense as Chicago and, in fact, denser than many parts of Chicago. We all know Metra provides crappy service. It's a shorter trip time to downtown but off-peak, the trains only run hourly.

Plus, Metra provides terrible access to any North Side destinations between Evanston and downtown (the stations at Lawrence and Lunt are not huge centers of activity).

As to claim 1 that is simply not true. As to claim 2, sure it is more dense than riverdale or Beverley; but we are not talking about those parts of the city now are we? The densest census track along the purple line is the one just north of Howard at around 16,000 / sq mile. The next densest is around 15,000 the rest float around 9-13, 000 sq mile. Now the line in chicago typically runs through census tracks with densities north of 30,000 sq mile; it rarely passes through anything much less than 20,000 and most are well above 25,000 sq mile several are north of 40,000 sq mile.

As to point 3: all the more reason for a Howard Metra stop with transfer to red / purple lines.

I would keep the purple line for in-city use only to augment the redline.


These two articles i think capture what I am speaking of:

http://chicago.straightdope.com/sdc20100701.php
http://chicago.straightdope.com/sdc20100401.php

To augment my point here is a graph of ridership levels on the L line 1985 = 100

http://chicago.straightdope.com/1985-2010_nside_riders_v5.JPG

Ridership on the northside lines has either eclipsed or is very near historical highs whereas the suburban lines are around 70% of what they were 25 years ago

[untitledreality]

I would keep the purple line for in-city use only to augment the redline.


These two articles i think capture what I am speaking of:

http://chicago.straightdope.com/sdc20100701.php
http://chicago.straightdope.com/sdc20100401.php

That has long been my 'wish' for restructuring the Northside Main. Have the Purple stop at Howard/Loyola/Bryn Mawr/Wilson --> transfer to the inner tracks after Addison and follow the Red Line through Belmont/Fullerton/Subway --> then either turn around on the 13th street incline, or continue on the incline to the Elevated and terminate at the new Cermak station (With the low frequency of the Green I would assume they could easily work in a quick turn around.)

Ridership would increase due to the influx of Red Line riders and would raise the effective capacity ceiling of both the Red Line and the State Street Subway during rush hours... and you would be unclogging the Loop as well by removing a train during peak hours.

It could quite possibly even serve as a trigger for further densification/gentrification of further North neighborhoods as well. Edgewater and Rogers Park would seem a more reasonable alternative to Lakeview/Lincoln Park/North Center/Lincoln Square when commuting to the Loop when a station like Bryn Mawr is a short two stops past Belmont, opposed to the seven it is currently.

[emathias]

...

Ridership on the northside lines has either eclipsed or is very near historical highs whereas the suburban lines are around 70% of what they were 25 years ago

Not surprising considering that 60 years ago you could get from the Loop to Davis in 31 minutes (http://www.chicago-l.org/maps/route/maps/1942detail1.jpg), a trip that now takes 41 minutes at the fastest during rush hour and longer when you have to make a Red/Purple transfer. After safety, speed is probably the biggest determining factor for transit use.

[lawfin]

That has long been my 'wish' for restructuring the Northside Main. Have the Purple stop at Howard/Loyola/Bryn Mawr/Wilson --> transfer to the inner tracks after Addison and follow the Red Line through Belmont/Fullerton/Subway --> then either turn around on the 13th street incline, or continue on the incline to the Elevated and terminate at the new Cermak station (With the low frequency of the Green I would assume they could easily work in a quick turn around.)

Ridership would increase due to the influx of Red Line riders and would raise the effective capacity ceiling of both the Red Line and the State Street Subway during rush hours... and you would be unclogging the Loop as well by removing a train during peak hours.

It could quite possibly even serve as a trigger for further densification/gentrification of further North neighborhoods as well. Edgewater and Rogers Park would seem a more reasonable alternative to Lakeview/Lincoln Park/North Center/Lincoln Square when commuting to the Loop when a station like Bryn Mawr is a short two stops past Belmont, opposed to the seven it is currently.
I pretty much agree. I think one of the issues holding back gentrification of areas like RP and EW and to a lesser extent UPtown are the travel times. If you could get RP to DT at around 25 minutes or perhaps even somewhat less it could make a difference. I think back in the skip stop days Loyola was labled as 23 minutes to downtown....imagine that now.

[Jenner]

That has long been my 'wish' for restructuring the Northside Main. Have the Purple stop at Howard/Loyola/Bryn Mawr/Wilson --> transfer to the inner tracks after Addison and follow the Red Line through Belmont/Fullerton/Subway --> then either turn around on the 13th street incline, or continue on the incline to the Elevated and terminate at the new Cermak station (With the low frequency of the Green I would assume they could easily work in a quick turn around.)



I had wondered if the CTA could build a small rail yard and turn-around depot just as the Red line emerges from the subway between 16th St and 18th St. There seems to be some amount of land that could be configured into a depot, and then you could have Purple line trains turn around and go back north through the loop. Another option would be to have a steep incline into the Orange line to circle back into the subway via the Green line.

During my research for a Circle line alternative, I had some discussions on other forums which talked about the peak capacity of the Red line subway. During peak periods of the Red line, more trains are added, at which you will have a train every 2-5 minutes. Adding another line into the subway could make the subway too congested, unless they eliminate peak period Red line trains and transfer that ability to the Purple line instead. That would probably fix the problem of where capacity is needed most -- on the northern segment of the Red line.

[ardecila]

^^ With signaling upgrades, it shouldn't be too difficult to run trains on 3-minute headways through the State Street Subway.

Ideally, if you do run the Purple Line through the subway:
- You want the last station to be a busy one so that the train doesn't totally empty out as it moves south.
- The station also has to be configured to allow for quick turnarounds, including a dedicated siding and a outdoor walkway for the motorman to switch directions.

From a quick examination, the only cost-effective place for an efficient turnaround facility is probably along the Red Line just south of the Chinatown station, in the median of the highway feeder ramp. The tracks exist on solid ground there, so you could shift one of the Red Line tracks to the side to allow for a center siding and a narrow platform for the motorman to switch directions. You might even be able to extend the siding further south over the Stevenson interchange, since it looks like the piers for the highway bridges there were built to accommodate an extra lane or L track, and there's a bit of extra room (also on solid ground) south of the interchange for the necessary switches.

In a broader sense, none of these changes are free. Changing service patterns will require somewhat expensive changes to track, signaling systems, and signage, and expensive personnel shifts. So it's not necessarily the "no-brainer" everyone seems to think it is, and it should be weighed against other potential uses of CTA's limited funds.

[schwerve]

^^ With signaling upgrades, it shouldn't be too difficult to run trains on 3-minute headways through the State Street Subway.

Ideally, if you do run the Purple Line through the subway:
- You want the last station to be a busy one so that the train doesn't totally empty out as it moves south.
- The station also has to be configured to allow for quick turnarounds, including a dedicated siding and a outdoor walkway for the motorman to switch directions.

From a quick examination, the only cost-effective place for an efficient turnaround facility is probably along the Red Line just south of the Chinatown station, in the median of the highway feeder ramp. The tracks exist on solid ground there, so you could shift one of the Red Line tracks to the side to allow for a center siding and a narrow platform for the motorman to switch directions. You might even be able to extend the siding further south over the Stevenson interchange, since it looks like the piers for the highway bridges there were built to accommodate an extra lane or L track, and there's a bit of extra room (also on solid ground) south of the interchange for the necessary switches.

In a broader sense, none of these changes are free. Changing service patterns will require somewhat expensive changes to track, signaling systems, and signage, and expensive personnel shifts. So it's not necessarily the "no-brainer" everyone seems to think it is, and it should be weighed against other potential uses of CTA's limited funds.

Any chance that was included to some degree in the Green Line Cermak Station plans? Seems like the an ideal opportunity.

[Beta_Magellan]

FWIW, there is a third track south of 35th/Bronzeville/IIT on the Green Line, which could conceivably be upgraded for a turnaround.

If we’re assuming big upgrades that allow eight-car trains on the Purple Line in Evanston, one could through-route the Purple Line through to the Orange Line—currently, they have roughly the same frequency. The big disadvantages would be poorer access to western parts of the loop (with the advantage of improved access to River north and Michigan Avenue) and crossing Green Line tracks: the Orange Line’s flying junction deposits trains on the outer of four tracks around 18th, while the inner tracks lead to the subway incline (currently Green Line trains switch to the outer tracks before that). The latter might be a deal-breaker—although there’s be less traffic at Tower 12 (and the Loop as a whole), crossing the Green Line tracks could still lead to congestion.

[ardecila]

The siding south of 35th is fine for train storage, but not as the terminus of a relatively frequent line. Since there's no outside platform, the motorman would need to walk from car-to-car to reach the opposite cab. That could take as much as 4 or 5 minutes, and then he has to wait for signals to give him an opening to move forward. Then the motorman must wait again on the 13th St incline to move into the subway. If anything goes wrong, the turnaround train is stuck on the siding and southbound trains start to stack up. Too much interlining is a recipe for disaster unless you have relatively low service levels (such as on the many new US light-rail systems).

I guess you COULD potentially make it work if Purple and Green had interchangeable trains so they could be switched at will - they'd need to have the same train length and rolling stock to avoid yard problems at the end of the day.

As you mention, bringing the Purple Line trains up onto the elevated structure at Tower 18 creates a potential conflict with weaving maneuvers, which also constrains frequency. A potential Orange-Purple merged line could approach the Blue Line in ridership after maybe 10 years of service, and it would require similar service levels. If that's the goal, then a new connection should be provided between the HoDaR subway and the Orange Line viaduct at 18th/Wentworth.

This is why I think a siding somewhere on the Red Line is a better idea. Fortunately most of the Dan Ryan branch runs at-grade, so I'm sure you could find the space for a siding somewhere - even if you need to beg IDOT to borrow 1000' of Dan Ryan shoulder.

[OhioGuy]

Posters that rival the London Underground - These fascinating transit posters provide a different view of 1920s Chicago (http://www.salon.com/2012/01/27/posters_that_rival_the_london_underground/singleton/)

The link above includes not only some great classic transit art from the 1920's, toward the bottom it also includes some old photos from that period as well.

Here are a few of the transit advertisements:
http://imprint.printmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2.SteelMills.Tribune.Neptune-1024x558.jpg

http://imprint.printmag.com/wp-content/uploads/5.milwaukee.GrandAve.RapidTrans-1024x513.jpg

[ardecila]

I had no idea there were so many. Absolutely incredible stuff.

[Beta_Magellan]

I’d never seen most of those—I’m surprised at how many there are of Milwaukee (as a former resident, I think they’re quite lovely and really capture the city nicely—especially the snowy view of the cathedral and the view of the lakefront bluffs).

[Steely Dan]

Not surprising considering that 60 years ago you could get from the Loop to Davis in 31 minutes (http://www.chicago-l.org/maps/route/maps/1942detail1.jpg), a trip that now takes 41 minutes at the fastest during rush hour and longer when you have to make a Red/Purple transfer. After safety, speed is probably the biggest determining factor for transit use.

door to door, taking the purple line from my home at marina city up to my job in downtown evanston (essentially loop-davis, though i get on at merch. mart) takes about 45-50 minutes on average. i can ride my bike over the same distance in approximately 50 minutes, on average (45-55 minutes depending on wind). that's right, the purple line barely beats a bicycle.

since becoming a bike commuter, i rarely take the train. why pay money when my bike does the same job for free, and comes with a negligible time penalty?

[k1052]

door to door, taking the purple line from my home at marina city up to my job in downtown evanston (essentially loop-davis, though i get on at merch. mart) takes about 45-50 minutes on average. i can ride my bike over the same distance in approximately 50 minutes, on average (45-55 minutes depending on wind). that's right, the purple line barely beats a bicycle.

since becoming a bike commuter, i rarely take the train. why pay money when my bike does the same job for free, and comes with a negligible time penalty?

Being on the Purple line to Evanston and being overtaken regularly by Red Line trains is pretty discouraging. Track condition is so degraded that track 4 is about 2/3rds slow zone north of Lawrence to Howard at this point. The Brown line routing south of Belmont isn't doing it any favors either with too many stops and and an ever increasing amount of slow zones between Armitage and the Loop.

[lawfin]

http://www.chicagonow.com/cta-tattler/2011/01/cta-red-purple-line-alternative-basic-rehabilitation-with-transfer-stations/

CTA Red-Purple Line alternative: Basic Rehabilitation with Transfer Stations

By Kevin O'Neil, January 30, 2011 at 3:22 pm

This alternative includes all of the elements of the Basic Rehabilitation Alternative plus new transfer stations at Wilson and Loyola.

Estimated cost
$2.9 billion

Longevity
20 years (60-80 years at new transfer stations)

Evanston Branch
Same as Basic Rehabilitation Alternative in this segment for this alternative.

North Red Line

In addition to including all of the elements of the Basic Rehabilitation Alternative, this
alternative adds new transfer stations at Wilson and Loyola in this segment.

[Hayward]

door to door, taking the purple line from my home at marina city up to my job in downtown evanston (essentially loop-davis, though i get on at merch. mart) takes about 45-50 minutes on average. i can ride my bike over the same distance in approximately 50 minutes, on average (45-55 minutes depending on wind). that's right, the purple line barely beats a bicycle.

since becoming a bike commuter, i rarely take the train. why pay money when my bike does the same job for free, and comes with a negligible time penalty?

I had always tried to figure this out as well. Why was I arriving at my destination locations on the far Northside earlier by bicycle than by taking the EL? after all the stops at stations aren't THAT lengthy, and even taking the lakefront trail, you are eventually confronted by stoplights and heavy traffic once back on surface streets.

The answer is simple. Bicycling is done doorstep to doorstep where transit is station to station plus the time it takes you to get to and from the stations and wait on a platform.

[emathias]

http://www.chicagonow.com/cta-tattler/2011/01/cta-red-purple-line-alternative-basic-rehabilitation-with-transfer-stations/

CTA Red-Purple Line alternative: Basic Rehabilitation with Transfer Stations

By Kevin O'Neil, January 30, 2011 at 3:22 pm

This alternative includes all of the elements of the Basic Rehabilitation Alternative plus new transfer stations at Wilson and Loyola.

Estimated cost
$2.9 billion

Longevity
20 years (60-80 years at new transfer stations)

Evanston Branch
Same as Basic Rehabilitation Alternative in this segment for this alternative.

North Red Line

In addition to including all of the elements of the Basic Rehabilitation Alternative, this
alternative adds new transfer stations at Wilson and Loyola in this segment.

Speaking of which, the next meetings (http://www.transitchicago.com/rpmproject/) about that project are next Monday and Tuesday:

Monday, February 6, 2012
5:00 to 7:30 p.m.
EVANSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY
1703 Orrington Avenue
Evanston, IL 60201

Tuesday, February 7, 2012
5:00 to 7:30 p.m.
BROADWAY ARMORY
5917 N. Broadway
Chicago, IL 60660

[lawfin]

A key House Committee is threatening to kill three decades of successful investments in mass transit — originally started under President Ronald Reagan — by ending the guarantee for dedicated funding for public transportation, leaving millions of riders already faced with service cuts and fare increases out in the cold.
In a stunning development late last night, House leadership and the Ways and Means committee made a shocking attack on transit that would have huge impacts for the millions of people who depend on public transportation each day.
They proposed putting every public transportation system in immediate peril by eliminating guaranteed funding for the Mass Transit Account and forcing transit to go begging before Congress for general funds each year — all while highway spending continues to be guaranteed with protected funds for half a decade at a time.

[ardecila]

It's dead on arrival. There's no way this will pass the House and no way in hell it'll pass the Senate, certainly not with a veto-proof majority.

It's just retaliation. The House Republicans didn't like the move that Reps. Petri and Johnson (Republicans themselves) pulled in the transportation committee yesterday when they tried to reinstate funding for ped/bike programs. So now they're flexing their muscles, trying to remind their wayward lackeys just how much power they have.

Conceptually, though, I like it. User fees should fund the road system, but if they're redirected to transit, they're no longer user fees. Personally, I'd prefer that all transportation spending were devolved to the state level, where the Feds would simply return the gas tax revenue to the states, in the same proportion that each state contributes. Then states could set their own transportation priorities without worrying about top-down Federal planning. Illinois could spend a greater degree of funding on much-needed transit, whereas Texas could expand freeways to their hearts' content.

The relative scarcity of transit funding, especially in red states, would force cities to scrutinize their transit wish-list and only build those projects that would generate significant ridership - which might also mean that those cities must change their land-use patterns in certain areas.

[Beta_Magellan]

Theoretically, I’m in full agreement with you ardecila—the interstate network is essentially built-out (or overbuilt, especially if you include urban expressways) and transportation needs needs are rather divergent across states. State transportation policies could be better tailored to local needs, so with transit you’d expect states like Illinois, New York and Massachusetts to focus more on modernization and improving their existing networks (since there wouldn’t be any FTA incentives towards expansion) while Minnesota, Colorado and Washington focus on expansion and rural states focus on their needs. And minus federal taxes, you solve the donor/recipient problem with gas taxes. Voila!

In practice, though, I’m much less optimistic. Although I have my quibbles with the way the FTA operates, in practice it’s much better than state DOTs, which tend to often be 100% highway-oriented, are often hostile to basic pedestrian amenities, and usually don’t know much about transit. From what I understand, federal funding allows metropolitan areas to mostly bypass their states to get federal funding (provided there’s a local match)—if that’s eliminated, cities might end up at the whim of potentially-hostile state governments. Plus, state government suffers from the same problem as the feds in terms of disproportionate representation—cities would, in all likelihood, still get screwed over for funding. Finally, although I’m sure it varies widely from state to state, I don’t get the impression that state DOTs are all that big on cost effectiveness metrics for determining which projects should go forward or not—they strike me as being much more clout-oriented. So, absent a major step up from state DOTs, I’d prefer for metros to continue dealing with the Feds.

[Beta_Magellan]

More on-topic to Chicago, the CTA’s claiming that the rehab project’s just a facelift and that the big RPMP is still going forward:

http://www.chicagonow.com/cta-tattler/2012/02/cta-red-line-rehab-work-is-interim-facelift-not-part-of-red-purple-project/

I’d say this makes sense, although they probably should have done basic rehabs like this ten years ago or so. Given the scale of some of the proposed Red-Purple alternatives, $60 million for short-term improvements is basically a rounding error—furthermore, if you’re going to go forward with a major tunneling/embankment repair-and-replacement project, you’re talking about ten to fifteen years in engineering, paperwork, assembling funding, and construction—those short-term improvements would get plenty of use in that interval. Furthermore, should the RPM not end up going forward due to the collapse of federal funding (and IDOT subsequently deciding that Decatur needs a full beltway or three), these could serve as an armature for more modest improvements along the line.