HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #14021  
Old Posted Feb 12, 2018, 8:10 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,819
They could in theory, yes.

I suspect you really are asking whether it would be a good idea. Let's look at the relevant criteria ("I like streetcars" is not a relevant criterion).

First, cost per rider would go up. Remember that not only do light rail lines have enormous capital and vehicle costs, but their expenses per rider are also much greater. Looking at NTDB figures for systems that operate both light rail and buses, we see that operating costs per hour are more than double (average 220% of bus costs) but crush capacity is only 50% greater.

Next, capacity. I'm not aware that the 79 or 81 see crush loading for much, if any, of the day. For the passenger, of course, waiting 6 minutes for the next vehicle is much preferable to waiting 12 minutes for a larger vehicle.

Finally, guideway. Obviously there'd be little point in building a new streetcar line that gets stuck in traffic, so that means taking away two lanes of the street—more at stops. Well, if that's politically palatable, why not start by creating a busway? If passenger volumes get up above 5000 passenger-miles per route-mile, then you could consider installing a light rail line there.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14022  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2018, 1:14 PM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishIllini View Post
I'm guessing pcclcar1 owns or rents property closer to the proposed red line route. The Metra Electric becoming a CTA-operated line does more for the south side than extending the red line.
I own no property in the area. I want genuine CTA Rapid Transit.....I don't want a Metra conversion with 100 percent less service and five hundred percent more expense. Why can't your intellectuals see that!!

All of you people are welcome to spread your intellect out on the south side if you dare. Speaking is so much easier than carrying on a debate in the internet, don't you agree?? Here's the meeting.

Public Open House Scheduled for the Red Line Extension Preferred Alignment
CTA is hosting a public open house to provide information on the Preferred Alignment for the Red Line Extension (RLE) Project. At the open house, you will learn more about the Preferred Alignment and anticipated project benefits and impacts. You will also have the opportunity to provide feedback. CTA welcomes your comments and feedback about the Preferred Alignment and potential impacts.

Tuesday, February 13, 2018
6:00 - 8:00 PM
Gwendolyn Brooks College Preparatory Academy
Main Gym (west side of building)
250 E. 111th. Street, Chicago, IL 60628
*Please enter through Door 8. Parking available in rear of building.
Parking lot entrance via King Drive.This location is served by CTA Bus #111, 4, 34, 111A, 115, and 119; and Metra Electric 111th Street (Pullman) Station.

The facility is accessible to people with disabilities.

Peace!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14023  
Old Posted Feb 13, 2018, 3:59 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagopcclcar1 View Post
I don't want a Metra conversion with 100 percent less service and five hundred percent more expense.
Why do you assume fares on a converted IC line would be higher than other CTA train lines? And why do you assume headways would be less than the Green Line branches? Surely those would be the two most basic conditions underlying any transfer of operation or branding. Don't let your distaste for the Gray Line's main proponent blind you to the benefits of better using existing infrastructure.

Why do you think it's good policy for CTA to extend the Red Line and run eight-car trains on eight-minute headways through an area with such low population and even lower ridership potential? Fewer than 20,000 people live within a half-mile walk of all four new RLE stations combined. I find it hard to imagine that boardings will even cover the station agents' salaries.

Quote:
All of you people are welcome to spread your intellect out on the south side if you dare. Speaking is so much easier than carrying on a debate in the internet, don't you agree??
CTA does not allow public speaking at their "open houses." You write your question or comment on an index card and put it in a shoebox, to be responded to later.

Last edited by Mr Downtown; Feb 13, 2018 at 5:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14024  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2018, 12:34 AM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Why do you assume fares on a converted IC line would be higher than other CTA train lines? And why do you assume headways would be less than the Green Line branches? Surely those would be the two most basic conditions underlying any transfer of operation or branding. Don't let your distaste for the Gray Line's main proponent blind you to the benefits of better using existing infrastructure.

Why do you think it's good policy for CTA to extend the Red Line and run eight-car trains on eight-minute headways through an area with such low population and even lower ridership potential? Fewer than 20,000 people live within a half-mile walk of all four new RLE stations combined. I find it hard to imagine that boardings will even cover the station agents' salaries.



CTA does not allow public speaking at their "open houses." You write your question or comment on an index card and put it in a shoebox, to be responded to later.
WILL ANY INTELLECTUALS AT "SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation" AFFECT THE CTA/CHICAGO RED LINE EXTENSION???? NO!!! So it's hopeless to argue!! They will never learn.

Peace. DH

Last edited by chicagopcclcar1; Feb 14, 2018 at 2:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14025  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2018, 4:59 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,208
^ Not sure what you mean by "they". It's pretty clear that Rahm is slow-rolling the project until it is politically convenient to give it the chop.

If this were truly a priority for the administration, they would be knocking on doors in Washington and hiring lobbyists to get the dang thing approved and funded. They would be providing CTA with the money they need to continue planning, land acquisition, and early engineering work. Instead, CTA has a trickle of funding to do this work and the periodic announcements of "progress" are just for show. CTA and the Mayor's Office are all too happy to pin the blame on dysfunction in Washington, but that's not the real holdup.

Plus, there's the big new station at 95th which has gotten far more hoopla from the Mayor's Office. The stated purpose of the 95th St project is to ease bus congestion and improve conditions at the terminal. But if the Red Line is going to be extended, and bus passengers will be making their connections at 103rd, 111th, and 115th, then why invest all that money adding new bus bays at 95th?

I'm guessing the Mayor will schedule a grand opening for the 95th St station in the months leading up to the election. Assuming he is re-elected, the Red Line Extension plans will be quietly shelved, just like all the other big CTA proposals were. Maybe another big new project will take its place in the planning queue, maybe not.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14026  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2018, 6:28 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Miami of Canada
Posts: 19,110
a quick CTA question.

after spending nearly all of my life as a regular red line rider, our recent move to lincoln square has turned me into a regular brown line rider for the first time.

why does the CTA route some brown line trains through the loop and onto the orange line tracks down to midway? and how long has this been going on?
__________________
He has to go.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Feb 14, 2018 at 9:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14027  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2018, 10:55 PM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
a quick CTA question.

after spending nearly all of my life as a regular red line rider, our recent move to lincoln square has turned me into a regular brown line rider for the first time.

why does the CTA route some brown line trains through the loop and onto the orange line tracks down to midway? and how long has this been going on?
I think they do it primarily because of the small size of the yard at Kimball. They've been doing it at least since the 8-car expansion project, maybe longer.
__________________
I like travel and photography - check out my Flickr page.
My current camera gear: Nikon D750, Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 zoom, Nikon 50mm f1.4 AF, Nikkor 135mm f3.5 manual focus, Nikon PB-4 Bellows
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14028  
Old Posted Feb 14, 2018, 10:59 PM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
^ Not sure what you mean by "they". It's pretty clear that Rahm is slow-rolling the project until it is politically convenient to give it the chop.

If this were truly a priority for the administration, they would be knocking on doors in Washington and hiring lobbyists to get the dang thing approved and funded. They would be providing CTA with the money they need to continue planning, land acquisition, and early engineering work. Instead, CTA has a trickle of funding to do this work and the periodic announcements of "progress" are just for show. CTA and the Mayor's Office are all too happy to pin the blame on dysfunction in Washington, but that's not the real holdup.

Plus, there's the big new station at 95th which has gotten far more hoopla from the Mayor's Office. The stated purpose of the 95th St project is to ease bus congestion and improve conditions at the terminal. But if the Red Line is going to be extended, and bus passengers will be making their connections at 103rd, 111th, and 115th, then why invest all that money adding new bus bays at 95th?

I'm guessing the Mayor will schedule a grand opening for the 95th St station in the months leading up to the election. Assuming he is re-elected, the Red Line Extension plans will be quietly shelved, just like all the other big CTA proposals were. Maybe another big new project will take its place in the planning queue, maybe not.
I hope so, although I've also heard stated on here that the CTA, once the Red/Purple modernization plan completes, will need a larger yard at 95th, so some of the project needs to happen anyway, and maybe the cost of expanding the yard at 95th is not that much less than making a line to a lower-cost, higher-space area further south so they figure they may as well throw in a few extra stations and get the political good will out of that.
__________________
I like travel and photography - check out my Flickr page.
My current camera gear: Nikon D750, Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 zoom, Nikon 50mm f1.4 AF, Nikkor 135mm f3.5 manual focus, Nikon PB-4 Bellows
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14029  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2018, 12:24 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 13,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
I hope so, although I've also heard stated on here that the CTA, once the Red/Purple modernization plan completes, will need a larger yard at 95th, so some of the project needs to happen anyway, and maybe the cost of expanding the yard at 95th is not that much less than making a line to a lower-cost, higher-space area further south so they figure they may as well throw in a few extra stations and get the political good will out of that.
I can't imagine that's the case. The current yard is a small patch in the middle of a truly massive interchange. There is plenty of room to expand the yard, either within the interchange or within the median of the Bishop Ford a little further east, given a little roadwork.

Perhaps it could be coupled with a short one-station extension that would put a station directly at Chicago State University (with the potential for a transfer to the Metra Electric eventually). Of course, the future of that institution is also very much in doubt, but perhaps better access would enable it to draw a larger and stronger student body.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14030  
Old Posted Feb 15, 2018, 4:45 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
why does the CTA route some brown line trains through the loop and onto the orange line tracks down to midway? and how long has this been going on?
Since 2009, one Orange Line train in both morning and evening rush (might now be more than one run) continues to Kimball as a Brown Line train and returns to Midway yard. It's because they need more trains on Brown than can be stored at Kimball.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14031  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2018, 1:27 AM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
^ Not sure what you mean by "they". It's pretty clear that Rahm is slow-rolling the project until it is politically convenient to give it the chop.

If this were truly a priority for the administration, they would be knocking on doors in Washington and hiring lobbyists to get the dang thing approved and funded. They would be providing CTA with the money they need to continue planning, land acquisition, and early engineering work. Instead, CTA has a trickle of funding to do this work and the periodic announcements of "progress" are just for show. CTA and the Mayor's Office are all too happy to pin the blame on dysfunction in Washington, but that's not the real holdup.

Plus, there's the big new station at 95th which has gotten far more hoopla from the Mayor's Office. The stated purpose of the 95th St project is to ease bus congestion and improve conditions at the terminal. But if the Red Line is going to be extended, and bus passengers will be making their connections at 103rd, 111th, and 115th, then why invest all that money adding new bus bays at 95th?

I'm guessing the Mayor will schedule a grand opening for the 95th St station in the months leading up to the election. Assuming he is re-elected, the Red Line Extension plans will be quietly shelved, just like all the other big CTA proposals were. Maybe another big new project will take its place in the planning queue, maybe not.
ardecila.....Even though I support the CTA Red line extension....your post contains some factual truths that even I have to agree with.

DH
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14032  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2018, 3:56 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Leftist Correctist
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Spaceship Earth
Posts: 5,154
25 Years of Color-Coded Lines on the CTA

__________________
You slip me the cash and I'll slip you the wiener. <><><><><><>IMPEACHMENT NOW!

For me it can be reduced to this: For every personal freedom we gained from the automobile, we lost in social cohesion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14033  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2018, 9:26 PM
K 22 K 22 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 114
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy Bee View Post
The Pink Line has been a thing for 12 years now. Time certainly does fly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14034  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2018, 12:07 AM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 7,088
Just thinking out loud here, but with the massive boom in the West Loop, access to that area from the north side isn't particularly good without transferring. I'm wondering whether it makes sense to reroute the purple line rush hour service from the Loop? Instead of having it make the left turn onto the Loop for a clockwise route, instead turn trains westward along the Lake Street elevated to perhaps Ashland or wherever trains could be turned back? If purple line express riders want to reach the Loop, they can transfer to a brown line train or red line train at Belmont. Otherwise this option would give north side riders a one seat ride to the expanding employment market in the West Loop during the morning & afternoon rush periods.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14035  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2018, 12:15 AM
IrishIllini IrishIllini is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioGuy View Post
Just thinking out loud here, but with the massive boom in the West Loop, access to that area from the north side isn't particularly good without transferring. I'm wondering whether it makes sense to reroute the purple line rush hour service from the Loop? Instead of having it make the left turn onto the Loop for a clockwise route, instead turn trains westward along the Lake Street elevated to perhaps Ashland or wherever trains could be turned back? If purple line express riders want to reach the Loop, they can transfer to a brown line train or red line train at Belmont. Otherwise this option would give north side riders a one seat ride to the expanding employment market in the West Loop during the morning & afternoon rush periods.
Do you have a moment to talk about our savior, the Clinton/Larrabee subway
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14036  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2018, 12:43 AM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 7,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by IrishIllini View Post
Do you have a moment to talk about our savior, the Clinton/Larrabee subway
Haha, well that would be nice! But probably more than a decade away from reality (if it ever becomes a reality). So in the meantime sending the purple line west on the Lake Street elevated tracks might be a cost effective way to provide direct access to the West Loop for northsiders during the weekday rush periods. Might also help free up some space in the Loop? (unless going through the junction at the NW side of the Loop would minimize the ability to relieve Loop congestion).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14037  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2018, 3:22 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by OhioGuy View Post
Instead of having [the Purple Line] make the left turn onto the Loop for a clockwise route, instead turn trains westward along the Lake Street elevated
Lake and Wells has no southbound-to-westbound turnout; Tower 18 sits in that quadrant. For that matter, no eastbound-to-northbound either, to run the trains back to Linden.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14038  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2018, 4:17 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Uptown, Chicago
Posts: 7,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
Lake and Wells has no southbound-to-westbound turnout; Tower 18 sits in that quadrant. For that matter, no eastbound-to-northbound either, to run the trains back to Linden.
Ah ok, didn’t realize that. Thanks for the info. Unfortunate it’s not possible with the current infrastructure given how unlikely it is to have a separate rail line between the north side & west side in the near or even moderately distant future. Is there enough space to add it in (if the tower could be fit in somewhere else)?

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14039  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2018, 4:57 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,819
That's a lot of money and trouble just to avoid some (pretty easy) transfers. Purple-to-Green is just up and over to the other platform at Clark/Lake. Brown-to-Pink is just under and over to the other platform at Washington/Wells. Purple-to-Pink is same platform anywhere on the Loop.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14040  
Old Posted Feb 23, 2018, 5:06 PM
emathias's Avatar
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,538
The City really does need to get serious about the Larrabe-Clinton subway sooner rather than later. It's been talked about for 50 years (at least similar plans have been), and it's finally at a point where it's becoming a "need" rather than a "nice-to-have." If the CTA planned well, it could at least start it after the RPM is complete and then either run the Purple all day through Clinton, or switch Purple to Clinton and run Red through Clinton.

In the longer planning, having it touch base in Chinatown and then swing west to Halstead as a subway through Bridgeport, then east at Pershing to the south Lakefront would accomplish a lot as a long-tern plan (completion circa 2040?).
__________________
I like travel and photography - check out my Flickr page.
My current camera gear: Nikon D750, Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 zoom, Nikon 50mm f1.4 AF, Nikkor 135mm f3.5 manual focus, Nikon PB-4 Bellows
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:54 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.