They're pretty easy to find but i'll try to grab some later. Either way, they did a great job in such a short time...the platform was predictably nice but i was really surprised how nice the ground level turnstyles and retail spaces turned out...once the viaduct work is complete is will be pretty impressive.

The potential with the Wilson makeover is massive.

I'm interested to see the nature of the work at Lawrence. Will they build an enclosed structure? Will they sandblast and paint the trestle? So many questions.

There are some up on CTA's flickr stream.

Anyway, I like the updates! This station renewal project has been a boon for these stations. It's unfortunate that they'll probably get eff'd up in fairly short order by some schmucks that love to tag everything under the sun, but hey, that's just the pessimist in me talking. :rolleyes:

Wow, the new Wilson station looks great! I, too, hope that the city upzones that area. That corner of Uptown is a real dump.

New chairman selected by Metra; as usual, it's a suburbanite who probably opposes service to city neighborhoods.

Pace picks up CTA’s slack while increasing service in Chicago and suburbs

Read More: http://gridchicago.com/2012/pace-pic...rid+Chicago%29

http://farm9.static.flickr.com/8467/...abe21c209c.jpg




Deal reached in transit fund fight

Read More: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,2592629.story

http://www.trbimg.com/img-507630a2/t...g-20121010/600

The plans for Wilson do indeed look great. The designs are sleek and ambitious. By reconfiguring the entire track structure and taking advantage of available space between the historic terracotta buildings on Broadway and the modernist Truman College to the west, the station redesign represents a bold move to recreate a vibrant core for the Uptown neighborhood.

Find the full review, along with links to the CTA presentation boards, at CTA Station Watch.

http://ctastationwatch.com/uploads/c...1.ImageHandler
The auxiliary entrance at Sunnyside, looking north.

A review of the Argyle and Thorndale stations is on CTA Station Watch and CTA Tattler. I gave the jobs a B+. The stationhouses and platforms are up to the gold standard set at Morse, but there seemed to be some cost-cutting in the finish of stairwell walls and support columns.

Read the review and find a bunch of photos here.

http://ctastationwatch.com/uploads/c...3.ImageHandler

CTA released the Phase II developments on the Western & Ashland BRT projects. The preliminary study shows that the best design is a pair of dedicated median bus lanes, created by removing one traffic lane in each direction. This is essentially the gold standard of BRT design, as seen in Curitiba or Bogota, or domestically in Cleveland. I'm pretty sure the end result will not be a single design, though (in some sections, the parking lanes may be removed to preserve 4 lanes of traffic, while in others they may remove traffic lanes).

At any rate, this project will be quite extensive. After improvements, the travel times will be only 20-50% more than the Red Line to go a comparable distance, so long crosstown trips will finally be reasonable without traveling through the Loop. Cost for each is estimated around ~$150M.

Now... I am awaiting the massive revolt of drivers and businesses.

http://www.transitchicago.com/assets...wab-center.jpg
source

http://www.transitchicago.com/assets...inecompare.png
source

If the comments on the Chicago Tribune are any indication I'm sure the naysayers will be out in force. I'd think (hope?) that businesses would be smart enough to realize how huge this would be for these areas. Unless you are a drive-thru you've got to love this as a business owner in these stretches.

Personally I can't believe how little discussion there has been about this project so far on SSP. Chicago needs dozens of lines like this. I find this project more exciting than any glitzy high rise downtown. I'm basically salivating over these renderings.

Also, maybe I'm missing something but why aren't the stops closer to el stations. I would've thought Ashland & Lake or Western, Armitage & Milwaukee would be a natural. Any explanations?

Edit: nevermind. It appears that that graphic is intended only to compare to equivalent red line stations. It does indeed link up to rail lines like one would expect if you follow the link through and look at some further graphics.

^ Uhhh, no. The commentators in the Chicago Tribune are the lowest form of sub-humans in existence. They are essentially suburban Republican xenophobes who hate the city and regularly threaten to bail for Arizona, yet for some reason keep sticking around and bitching, to the dismay of those of us who yearn for intelligent discourse.

It should have concrete barriers to those lanes.

Looking at the display boards from CTA open houses held in June of this year regarding Western/Ashland BRT, the agency has already categorically eliminated the possibility of concrete barriers.

Congestion pricing!
 

I don't think I've seen any discussion on CMAP's congestion pricing initiative. I think this is a GREAT idea.

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/congestion-pricing/about

CMAP is proposing to add congestion pricing/car pool lanes to the Eisenhower, Stevenson, Addams. It isn't clear that CMAP is suggesting this, but I am also 100% in favor of converting the express lanes on the Dan Ryan and Kennedy to congestion pricing/carpool lanes.

Think of all the advantages!

(1) Vastly reduced travel times for public bus services from the suburbs to the Loop as well as for carpoolers.
(2) Easy executive travel from affluent suburbs to downtown (that would provide another big incentive for companies to move from the suburbs to downtown).
(3) Ability to get in and out of the city quickly for everyone that is in an emergency, at least as long as they are willing to pay $$$.

Those are all great advantages. And everyone who doesn't want to pay, of course doesn't have to pay.

Congestion pricing is a no-brainer.

So, what would I do with the tolls? Improve Metra. The number 1 thing Metra lacks is connectivity of the downtown train stations so people can easily use Metra not only to get to nearby Loop jobs, but to travel from the suburbs to anywhere in the city. Specifically, I say use the toll revenue to build light rail connecting Union/Ogilvie to the El system and to destinations throughout downtown. As just one example -- it blows my mind, given the hundreds if not thousands of users of private shuttles from Union/Ogilvie to office buildings along the river and Michigan Avenue that we can't build light rail along the Carroll Avenue transitway. The demand is already there! And, given the cost of parking on the weekends along Michigan Avenue, wouldn't suburban visitors utilize a straightforward, comfortable rail connection between Union/Ogilvie and Michigan Avenue? Plus, why aren't Union/Ogilvie connected to McCormick Place? Finally, if there is any toll revenue left over, build express trains from Union/Ogilvie to the airports.

That plan would completely change transportation in Chicago. It would make the Loop by far the most easily and cheaply accessible global business center in the country and perhaps the world. It would be a tremendous competitive advantage. And, with tolls from congestion pricing, it might even be financially achievable.

I think you're misreading the situation with the private shuttles. Those are being run not because the transit from the train stations is so bad (it isn't) but in a desperate attempt to make River North and East Loop office space as attractive as the buildings within walking distance of the stations. CTA is about to drop/consolidate some of its Streeterville and Illinois Center shuttles because of modest ridership.

As a rider of one of those private shuttles, I don't agree. The transit from the train stations is "bad." I live in the West Loop. I take a private shuttle to work in River North because it is easily the most convenient form of transportation from the West Loop to my office. The shuttles pick people up at scheduled intervals and drop them off directly at the office. CTA's existing bus service can't compete with that, and that is the reason no one rides CTA's buses. In any event, even if we disagree about the reasons CTA's existing bus service is apparently not popular, I am not sure CTA's lack of popularity has anything to do with my argument that light rail service would have high ridership. The difference between under-street light rail service (that is modern, comfortable, allows for efficient boarding in climate controlled environments, isn't stopped by traffic lights, and isn't stuck in traffic jams) versus the existing bus service, or even the private shuttles, is pretty clear. Light rail would be a huge improvement.

Of course, downtown light rail may not be worth the cost, which would be significant. I think that is a debatable question. But I disagree strongly that the ridership isn't there (it is) or that ridership would not increase significantly versus the slow, inefficient, and weather-exposed bus service that currently exists (it would). Further, as I mentioned, light rail service from Union/Ogilvie wouldn't just serve office workers. It could/would also connect Union/Ogilvie more effectively to the El lines, to Michigan Avenue, and to other destinations, like McCormick.

I think it shocking and dumb that Chicago's largest public transportation stations offer no rail connections to any of Chicago's core transportation infrastructure. Metra should be designed to serve more than just West Loop office workers.

Of course, there is no money for such improvements. But congestion pricing could be a pretty lucrative source of revenue, and, especially with improvements that make Metra more usable for more kinds of trips to and from Chicago, congestion pricing would leave everyone better off.

^ The problem is, and I think either VivaLFuego or Ardecila brought this up a few years ago, congestion pricing could also cannibalize mass transit ridership.

If I were a fairly well paid, but not super rich, professional from the suburbs or outlying neighborhoods who worked downtown, all of a sudden congestion pricing makes driving downtown a more attractive option for me.

Now, instead of paying for a Metra ticket, I can pay daily for the "congestion lane" and get downtown just as fast, if not faster. All of a sudden you are raising revenue for Metra while, at the same time, decimating its ridership.

To me, congestion pricing isn't a bad idea but I think the cost should be high enough such that it doesn't become too attractive an alternative to the train. It should be more of a "damn it I really need to get downtown fast today, I'll bite the bullet and pay the high price just this once!" kind of thing. Here's who should use congestion lanes:

1. Individual cars for a steep price that varies throughout the day--no matter how many people are in the car, the price is the same. This will encourage carpooling because people can take turns using their own car and thus split up the cost over time
2. All buses use these lanes free of charge
3. Emergency vehicles (of course)
4. Taxicabs? Not sure about this one. I'm inclined to say they should be able to use the lanes but should still pay the congestion charge, or perhaps have a special transponder that charges them only half the congestion charge

Unfortunately this is correct.

I agree. I think $5+, at a minimum. Maybe $10-$15 per trip during rush hour. The trip should priced high enough so that only top level executives, individuals with emergencies, and carpools will be occupying the lane. Also, doesn't it cost $25 to park downtown per day? I think with a $10 per trip charge, only top level executives could afford it on a regular basis. But, the price should be set at whatever the market will bear. The basic idea is to keep just one lane flowing freely, and there isn't that much capacity in just one lane, so it is physically impossible that there would be that much of a shift from Metra to the congestion pricing lanes no matter what price is set.

(I think it will be a bit tricky applying this concept to the Kennedy. Maybe the reversible express lanes should be divided into two express, congestion pricing lanes going in each direction, though that would reduce the overall capacity of the freeway in the direction of heaviest travel, except to the extent car pool and bus use increases.)

I don't think that taxis should get any discount. I am not sure what purpose that would serve.

$10 per trip x 10,000 users x 2 times a day x 300 business days = $60,000,000 annual revenue. That could help finance the debt service on the cost of the congestion pricing lanes as well as a very significant investment in improving Metra.

I don't even own a car and rely on public transit for everything, but you can see in the picture how that design will totally cripple traffic on Ashland and Western, which are basically the "urban highways" that are more high capacity wide roads to carry surface traffic through areas as opposed to say Damen or Racine, etc. that tend to just be more local roads.

I would assume with huge traffic pile-ups that will happen on that street, they'd better have HUGE fines to people who drive in the bus lane. When you're sitting in traffic for 5 minutes looking at a totally open lane and no buses in sight - you're really going to want to just zoom up that lane. I'm on Western and Ashland a lot with friend who always take those cause they move so fast with the second lane option to pass people/turning cars, etc.

It's not like all that traffic will just go away and take the bus or anything. The people driving up those streets normally aren't going from one point on western to one point on western - they're trying to move in zig zags from one random place to another.

If they could at least ditch the parking on that route they could stick with it as an obvious route for cars to move quickly across the city as well as have the bus lanes.