So those are going to be replacing the orange South Shore ones?

I wish these things, and others for any rail expansion from the stimulus, could be totally made in the Midwest. But at least they were assembled in Milwaukee.







The car bodies were manufactured by Nippon Sharyo/Sumitomo, in Toyakawa, Japan. The cars were assembled at Nippon Sharyo/Super Steel in Milwaukee, Wis.

Specs for new double-decker South Shore cars

Style: Gallery-style
Power: Electric
Cost: $3.64 million per car
Seating: 111 passengers
Weight: 145,000 lbs.
Height: 16 feet, 2 inches
Length: 85 feet

^ So I take it you don't think there's any hope that Chicago could support a circumferential rail line, despite the fact that pretty much every global, respectable city out there has circumferential lines at some point (and usually more than one of them) in their transit networks?

I understand your argument--I sincerely do. But the only way to move Chicago out of its current immensely downtown-centric model is to at least try to make cross-city trips easier and sexier (ie buses aren't considered sexy) than the car. The Circle Line may be stupid, but it's a start and 50 years from now it could pay off, if not now.

http://i40.tinypic.com/2aeowed.jpg http://www.railway-technology.com/co...-west-loop.jpg

Generally, if it were economical to produce railcars in the US, there would be manufacturers. As it is, the federal Buy America requirements ensure that at least final assembly of transit vehicles is done here (such as the many buses churned out by the New Flyer that happens to be in Rep. Oberstar's district in Minnesota, etc.). At some point, mandating domestic production for government spending becomes just a form of wealth redistribution when the taxpayer is thus paying uncompetitive wages and therefore inflated asset prices, but that's a separate can of worms only tangentially related to Chicago transit.

I wonder, all those countries that manage to build transit infrastructure cheaply and quickly (Spain comes to mind), to what extent do they mandate labor and materials be domestic, versus whatever it takes to get the job done fastest, at highest quality, and lowest cost to the taxpayer?

In the long run, anything's possible. It's never a bad idea to plan, and plan wisely - I'm all for protecting ROW, carefully building utilities, and building support infrastructure incrementally. But as of right now, no, there isn't remotely the trip density to justify it, nor is driving/parking nearly an unattractive enough option to generate such trip density. Even as it is now, probably 20% of the CTA rail system (ballpark guess) could be replaced with buses with negligble impact on regional transit ridership or congestion (depressing thought, eh?). I just look at the continuous nightmare that is the CTA operating budget and can't fathom how one could add even more underutiilized deadbeat rail service to it, unless you want to go the route of St. Louis, Dallas, et al and build shiny new rail lines in an effort to be a "real city" at the expense of necessary cuts to bus service, to the overall detriment of the transit-dependent population. But at least they have rail lines, like real cities.

Isn't part of the problem with the Circle Line simply that the routes roughly along Ashland are just too close in to really be worth it? The Alternatives Analysis from way back noted that a line along Western would have higher ridership. I have a hard time believing that a circumferential line through the middle of the city would have low ridership, it would just be monumentally expensive to build... same problem, but let's distinguish ideas that are bad because of low benefits from ideas that are bad because of high costs.

I still think the answer is a big fat investment in the Mid-City Transitway, which is already up on a nice straight embankment connecting the far reaches of the city to six el lines and two airports.

^ It would be great if somehow the concept of the Mid-City-Transitway and the Circle Line could be merged into one concept.

Also, if the city somehow mandated higher zoning along the route of the transitway, that would improve its chance of being successful.

^What would be the point of "merging" two parallel routes four miles apart? What does that even mean?

Style: Butt ugly and boring as hell

I wish I could be excited for new cars on the SSL but i just can't. We are creating a metro area with absolutley no stylistic diversity in rolling stock. LAME!!!!!!

Just a reminder of what the rest of the 1st world is getting their hands on:

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q...2-Helsinki.jpg

And we want the Olympics?

I don't think that affected the domestic production as much as the fact that because funding for public transit has been so low for so long, there was barely any demand for railcars in the US. Maybe this will be yet another positive gain from the increased use of public transit, and yet another reason to encourage increased funding. How many orders would it take to get a plant built in Chicago?

Could you post a link to that alternative analysis study?

edit: found it.

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q...Lphotoshop.jpg

It's not rocket science.

I like that, hydrogen. There are some practical considerations as to why railcars look the way they do here, though. Offhand:

1. SSL trains need to accommodate both high-level and low-level boarding

2. Articulated trainsets are impractical for the Chicago context, where demand is so heavily peaked. Individual units (commuter) and married-pairs (rapid) provide the flexibility to appropriately meet demand.

3. Ribbed stainless steel is more graffiti-resistant and requires less maintenance than a painted or printed livery. The only such liveries that are economical are when advertisers are paying for ad wraps.

4. This one's simple: railroad standards governing length, height, weight, safety, and so on. Similar to how zoning codes impact/limit the universe of shapes and forms under which architects operate.

See pics of the corridors in this document: http://www.transitchicago.com/assets...dors200605.pdf

See analysis of the corridors in this document (good stuff starts on about page 18):
http://www.transitchicago.com/assets...pres200609.pdf

My sentiments exactly, Busy Bee. I don't know why Japanese rolling stock is so butt-ugly. The only exceptions that come to mind are the Shinkansen trainsets, Nankai Electric's rapi:t trains, and the Kinki Sharyo SP150s for Kowloon-Canton. I think Dallas DART had to do their own design, and maybe Sound Transit as well.

In this case, NICTD is piggybacking on an order that Metra Electric is making (NICTD is adding cars, not replacing the current single-level cars). I don't know if there was some desire to have seats and other interior components interchangeable with other 50-year-old Metra bilevels or why the design is so retardataire. The Highliners they're replacing look sleek and modern next to these things.

As to #3, if that was such a HUGE issue than all rolling stock in Europe would be strainless steel. There is more graffiti in a medium sized German or Italian city than in all of Chicagoland. I don't for a second believe that if Metra or CTA or SSL went with a pianted car body that it would become an instant overnight graffiti target requiring an abundance of money and man hours to maintain—that's plain baloney.

As to Mr. Downtown, yes the IC Highliners 9in their original IC orange) are the most bad ass EMU's we've ever had.

I just assumed that the intent was to create a recognizable consistency between Metra Electric and the other 11 lines, so that the image of the bi-level car would automatically associate with Metra. AFAIK, no other major commuter railroad in the country uses the same bilevel cars that we do; they all use the awkward-looking Bombardier ones.

South Shore, although it would be cool and advantageous for them to maintain a separate branding identity from Metra, is getting new cars at a cost savings by using the same design and assembly line that was set up for Metra.

JPB/CalTrain does. And the systems, such as Virginia Railway Express, who bought our old bilevels.

It's not big money, but it's money nonetheless, so unless a policymaker (like say, Daley) makes some idiosyncratic stink about style/aesthetics, the budget concern tends to win in the culture/climate under which Chicago transit agencies operate. Check out the value-engineered spartan delight that are the new Brown Line stations - any interest/ornament that was left in after budget-cutting was that absolutely required by contractual or grant stipulations (e.g. the artwork, the "historic" nods at Armitage and Diversey, etc.)

Viva, what's the story on the Armitage/Diversity stations? I guess I just assumed TIF or SSA funds went to make them oh so slightly nicer.

I don't know or remember the details, but there were some agreements CTA signed in regards to certain elements of the station being "historic" in nature, such as the shepherd's crook light standards and some of the railing designs. There were a few contentious Lincoln Park community meetings regarding both the original designs for these stations (at first CTA was pitching something rather modern for Armitage) and again after all station designs were revised, standardized, and utilitarianized after the initial bids came in drastically over budget. The original stationhouses themselves are landmarked I believe, hence the non-optional restoration of their exteriors.

All in all, I've actually been relieved by the general quality and feel of the new stationhouses along the line, but the platforms sure are stark and lame - widespread use of plain galvanized steel makes many of them feel permanently "unfinished," to boot (I know that for every raw material painted, AdrianXSands cries, but really, many of these stations cry out for a can of paint). Even the stations rebuilt in the Green Line rehab of the 90s had substantially more attractive and thoughtful design in the canopies, railings, and placement of stairwells/lighting/other amenities. And then there's the new Pink Line stations between Damen and Pulaski, with platforms of surprisingly striking/expensive design.

I sure wouldn't have minded if some of the extra expense put into those Pink Line stations had instead gone into extending the canopies to cover more of the platform. It's kind of cool that they reused some of the old canopies, even though it's bizarre to see canopies that used to be across from each other put together on an island platform.

But yeah, the new and refurbished Pink stations are way better than the Brown stations.

Wouldn't surprise me. You can definitely see who has the pull. No Lincoln Park stations were closed during construction, and they got some paint at Armitage too.

I think the station house interiors are hit or miss, but agree completely on the platforms.

http://www.wibc.com/news/Story.aspx?ID=1079911

Proposed Tax Increase Could Extend South Shore Railroad

By Eric Berman
4/7/2009

A proposed new income tax could extend the reach of the South Bend-to-Chicago South Shore Railroad.

The Senate will vote next week on a proposed local income tax of up to a quarter-percent for Saint Joseph, Porter, LaPorte and Lake Counties to help pay for a billion-dollar extension of the railroad to Valparaiso, Lowell and Cedar Lake.

Representative Chet Dobis (D-Merrillville) notes the region is home to thousands of people who work in Chicago....

CTA Alternatives Analysis Meetings
 

Looks like they have set up further meetings for CTA's four Alternatives Analysis projects. Circle Line is scheduled for "Fall 2009" (postponed from Spring 2009) and Red Line Extension is scheduled for June sometime.

The Yellow Line and Orange Line extensions have definite dates and sites, later this month.

Orange Line Extension
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
6:00 PM – 8:00 PM (presentation will begin at 6:15 PM)
Richard J. Daley College
Lobby adjacent to auditorium
7500 South Pulaski Road
Chicago, Illinois 60652

Yellow Line Extension
Thursday, April 30, 2009
6:00 PM – 8:00 PM (presentation will begin at 6:15 PM)
Niles North High School - Auditorium
9800 North Lawler Avenue
Skokie, Illinois

CTA - Red line stinks!
 

Has anyone else who rides the Red Line noticed that ever since Ron Huberman left the CTA, the train cars are back to their old stinky, dirty, urine smelling selves? It might be just me, but Huberman always took the Red line to work and I think now that he is not in charge, things are slipping.

I've actually noticed that all the trains, not just the red line, are filthy. The stainless exteriors are brown with filth, and the interior floors are grimey. Take some pride, CTA!

^You don't think this might have to do with us coming out of winter with the slush, salt and snow associated with it that makes everything look dirty?

in my opinion, the red line has never struck me as terrible. the only time i was appalled is when the homeless man across from me peed on the floor of a nearly full train and the cta driver just told him not to cause trouble. but yeah, other than sunflower seeds on the floor and the occasional mcdonalds cup, i don't feel like the trains are that bad, but maybe i just have low standards

I get that we are coming out of winter, etc... I just think it is interesting, because all winter long the Red Line cars were pretty clean, Ron Huberman was also still riding and running the CTA at that point.:shrug:

Its just you...are you not the guy who only about a week ago stated that you you see altercations or incidents on the L on nearly a daily basis

Are you hypersensitve to the point of obsession or are you just uncomfortable in an urban setting? Me thinks one or the other or both

Sure. But they were cleaned prior to mid April last year, and generally were cleaner during the winter.

I'm not hypersensitive, I just expect a little more I guess. I'm not complaining about trash here, paper and garbage on the CTA floors is one thing, but urine, and other bodily fluids is completely unacceptable. If I'm paying for the fare to ride the train, I have a legit beef if things are not at least sanitary to an extent.:shrug:

http://cbs2chicago.com/local/chicago....2.981795.html

Drivers Who Don't Stop For Pedestrians Face Fines

CHICAGO (STNG) ―

Chicago motorists who barrel through intersections and fail to yield for pedestrians had better be prepared to pay up. They might get stopped by an undercover police officer posing as a pedestrian -- and playing for keeps.

One year after a pair of Northwest Side stings triggered 179 warning citations, City Hall is gearing up for "at least 50" undercover operations -- only this time with real tickets. Fines will range from $50 to $500, the Chicago Sun-Times is reporting.

Last year, there were more than 3,000 pedestrian-related accidents on Chicago streets. More than 50 of them resulted in pedestrian fatalities, an average of one a week...

More Chicago B/S
 

This is such a load of CRAP!

If someone can find this information, I would love to know what the statistics behind these numbers are, how many of the 3,000+ accidents were a result of moron pedestrians? I'm not saying that drivers are 100% innocent, but I see people trying to cross the street against signals, in the middle of the street all the time. That's not to mention the number of pedestrians that are completely clueless to their surroundings because they are either listening to their IPOD, texting/emailing someone, or on their cell phone.

"It's all part of a nearly three-year-old campaign known as "Safe Streets for Chicago," designed to improve pedestrian and traffic safety through: technology, such as countdown signals; infrastructure investment, such as marked crosswalks, and education. "

How does placing an undercover cop in a sting, relate to any of the quoted methods to improve safety? This is just another B/S way to collect more money. Why doesn't the city start writing tickets for jaywalking?

I think you have it backwards.

Whenever I cross against a light or in the middle of the street, I'm extremely careful to make sure there are no cars coming. But when I have the signal, I'm less careful. As a result, every time I've had a close encounter as a pedestrian, it has been when I have the signal.

Also, many Chicago drivers don't understand or don't care that pedestrians have the right of way in the crosswalk. Crossing the street is a nightmare in this city because drivers ignore stop signs and ALWAYS ignore crosswalks that aren't at intersections.

Whenever I drive I have no trouble avoiding unscrupulous pedestrians, because I am a careful driver. I would bet there are very few collisions that cause pedestrian fatalities that couldn't have been avoided by the driver.

:previous:

The stings are not going to take place in areas that have pedestrian signals. They are going to take place near crosswalks that do not have a light or stop sign. I think it’s a great idea. Drivers need to be more aware of people in this city. Hell, I bet most drivers don’t even know that pedestrians have the right-of-way at a crosswalk with no stop sign or light.

I agree that most drivers probably don't know all the rules. If I remember correctly (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong), but doesn't the particular rule/law stating that peds have the right-of-way at cross walks apply only to those that are marked with both a sign and have the large white striping across the cross walk? I know that is the case in Missouri, but doesn't the same apply here in IL?

^^^ No, not at all. In the City of Chicago traffic laws are heavily in favor of pedestrians. If you are in a crosswalk the driver must yield to you unless there is a signal and it is orange telling you not to cross. So if there is a mid-block crossing cars are supposed to stop when a pedestrian is standing there waiting to cross.

They are dirtier on the inside than they were 9 months ago but that is only because they did their complete rehab thing on most of the Red line cars last spring. Every couple years they completely rehab the interiors of each train car re-waxing the floors, scraping all of the gunk out of any cracks, and replacing the little fabric squares on all of the streets and fixing whatever else is in disrepair. That is why things seem dirtier on the inside now than 9 months ago since every car had been recently refurbished. That has nothing to do with Huberman, it has to do with periodic maintenance.

As far as the outside of the cars goes I have no idea what you are talking about, the cars have always been dirty and always will be dirty, I see no difference...

A law that 99% of drivers don't adhere to, and when I learned that pedestrians have the ROW in such situations and started stopping, I created hazardous traffic situations (including irate people behind me swinging out to the other side of the yellow line to pass me while gunning it). As much as I am for ped-friendly streets, this is another stupid (or rather, revenue-driven) idea like the red light cameras. Either it has to be enforced universally so all drivers adhere to it, or not at all, because the selective enforcement leads to even more dangerous traffic conditions.

How can it be enforced universally? It's like speed traps. If you do them properly, then their locations are randomized and the fear of getting caught is the deterrent.

^ Agree.

I would advocate using the same technology as the red light cameras to ticket cars that don't give pedestrians the right of way. Have people watch various intersections from the camera and simply push a button when they observe a violation--bada boom bada bing, you been busted!

I realize it's incredibly hard to change entrenched ways of driving, but you know, there are lots of places in this country where people actually follow that law. In a lot of Pacific Northwest cities, drivers ALWAYS stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk, and usually stop for pedestrians even when they're not in a crosswalk. I've seen the same behavior in small towns throughout the Upper Midwest, but then small town drivers are always more courteous.

That said, in Chicago I tend to drive like a Chicagoan for the same reason you do: driving courteously could put pedestrians in more danger because of psychotic drivers gunning it to get around you. But I still stop for pedestrians whenever it's safe to.

I think these operations should be happening all the time, but at signaled intersections since they can catch plenty of people flagrantly and dangerously breaking the law there. Maybe focus on particular behaviors, like drivers making right turns while pedestrians are trying to cross the street (I swear to god this happens like every time I walk anywhere).

I really don't know what your problem is....but anyhow...driving is a massive responsibility....unfortunatley many in our society do not treat it with the gravity that is deserves. Just think for a second, you are hurtling down the street in a minimum of a 2500lb car going 30 mph...more likely a 6 or 7000lb car going 45-50......the onus is on YOU....you are the one driving the deadly weapon.

Our culture has engrained such a sense of entitlement to drivers it is really maddening....

I had a guy in a v12 mercedes turn on me as I was crossing adams yesterday....so I kicked his door as he went by...he was not too happy. I invited him to dance, he declined and sped off. Maybe he will think twice next time before turning AGAINST the light while pedestrians were crossing at a cross walk WITH THE LIGHT......probably not.....he probably thinks all pedestrians are ....morons...and that their crossing at crosswalk is a load of crap....those brazen twits

Pedestrians are impediments to rapid automobile travel. I'd like to see a study showing how much "walkability" adds to traffic congestion and all the associated negative effects that go along with it.

I think Chicago needs to institute better flow separation between pedestrians and automobiles. Denver, and I think Boston too, have certain locations downtown where all intersection traffic is halted in all directions if a pedestrian presses the cross button. Otherwise, there is no walk sign, and traffic can proceed more smoothly, without the chaotic dangers of pedestrians crossing at random times. Sometimes with all that is going on downtown, you just don't see pedestrians beginning to cross. As careful as you try to be, accidents are waiting to happen - and some pedestrians are simply rude or unaware of their surroundings.

Not saying I'm against this ordinance overall, but I'd like to see some real solutions to real problems, not all these band-aids. Chicago seems permanently in band-aid mode, and a lot of these implementations decrease the workability of the city. Have through-traffic problems? Add in a cul-de-sac without thinking. Drivers going too fast? How about speed bumps all over the place? Chicago has no bike paths? Why not just throw some stripes down on major arterial streets? I have concerns that all of this adds up to a lot of headache and begins to make the city less desirable as a place to live and conduct business. As though we had perfect weather and low taxes already...

^ What's your point? Are you suggesting that making places less walkable is a good thing?

If so, you're on the wrong forum.

Edit: Misinterpretation

Oh, just a talking point, really. We should look at the objective data rather than just assuming that making places more walkable is automatically a good thing.

^ I'm down with objective data, but I'm not down with the assumption that our goal is optimizing automobile traffic flow.

It is championing that particular issue where, trust me, you will find virtually no support around here. Most people here are concerned with livability, pedestrian safety, and improving mass transit--not making automobile flow more effective.