I'm assuming they're using the opportunity to tackle needed utility work, while it's easy to get workers in and out. The work isn't strictly part of the Wacker rebuild.

Further south at Congress, they've also been doing work for the MWRD with a tunnel-boring machine. Cool stuff.

It's good to see a photo of the tunnel. I have drawings, but that doesn't really give a sense of what it feels like down there.

As we speak, Mayor Daley is on a 5 city tour of China for the sole purpose of finding funding for an O'Hare-downtown high speed rail link, as well as (of course) selling Chicago to Chinese people.

Thoughts and questions:

1. Does Daley know something that we don't know, or am I correct in thinking that this is a quixotic effort?

2. Why has Daley become so obsessed with China lately?

3. Why didn't Daley start doing this sooner?

^ ...and while I'm on this topic, here's a thought:

Is it possible that Daley might try to win some of Florida's lost HSR money as seed funding for an O'Hare-downtown HSR train (after all, it is still considered HSR money), thus leveraging funding from Chinese investors?

I wonder if I could put aic4ever on the spot, due to his expertise in construction costing. When I look at this photo of the new 35th St. Station on Metra's Rock Island District, I just don't see more than $500,000 worth of work: demolish Test Cell building, construct some retaining walls and ramps on earth fill, pour two flat level platforms, and erect two small shelters fabricated off-site. Instead, it cost $18 million. What am I missing here? Are the shelters made of unobtainium?

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5251/...ab17cfe8_z.jpg

I’m betting on number 1. Daley’s been emphatic about the private-sector nature of his HSR scheme, so I doubt he’d go for the money (and he doesn’t have any preliminary planning to show for it, anyway). Maybe he’s going to malls looking for secrets of downtown retail revitalization—Block 37 really reminds me of this mall from Wangfujing (picture copyright Super Stock):

http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI..._1071-7313.jpg

^ I'm not sure I share the degree of skepticism. Do you really think he went to China just to look at malls? Again, I could be wrong, but he must at least think there is a chance he'll be successful.

He has already WASTED +$250 MILLION at Block 37 (correct me if I'm wrong) on "The Emperor's New Clothes" Show; how much does he get to WASTE now???

I think you might be surprised at the lineal foot cost of a retaining wall... the 18m figure doesn't surprise me.

Sorry—I should have included a wry smiley and complete sentences in my post. I think he’s on a quixotic quest for HSR money—what I meant to say was that I doubt he’d even bother applying for Florida’s, mainly because he’s been so intent that a Chicago-O’Hare express be entirely done by the private sector and also because he probably knows he’ll have to do more than say “It’s for a Chicago-O’Hare express” to get anything (as far as I can tell, that’s about how advanced the planning is at this point).

I only brought up that mall because I finally went in the non-pedway part of the Block 37 mall the other day and it reminded me of that mall at Wangfujing (a big Beijing shopping district) and was feeling a bit facetious. :dunce:

^ Well, I suspect you may be right, but I hope you're wrong.

Daley may not always get what he wants (Olympics), but he usually does not waste his time on wild goose chases, either.

Your needless hectoring via unnecessary use of capital letters is quite tiresome & does not do your cause any good. We get your drift. You are dissatisfied with the current transit schemes being offered by the city. Many of us are sympathetic.

Now can you please stop with the pointless stridency.

OK, sorry - No more all caps lawfin; but you are exactly right about my stridency - parts of this city are without CTA train service (for decades), while O'Hare already has 2 rail services (CTA Blue Line and Metra). How does O'hare deserve 3 rail services, while he apparently feels by his actions that some other parts of the city can do without it altogether; and guess what the demographic of that part of the city is??

^ Because O'Hare is a big, fat money machine. It's all about economics and $$$.

The south side is (largely) a bottomless, economic drain. O'Hare, on the other hand, is a cash cow.

Connecting O'Hare to downtown by HSR only helps cement the connection between downtown and the cash cow.

I'm not condoning it, but I'm just giving an explanation.

Wasn't sure I'd chime in here, but I thought the SE side has a bunch of white population (Hegewisch etc.) too? I don't think TUP was going the direction you were thinking. Anyway I'm optimistic the area is ripe for infrastructure investment. As far as ORD goes, it is a goose laying golden eggs for us. Just one recent example - Lollapalooza brings in how many $millions in tourist dollars, and one big reason is that all the out-of-town kids have easy access to cheap flights and no-brainer rail service into downtown. Lots of service jobs from strong lodging and food sectors. So let's make it as easy as possible for out-of-towners to leave their $ in Chicago. It's like doing a rain dance for money.

1. Wasn't Quinn's idea to use Amtrak for the O'Hare service? Assuming a quick and dirty service, an Amtrak train leaves Olgilvie or Union, and heads to O'Hare, and uses the existing Metra transfer stop. I would imagine that a canopy would be needed at the stop, as well as a shuttle bus to the terminals. Would Amtrak just pocket all that money? Some kind of sharing agreement? I would imagine a huge political fight as to who would get the money.

The service mentioned in the above paragraph would have to be coordinated with all the other trains, as frequent service would congest the railways. I'm not sure if any CREATE projects would impact this service (and eventually improve it). It appears that 2 projects could be in the path.

2. Seems odd to extend the red line south, when the Metra electric line is right there (aka Gray line). The only thing missing is frequency and an easy way to transfer fare to CTA.

Yeah, the metra already goes to o'hare. You would just need to extend the people mover train a mile or so over a parking lot and connect it to the metra stop.

Even if we were to improve frequencies on the ME Line and introduce fare integration, I don’t think that it would really function that well as a replacement for a Red Line extension.

First, let’s note that we’re probably beyond the point where buses feeding into existing transit can serve the south side’s transit purposes—the bus terminal at the 95th Street Red Line station’s currently well over capacity. For convenient reference, look at the far south side CTA map.

Notice that the Metra Electric line’s at the eastern edge of the space bounded by I-57 and I-94, along Cottage Grove Avenue. Most bus traffic, however, goes up Michigan and Halsted, further west. The proposed Red Line extension would run pretty along a ROW in between Michigan and Halsted between ~99th and 111th, and then turn southeast towards a station at 115th and Michigan, better serving the existing north-south travel market better. Although if something like the Gray Line were to be implemented, you’d probably see some shift to the east-west buses, I doubt it would be enough to serious reduce traffic at the 95th Street terminal.

There’s also the issue of where commuters will go. The Metra Electric line’s best suited to commutes downtown (and to Hyde Park, though I’m not sure how much of a destination it is; I’d guess it formerly was an important way to get to far south side industries as well, but unfortunately that’s not a major commute market anymore). However, a lot of south side commuters are making intra-south-side trips. The Red Line’s better situated to serve these commutes—if you work on, say, W. 87th Street, the Metra Electric Line, even with improved frequency, is too far east (and I doubt the Gray Line could ever match the frequencies of the Red Line—Millennium Station simply doesn’t have the capacity).

The Red Line extension also has the ancillary benefit of making possible a a new yard and shops facility around 120th, replacing the current one, which the CTA claims is small, outdated, and hard to access (Google Maps link). The current plan sees the Red Line extending all the way to 130th & Ellis to serve the Altgeld Gardens housing estate and a large park-and-ride facility for commuters driving up I-94 from the southeast suburbs. FWIW, I think 115th seems a more natural end point for the Red Line—a major intersection that could become a TOD hub (with a single track leading to the new shops-and-yards).

How To Fix the El


http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago...nt?oid=3473194




http://www.chicagoreader.com/imager/...ont_magnum.jpg

It's not like there won't be a station at 115th. What's the problem with a station at 130th? A south park-and-ride is an excellent idea. I don't know why we don't have one already.

Personally I would prefer the alignment to turn east at 115th and run elevated over 115th (or the adjacent alley) to the Bishop Ford and a park-and-ride there. It wouldn't serve Altgeld, but it would serve the new Pullman Park development and the historic areas of Pullman, and it would have a REAL transfer to Metra Electric and South Shore at Kensington. Even if Metra is hostile to the idea right now, it's stupid for CTA to built an alignment that rules out the possibility in the future.

Not to get too controversial here, but I'm not sure about the appeal of a park-and-ride station that also happens to be right across the street from a massive housing project. Generally, suburbanites and public-housing residents don't mix too well.

^Why is it important to spend lots of money to establish a CTA park 'n ride in an area already criss-crossed by Metra/NICTD lines?

A) none of the existing commuter stations have real parking facilities

B) the Red Line offers greater accessibility to North Side and South Side destinations than Metra or South Shore (i.e. Mag Mile, Wrigley, the Cell, Uptown, numerous universities, etc)

C) the Red Line operates frequently 24/7, unlike Metra or South Shore

You're right that park-and-rides elsewhere in the CTA system (most notably at Cumberland) fail to attract many riders due to competition from Metra; Metra stations are usually more convenient and offer a better travel time than driving to Cumberland and making a 45-minute trip into downtown with frequent stops. But the Dan Ryan branch offers much better travel times into downtown (~35 min from 130th) and the Bishop Ford doesn't clog up like the Tri-State/Addams tollways do feeding people into Cumberland.

My main concerns weren’t with the park & ride per se, but more with the capital and operating costs of extending beyond 115th. When the Red Line extension was in the previous phase of the AA, I remember reading that the project would jump a category or so upwards in the FTA’s cost-effectiveness ratings if it were curtailed at 115th Street (I think that was before they started considering factors like community development, though). IIRC, it’s something like a $300 million (2009) dollar difference—you could another capital project in there. It just strikes me as a lot of infrastructure to build to get to one station, and one with minimal redevelopment or reverse commute potential at that.

Anyway, there’s also a good chance that the 130th Street station won’t actually be all that close to Altgeld Gardens—they’re looking at two options, one on the north side of 130th Street right across from it, and another closer to the 130th/Bishops Ford Interchange, which would be very easy to access by car and kind of forbidding by foot.

^^ The specific design of the 130th Street station obviously needs to provide wide, well-lit pedestrian walkways into Altgeld Gardens and Carver Academy, but that's a site planning issue, not an alignment issue. The whole environment is really not an optimal one for pedestrians, but it is possible to design a station that's equally welcoming to pedestrians, bus transfers, and park-and-ride customers. The Orange Line was fairly successful in this regard (look at the Pulaski station).

IIRC, South Shore is also looking into an infill station at 130th.

Investing in the south side wouldn't make it a bottomless economic drain now would it. One reason why it is the way it is now is because of attitudes like that. Well lets not waste money on that side of town because it isn't worth it. Well, don't you think that it's time to make it worth it?

Maybe not for HSR, but certainly for other transportation needs.

^Fifteen years ago we completely rebuilt an underused and redundant L line through the most promising part of the South Side. When does that start paying any dividends? Hell, when does that even begin to pay the salaries of the station agents?

How can anyone with a straight face argue that the South Side lacks transit infrastructure? It lacks transit ridership.

^ What the south side lacks is people.

In a way, God bless those NIMBY's on the north lakefront, because perhaps some day, who knows when, people will realize that there is a whole part of the city with great access to downtown and the lake that is ripe for development, relatively cheap, and ready for new residents.

Until then, lets keep fighting 3 year long battles (see Webster Square) just to build one condo project in a neighborhood where it's not wanted.

No Kidding there are parts of the Southside that have much better transit access than all but the north lakefront in comparison to other area of the city..Thinking northwest side....etc...West Ridge, North pArk, Forest Glen etc



I mean in terms of potential the green line could be an awesome transit asset as could the orange; its just that the Green line traverse some of the worst urban blight in the known universe.

Hopefully this will change.

Interesting to note that some of the largest population losses occurred along near green line corridors.

Perhaps laying the groundwork for priming the areas for redevelopment as they have been a wreck since the 1960's

^ Well, thank God The Metropolis project is going to swoop in and save the day! :rolleyes:

Exactly a great way to make use of the Green Line--by building a suburban style shopping center with oceans of surface parking right next door--basically telling the Green Line station to go fuck off... :tup:

Are there any plans to add more stations between Roosevelt and 35th....if I am not mistake that is the longest run on any line between stations.

It would seem that with the development of the south loop and the nascent recovery and redevelopment of areas like oakland and douglass may in time jusitify that green line investment.....though progress is slow

^ Except that by the time the areas around the Green Line densify enough to justify that investment, the Green Line will probably be due for another round of maintenance.

HAs Metropolis even started? Yeah that revision of the original was dissappointing. And I agree that Chicago should really encourage leveraging its transit assets to a better degree; but in reality those parts of the south side are really emerging from essentially a fourth world level of social and economic isolation.

Perhaps the current iteration of that single development is disappointing; perhaps the level of investment in those areas of the south side is not ideal; but considering where it came from I am not convinced it is as good as reasonably could be expected.

Would you rather have it that the green line been knocked down. At least as it stands there is the potential for leveraging the transit assets; something that is lacking in probably 99% or the US urban environment

^ I actually think the Green Line should be relocated.

It should be partially dismantled, moved, and reassembled on a new ROW that is much closer, perhaps within 1/4 mile, of the lakefront.

Like the North Side, on the South side it is only the lakefront and perhaps a few blocks inward that have any chance of some serious density. I think the Green Line, as it currently runs, is much too far inland.

How about that idea?

I think that would inordinately expensive....esp considering the somewhat whimsical but nonetheless interesting possibility of utilizing the ME as a rapid transit line.

If I recall back to metropolis...it wwas proposed late 2006-2007....at the inflection point of our economic shitstorm........it is not surprising that such a ambitious project was scaled back given the economic realities during the past 36-48 months.


It would seem just to me to realize that those parts of the southside served by the green line where once extremely urban and vibrant; and over the last 50-60 years of disinvestment will not turn over night.

The bones are there; and with appropriate patience and policy choices I think areas near green line really could be ripe of substantial if not explosive investment.

I am curious what do you consider serious density. Some of those former green line neighborhoods once had densities of 30-50K /sqmile.They will not see that again; however densities in the 20-25K . sqmile I don't think is out of the question if policy choices encourage investment and transit appropriate development.

Speaking of moving lines, if/when the Clinton Street subway is built, rather than sending it back to the Dan Ryan just ahead of Chinatown, it really ought to stay a subway, jog west to Halsted after Roosevelt and travel to Pershing, then head east as an elevated line, passing next to and continuing past the Indiana Green Line stop to Drexel, then south to Hyde Park (possibly as a subway again, possibly moving to Woodlawn in Hyde Park). Eventually, you could create a lakefront line starting from Drexel and going north under Cottage Grove. It would take a lot of new residents on the Lakefront there to support that line, but getting rail into Bridgeport would probably really help that area maintain strong growth and reuse some of the great, dense buildigns they have.

If we did stations at 1/2 mile increments, with a few gaps for industrial areas, we might need 13 stations. Maybe 8 of those would be in places averaging about 10k within 1/2 mile walk of the station (not 1/2 mile radius, but 1/2 mile walking), the other 5 might be closer to 5k people. Getting just that walker ridership base up to something long-term acceptable (17.5k within 1/2 mile walk) would then take 122,500 new residents to move into the relevant area. As much as I'd love to see that built, that seems more than a little challenging. Especially since we probably already need at least that many to move near Pink and Orange Line stations, too. But heck, if we could get a quarter million people to move within 1/2 mile walk of both new and existing CTA stations, I think we'd probably come close to doubling rail ridersip on the CTA, and if most of them were near the Orange, Pink and Green lines, it wouldn't even strain capacity (assuming the CTA could afford some new cars and operators for increased frequency on those lower-frequency lines).

The area around the South Side L used to be incredibly dense, and still has high density zoning (mostly R5, generally allowing 3-4 units per 25' city lot depending how deep the lot is) if there were either (1) any demand to justify or (2) a coordinated effort by the City and CHA to target subsidized housing construction around transit stations.

The area in 1938: http://www.historicaerials.com/aeria...0302&year=1938

Basically corner-to-corner 3 and 4 story buildings. In theory, the zoning would allow for something at least approaching that level of housing unit density (albeit with more off-street parking now, of course, due to minimum requirements that didn't exist before 1957). Aside from right along the L, the residential streets are actually generally mostly intact but for periodic empty lots, but the commercial streets have been decimated, taking a lot of housing units with them.

The Indiana Green Line station is several blocks away - not right next to Metropolis. Also, Metropolis ISN'T going forward, while the redevelopment of the Taylor Homes is. That project is exactly the type of dense infill you're looking for.

:previous: Any chance we’ll be able to lure back some of the residents we exiled to the likes of Harvey and Danville?

Yep.

Here is an example at 62nd and Langley a couple blocks from 63rd st Green line
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...12,329.06,,0,0

http://www.redeyechicago.com/news/ct...,5389613.story


CDOT seeks input on South Side transit improvements

By Tracy Swartz RedEye

11:55 a.m. CDT, March 29, 2011


The Chicago Department of Transportation is seeking input from South Side residents on how to improve public transit in the South Lakefront Corridor--the area spanning from 22nd Street to 95th Street east of the Dan Ryan Expressway.

CDOT is holding a public meeting about the South Lakefront Corridor Transit Study on April 13 from 4 to 8 p.m. in the Atrium of University Technology Park at the Illinois Institute of Technology, 3440 South Dearborn Street.

The City of Chicago Department of Transportation and Department of Housing and Economic Development initiated the study recently to identify and evaluate alternatives for improving public transportation within Douglas, Grand Boulevard, Oakland, Kenwood, Hyde Park, Woodlawn, South Shore, South Chicago, Washington Park, Avalon Park, Calumet Heights, Greater Grand Crossing, and Burnside.

This public meeting is the first of several meetings planned over the course of the study. At this meeting, the project team will review early findings on the travel market and existing conditions and seek comments from the public on potential improvement options.

Funding for this study is provided by a subregional grant from the Regional Transportation Authority.

^^^Does your Grey Line Proposal include any additional stops? Versus those already present on ME?

Also does it include the "split" line of the metra...the one that hits Chicago East side as well as the one that tracks closer to the redline terminus

It is the "Gray (with an "a") Line", and it includes the South Chicago Branch to 93rd & Brandon (the East side line you refer to), the Mainline to Kensington (115th & Cottage Grove), and Shuttles from Kensington to Blue island (shown), and Hegewisch (not shown here): http://community-2.webtv.net/GLRTS/Proposedroutemap/

The Blue Island branch can easily be replaced by a modified 119 bus, and Hegewisch by a modified 108.

Dunno why you'd want to have service to Hegewisch anyway beyond what the South Shore already provides - or to Blue Island for that matter (which has frequent bus service and Rock Island service).

I do agree that the Blue Island branch is a huge waste of money when a bus could serve the limited number of people much more cheaply. I'm surprised Metra hasn't tried to shut it down already, given how much they hate providing service to the city. Must be some law preventing them.

I’d guess that, as part of the agreement for taking over the IC’s commuter rail service, Metra’s mandated to provide a certain minimum level of service. Ending service along a line could be pretty difficult, perhaps even needing legislative approval (anyone here familiar with Metra’s charter). I can’t think of an instance when Metra’s permanently reduced the number of trains on a line—suburban growth’s been pretty good, so demand’s generally pushed services upward. The Blue Island branch is definitely an exception to that. In any event, it’s not being abandoned anytime soon—some of the stations received (are slated to receive?) state funding for refurbishment, and I’m pretty sure Blue Island has funds to go ahead with a combined Metra Electric-Rock Island facility as well (I doubt that the design work’s finished yet).

In any case, the Blue Island trains also have the benefit of providing extra capacity to Chicago—I’ve occasionally taken them home to Hyde Park during rush hour, and though they certainly weren’t full they certainly have some utility in reducing crowding on the other divisions.

119 and 108 upgraded bus service would attract no riders, and then the powers that be could say that there was never any ridership potential there in the first place.

The Hegewisch Shuttle would allow the South Shore to be relieved of having to carry Illinois passengers (reducing it's capacity for it's Indiana passengers), and end the subsidy provided by Metra.

^ Gray Line - your signature/footer should read "little", not "small", plans.

Have people noticed new street lights along the northernmost 1 mile (at least on the northbound side) or so of LSD? I think they are noticeably whiter and brighter -- they must be LEDs or something. You can tell they are new because it is almost impossible to stare at them for even a second. (That aspect kind of makes them creepy, in a weird way, like some dystopic sci-fi where machines have taken over in a way that is incompatible with human comfort.)

Their height is also a bit lower. It's hard to tell whether up-facing light leakage has been eliminated, but maybe "dark sky" principles have been adopted here as well, which would be particularly welcome by the highrises nearby.

Thanks for the correction.

Wouldn't fare integration be the logical first step in revealing if there's latent demand for increased service levels on any particular Metra branch?

All else equal, can you point to any recent example in Chicago where dramatically increasing service levels attracted anywhere near enough riders to even maintain the existing productivity levels from before the service increase? (to say nothing of actually improving productivity). It just doesn't happen. Generally, you can double a route's service level and maybe get an extra 15-20% total ridership... except now it's a much less productive service (riders per service-hour), requiring ever more operating subsidy. Realistically, unless you've got tons of money to burn on operating subsidy, you have to let the demand drive the service level, not vice versa.

With regional fare integration, the artificial impediment to taking Metra in the city would be removed --- particularly if, in addition to simply being able to use the same fare media, the fare integration works out (a) some sort of transfer discount arrangement so buses can feed Metra and vice versa and (b) some sort of tiered unlimited ride pass for 1, 2, or all 3 RTA agencies. Once the Metra routes can serve as a natural component of the integrated urban transit network, there would, in time, be a clear sense of the extent to which extra service is or isn't warranted on the ME branches. Otherwise, increasing service levels is just looking for a way to spend money on operating subsidy, which is basically a zero sum game (i.e. paying for more frequent service there would mean cutting service somewhere else, and the more unproductive the new service is, the more you have to cut elsewhere).

Interesting First & Fastest article on Kensington Interlocking:

http://www.shore-line.org/_pdfs/kens...r05_06_F&F.pdf

I agree with pretty much everything you are saying; except that unless they are forced they will never do anything of that sort (childish sibling politics).


lawfin: Is this form of emphasis OK??