The Combined Cost of Housing & Transportation in the Chicago Metropolitan Region


Full PDF Report: http://www.cnt.org/repository/DAHB.pdf

More in link

More in link

A monorail? Is he joking? How about conventional heavy rail, like you know, the kind you already operate and have tons of experience with. Just put it up on a modern concrete elevated structure or sink it in a trench. It worries me we have officials actually using the word monorail when talking about transit aspirations. This isn't 1970. Conventional heavy rail is proven for high ridership rapid service. Monorail is not. The monorail would be a silly solution, not to mention a technological boondoggle. Yeah, give us the Mid-city transitway, just give it to us in the form of conventional CTA heavy rail or Paris RER style EMU's. Steer clear of the monorail route, its pure Futurama fantasy for a reason.

^ That's what happens when you replace the CTA chairperson every 2 years.

Well, I could see a Vancouver-style light metro along Cicero, if it somehow posed a substantial cost savings over traditional heavy-rail.

People like to think of monorails as futuristic, but they haven't really been futuristic for 40 years. We've already been there, done that, and discovered that monorail technology has numerous drawbacks and practical problems. Tokyo is really the only place where they've made monorails work as a serious transport mode...

Rodriguez talking monorails has me questioning his competence to run the CTA. Maybe he meant elevated?

Monorails would be ok IF there was no rational way to need to route from the monorail routing to the existing rail routes.

In other words, if running a line over Cicero would never need to also turn east onto the Green or Blue lines, then a monorail is a big impovement over a bus route, and if it doesn't need to merge with existing rail, then what's the problem?

Well, monorail technology is still very proprietary - every company produces a different, very specialized system. There aren't any standards or regulations, so CTA would essentially be tied to a single manufacturer forever, when track needs replacing, vehicles need replacing or major maintenance, etc.

For practical everyday purposes, CTA would need to train a whole crew in the maintenance and repair of monorail systems. This increases CTA's payroll, which adds quite a bit to the operating budget. A new heavy-rail line could just use the existing crews to perform maintenance and repair jobs.

It also gets quite complex and costly if you ever want a network instead of just a single line - switches on a monorail system are massive things that require a lot of complex machinery. Imagine sliding a huge concrete beam 9-10 feet to the left and sliding in another beam. A traditional rail system just uses frogs, little metal pieces that can be moved fairly easily with small motors.

Even light rail would be a better choice than monorail - light-rail systems are fairly common around the world, so there are standard construction practices, plenty of trained technicians available, and plenty of manufacturers to work with.

Really, the only advantage of a monorail system is aesthetics (due to a narrower guideway), noise (rubber wheels on concrete are quiet), and a slightly lower construction cost, because of simpler construction. In the long run, I doubt the advantages amount to anything, which is why monorail systems haven't taken over the world.


Most of those advantages would be a moot point along the Cicero corridor. Cost reduction measures would probably force the transit line onto the BRC viaduct two blocks east, where the narrower guideway of a monorail would confer no aesthetic advantage. Tracks on an earthen viaduct that are properly fastened to the track bed don't generate much noise, either, especially on straight segments - look at the Orange Line at Western or Kedzie. The construction cost would be reduced anyway, since the land acquisition costs would be small and there wouldn't be the nightmare of drilling piles down the center of Cicero.

I have to say that excites me a lot as a transit enthusiast, despite the silliness of the monorail suggestion.

I assume that they talk about the rail corridor east of Cicero whenever they mention that mid-city line. The city is covered with rail rights-of-way that could potentially be used as new lines if there was ever some decent money for them.

I especially think about that Bloomingdale line that runs through Humboldt Park being converted into a CTA branch. The park idea is kind of nice but seems like a waste when the valuable right of way could be put to transit use.

Does anybody have or know of any other reuse ideas similar to that one?

I still think the best place for a circumferential, mid-city line is along Ashland.

The Ashland corrider, for the most part, is pretty well built up, has seen a lot of new development, and seems to have the density to support it.

Western, on the other hand, is a lost cause IMO. It has already succumbed to the needs of the automobile and I suspect it would be far too difficult to turn things around. How are you going to redevelop all of those strip malls and auto dealerships into denser, pedestrian-oriented businesses? Not gonna happen.

And don't tell me that introducing a mass transit line will change that. I have yet to see any evidence that the Orange Line led to denser, transit-oriented development with the exception of a stop or two closer to downtown (and one can argue that those developments would have happened any way).

Chicago Red Line Extension Moves Forward as Some Push Cheaper Alternative


http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...r-alternative/




http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/w...South-Side.jpg

More laughs from the CTA
 

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2...=Google+Reader

'L' station to take Harold Washington's name
Jon Hilkevitch October 6, 2010 11:22 AM

...The CTA board voted Wednesday to change the name of the Library-State/Van Buren rail station to the Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren station.

...That it took this long for the CTA to adopt the change "is a form of racism," Blakemore said. "They are trying to deny a group of people their legacy."

Its already the longest CTA announcement by far so now its:


the next stop is Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren

doors open to the left at Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren

this is Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren

transfer to Red Line trains at Harold Washington Library-State/Van Buren

Doors closing.

I think by that time the train has left.

:rolleyes:

Stupidity

People as stupid as this Blakemoore person are why racism exists. If everyone were just a little less moronic then we wouldn't have these problems...

Or how about the fact it costs $19,000 to replace the signs, that doesn't have anything to do with it? Nope of course not, its just racism. Just like how your eligible for free rides on that same system, yup so much discrimination.

What a F****** retard. And how much money are you donating to this cause Mr. Blakemore? I know I'll be paying for it with reduced service if the operating budget needs additional trimming next year.

I'm equally upset with the CTA for stubbornly NOT optimizing the station name. "Washington Library" would have done the trick. They could drop the "Harold" part and drop the "State/Van Buren" part.

DC seems to get along perfectly well naming their downtown stations after landmarks instead of streets and intersections. Even in Chicago, we have "Merchandise Mart". We don't call it "Kinzie/Wells".

Jesus Christ...Could they have made the name longer?

They should have just gotten rid of the library portion and simply called it State/Van Buren. I don't want to see the el turn into something similar to the DC Metro with its ridiculously long station names.