Does the Kennedy branch have the same problems generating ridership that the Dan Ryan or Eisenhower branches do? I always assumed that the relative popularity of northwest side neighborhoods canceled out the poor surroundings of transit stations.

The Kennedy branch right now has other problems (slow zones/outdated signaling) that create slow zones and make the service less desirable, but it seems like River Road, Cumberland, Harlem, and Jeff Park are able to overcome their locational problems because of the local development and the many feeder bus lines that serve those stations. O'Hare riders add some more ridership. It would seem that the Kennedy branch succeeds in spite of its expressway-median location.

While we're talking about the Blue Line, is there anything that can be done to salvage ridership on the Forest Park branch? If ridership rebounded here, the Blue Line could easily overtake Red as the busiest.

Short answer is "yeah, sort of".

For the stations Addison - O'hare, there are over 35,000 daily boardings. This compares with about 22,000 on Congress (UIC-Forest Park) and 51,000 on the Dan Ryan (Cermak-95th).

On the one hand, there is definite value for everyone in the area by having O'hare connected to the Loop by rapid transit.

On the other, we look at cost effectiveness in terms of daily boardings per route-mile. The route-miles portion of this ratio takes into account the wear and tear on vehicles, and the amount of trackage that must be maintained.

Addison to O'hare is over 10 route-miles long.
For comparison, Congress branch is about 8 miles long, and Dan Ryan is about 9 miles.

For further contrast, the portion of the Blue line between Grand and Logan Square we'll call this the "old school Northwest service circa 1950-1970":
26,000 daily boardings
3.5 route-miles

So even though some of the farther out stations have otherwise excellent ridership figures, those figure's aren't commensurate with the financial pressure put on the system by the station's distance.

Perhaps it's useful to remember two big historical factors:

One is that the Illinois Central functioned as the South Lakefront's rapid transit line. Electrified since 1926, with high-level loading and closely spaced stations. Those of us who know Chicago only in the RTA/Metra era forget that the IC ran 10-minute headways or less, all day long.

The other is that the far South Side was not focused so much on commuting to the Loop. Industrial job centers were much more important.

I think this is a very important point. Even high density doesn't necessarily translate to high rail usage, with Pilsen being a local obvious example of this. There is the simple issue of whether there is the trip density (in terms of the quantity of Origin-Destination pairs) between the South Lakeshore and Downtown that isn't met by current capacity, both in transit and roads (a substantial number of the wealthy in South Shore simply drive downtown, and LSD traffic isn't bad until north of the Stevenson merge).

^Centralization is an interesting subject to bring up in this thread. Despite the massive office corridors on I-90 and I-88, the northern half of Chicagoland is much more tired to the Loop than the southern half, which is much more industrial, thus employment areas are spread out and so is traffic. Simple observance of congestion levels illustrates this. Personal experience has told me that Chicagoland south of I-55 is much easier than north of it to navigate by car, even during rush hour.

Even when thinking about the whole region, we have to bear in mind that only 18 percent of Chicagoland jobs are downtown. Focusing all our attention on high-density line-haul public-vehicle transit along the radial corridors is like the general fighting the last war. Trying to use those same tactics (STAR Line, anyone?) to serve widely dispersed suburban origins and destinations is even sillier.

Do any transit junkies support the STAR line? The things got PORK written all over it.

The money could be better spent extending existing lines to service further outlying areas and the construction of multi-level parking structures at high traffic stations where possible. IMO.

Metra
 

..

as much as I think the money should go to better projects, I do think the STAR line is needed. But only if the projects that surround it in the future do as much as possible to mitigate even further sprawl while increasing the share of transit usage metrowide.

it's a longshot to see everything land as I would like it to but one that I wouldn't mind see played out.

I think the STAR line would make a lot more sense if it followed a route OTHER than the EJ&E. With the EJ&E, basically all you're doing is providing a way for people in outer suburbs to park & ride to O'Hare. The fact that the EJ&E stays pretty much far away from everything makes it much more useful as a freight bypass.

IMO, a superior route would be to serve the historic downtown areas along the Fox River, like Elgin, South Elgin, St Charles, Geneva, Batavia, and Aurora, plus downtown Joliet on the Illinois River. There are some abandoned interurban rights-of-way that could, potentially, be used to do this. It would be hard to find an alignment that doesn't require at least some street running, so a light DMU interurban line, like the NJT River Line between Trenton and Camden, would be the concept.

But the STAR line as proposed? A useless, pointless waste of money.

http://www.metroplanning.org/calendar.asp?objectID=4160

MPC ROUNDTABLE BREAKFAST
Within Our Reach: Your World in a Half Mile

January 10
8:30 am–10:30 am
Union League Club, 65 W. Jackson, Blvd., Crystal Room, Chicago
Cost for MPC donors: $15.00
Cost for non-donors: $15.00

MPC 2008 Winter Roundtable Series. Join transit experts, planners, developers and public officials from Chicago and peer cities to learn how the public and private sectors can work together to create great urban places.

The next time you take public transportation, look around you. Every person on that train or bus starts and ends his or her trip as a pedestrian. Now imagine leaving the station or bus and having all your needs within reach: a full array of services and retail options, an affordable home, and entertainment and dining choices – all within walking distance.
On Thursday, January 10, 2008 from 8:30 to 10:30 a.m., the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) and the Metropolitan Planning Council (MPC) will host Within our Reach: Your World in Half a Mile, a unique conversation with some of the country's most knowledgeable transit experts, including developers and planners from Chicago and peer cities, about why transit-oriented development (TOD) is critical to urban vitality.
Vibrant, walkable communities don't happen accidentally; they are created and must be carefully nurtured. Development that is seamlessly oriented around transit pays dividends well beyond homeowners' pocketbooks and convenience — it is a boon for local businesses, protects the environment through massive energy and emissions savings, and supports better transit service and increased ridership.
CTA has renewed its commitment to integrate transit more fully into its surrounding communities. Both MPC and CTA recognize the market value of our region's transit facilities and how capturing that value will build local economies while improving transit service and operation for current and future customers.
Join us on January 10 th for Within our Reach: Your World in Half a Mile to learn how the public and private sectors can work together to create great urban places.

MODERATOR
David Taylor
CNU, National Director
Sustainable Transportation Solutions, HDR, Inc.
PANELISTS
Catherine Cox-Blair
Principal City Planner, Denver
James Keefe
President and Principal, Trinity Financial, Boston
Ald. Mary Ann Smith
48th Ward, Chicago
Sam Assefa
Deputy Commissioner Dept. of Planning and Development, Chicago

Registration cost is $15.00.
Register early as seating is limited. Cancellations must be received 48 hours in advance to prevent being charged.
Breakfast will be provided.
This roundtable is co-hosted with the Chicago Transit Authority and generously sponsored by Bombardier.

For more information
Pam Lee
Development Assistant
312-863-6011

CTA to replace old rail station signs with uniform system, boost updates
Chicago Tribune
December 24, 2007

Outdated or confusing signs are posted at almost half of the CTA's rail stations, according to a new inventory that found misleading information at station entrances, fare-collection areas and on platforms.

Such signs are daily reminders of the many changes in transit service that have occurred over the years. But more important, they indicate the pressing need for the Chicago Transit Authority to provide more accurate travel advice to its customers.

Even in a time of "doomsday" budgets, an effort is under way to replace the hodgepodge of signs with a consistent design that provides straightforward information, officials said.

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/4803/34414501pj5.jpg

--------------------------------------------------------------

The article mentions that all 144 CTA stations will be receiving small erasable whiteboards where service disruptions can quickly be written and updated.

^SUCKS!!!

From a graphic designer's perspective the Frankle-Monigle signs are functionally and aesthetically more advanced... http://chicago-l.org/signage/platfor...x.html#frankle Talk about a tiny step forward CTA.

Another thing I also don't understand is why the grid address location continues to be so prominent. Is this really something that alot of people use? I'm not saying that it should be eliminated, but it just seems other information would be more valuable for a transit wayfinding system. Not to be gloomy, but this seems like another lost opportunity and is certainly not world class in appearance.

Yes, those are much more beautiful and sophisticated. Why not use them?

Answer: Because the CTA can't do anything right. DUH.

So lets say you are not from this neighborhood; 3400 South/ 1800 West or 6300North/900 West.

I think that gives a great indication of where you are.

^^^ Yeah, I use it all the time. It is most helpful on the subway and angled lines like the Blue to o'hare and Orange to Midway, it is easy to lose your bearings on those lines and, if you aren't already familiar with those lines, it is very helpful.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/comment...its30a.article

Railroaded
A small, peaceful Will County community is about to get a noisy neighbor in the form of a rail and truck yard

December 30, 2007

'We came here to live the rest of our lives in a good way," said 77-year-old Crete resident Carolyn Jernberg, showing off the wintry bucolic view outside her cozy home in the Village Woods retirement complex. It's a peaceful place on the southeastern edge of this Will County town, surrounded on three sides by the Balmoral Woods golf course and featuring a gracefully curving lake.

It's quite important because the whole gist of Chicago's organization is that it's on a grid. Major streets are every half-mile, and every major street has a bus line. This means that with only two bus rides, you can get from within 1/4 mile from your origin to within 1/4 mi from your destination, no matter where they are in the city.

The L system provides a (usually) faster ride than a local bus that stops every block, so it can be a faster and better replacement for one of the legs of the trip.

The grid coordinates on the station signs allow for a much better, more user-friendly system of orienteering than simply relying on street names. For example, somebody looking for an address at 2902 North Ashland only needs to ride to a station with a close N/S coordinate (Diversey at 2800N) and take the #76 bus westward to Ashland/Diversey. From there (2800 North Ashland), it's only a simple 1-block walk to the destination.

You can piss and moan about how cold and/or sterile it is to refer to a location in the city by a coordinate, but the grid is one of the many reasons that Chicago is the City That Works. When somebody needs to get to a certain place at a certain address, I don't think they care what neighborhood it's in or what local landmarks are nearby; they just want to get there as fast as possible.

Really? To this non-graphic designer they look kind of overwrought.

I use them all the time. It's a simple and precise system that makes navigating the city very easy. I've also found it also serves as a litmus test for mental handicap.

Money, basically. Systemwide signage replacement would run well into 8 figures. The standard being used is basically an evolution of the older KDR signage standard, so it's a bit more seamless to replace on a piece-by-piece basis: a thick Helvetica, the grid coordinates, the first letter of the station name, etc.

Perhaps a more elegant font choice (a lighter-weight Helvetica, or switching to the Frutiger variant on the prototype signage) would win people's fancy?

Absolutely. As a suburbanite who isn't going to memorize every single street, I'd say 80% of my navigation in Chicago is by grid number. Memorize the half-mile streets and follow the numbers from there.

For example, if you tell me to go to 2700 N Clark, I know without looking at a map that that's just south of Diversey, because Diversey is 2800N. I love the grid numbers on street signs.

Alright you guys win!

I guess I'm not a grid guy. I'll survive.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transpo...010208.article

Transit woes topic of Blago special session
January 2, 2008

Governor Rod Blagojevich called the special session, and he plans a morning news conference in Chicago before heading to the Statehouse. The governor wants legislators to pass a long-term funding plan for mass transit before the January 20 deadline.

Well it's good news that they're talking, but I won't hold my breath. This government treats the transit funding the way I used to treat my calculus homework. Just about every other chore becomes preferable, and you find yourself cleaning the garage

They'll probably end up remaning a few interstates and then passing 3 months of emergency funding at 11:59pm on Jan 19th.

What do you guys think of my idea for The "L" Train network. You think this would work and could build the ridership needed to sustain these kinds of service levels?

-------------

THE NEW "L"

-NO MORE WAITING 15-20MIN FOR AN L TRAIN.

SERVICE ON ALL LINES WOULD OPERATE EVERY 7MIN OR BETTER SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. ONLY EXCEPTION TO THIS RULE WILL BE THE GREEN LINE COTTAGE GROVE AND ASHLAND BRANCH ROUTES, WHICH WOULD OPERATE EVERY 15MIN OR BETTER SEVEN DAYS A WEEK, WITH COMBINED GREEN LINE SERVICE OPERATING EVERY 7MIN OR BETTER NORTH OF GARFIELD.

ALL SERVICE TO OPERATE TILL 1:30AM SEVEN DAYS A WEEK ON ALL LINES.

PURPLE LINE
-Service will operate seven days a week to the Loop, operating express Mon-Sat during busy periods.

BLUE LINE
-Cermack Branch trains will no longer operate. Only Pink Line service will operate. The low frequency Blue Line Cermack service operating only during rush hours, is a waste of resources, and trains from this service can be used to provide more frequent service on the entire system.

RED LINE
Eliminate the following stops on the Dan Ryan Branch, due to their close proximity to the Green Line.
-47th
-Garfield
-63rd
Eliminating these stops will allow Dan Ryan Branch riders a faster trip to the Loop, and will eliminate duplication of service with the Green Line.
All feeder buses that service the eliminated Red Line stations, will terminate at the Green Line stations instead.

MOST BUSES WILL NOT TRAVEL TO THE LOOP
-To support increase rapid transit service, many bus routes that operate in close proximity to the L system, or that operate all the way to the Loop, would terminate instead at L train stations.
Buses would provide more of a feeder service to the L trains.

Entire or portions of bus routes that could be cut due to their close proximity to the L trains are as follows.
-21 CERMAK
-7 HARRISON
-3 KING DRIVE
-56 MILWAUKEE
-36 BROADWAY
-8 HALSTEAD
-22 CLARK

NEW L CLUBBER SERVICE ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAY NIGHTS
-In addition to the regular Red and Blue line services that operate 24 hours a day,
new late night trains will leave every Friday and Saturday nights from the Loop on all lines at 30min service levels, till 4AM. No inbound service will operate on the special clubber trains. Exception to this will be brown line trains which will make connections in the loop to outbound Orange, Pink, Blue, Red, and Green line trains.

^mike,
Some good ideas, especially for someone who doesn't live here :)

The Cermak Blue Line's days are probably numbered, it was only kept as a political favor anyway. Either it's frequency will be increased or it will be eliminated, but you're right that the current arrangement is pretty odd.

Regarding your elimination/shortening of bus routes, this is a tricky one on a case-by-case basis. At most, some of these could be shortened during off-peak hours only. During rush hour, the Red, Brown, and Blue lines are already so ridiculously packed that the buses are necessary just to have capacity to get everyone downtown (and even several of those routes, particularly the 22 and 56, are already packed to the gills on ~3-minute headways), so eliminating that would be a bad idea. Perhaps there could be some scaling back if the Red line ever gets a 10-car capacity expansion, but otherwise...

In some cases (I'm thinking the 56 and 21 particularly from your list), the parallel routes also serve an important function in providing local service along busy commercial streets where tip lengths are often pretty short, and the rapid transit is used more for longer trips either as a result of station location or wide station spacing. In contrast, the 62 which parallels the Orange Line functions as a feeder/distributor service to the Orange Line, which has widely spaced stations, so even though its parallel its complimentary, not competitive. The 3 is tricky; south of 63rd it is a vital neighborhood route, as it is north of about 35th street. The route is already split into several segments, with certain scheduled trips only running part of the route. I suppose the route could be split altogether, but there are some people who need to make that long trip and its probably more trouble than its worth. The 8, while running parallel to Red/Brown on the northside, provides a valuable connection for Lakeview/Lincoln Park residents to travel directly to the West Loop/UIC area without having to travel into the Loop. I would generally agree with you on the #7, and would toss in the 38 (served by Pink), X20 (served by the green line), 17 (served by pace), 129 (basic route is already served by the 1), 143 (served by 151) as other duplicative routes to eliminate.

re: closing Dan Ryan stations, it's unlikely since Federal money was just used to renovate those stations. Furthermore, the Red line is already FAST: I've timed it at under 25 minutes from 95th street to Jackson, so travel time isn't really an impediment to ridership on the branch (if anything, the route needs high overall accessibility, e.g. park n ride lots and TOD).

The clubber service may not be fully necessary; right now, the Brown Line shuttle (Kimball-Belmont) and Purple (Linden-Howard) operate until about 230am, by all means I'd just make those run 24 hours like they did until the mid-1990s. Otherwise, the other lines that don't run overnight are run by buses on 30-minute or less headways (the #62 for the Orange, 60 for Pink, 20 for Green). And honestly, this is a major cab city (highest medallioned taxis per capita in the US....yes more than NYC), which is the standard form of transport for all but the youngest and brokest college student nightcrawlers. Getting cabs at night is so easy that it's hard for transit to compete, particularly when a group of 2-4 can just pool together and spend barely more than a transit fare.

another suggestion: increase the frequency of Metra Electric trains and eliminate the Hyde Park bus routes (Nos. 2, 6, 10, 14, 26, etc.) during non-peak hours.

The situation right now is kind of frustrating. Of course, ridership is going to be very low on a line that only runs every half-hour during peak hours, and unpredictably at that; I'd love to take the Douglas Blue Line, but I can't count on it showing up when I want it to. It could pretty easily be eliminated if it were possible to transfer to the Forest Park Blue Line where the tracks cross over the expressway, but as it is one has to ride all the way up to Lake, which makes it a little ridiculous to get from Pilsen, Little Village, North Lawndale, or Cicero to UIC, Union Station, or the South Loop. The #7 allows you to do that. The ridership statistics show that it's a pretty heavily used bus on a per-platform hour basis and has grown substantially since the creation of the Pink Line.

In other Pink Line speculations, almost the entire right of way of the demolished portion of the Douglas branch (to Oak Park Ave) is still there and only used for parking. I wonder if there's any chance that in some distant, enlightened future, one with a denser Berwyn, that line could come back.

After my recent Chicago visit (thanks for the late hours mini-tour, VivaLFuego!), I can say that the bus service seems damn good, at least in the inner core/tourist attraction areas. It was an absolute breeze to get around from the Magnificent Mile area down towards places like the Museum of Science and Industry. The el trains were fun (albeit I was only on the blue line to and from O'Hare), but at least for that route, it's painfully slow. I was reading on the train that the tracks are being reconstructed, hopefully making for some faster speeds in many areas, but wow, those sections of 15-20 mph are truly horrible...

One other thing about walking around downtown a lot, I think any NIMBY complaining about LIGHT RAIL noise needs to head down to the Loop area and REALLY hear what transit noise can be like! :) When those trains are going by, it's nearly impossible to even hear yourself think! Haha

Aaron (Glowrock)

It wasn't demolished. The right-of-way was acquired, but tracks were never actually laid that far. Eventually, the land was just sold off without ever being used.

That's a nice idea, but unfortunately, there's a crossing at every street, which would mean lots of grade crossings for CTA to deal with, and lots of potential pedestrian fatalities. I doubt a rapid transit line with so many crossings would meet Federal standards nowadays, so the extension might have to be elevated, raising the cost significantly.

No, it did run to Oak Park Ave until, I believe 1947.

An extension to Harlem and Riverside Park Mall would connect an area with very solid trip density to rapid transit, but at this stage it's really not cost-effective considering it would probably have to be done in a trench to pass the Environmental Impact Study (noise and visual pollution).

Douglas line was cut back in 1952, because Berwyn would not allow any of the grade crossings to be closed.

http://www.economist.com/world/na/di...ry_id=10431680

Chicago's public transport
Off track
Jan 3rd 2008

THE city's average commute is not quite America's longest (that honour goes to New York), but in one respect Chicago is unrivalled: the bitterness and passion of the argument surrounding its public-transport system.

Right, it went to Oak Park Ave and additional land was bought to extend it to Harlem, which never happened. West of Oak Park Ave you can still see where the right of way obviously was, but it's been turned into parks and some facilities. I wouldn't expect anybody to seriously consider restoring the former service now, considering it would have to be either elevated or sunken, but one nice thing about the corridor is that it would require virtually no demolition. And I've never exactly had a difficult time parking around Cermak. I just think it's interesting to see where the path of former transit lines is still very obvious, unlike, say, the section of the Paulina connector north of Lake, which has been largely filled in.

<< I just saw that Economist article as well... a pretty significant black eye for Chicago and its international reputation there.

I don't know about that. The tenor of that article is par for the course for the Economist. They're always either negative or ambivalent; very cautiously optimistic is the happiest they ever get. Not that the problem isn't real. But:

"If the Illinois state legislature does not act by January 20th, more than half of bus routes in the city will be eliminated, some 2,400 transport workers will be sacked and fares will be raised. Suburban rail and bus lines face cuts as well. Commuters will be forced to drive on already crowded roads or walk to a distant bus or train—this in the depths of winter, with pavements icy and kerbs surrounded by lakes of frigid slush."

...really?

uhhhhhh........yeah. Though the suburban rail cuts likely wouldn't occur until 2009, they would just start with a fare increase. City and suburban bus will be decimated, though.

^ It's an article written by someone with no knowledge of how politics in this state work. There will never be any service cuts. Eventually, we'll have some mediocre solution including a hike in property taxes, more gaming, higher fares, and a Lisa Madigan gubernatorial run where she beats a republican from the western suburbs because "she's less like bush". We are just getting primed for the inevitable.

What do you guys think of my L train extension ideas?

------

ORANGE LINE
-Extension from Midway to Westfield Chicago Ridge Mall.
With stops at 79th Ave, 87th Ave, Chicago Ridge Mall.

BROWN LINE
-Extension from Kimbell to Westfield Shoppingtown Old Orchard Mall.
With stops at Northwestern University, Lincolnwood Town Centre, Oakton Community College, Old Orchard Mall.

BLUE LINE O'HARE BRANCH
-Extension from O'Hare Airport to Woodfield Mall. One stop, at Woodfield Mall. No stops inbetween O'Hare and Woodfield Mall.

PINK LINE
-Extension from 34th/Cermak, to Oakbrook Terrace and Midwestern University.

The Brown line exension will never happen. Too many communities to go through, Northwestern is served by the purple line and metra, Lincolnwood doesn't want el service, and an Old Orchard yellow line stop seems to be in the works.

There seems to be some opposition to extending the blue line to Woodfield. Metra already provides service from Ohare anyway and there are too many stops there as it is.

The pink line should be eliminated all together. I have no clue where midwestern university is and too many rich and politically powerful communities in between to get everyone's support. And once again, already served by Metra.

The orange line extension is not needed. Not enough density.

Why would suburbs be against having rapid transit expanded into their borders? Usually any district, suburb or not would beg to have rapid transit extended into their borders.
Also for the Brown Line I mean the Northwest University campus near Skoie. Not the one near the lake. On the transit map there seems to be two campus'.

Are you sending us the money for all the CTA changes you're proposing? :)

I definitely understand the attraction of looking at a map and thinking about expanding the CTA, but let us know how to get Madigan, Jones, and Blago to act like adults first.

I wouldn't support them - in fact I'd probably actively protest against them if they were slated before more pressing urban routes.

The "L" is an urban rail system, not a suburban rail system. With the possible exception of a shuttle system connecting the end of the Blue Line to Woodfield, I don't think any of your ideas would be used much (they would be used, but the operative word in that sentence is "much") or even appropriate to the areas they would serve.

There are way, way to many routes in the core of the city (such as a line from the West Loop to the Michigan Avenue/STreeterville area and/or the Loop to McCormick Place) or that connect parts of existing branches (for example, the Midcity Transitway from about Jefferson Park on the Blue Line south past Midway and then east ot the Red Line at about 79th or the Brown Line extended not north, but west to Jefferson Park on the Blue Line or the Pink to the Orange) that should be added before the types of suburban systems you describe should be considered. In my opinion, the only thing related to rail that should be going on in Chicago suburbs are a couple minor Metra extensions to existing lines and, in a few corridors, corridor preservation for possible future use. There are probably some corridors that could benefit from enhanced bus service, but outside of the first ring suburbs, there is just not the density necessary to support urban rail - and certainly not to support it over strictly urban projects.

Yeah, really. Now, chances are something will get at least partly worked out, but the way the legislature has been dicking around all year it's a pretty real threat. The Economist's evaluation of the Illinois legislature as being an example of how NOT to govern is pretty much spot on accurate.

And I don't think you actually read the Economist. If anything, they're like a teen party magazine compared to the Wall Street Journal or the Financial Times.

Fear of city residents. Historically, US suburbs were fiercely protective of their separation from central cities such as Chicago. Suburban residents often have irrational fears that transit extensions will give homeless people and urban criminals easy access to their neighborhoods. When you add the threat of eminent domain takings, noisy trains, and higher taxes, suburban transit extensions are quickly buried.

In addition, Chicago's rapid transit equipment is only marginally suitable for a run as long as Loop-Schaumburg. The cars (only a little larger than the Scarborough Line's) have short wheelbases, weigh less than many "light rail" vehicles, have hard seats and no washrooms. If track geometry is not beautifully maintained, they become very uncomfortable at speed.

Much smarter to integrate fares and let the regional rail network handle regional trips.

(Incidentally, next time you need a book review for uni, you might be interested in a book illuminating the differences between Canadian and US cities: Goldberg, Michael A. and Mercer, John. The Myth of the North American City: Continentalism Challenged. UBC Press, 1986)

As much as I would love a Blue line extension to Schaumburg, you make a good point.

And with the UP-NW to Jefferson Park transfer, it isn't really needed.

If the Brown Line is extended anywhere, it should be extended westward to meet the Blue Line at Montrose or Jeff Park.

I do like the idea of an extension out to Oakbrook. There are several rights of way, currently trails, that could be used in conjunction with I-88 to extend either the Pink or Blue Line out to the mall, which is also an employment center. Also, the metal elevated structures in the city give a misleading impression of the noise L trains create. Concrete viaducts generate much less noise, especially when sound walls are incorporated.

Bellwood, Hillside, and Maywood all have high minority populations, low income levels, and from a demographic perspective, are merely extensions of the West Side. Would residents of these communities oppose additional transit in their communities?

U.S. President To Be Briefed On Chicago 2016 Bid