I would love for them to build the Mid City transit line and then upzone the entire length of Cicero to B3-3 or so. Massive TOD would result as there are a lot of very nice, stable, neighborhoods along that route that suffer only from a lack of accessibility. There are some places on the NW side where you are a 20+ minute drive from any L station or freeway.

A CTA extension to the Oak Brook/Yorktown area should be a priority. I know several commuters who drive to the forest park blue line stop in order to get downtown everyday. It's either that or Metra, which isn't all that convenient in terms of time, location, etc.

Yay sprawl.

Cicero line, maybe. Implementing Mike Payne's Gray Line, yes. Connecting Brown to Blue, yes. An Ashland route, maybe.

Anything else on that map? No.

Instead:

* Connect Green to Jackson Park again.
* Create new Monroe subway from the Medical District/UIC/Taylor Street through the Loop connecting to a new subway running north under Columbus/Fairbanks then Clark/Broadway to roughly Wilson eventually (start with to either Armitage or Diversey and then build on that)
* Connect that Monroe-north subway with the line utilizing the Metra Electric route.
* Clinton Subway with West Loop Transportation Center, from Clybourn to Chinatown
* Change Orange Line routing to run along east bank of river and connect to Loop at Wells instead of Wabash.
* Extend Pink Line to have transfers with new Orange Line route and run on new lakefront route north.
* Implement the Circle Line as previously described
* Upzone anywhere near a rail station with zero parking minimums.

Ultimately I think DuPage needs to be included even if the other collar counties are left out... It is too central not to be included. That may mean other transit investments in DuPage need to be added as an enticement. A BRT line along 355 would be awesome as a feeder for Schaumburg and the Lombard/Downers area. A BRT along IL-83 would similarly be awesome, and Butterfield too.

There's also not enough investment in the core... I've become convinced that the West Loop Transportation Center is the single most important transit project in the region. Bringing the L to Union Station and allowing Metra trains to run through will drastically change the usefulness of transit for all of Chicagoland. My only concern is that it might be under built with only two Metra tracks and a limited set of vertical access points (since everything is stacked). SF is starting to run into capacity problems under Market St in a similar multi-level subway.

DuPage County, in which the City of Oak Brook resides, has just one of fifteen board members on RTA's board. You're crazy if you believe there will be any improvements in five of the six counties in the RTA service area. Chicago controls five, Cook County controls another five. Let's get realistic, Chicago and Cook County will see all the improvements for the foreseeable future - that's how the board is set up.

It's also how the density is set up.

Agreed. In general I think some planners or advocates keep looking to see how far we can sprawl the systems we have. To keep extending the lines indefinitely. While these end up looking impressive on a map and a stat sheet I think in general this is the wrong approach.

Very generally the better approach we need is to upgrading and integrating the infrastructure we currently have. Talking about extending CTA lines to Oak Brook, Woodfield, or even Old Orchard are basically nonsense IMO. Its much better to try to push some BRT feeders from Metra stations in terms of the suburbs if anything. Trying to make new suburban TOD nodes in currently long established auto-centric grids running along highways is just a waste of resources. Not to mention the travel times just start becoming too long for most potential riders once the CTA extends further out of the city IMO.

Actually I talked with a transit planner in the suburbs last summer who told me that there's plans to extend the Blue Line to Elmhurst and also Des Plaines. He may have even mentioned closer to Arlington Heights. Actually to Elmhurst makes sense if it were the Green Line with all those train lines that go there - only if they can work it out of course. I'm pretty sure around Maywood it drops to just one set of tracks doesn't it for the Metra. That probably wouldn't work.

The thing they need to do is really connect points, which is what they've shown here in some spots so it's not so Loop-centric. That's what's wrong with the system here really.

AMEN. There just needs to be two connecting lines really (one near I-294 north/south) that would connect the airports, and one in the west side of the city (Mid-City/Clinton St. subway?). A dream world would also have a line running up/near I-355 to capture the Schaumburg, Itasca, Lisle/Lombard/Downers Grove combo, and Orland Park labor markets.

Imagine our expressways with no 90/94, 294, 355 (essentially no connectors to the radials like 88, 57, 55, 90, 290). It would be a nightmare to get around. That is how our public transit system is currently set up.

BTW, here's a picture I found on CNT's Facebook page with Rahm at the launch of that thing:

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hpho...62060190_o.jpg

You mean this?

http://25.media.tumblr.com/273007dab...fqyo1_1280.jpg

This is probably not referring to the downtowns of those communities... the south part of Elmhurst touches I-88, and the south part of Des Plaines/Arlington Heights touches I-90. Both Blue Line extensions would likely run along the highway median (sadly) because putting it anywhere else is apparently too difficult...

Well, I know you're being facetious but it probably is. The other ways you have to actually tear down peoples' homes, displace and maybe help relocate them, etc. Just one reason I'm more for BRT and legitimate tram/light rail.

The other route they can go about it is by building the new lines as a subway system. The Blue Line extensions and the O'hare-Midway Express don't really need it because they can just run on the expressways while the Gold (Gray) Line is using Metra tracks. However, the Lime (Midcity) Line would have to run subway for the most part unless for some reason every homeowner on Cicero wants there house torn down. This will obviously drive up construction cost and time of completion but at least it won't lead to the displacement of people. Besides, do you really think people will support this project once they found out homes have to be destroyed?

Same sentiment over here. I like the ambition, and the drive towards funding, but a few of these are extremely low impact, high dispersion ideas.

True - but still costs a lot of money but I agree it's better from a social point of view during construction than tearing down homes.

Wouldn't the right-of-way run along the existing abandoned corridor that roughly aligns with Kenton St. -- not along Cicero?

The plan also does not seem to address the increasing near-north density. There is still no easy flow from the Blue Line service area to the near north side; and there is no easy connection for the west river terminals to near north

Yes. Unfortunately this line is just a little too far away from Cicero for TOD - a full two blocks. I could see some of the industrial sites getting redeveloped with dense housing, but they wouldn't be along Cicero. Even transfers to other rail lines would be difficult; you'd have to walk the full two blocks to the existing stations along Cicero.

I'd rather see the rail corridor become a 4-lane truck highway (with toll access for cars) and then two lanes subtracted from Cicero for light rail on the surface, maybe with some short subways or elevated sections at busy intersections.

So you are basically talking about the Crosstown Expressway?

I guess, but the original Crosstown proposal was massive. The truck highway would be about as narrow as they could manage, kinda like the newer toll roads in Houston. Ideally it would have no property takings at all, and fit completely inside the railroad ROW. It would pull trucks off of city streets like Cicero and Western, and off of the downtown highways.

I'm just not sure the Belt Railway corridor is a good choice for transit, given Chicago's urban pattern. Imagine the Orange Line, but without the strong anchor of the Loop at one end.

http://www.aaroads.com/texas/texas99...ge_pkwy_02.jpg

Yes - the green part, anyway. The black parts I don't think are that necessary - perhaps ideal, but then those included demolishing the elevated Loop, which might be good for transit but not good for the "feel" of downtown - although building a subway entrance under Lake so that, with the Block 37 connector, you could route the Green Line through the subways instead of over the Loop which might be good for some things. The Blue Line subway was built with a stub to accommodate that.

Additionally, I've always thought that extending Lower Michigan all the way to Oak as a bus-only road, and putting BRT on CHicago Ave and running a Lower Chicago tunnel intersecting with the extended Lower Michigan would enable some really efficient and helpful bus routes. It would cost as much - or more - than a subway of similar size, but the flexibility of running the express buses through it would make it a really valuable addition to the Near North and the North Michigan cooridor. It would also greatly enhance the utility of a Carol Street busway and put a lot more pressure on the RTA and McPier people to open up the Grant Park busway to CTA use.

Reinventing mass transit in metro Chicago
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...,2642840.story

Can anyone really defend the status quo?

April 7, 2014

In a more temperate moment, Mayor Rahm Emanuel might have used the term "blue ribbon panel" to describe the task force assigned to rethink metropolitan Chicago's mass transit system........

One of the relatively few times I will say to the Tribune: SPOT ON!

Indeed. And what I find most disappointing (though not surprising) is Rahm's flip dismissiveness of the report and condescension towards the panel and its recommendations.

Instead of name calling why not put forth a rebuttal of a list of points why he thinks it wouldn't work instead of resorting to name calling. Really such antics should be beyond a big time city mayor. The public deserves a more civilized stick by the facts debate.

I know that Rahms is intent on maintain control of his and the citys turf and leverage but there has to be a better reasoning for not overhauling the system then that. Because ultimately these agency and geographic fights about who gets what is a high stakes game that isn't good for the public.

It is N O T "his and the citys turf" -- And that is EXACTLY the BIG problem with things the way they are; that "turf" belongs to the Citizens of the "City of Chicago", and it's surrounding Suburbs.

They are supposed to be "Administrators" -- N O T "Owners", and "Owners" is their ingrained long-term attitude (the curtain gets pulled back).

They do NOT have a "Title" to CTA and Metra like I do to my old-@$$ed car!

If I put MY car into your possession (or Elect you) to repair, improve it, or whatever: I want you to do what I (Me) want you to do with MY car (or City).

N O T what YOU (all arrogant, Imperial, and paternalistic) think is "best" for ME and MY car (or my City)!!


It is really too bad that Pace is caught-up in this mess, because they seem to be a well-run -- and dare-I-say-it "honest" Organization. But there's not to much you can do when you're swimming much too close to the Titanic

Which governor?
 

Realistically, governor whom would be more likely to support Transit Future: Quinn or Rauner? Quinn is not well regarded with our taxes/spending; Rauner is likely too privatization-oriented to support.

Plan criticism: Ashland need to be rail, and an extension of the Englewood green line along 63rd to Midway would eliminate the need for that 75th street lime line segment. 63rd already intersects the Dan Ryan red line.

Displacement: it's a fact of life. Does individuals' right to exist in any given space for a lifetime, outweigh the region's progress well beyond this generation? There would be no expressways with that reasoning.

At this point, Quinn's knee jerk reaction to just raise taxes in nearly every instance is out of control. Rauner is better.

Yes!! 100%!! Actually an Ashland subway was proposed back in 1939 (when we still had money) to run under the southern portion of Ashland, use the Paulina Connector and then use existing Brown Line tracks. It's the line parallel to the Red Line (man I have been uploading a lot of old transit plans).
http://www.chicago-l.org/plans/image...bways_prop.jpg


I'd still rather prefer that the southern leg of the Lime Line is kept. The gap between the Orange and Red Line is a pretty big gap and would certainly benefit from having more lines to fill it in. Also the Line Line runs on 79th, not 75th, which would be a 16 block gap between the two and if it were removed, then people will certainly have to walk much further for no reason (and we all know how much Chicagoans love to walk to stops). You could argue that they could take the Ashland Subway but the problem is that many people live perpendicular to the line instead of parallel so the new line wouldn't help them that much, and that if they wanted to transfer to the Red Line then they wouldn't be left with a good alternative.

if you look closely at that map, it is aligned on an old railway between 75th and 76th street, well north of 79th. that right-of-way was formerly included as part of the old cross-town exp. east leg plan.

Well, actually, we didn't. Chicago's subways were built with federal PWA grants.

Yeah, the Red Line transfer occurs at 79th but I can't imagine the rail line anywhere except the 75th St corridor. There would probably be a short stretch of elevated built to link between the two.

It's unfortunate that we are wedded to the idea of turning freight railroads into transit corridors, when most of the city was explicitly built to keep railroads away from commercial areas where transit is most needed.

That's why I think BRT running on major streets, or LA-style light rail lines with a mix of surface/elevated/subway, is the better choice for Chicago neighborhoods. When coupled with TOD, it would definitely produce higher ridership even if the travel times are slower.

Chicago looks a lot like Toronto based on the map's orientation.

The World’s Subway Maps Show How Poor Transit Is In Chicago
 

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2014/04/...ampaign=543922

By John Dodge

CHICAGO (CBS) — Gazing at the work of Jug Cerovic, evokes very different reactions.

1) Maps of subways–which themselves are mostly invisible, often dark and gritty–are beautiful.

2) Chicago’s subway system design sucks.

Cerovic is a Paris-based architect..........

^. What part about "streetcar city" do people not understand?

Most public transit in the US sucks compared to other country's cities. Huge surprise.

Also what part of "hub and spoke city" do people not understand. Anyone who compares Chicago's built environment to Paris' (other than the occasional Paris on the Prairie quip) is clearly massively ignorant. The two cities couldn't be any more different in terms of history, layout, function, industry, etc... They literally have nothing in common other than the fact that they are both pretty, pleasant, places in spring time.

appreciate our transit
 

since chicago transit bashing seems to be heating up lately, i just want to add something. i think that what we have is overall pretty good. i mean lots of cities would just kill for the system(s) we have. realize how innovate the expressway median transit was at that time--how many other cities wanted, but never materialized with that? how many other cities in this country even have subway(s) or only get light rail as another thread is discussing? how many african cities, much larger than ours, manage without rail?

we simply need to get moving on some of the many plans (yes, planning fatigue someone mentioned earlier here is real) because we have languished behind for far too long in a city of this size.

let the photo of the o'hare "stair climbing" train symbolize of our low point, cause we can find our way up.

I'll agree. CTA, MBTA, and Pace when considered as part of the whole isn't as bad as some will suggest. Just look at th daily ridership data....
1) CTA = Bus: 925,074, Rail: 715,420, Subtotal: 1.64 million
2) Merta = Rail: 303,800
3) Pace = Bus: 87,000
Totals = Rail: over 1 million, Bus: over 1 million
2 million daily trips each day is not bad for a metro population over 9.7 million.

Yes, and these numbers are why I have serious reservations about the various public transit reform plans being floated lately.

Mostly-Chicagoan CTA handles 1,640,494 daily riders, while mostly-suburban Metra and Pace handle 390,800 combined, less than a quarter of the CTA's load. And yet these proposals have the tables turned, with the city representatives drastically outnumbered (10:6 in the Biss proposal, and and even worse 16:5 in Governor Quinn's task force's version).

It seems to me that a transit board should represent it's system's users, and these proposals aren't even close.

CTA's proper ridership base is Cook County, not the City of Chicago. Plus, governor-appointed board members are not beholden to the suburbs especially. It's a stretch to say the CTA territory is "drastically outnumbered". I think the Task Force plan does a good job of balancing population vs. ridership criteria for power on the board.

Ultimately the modest share of transit money that Metra receives only restricts Metra's options for expansion. They only spend money on state-of-good-repair and cheap outward extensions into the cornfields. They simply don't have the resources to do anything transformative, like a downtown subway for through routing, a circumferential line or an upgrade of lines to full regional service with 20-30min headways, high platforms, electrification, etc. Without transformative transit projects, the suburbs will continue to be auto-oriented low density bedroom communities.

until a couple months ago, I had not known how extensive the IC station is b/c I had only seen the s. shore part. I walked from Randolph through the pedway; then thru the station, all along the lower-level (underground, or whatever) to s. water st. into IL center. that was so amazing to me having never seen that. how awesome would that be to connect thru to n. Michigan ave.? though i'm sure it's more complicated than what meets the eye!

I believe simply putting all Metra lines on 30-minute "memory" schedules from early morning to late night would be transformative to the region.

We need to encourage more downtown Evanstons to spring up, not try to reach the Woodfield Corporate Centers and Canteras of the region. The "last mile" problem will forever make transit too frustrating a way to serve sprawling corporate villas like Prairie Stone or The Esplanade.

That would be ideal, but we live in a region where the land along railroads is chopped into countless little fiefdoms, most of which abhor any kind of density or tall buildings. Ownership of land is also dispersed, so it's much harder to coordinate redevelopment even if the voters are on board.

Prairie Stone and Cantera are easy to redevelop - large developers can come in and re-do things on a large scale, as we are seeing in Northern Virginia. Within the office-park context, I still think expressway medians are a poor location for rail/bus stations (the side of the expressway or the parallel arterial road are better spots) but I fully believe that the expressway sectors need better transit service. This also ignores the millions of Chicagoans who live near expressways and not Metra lines, who need backbone transit service even if there's no redevelopment.

close-in TOD potential
 

jefferson park was headed in that direction prior to the economic downturn, and i don't recall if there was any real community controversy when the 4 or 5 additional levels were added to the 9-story veteran's sq bldg. there were other plans for adjacent vacant land aplenty, ripe for development beside the kennedy.

oakton st. adjacent to the yellow line in skokie is now being discovered

howard st. station has much more potential.

95th/dan ryan vicinity, i would love to see TOD, but is there any zoning restriction, as such? other than residential, there seems to be plenty of fast food and gas station mini-mall type structure adjacent to the sta.

The CTA may have a little reach beyond Chicago, just as Metra has some stations within, but I doubt the CTA's suburban ridership (balanced with Pace and Metra's Chicago ridership) would shift those ratios much.

And given that state level politics have historically sided against big cities like Chicago, I've got to expect the same will continue to be true here. But even if we were to consider the governor's appointees neutral, that's still 10:5 against the city.

And all of the improvements you mention taken together won't make most suburbs cease to be "auto-oriented low density bedroom communities". The suburbs are the way they are because the people running them want it that way; you just said so yourself: "we live in a region where the land along railroads is chopped into countless little fiefdoms, most of which abhor any kind of density or tall buildings". Another thing a lot of them abhor is easy access to rapid transit, just look at the reactions to the plans to extend the yellow line to Old Orchard.

The city's density is what makes transit workable. Reallocating representation (and thus priorities) away from dense areas into the corn fields you mention seems likely to result in a sprawling network without the ridership to support itself and a core of underfunded crumbling century old infrastructure where the people who actually use the system live.

I'm not blind to the advantages of the systems working together more effectively, but it seems to me that a lot of people are getting lost in utopian fantasies of how things could be better and not thinking of all the ways this change of control could make things worse. This plan looks worryingly likely to produce the transit version of the Illiana toll road to me.

Yes, Jeff Park is a natural TOD node but the neighbors have proven to be hostile to development in the past. Ald. Arena seems to have a more principled pro-development stance than the corrupt, flip-flopping Levar... Hopefully we see some action in that area, but it really needs to have the density of downtown Evanston and instead it's like a sleepier version of Park Ridge.

I just don't think this is sustainable politically. We need voters across Chicagoland to understand and support transit, which means all of Chicagoland needs to benefit. Chicago spends so little on transit per capita compared to its peer cities precisely because suburbanites see so little benefit to transit spending - the benefits all accrue to the city.

Like it or not, the suburbs contain the vast majority of Chicagoland's population. That won't change anytime soon and Chicago will ultimately lose out to those peer cities unless it has a unified push with its suburbs.

The thing is, as you implied, the suburbs don't currently "understand and support transit".
So how can it be a unified push, rather than a city push voted down by a suburban pull?
And how will a transit system undermining itself at the board level ever make itself more popular?

A lot of noise is made about corruption and lack of cooperation, but in spite of all that Chicago has the most cost efficient transit system of it's scale and age in the US. Let's not pretend we have nothing to lose.