^ WOW! Such an improvement over a gas station, eh?

Anyhow, I guess we've all gotten way off topic here, this being the Transit thread and all..

Our politicians in DC have secured funding for many projects. It's really up to Blagojevich to provide the matching funds to get these projects done.

sorry. i mis-wrote. i meant "Guv" not "Gov," in reference to Blagojevich, who will leave money on the table and not Durbin et al. who put it there.

Transportation planning looks to 2040
 

..

Maybe we should all just mass forward this thread in the suggestion box:D

^ Zzzz...

Another plan that nobody will heed

bus tracking system
 

....

Will they be managing their buses with this system too? I don't care about tracking (it was flawed in San Francisco.....tells you when the bus left the last station...with a tracker...but that doesn't mean they will be at your stop on time.).

Short answer is yes. It will take some time and practice before the exact procedures are worked out. But the plan is to equip mobile supervisors and line managers with this real-time data. I still think the value of bus tracker is in reducing customer's perceived wait time and boosting the overall perceived value of their trip. In terms of actual by-the-numbers improvements in 'reliability', I think the answer is in enforcing on time departures, constructing the best schedules possible (inter-related, of course), and on-street traffic engineering under the purview of CDOT (signal priority, bus lanes, etc). Once a bus has left the terminal, there's not much in the transit agency's control to fix inconsistent headways outside of holding buses, thereby delaying those customers and decreasing the value of their trip. By the time an unacceptable gap in service has formed and a plan can be worked out to re-space the buses, the buses will be almost done running the route anyway.

Preceived bunching at 8 a.m. on Sunday morning....no good reason for it. Would love to see bunching ended with this device. If it happens because of traffic and daily interruptions then hopefully CTA will be able to turn buses around quicker...make passenger trades and get back on schedule. Heard that the union has been against this for a long time.

If buses are bunched a supervisor will pull stop them and put the people on it and send the empty one aheard or turn it around to get it back on schedule.

GPS tracking cost?
 

I posted the below in the Tribune Topix section in regards to the GPS tracking topic. Wanted this forums take on the cost associated with this project.


Does $24 million seem kind of high to anyone else? This kind of technology is found in many high end cell phones, but those cost, what $500 tops? So why the high price tag? How expensive is each unit? Whats the cost of installation per bus and the cost of linking it to the CTA'S website?

A GPS tracker costs (quick Internet search) roughly $500. Lets say installation of each unit is $1000. The CTA website says they have 2000 buses in their fleet. So that means....

2,000 buses x $1,500 per unit and installation = $3 million dollars.... So where is the other $21 million going? It doesn't cost $21 million to link a bunch of GPS trackers to a real time website!

Low Jack, the anti theft device cost $1,200... Its the same freaking technology!!! And from the story it doesn't seem like this will be on all 2000 buses the city runs, it sounds like half. So were paying $24,000 per bus for a GPS tracker...

.....

Chicagoans -

Ian Wright, British host of The Travel Channel's "America: the Wright Way", toured Chicago tonight. He took the el and seemed visably impressed. He remarked that it was cleaner and much more spacious than the Tube. And he liked the fact that it afforded an above-the-street view of the city.

:sly: i have yet been to London but have seen many photo's and I have a hard time buying that. The one thing I it does have over the London system is air conditioning which I hear is brutal in summer in London.

^ I've ridden both. I think they are both equal in their cleanliness (frankly, I don't know what's up with a lot of you Chicagoans and your "the L is so filthy!" nonsense), but Chicago's train cars are definitely more spacious than London's, IMO.

It must be a Chicago thing, to diss your transit ... in contradistinction from the propensity of the Londoner to brag about theirs.

I think you've under-estimated the cost of installation, as well as initial maintenance. There's also a fair amount of testing of the system involved. Plus, a $500 GPS tracker doesn't broadcast back.

The LoJack is not constantly broadcasting, it's just activated if the car is stolen, so while they use similar technology it's not exactly the same. And you said LoJack is $1,200, right? But you're only allowing $1,500 for the CTA's more robust, more flexible product?

Plus, if you consider LoJack to be like a Gateway PC, and what the CTA is getting to be like a dedicated Linux server purposed for a high-availability system, you kinda start to see the difference. A basic Gateway PC can be had for $500, but a solid, reliable server may run you 5 times that (maybe more).

They also have to be built to handle relatively rough conditions, and, I would assume, to broadcast at a higher average power than most cell phones to ensure a stable connection.

Finally, the central parts of the system, built to be reliable, would have to be fairly robust and that doesn't come cheap, and I don't know how much the software to tie them all together costs, but I do know that logistics software usually isn't cheap. Hiring people to administer the system doesn't come cheap, either.

Do I think $24 million seems high - yeah, at least a little. Do I think it's unreasonably high? No, I don't.

No. I'm pretty sure I've already explained the cost components earlier in this thread, and I don't feel like rehashing it. You're vastly underestimating the complexity of the system. Alot more parts and labor are involved than buying a $300 part and plugging it in.

One of the most idiotic things that CTA has to do by law is go with the "lowest" bidder. A great case in point...ever wonder why those stupid Electronic Bus identifiers at the top of the the front of the bus often don't work.....even on the newer buses? Well each time they go to purchase them they have to send out another bid...and they will more than likely end up with signs from a different company. That means different parts and different reasons for them breaking down as well as programming them. Does it make sense? We hate CTA for it...stupid CTA...but they are required to bid like that.

We need a best buy formula for everything CTA purchases.....best bang for the buck...short term along with long term...not "cheapest" short term horribly expensive long term.

As far as this system being over priced...guess I would have taken your points a little more seriously if you would have an exact comparision...from say other cities and their systems. Apples to apples. Plus.....do phone companies really keep track of your phones where abouts (all of them) and broadcast that out live?

God, I hope not!

I can't believe Metra might put a wrench in this. This is SO important to the freight rail movement in Chicago, and it would add a lot more to the local economy than the STAR line ever would ...

CTA just announced some significant service increases on several south lakeshore routes:
http://www.transitchicago.com/news/w...ticleid=110240

This improvement in frequency makes the CTA service ever more desirable than the parallel Metra Electric service, in which Metra apparently has little interest in beefing up. Particularly for South Shore residents who are stuck riding local all-stop trains downtown, the CTA express buses (particularly the #14 and #26) generally provide a faster option that probably picks them up closer to their front door. The #2 actually distributes people to/from major trip generators in west Hyde Park (the hospital and dense apartment blocks) who otherwise have a significant hike to Metra. The #6 closely parallels the Metra Electric and isn't any faster, but now runs with such good frequency that it is always a good default option that requires no trip planning and much quicker access time.

Exit question for you all: These CTA improvements, - Good thing or bad thing? Detrimental to Metra?

I agree, I just hope they are trying to get assurance and reasonable terms for their services and wouldn't go as far as trying to impede the sail. I also find Canadian National's take on the STAR line right on target and hopefully some pols will listen to them.

Can't they just adjust the product specifications? Instead of putting out a proposal for "electronic bus identifiers" put one out for "electronic bus identifiers with [insert tech specs or warranty requirements]". Easier than changing the law.

Well some service is being reduced, so I'd call it service changes rather than improvements. The increase in frequency for the 6 is good, but I do kind of wonder why that bus has to make so many turns in Hyde Park--it seems like it would shave a few minutes off the trip to just stay on Lake Park and then go straight to Stony Island, rather than going over to Hyde Park Blvd. That would also make it more convenient for most people, since nobody lives east of Hyde Park Blvd. I'm sure there's a reason they do it that way though. Of course I'd rather just be able to take Metra...

I think the routing of the 6 is a combination of historical precendence (minor reason) and the fact that going down Hyde Park Blvd serves many, many more residents than Lake Park (major reason). When the major South Lakeshore service revisions were under way about 5 years ago, they had the X28 following the routing you suggest, but moved it to Hyde Park largely on account of increased demand for it there.

Really, that's surprising. Hyde Park is at the edge of the neighborhood whereas Lake Park is closer to the middle, although still pretty far east. I guess the tracks plus the ugliness of Lake Park must detract a lot of people living east of them. Those buses just CREEP down Hyde Park.

The parallel bus service isn't that bad, but it kind of sucks that a lot of people living farther south sit through a 15-minute crawl along a local route before reaching the express portion. Also, it would really help tie the lakefront South Side neighborhoods together if you could take rapid transit between the neighborhoods, rather than only being able to get downtown from any given neighborhood. The shape of the lake makes it impossible to get between, say, Bronzeville and South Shore without taking two buses, but the Electric would allow for this very nicely.

Agreed on better connecting South Shore to other south side neighborhoods via transit. However, residents along the southern portion of the 6 can take the 26 during rush hours (or possibly the 14 any time of day, depending where they live) and bypass the Hyde Park portion, significantly speeding up their trip.

from the Sun Times

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transpo...032608.article

Monroe, Clark & Division, and North & Clybourn all need face lifts as well - particularly the first two. And are they EVER going to get Washington finished? I never see any work being done there.

^Some of us are working to get these three stations preserved and restored, rather than remodeled. The state office of historic preservation is raising all kinds of spurious roadblocks, claiming to have "lost the file" several times.

The work at Washington isn't actually to renovate the station, its work associated with the new Block 37 station. The existing stairway down to the blue line transfer tunnel was exactly where the new tracks are to cut across, so each stairway had to be moved out about 75-100 feet. When the station reopens it probably won't look much different, except perceptive people will notice that the stairs are in a different spot then they used to be.

All work is being performed inside a closed off area, so nothing is visible to passing trains.

It'd be nice for at least one of the subways stops to be restored to something pretty close to original design (albeit with better/brighter light fixtures and maybe some tasteful, non-intrusive, darker-colored wall paneling at platform level to absorb sound and help hide brake dust soot), though I doubt it will happen. The glazed brick, Futura typefaces, and simple design have more aesthetic potential to my eye than the cheesed-up rehabbed stations, though I'd take the rehabbed stations over the dilapidated stalactite-ridden messes that are the current stops.

Which Green Line is he referring to? The one in Boston? I can't think of any Green Line stations that are even half as bad as the Grand stop on the Red Line.

While I support the idea of preserving a lot of things in this city, I don't think I'd support preserving a subway station in its original form. Too small, too cramped, to old (as opposed to historic) feeling. Now, a remodel that used original typefaces and finishes I could get behind, but I think the form of the stations needs to be updated to reflect modern expectations when it comes to transit stations.

Thanks for your efforts. Sometimes I come across articles / comments that praise the old stations. Will let you know if I remember any of these or come across any others.

Do the green line stations (outside of the loop) combined even get as much daily traffic as the Grand red line station?

Yeah (certainly on the Lake branch, the South Main totals barely more than Grand/State), but the comment is still incomprehensible; the Green Line stations are almost all in very good shape, with the exception of a few on the south side which at most could benefit from a fresh coat of paint.

People still have this idea that the Green Line is empty all the time, but in 2007 the Lake branch alone had almost as many passengers as the Orange Line, and the same number as the Forest Park Blue Line. And ridership on the Lake branch is going way up, in contrast to most of the other lines. And the stations are certainly in very good shape.

Historical reasons, I'd guess. When they closed the line for renovation, ridership was already low. Closing it decimated ridership. As ridership has climbed back up, public opinion has been slow in following.

Attitudes will change...

Taft

The Lake Street branch is very successful, but almost entirely buoyed by stations from Central Avenue to Harlem (Laramie to California are still very low ridership). Ashland and Clinton got a recent bump in ridership once the Pink Line started running.

The South Main still has incredibly low ridership though; I think the riders-per-route-mile might even be a bit less than the Pink Line; it's close.

From the Dec 2007 ridership report it looks like there's a decent but not vast dropoff east of Central (Cicero and Pulaski are still pretty respectable, but Central Park and California are very slow). It's too bad the city hasn't tried to encourage more integration with the Green Line among new developments in Bronzeville, but I guess redevelopment hasn't gotten that far west yet. The areas around the South Main are probably the emptiest places served by the el. I imagine that the long wait at the two spurs at the end probably holds down ridership on the line too.

I wonder how high Pink Line ridership will eventually climb now that rebuilding is done. East of Kedzie or so it is very dense, but a larger proportion of the population is not Loop-bound.

Big day on the CTA today. Southport and Diversey reopened, while Paulina and Wellington closed. Additionally the three track service in the southbound direction has begun at Belmont & Fullerton.

I also noticed the CTA has a new design for the main page of their website. Their system map still needs to be updated though. It's been showing Montrose and Addision closed on the brown line, despite the fact they've been open for 4 months now. Not to mention several other stations are now open and/or closed.

...this has probably already been covered, but I've lost track.......have they finished the excavation work on the superstation ? ...and have they finally decided if they are going to actually finish it ? ...or just take it to a point and leave it for a future date ?

What would happen if they didn't create a station but just used it as a connection and created an "Airports Line" that through-routed the Orange Line to O'Hare? I can't imagine anyone would use it to travel between the airports, but it'd be an optional routing. Maybe there are other possibilities, too. Heck, if they used those west-bound portals to create a subway entrance for the Oak Park branch of the Green Line, you could move the Green Line off the Loop and run it through the subways, opening up some capacity on the Loop to increase service on other lines.

I forgot about the Yellow line service beginning weekend service this past weekend as well. Hopefully the added service proves successful over the coming months.

Anyone notice a difference in loads on the incoming brownline today? I saw their 8 Car signs up yesterday.

Because of the change in the 3-track configuration, they're running fewer trains. The addition of the 8-cars, though, mean they're able to run the same number of total cars, though, so the loads should be about the same.

.....I sincerely hope the plan is to run as many 8-car trains as 6-car trains so there is a 20% increase in service........if they just slow the train intervals and add 2 cars, then we just went through a lot of grief for nothing.....

Currently it's a temporary but necessary restriction because of reduced thorough-put caused by the three-track situation.

Once they're back to four tracks, they may run the same number of trains as before the project and with more cars each, but if ridership declines because of the economy declining (or any other reason) then they probably will run fewer trains but in an eight-car configuration at rush hour. It would save them some operational costs (theoretically, at least, with fewer operators required for the same total line capacity). It would also save them the cost of additional rolling stock.

But the capacity would be there, so it'd probably be used sometimes. The length in platforms could also open the possibility of alternative routes, like a Kimball-Midway or Kimball-Oak Park type routing.

They're running 33% larger trains, but with 33% less total trains. Same capacity. You'd think it would be the same.

Unfortunately, people went to the spot on the platform where they always did, so the middle areas of the trains were crushingly crowded and most people south of Belmont weren't able to board. The front and end cars had a lot of free room though. I assume people will figure this out REALLY quick. I took the Brown Line, and immediately went to the very end of the platform, since I assumed people wouldn't think to go there. There was barely anyone in my car, but the front ones were at capacity. It seemed like a vast majority of people didn't know the trains were longer. I'm guessing the average rider couldn't tell you how long the cars were historically, let alone that they're longer now.

I don't know why people don't figure this out.......I never ever went to the middle of the brown line as it was. It was always full of lazy people who just stood right by the top of the stairs.