SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: Transit Developments (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=101657)

Kenmore May 6, 2013 7:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias (Post 6117645)
There's a lot of track work involved. My guess is that most of the length of time is because they continue to run trains through the station, not because the trains are stopping in the station.

makes sense

denizen467 May 9, 2013 10:34 AM

Somehow it does not sound appetizing that a hot dog factory might relocate into ... a used hot dog factory.

Also, if the parties aren't even close to agreeing on a land sale --- then the D/E/F road project might still be way far out in the future.


http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...-to-south-side
Vienna Beef mulling move to South Side
By: Alby Gallun May 08, 2013

...

The 120-year-old hot dog maker has been dealing with city officials over a plan to reroute Elston Avenue right through the company's current headquarters property, a move aimed at relieving congestion at the intersection of Elston, Fullerton and Damen avenues.

Now, Vienna, a fixture on the North Side since 1972, is considering moving its headquarters to Bridgeport, a shift that could include a subsidy from the city. Vienna has signed a contract to buy a former Sara Lee Corp. hot dog factory at 1000 W. Pershing Road, confirmed co-president Jack Bodman.

...

The city wants to reroute Elston so it runs through Vienna's property at 2501 N. Damen Ave. The project wouldn't disturb Vienna's manufacturing because the street would be paved on vacant land just south of the company's 100,000-square-foot factory. The city would acquire the land from Vienna or, if the two sides couldn't agree on a price, seize it through its eminent domain powers.

“They absolutely don't need to move” because of the street reconfiguration, said ... chief of staff for Ald. Scott Waguespack ... . Yet moving to the South Side “makes all the sense in the world” when considering other uses, including retail or residential, that would maximize the value of the Vienna property, said industrial broker Scott Duerkop ...

Vlajos May 9, 2013 1:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 6121334)
Somehow it does not sound appetizing that a hot dog factory might relocate into ... a used hot dog factory.

Also, if the parties aren't even close to agreeing on a land sale --- then the D/E/F road project might still be way far out in the future.


http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...-to-south-side
Vienna Beef mulling move to South Side
By: Alby Gallun May 08, 2013

...

The 120-year-old hot dog maker has been dealing with city officials over a plan to reroute Elston Avenue right through the company's current headquarters property, a move aimed at relieving congestion at the intersection of Elston, Fullerton and Damen avenues.

Now, Vienna, a fixture on the North Side since 1972, is considering moving its headquarters to Bridgeport, a shift that could include a subsidy from the city. Vienna has signed a contract to buy a former Sara Lee Corp. hot dog factory at 1000 W. Pershing Road, confirmed co-president Jack Bodman.

...

The city wants to reroute Elston so it runs through Vienna's property at 2501 N. Damen Ave. The project wouldn't disturb Vienna's manufacturing because the street would be paved on vacant land just south of the company's 100,000-square-foot factory. The city would acquire the land from Vienna or, if the two sides couldn't agree on a price, seize it through its eminent domain powers.

“They absolutely don't need to move” because of the street reconfiguration, said ... chief of staff for Ald. Scott Waguespack ... . Yet moving to the South Side “makes all the sense in the world” when considering other uses, including retail or residential, that would maximize the value of the Vienna property, said industrial broker Scott Duerkop ...

It's probably a smart move for Vienna.

sammyg May 10, 2013 5:57 PM

Streetsblog recently put up a post on the Englewood Flyover. Most of it rehashes things we already know, but at the bottom, they have a picture showing progress on the piers.

http://chi.streetsblog.org/2013/05/0...-metra-delays/

J_M_Tungsten May 10, 2013 8:47 PM

Today
Bridgework on 18th and Clark
http://i592.photobucket.com/albums/t...E62DCF7B2B.jpg

ndrwmls10 May 11, 2013 2:15 AM

Are there maps anywhere of a hypothetical L lines?

CTA Gray Line May 12, 2013 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6112330)
I guess I meant regionally, but obviously land use in the city needs reform as well.

Increased frequency on Metra lines and upzoning in suburban downtown areas can create a whole new swath of transit-oriented Chicagoland with almost no capital investment by transit agencies.

As I said above, the biggest stumbling blocks are not a lack of funding or a lack of will behind megaprojects but inter-agency disputes and a basic misunderstanding of transit-oriented regional planning. I hate to beat a dead horse here, but why are we planning to spend several billion to extend the Red Line when Metra Electric already has the infrastructure and frequent stop spacing to act as a frequent urban transit line? We forumers all know the answer by now, I think, but those are the problems we need to deal with; not some Burnham-esque lack of soul-stirring planning magic.

Notice especially the Metra Electric:


Metra train stops and income levels

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...oney-train-me\
tra-stops-and-income-levels

The geographic disparity in Chicago's wealth can be seen by tracking householdincome in the ZIP codes of Metra train stations. The Union Pacific North and Milwaukee District North lines pass through some of the wealthiest ZIP codes, while the Metra Electric and Rock Island lines go through some of the poorest.

CRAIN'S MAPS:
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/Asset...3charticle.htm

Metra station median income percentile ranking
Based on average income of the station's ZIP code. Mouse over stations to see
specific data.

Note: Map does not included Ravinia Park stop.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (2011, five-year)

Click here to view a static version of this map in a popup window:
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/Asset...3charticle.htm

Rizzo May 13, 2013 2:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_M_Tungsten (Post 6123668)

Looks like they are painting. I wonder why. The bridge was in good condition. It's those flyovers in desperate need of repainting.

ardecila May 13, 2013 5:20 AM

They are supposed to repaint the flyover. Ald. Solis got some TIF money for this purpose. They're probably just starting with the low-hanging fruit (no pun intended). It will be easier to get access to the underside of the flyover once Red Line service to the Dan Ryan ends.

K 22 May 19, 2013 5:58 AM

Dan Ryan track rehab starts today. Going to be an interesting 5 months (at least).

Nexis4Jersey May 19, 2013 5:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K 22 (Post 6133684)
Dan Ryan track rehab starts today. Going to be an interesting 5 months (at least).

Why did they pick the warmer months?

ardecila May 19, 2013 7:11 AM

Because a really tight construction project can't afford weather delays? Because confused riders won't be stuck in the cold when they miss their connection? Lots of good reasons.

Rizzo May 19, 2013 7:47 AM

Here's a terrible photo I took of the Clark and Division subway reconstruction. Other people were taking phone photos too so there might be better shots out there somewhere.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7296/8...db73e03f_b.jpg

Nexis4Jersey May 19, 2013 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6133705)
Because a really tight construction project can't afford weather delays? Because confused riders won't be stuck in the cold when they miss their connection? Lots of good reasons.

True , what other lines will be reconstructed?

denizen467 May 19, 2013 7:07 PM

There was a train of double-decker coaches crossing the St Charles Air Line at Michigan Ave yesterday; that's something I've never seen. A Tribune story today about a derailment also happens to include a photo of a double-deck trainset on the SCAL that is captioned as a "derailed Amtrak train on the Metra Rock Island line on ... May 19". Does Amtrak use trainsets (in Chicago) comprised mostly of commuter-looking double-deckers? Or is this just rare Metra usage of SCAL? (And is this just another Tribune reporting botch.)

K 22 May 19, 2013 8:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey (Post 6133758)
True , what other lines will be reconstructed?

I think that's it.

The upcoming major CTA projects after this (if I remember correctly):
- the new Green Line stop at Cermak Rd (to place in between the 3 mile distance from Roosevelt to 35th)
- merging the Wabash Avenue Loop stations into one mega station (Washington/Wabash).
- extending the Red Line from 95th Street to 130th Street.

I wish they'd place a Pink Line stop at Madison & Paulina Sts. for easier access to the United Center but that doesn't look like it's happening anytime soon. Damen/Lake would be helpful too for that.

N830MH May 20, 2013 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey (Post 6133685)
Why did they pick the warmer months?

Because they have keep away from the bad snowstorm. They don't want to do that. Instead, they don't have worry about the winter storm.

ardecila May 20, 2013 6:49 AM

Don't forget the Wilson rebuild or the 95th rebuild. Both are massive, hundred-million-dollar projects.

They're gonna need to do the same reconstruction of the Forest Park branch in coming years, too (it's even older than the Dan Ryan branch). CTA might do another closure, although there's room to lay temporary tracks alongside the old ones. I've thought recently that this wide ROW might make for some great landscaping opportunities, screening the rail line like DC's Orange Line along I-66.

Nexis4Jersey May 20, 2013 6:56 AM

Any Metra line rebuilds?

Bronxwood May 20, 2013 7:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin_Chicago (Post 6108175)
What is Chicago planning? Not nearly enough

The downtown circulator system designed to move commuters from West Loop railroad stations to Michigan Avenue and other points east died in the '90s, Mr. DeVries points out; a West Loop transportation center intended to allow further expansion of downtown's office district is moribund; and hopes of extending the Chicago Transit Authority's Red Line south have been delayed in favor of far more limited initiatives like the budding Bus Rapid Transit network.

Read more: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...#ixzz2RnTKcERD

It's a shame this isn't being pursued. I've been observing Chicago from above on google maps, and I've always thought the growth of downtown towards the west was a no-brainer. There's the University of Illinois, Malcolm X College, the united center, etc. and Commuter rail/two CTA lines that service the area for crying out loud! The surface lots, around the united center, scream "Hudson Yards".

The same applies for the areas of the south side nearest to downtown. Much of the building stock in this area is still phenomenal (what's left of it), there's beautiful historic town homes, small apartment buildnigs and highrises. The areas between the University of Chicago and the Loop can and should be connected with proper infill on the empty lots. Considering its proximity to the loop and excellent transit access, I'm in shock as to why Chicago fails to see the opportunity. Chicago could easily triple the size of its core and become a much more dynamic, healthier and competitive city.

the urban politician May 20, 2013 3:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6134464)
Don't forget the Wilson rebuild or the 95th rebuild. Both are massive, hundred-million-dollar projects.

:rolleyes: How could anybody forget that?

the urban politician May 20, 2013 3:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronxwood (Post 6134473)
Considering its proximity to the loop and excellent transit access, I'm in shock as to why Chicago fails to see the opportunity. Chicago could easily triple the size of its core and become a much more dynamic, healthier and competitive city.

^ Wow, really? Thanks, nobody in Chicago realized any of this... :uhh:

ardecila May 20, 2013 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 6134648)
:rolleyes: How could anybody forget that?

The dude specifically asked if he was forgetting any major CTA rail projects. I pointed out two big ones that he failed to mention.

I mean, all this stuff is displayed pretty prominently on CTA's website and Rahm's been really overzealous about building hype, so I assume the OP is not a Chicagoan.

k1052 May 20, 2013 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronxwood (Post 6134473)
It's a shame this isn't being pursued. I've been observing Chicago from above on google maps, and I've always thought the growth of downtown towards the west was a no-brainer. There's the University of Illinois, Malcolm X College, the united center, etc. and Commuter rail/two CTA lines that service the area for crying out loud! The surface lots, around the united center, scream "Hudson Yards".

The same applies for the areas of the south side nearest to downtown. Much of the building stock in this area is still phenomenal (what's left of it), there's beautiful historic town homes, small apartment buildnigs and highrises. The areas between the University of Chicago and the Loop can and should be connected with proper infill on the empty lots. Considering its proximity to the loop and excellent transit access, I'm in shock as to why Chicago fails to see the opportunity. Chicago could easily triple the size of its core and become a much more dynamic, healthier and competitive city.

It's not a lack of vision rather a lack of demand due to the housing crash and economic downturn. Things have sprung back in the last couple years and the market for small condo developments is heating up quite a bit recently due to a lack of inventory (few new builds and many underwater condo owners renting out since there is good money to be made now). More infill, hopefully more TOD, is definitely on the docket.

Bronxwood May 21, 2013 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 6135144)
It's not a lack of vision rather a lack of demand due to the housing crash and economic downturn. Things have sprung back in the last couple years and the market for small condo developments is heating up quite a bit recently due to a lack of inventory (few new builds and many underwater condo owners renting out since there is good money to be made now). More infill, hopefully more TOD, is definitely on the docket.

Thank you for not taking my observations the wrong way. I'm not really aware with Chicago's development so forgive me for my ignorance. Upon closer inspection I do notice some good changes taking shape. Some old public housing projects are being replaced with new town homes/apartment buildings that better integrate with the neighborhood. Already a good step in the right direction! I particularly like some examples seen near Ellis park on the south side. Although some ground floor retail, along the major streets, wouldn't hurt.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=chica...,,0,-4.62&z=16

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=chica...,,0,-4.55&z=16

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=chica...8,,0,-7.1&z=16

Philadelphia currently offers incentives for new housing development and rehabilitation via its 10 year tax abatement program. This program has helped rehabilitate neighborhoods in and around center city, including some pockets of north Philadelphia. Perhaps Chicago can offer something similar to speed up the process if it hasn't already done so.

the urban politician May 21, 2013 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6135122)
The dude specifically asked if he was forgetting any major CTA rail projects. I pointed out two big ones that he failed to mention.

^ I think you misinterpreted my rolling eyes.

I was rolling eyes at the cost of rebuilding stations (hence I bolded it), not your statement.

ardecila May 21, 2013 3:51 AM

Of course, the high cost is a big problem. I'm glad the Wilson issue is finally being addressed, though. Given the potential high density of Uptown, the need to remove support columns, and the historic Gerber Building, I think the big investment is somewhat reasonable.

95th seems like it's less justified, mainly because the project appeared out of nowhere as a political sop to South Siders who won't be getting their Red Line extension anytime soon. If this were the end of it, and Rahm was honest about the switch, then maybe we could shelve the extension plan for good (the 95th project will solve all the immediate issues) but instead politicians will keep pushing for the extension in the future and it will distract attention from more worthy projects at the core.

Justin_Chicago May 21, 2013 1:00 PM

My hope for the extension of the subway north under the redline/purpleline modernization plan was destroyed after the announcement of the Wilson Ave reconstruction project

I do not understand why the city would waste $100M+ on a Sherdian redline reconstruction project when the modernization plan proposes straightening the track at that stop. However, I am under the belief that the project will get funded within 5 years. If I am wrong, then the project is justified. I would like to see the suburban Walgreens get purchased under eminent domain. Most of the foot traffic is people walking across the parking lot as a shortcut to the sidewalk on Irving Park.

k1052 May 21, 2013 1:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6135428)
If this were the end of it, and Rahm was honest about the switch, then maybe we could shelve the extension plan for good (the 95th project will solve all the immediate issues) but instead politicians will keep pushing for the extension in the future and it will distract attention from more worthy projects at the core.

They surely understand at this point that the extension is a longshot and are getting two (or three if you count the extensive work done to the Green line recently) major projects that will greatly reduce travel time. So in a couple years when other major initiatives that focus on high ridership corridors (northside), downtown, and more infill stations in gentrifing areas there will be a minimal of political squealing from the south side since they just got theirs.

I would like to see Rahm start leaning on Metra to improve it's city services.

ehilton44 May 21, 2013 2:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin_Chicago (Post 6135667)
My hope for the extension of the subway north under the redline/purpleline modernization plan was destroyed after the announcement of the Wilson Ave reconstruction project

I do not understand why the city would waste $100M+ on a Sherdian redline reconstruction project when the modernization plan proposes straightening the track at that stop. However, I am under the belief that the project will get funded within 5 years. If I am wrong, then the project is justified. I would like to see the suburban Walgreens get purchased under eminent domain. Most of the foot traffic is people walking across the parking lot as a shortcut to the sidewalk on Irving Park.

I feel ya on the subway. That would've been great.

I haven't heard of any plans for Sheridan, it's just basic rehab, right? Even if the reconstruction is only 5 years away, that station needs a lot of work. It'll be worth it.

What route do you imagine the el taking? If it went through the walgreens then it would have to turn down Irving Park and then make a very tight turn back to the current tracks at Seminary. This is actually more of a general question, does anybody know how they currently plan on straightening out the track at Sheridan/Irving Park?

emathias May 21, 2013 2:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6135428)
...
95th seems like it's less justified, mainly because the project appeared out of nowhere as a political sop to South Siders who won't be getting their Red Line extension anytime soon. ...

I would guess that the 95th station reconstruction came up when they realized that the dramatic decrease in travel times on the Red Line would (hopefully) dramatically increase the ridership of the south Red Line. A portion of the ridership decline might be due to population decline, however much of the North Side did not gain population nearly as quickly as ridership rose - the ridership gains were largely driven by changes in mindset and demographics, and not raw population increases. Therefore it's reasonable to project that a dramatic increase in service quality will result in an increase in utilization even with the population loss. Standards for providing a high level of service in 2012 are different from when the Dan Ryan branch was first constructed, so if they're planning on dramatic ridership gains in the next few years, it's not illogical to reconstruct the station that at one time accounted for over 25% of the branch ridership.

If the Dan Ryan branch in general and 95th St station specifically "caught up" to the rest of the system in terms of ridership growth, 95th could end up with three times its current ridership numbers in as little as a decade. I don't know about you, but I think that warrants making sure the infrastructure can handle it.

Some supporting facts:
NOTE: Sources include online ridership reports for 2000-2012 numbers and paper report "Rail System Weekday Entering Traffic Trends, PSP-x01013, published 9/16/01 (supercedes PSP-x99021)", plus some tables from an unnamed report for the 1978-1980 numbers

95th St Station annual ridership:
2000___4.4 million annual riders
2012___3.9 million annual riders (-11.4% ridership decline)

95th St Station weekday ridership:
1980___26,450 daily ridership
1990___23,450 daily ridership
2000___13,508 daily ridership
2012___12,705 daily ridership (-6% decline since 2000; -52% decline since 1980)
NOTE: By comparison, Wilson only had 6,500 riders per weekday in 2012, and only had 3,700 riders per November weekday in 1978. If anything, 95th deserves the rebuild far more than Wilson does going strictly off the numbers.

Dan Ryan Branch annual ridership:
2000___16.5 million riders
2012___16.7 million riders (1.2% ridership increase)
NOTE: Ridership gains from 47th St station and north have offset declines or stagnation for stations south of there.

Red Line totals:
2000___61 million riders
2012___83.5 million riders (36.9% ridership increase)
NOTE: 50.1% increase for the non-Dan Ryan portion of the Red Line

CTA 'L' system totals:
2000___147 million annual riders
2012___231 million annual riders (57% ridership increase)
1978___558,250 weekday riders in November
2000___499,173 weekday riders in November
2012___725,355 weekday riders in November (45.3% increase from 2000; 118% increase from 1978)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin_Chicago (Post 6135667)
My hope for the extension of the subway north under the redline/purpleline modernization plan was destroyed after the announcement of the Wilson Ave reconstruction project
...

It was removed from the alternatives analysis list before they announced funding for the Wilson Rehab. I was disappointed it wasn't considered, too, though. A subway there would have solved a number of problems and been faster to Howard from Belmont than the current Purple Express is, and probably been less expensive to maintain (although more expensive to build).

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 6135668)
They surely understand at this point that the extension is a longshot and are getting two (or three if you count the extensive work done to the Green line recently) major projects that will greatly reduce travel time. So in a couple years when other major initiatives that focus on high ridership corridors (northside), downtown, and more infill stations in gentrifing areas there will be a minimal of political squealing from the south side since they just got theirs.

I would like to see Rahm start leaning on Metra to improve it's city services.

I agree on both points, particularly your last one.

I also wish the RTA would begin considering electrification of at least the UP routes.

the urban politician May 21, 2013 3:41 PM

Thanks for putting together that data, Emathias.

I'm quite impressed by the last figures. CTA L ridership has steadily risen over the past 3 decades, but simply exploded from 2000-2012 despite the city's population loss. One could partly attribute the gains from 1978-2000 to the opening of the Orange Line, but that doesn't explain the massive increases from 2000-2012.

In addition, besides the central area, very little of the city saw much of an increase in density despite the ridiculous condo and rental boom that we saw (and are still seeing) due to the drop in household sizes, etc which has been discussed at length before.

Not only that, but this has occurred despite increased gentrification and car ownership throughout the city.

So what gives? Is this growth all occurring at the expense of bus ridership, or is there some other process (paradigm shift, etc) at work?

Busy Bee May 21, 2013 4:17 PM

It's hinky.

emathias May 21, 2013 4:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 6135798)
...
So what gives? Is this growth all occurring at the expense of bus ridership, or is there some other process (paradigm shift, etc) at work?

It would appear that some of that is at the expense of bus ridership, especially prior to 2000. Since 2000, however, both bus and 'L' ridership have grown, albeit 'L' ridership has grown more quickly. The structural funding issues that started in the late 1970s and persisted until the mid-1990s hit both 'L' and bus service - and thus ridership - very hard.

There is definitely a paradigm shift when it comes to attitudes about public transit, though. The CTA today is far better than it was when I first came to Chicago in 1995. The bus service is somewhat less pervasive, but the 'L' service is overall improved despite the elimination of A-B stops so that travel times are somewhat longer for certain routes. Bus condition is far better - riding a bus now is a much more pleasant experience than it was in 1995. Coupled with the rebuilding of stations on the Green, Pink and Brown Lines, extensive track work on the Blue and Pink Lines, re-opening of some shuttered stations and making all stations full-time (instead of having part-time stations), and extension of the Brown Line to the Loop on weekends and later into the nights has made the service level better, particularly in the neighborhoods that have benefited most from gentrification.

Overall ridership for the CTA is still a long way off the peaks due to the crash of bus ridership, but growing the 'L' ridership purely at the expense of bus ridership seems to have finally stopped so hopefully as we move forward they can both grow together.

From this table ('rail' means 'L'):
1990
420 million bus riders
174 million rail riders
604 million TOTAL

1993 - the nadir of 'L' ridership - during Green Line shutdown for reconstruction
327 million bus riders
136 million rail riders
463 million TOTAL

1997 - the nadir of both bus and overall ridership for the CTA
288 million bus riders
151 million rail riders
439 million TOTAL

2000
302 million bus riders
176 million rail riders
479 million TOTAL

2012
314 million bus riders
231 million rail riders - record number for 'L' ridership, breaking a 1928 record
545 million TOTAL

Other interesting stats - for average weekday ridership:
1960___594,000 daily rail riders
1965___575,000 daily rail riders
1970___566,000 daily rail riders
1975___527,000 daily rail riders
1980___575,000 daily rail riders
1985___588,000 daily rail riders
1990___500,000 daily rail riders
1995___420,000 daily rail riders
2000___465,000 daily rail riders
2005___517,944 daily rail riders
2010___649,440 daily rail riders
2012___703.326 daily rail riders

ehilton44 May 21, 2013 4:52 PM

Wow, what happened between 1990-1995 to bus transit? Looking at it as a line chart over time really puts the decline into context -- most of it (from a pure numbers stand point) happened on the bus side.

From a percentage stand point, rail has really pushed the resurgence in CTA ridership. I wonder if BRT will help bring bus ridership back to its peak.

emathias May 21, 2013 5:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ehilton44 (Post 6135893)
Wow, what happened between 1990-1995 to bus transit? Looking at it as a line chart over time really puts the decline into context -- most of it (from a pure numbers stand point) happened on the bus side.

From a percentage stand point, rail has really pushed the resurgence in CTA ridership. I wonder if BRT will help bring bus ridership back to its peak.

The CTA was bleeding money badly - the rise of the automobile and the population loss in the central city, coupled with big moves of jobs from the Loop to the suburbs and collapse of the steel industry was finally catching up with the CTA's service levels and patterns. A consultant was engaged to recommend solutions, and the solution the CTA went with was to eliminate a number of bus routes and greatly cut back service as well. It also eliminated 24-hour service on all but the Red and Blue 'L' lines, but that was proportionally much less damaging to ridership than elimination in bus lines and bus service levels. Crime was also much more of a concern during those years, which discouraged people from riding public transit and impacts bus ridership more because while 'L' stations can be a bit scary, too, often times bus stops are more exposed with even less security.

Finally, inflation in the early 1980s had caused fares to increase dramatically - one year the CTA actually had to increase fares twice in a single year. It took until the mid-1990s for fares to stabilize. Increasing fares at a steady rate that correlates to inflation doesn't hurt ridership too much, but the dramatic fares changes seen before about 1995 hammered ridership, especially bus ridership because buses serve more of the working class and lower-middle class neighborhoods. This happened not just because of inflation, but also due to increases in fuel costs and the elimination of federal operating subsidies. The low fuel prices of the late 1990s were just one thing that helped give the CTA a bit of breathing room to stabilize their budget.

Rizzo May 21, 2013 5:04 PM

I expect some drops in bus ridership due to large population decline in areas that aren't as well served by rail. However, even CTA stops in some of the areas, especially along the green line have experienced tremendous drops but got a huge offset boost by gentrification in North and NW neighborhoods. Remember the above numbers are totals.

VivaLFuego May 21, 2013 5:33 PM

As implied above, 95th station, and the Dan Ryan branch in general, peaked in ridership around the late 70s/early 80s. Demand on the branch was then much more oriented around peak commuters, with the NB peak-hour AM passenger flow from the Dan Ryan the highest in the system (slightly higher than SB through the State Subway on what is now the Red Line), and the many bus routes feeding into 95th accordingly ran at incredibly high weekday rush period frequencies.

At quick glance, emathias' 2000 system ridership figure appears to be the turnstile count rather than total boardings (inclusive of within-station transfers), whereas the 2012 figure is daily boardings. The comparable 2000 figure would roughly be about 590k rail system boardings per average weekday, which is still indicative of a prolonged period of growth in the 2000s.

The 1978 figure looks way off, though --- the old reports I have show a daily turnstile count of over 550k, which actually was the highest annual average in that era. Since there were fewer enclosed transfer points then, the daily boardings total was probably [roughly speaking] in the 600-625k range... though, that was before construction of the 8-mile O'Hare extension and the 9-mile Orange Line, so it was a smaller system.

The years 1977-1985 were very good for CTA ridership between (1) the oil shocks, (2) the lack of any EPA mileage standards for cars before model year 1978, (3) generally declining/stagnant real earnings among the middle & working classes due to high inflation, (4) the 1973 RTA Act providing for very low transit fares, especially in real terms [see #3], and (5) restrictions on Loop parking supply due to non-attainment of federal air quality standards. As of each of those eased/reversed throughout the 1980s, it was a steady downhill for ridership before bottoming out in the early to mid 90s.

ehilton44 May 21, 2013 6:37 PM

Thanks, emathias for both the commentary and the numbers. I was wondering if there was some "spiraling" where there was a decrease in ridership which lead to a decrease in service which lead to an even larger decrease in ridership, etc.

Justin_Chicago May 21, 2013 7:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ehilton44 (Post 6135704)
What route do you imagine the el taking? If it went through the walgreens then it would have to turn down Irving Park and then make a very tight turn back to the current tracks at Seminary. This is actually more of a general question, does anybody know how they currently plan on straightening out the track at Sheridan/Irving Park?

I am not sure what the current plan is, but I picture a straight diagonal line from the walgreens/pet store to the cemetary. Personally, I think it would make more sense to extend the subway to Sheridan and turn the redline into an elevated track at Wilson. This should dramatically increase land values in Lincoln Park and Lakeview.

emathias May 21, 2013 7:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego (Post 6135949)
...
The 1978 figure looks way off, though --- the old reports I have show a daily turnstile count of over 550k, which actually was the highest annual average in that era. Since there were fewer enclosed transfer points then, the daily boardings total was probably [roughly speaking] in the 600-625k range... though, that was before construction of the 8-mile O'Hare extension and the 9-mile Orange Line, so it was a smaller system.
...

Thank you for catching that 1978 issue - I've corrected the number to 558,250 - I was looking at the wrong column. That number includes Full and Reduced cash customers, Transfer passengers and "Other" which according to a footnote includes monthly pass customers, firemen, policemen, CTA employees and other non-fare passengers.

Mr Downtown May 21, 2013 7:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ehilton44 (Post 6136033)
I was wondering if there was some "spiraling" where there was a decrease in ridership which lead to a decrease in service which lead to an even larger decrease in ridership, etc.

Indeed, that's exactly the pattern we were stuck in through the 80s and early 90s. I honestly didn't believe the system could lift itself up by its bootstraps, but the general prosperity in the 90s allowed CTA to bit by bit start restoring service hours. The boom in North Side population of Loop workers sent the Brown Line ridership soaring. It's tripled since 1970 and doubled since 1994.

ardecila May 21, 2013 8:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias (Post 6135723)
If the Dan Ryan branch in general and 95th St station specifically "caught up" to the rest of the system in terms of ridership growth, 95th could end up with three times its current ridership numbers in as little as a decade. I don't know about you, but I think that warrants making sure the infrastructure can handle it.

Is there a reason to expect that ridership will return to its peak? The revival of rail ridership on other parts of the system has come about because of gentrification; the influx of wealthier people into neighborhoods that work in the Loop.

This area of the South Side is seemingly not the ridership powerhouse it once was, both because of population loss and because South Siders do not work in the Loop anymore, to the same extent that they once did.

Wilson, on the other hand, is poised for a large-scale gentrification in coming years that could drive a ridership explosion. Rahm has major plans for the area to again become a major entertainment district, and lots of upwardly-mobile residents are moving in after being priced out of Lakeview. JDL is planning towers at the Maryville site, and other developers are waiting in the wings to do projects large and small. There's also an operational need to rebuild Wilson, since the creation of a new transfer point from Red to Purple will have spillover benefits for the rest of the line and the entire Far North Side.

the urban politician May 21, 2013 8:31 PM

^ Keep in mind that it is not just downtown office workers who work downtown.

All of these new hotels, residences, offices, taverns, restaurants, stores require personnel to service them.

If downtown's population continues to rise, and if efforts to attract more tourists continue to be more successful, that will continue to create opportunities (and demand) for lower income workers.

Heck, that auto repair shop being built on the 1800 block of S Wabash that some of us lament may likely create jobs for some south siders

K 22 May 21, 2013 9:21 PM

Quick question for the crowd:

I've mentioned this before but I want to bring it up again.

For service to the United Center, would you prefer a Damen/Lake Green Line station or a Madison/Paulina Pink Line station?

Both are about the same distance from the arena.

Mr Downtown May 21, 2013 10:20 PM

^As is the existing Blue Line station. I get 1100 feet from Pink Line at Madison, 2000 feet from Green Line at Damen, and 2200 feet from Blue Line at Damen.

ardecila May 21, 2013 11:05 PM

I was hoping for Madison/Paulina, with a mid-block pedestrian connection centered between Madison and Monroe. This could be lined with trees, shops, bars, etc and offer the most pleasant pedestrian connection. The site plan of the new practice facility may not allow this, though.

Rizzo May 22, 2013 12:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K 22 (Post 6136323)
Quick question for the crowd:

I've mentioned this before but I want to bring it up again.

For service to the United Center, would you prefer a Damen/Lake Green Line station or a Madison/Paulina Pink Line station?

Both are about the same distance from the arena.

Paulina and Madison for certain for the reasons ardecila mentioned and also because Madison will become an important transit and development corridor. I was quite surprised to see all the new development around Western and Madison the other day. More than I remember. United Center is the dead space between there when it really should become the focal point.

Decked parking could substantially reduce the arena's footprint and free up space for new development to make that area more attractive. I think United Center is still a modern enough arena to accomodate future state-of-the-art updates that would permit filling in the area around it with new buildings.

paytonc May 22, 2013 2:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ehilton44 (Post 6135893)
Wow, what happened between 1990-1995 to bus transit?

Here's a great article (from 2001) that looks at some of the reasons behind the 1990-1993 meltdown:
http://prospect.org/article/buses-do...p-here-anymore
It's interesting to read it today, because what seemed like exceptionally rosy predictions from that era now seem quaintly underwhelming.

MayorOfChicago May 22, 2013 3:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin_Chicago (Post 6136076)
I am not sure what the current plan is, but I picture a straight diagonal line from the walgreens/pet store to the cemetary. Personally, I think it would make more sense to extend the subway to Sheridan and turn the redline into an elevated track at Wilson. This should dramatically increase land values in Lincoln Park and Lakeview.

That Walgreens was built from the ground up and opened within the last year. I doubt they're going to go tear it down right after the thing opened.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.