Well I like to post compliments & complaints about the CTA in this thread and I'll post a compliment today. :) It only took me 20 minutes to ride the red line from Monroe to Addison yesterday evening. I got on the train at 8:51pm and got off at 9:11pm. Considering the slow zone is still in place between Clark & Division and Armitage, a 20 minute commute is an impressive feat. :tup:

Here we go agian. Does Gov. Ass Clown realize that he hurts more Illinois residents than helps with his stupid idoligies. Don't get me wrong, I am in favor of the Seniors Ride Free Program, but damnit put your money where the mouth is; and give proirity to seniors with low fixed incomes if the state doesn't have the funds for a full program. He better not sign that bill for disabled folks to ride free too. A discount fare is better than no bus at all, which is now once agian a very real issue. Now the rest of us all must suffer, including the very population he was trying to help for his own political gain.

I AM SO F***ING PISSED right now. Can we pleased send this crook to jail yet? Find something, anything to put him away. :hell:



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

ON the Truman Park and Ride, well the land was being used for parking already; and the Wilson Station should be seeing an increase in boarding due to Wilson Yards now moving forward. Plus I expect every park n' ride space to filled on every day a Cubs game is held, because at $2 to park + train fair, this is competively priced to lure families comming in by car from the north and northwest suburbs. The scarrated lots near Wriggley are what, $15-$20 for Game day parking (I really don't know, I don't drive). Montrose is also eaiser to navigate on Game Days than Addison.

I've been telling all my friends for about a year now that a massive party will be held at my place the Friday night following any combination of: the indictment/impeachment/conviction/sentencing/incarceration of Blagojevich. I dream of a courtroom scene wherein the jury foreman reads the verdict, then presses a button triggering Kool & the Gang - "Celebration" and confetti streamers while the entire state erupts in joy on the next new state holiday.

I thought that last one was incineration at first ....

I hope that if the RTA does have to raise fares they name the increase. You know, like ball parks get names or some concerts get names or "brought to you by" subtitles ...

This RTA fare increase brought to you by Governor Rod Blagojevich. Additional lack of funding courtesy of the Illinois House and Senate.

Tokyo currently has several rail lines which use standee-only cars, including the Yamanote Line, Yokohama Line, and Tokyu Den'en Toshi Line. At most, it is only two cars in each consist (out of 8 to 11 cars total, depending on the line) that are configured to operate this way, and usually for only the morning commute period, which has the highest loads. The cars actually contain seats, but they are the "fold-up" type and are locked until 9:30 or 10:00 in the morning, at which point the operator unlocks the seats with a switch he controls and the seats become usable.

The headways on these lines are on the order of 2 to 2.5 minutes, so any delays can blow up quickly. Since the standee-only cars carry more people than the average car, in order to get people in and out effectively without impacting dwell time at stations, the cars are also configured with six doors on a side vs. the usual four. The cars are usually easily identifiable, and are given special branding such as stickers above the doors to distinguish them from the other cars. The cars always occupy the same position in the consist (i.e., cars 7 and 10 on the Yamanote Line, cars 5 and 8 on the Tokyu Den'en Toshi Line, etc.) so that passengers always know which cars will be standee-only. The position in the consist is usually chosen based on which cars have the most crowding, usually coinciding with the location of stairs, escalators, etc. at terminal stations. Vertical floor-to-ceiling poles are installed along the middle of the car a la Hong Kong or Shanghai (these are not provided in the regular stock), in addition to the usual grips and bars.

JR East 204 Series six-door car on the Yokohama Line, in standee-only configuration
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...04standing.jpg

Inside a six-door car on the Yamanote Line as the seats are unlocked
posted by pgstones on Flickr
• Video Link

The cars certainly help to relieve the crush loading and are useful if you are carrying big luggage or other items, as there is more wiggle room than a standard car.


As for how this relates to Chicago, I question whether running standee-only cars is the most effective way to increase capacity in the short run. It would seem that a better solution would be to change as much of the fleet from transverse seating to longitudinal seating as possible, although having a few cars lose all seats may sound better to the average rider than having all cars lose a few seats. Another issue would be getting people in and out of the cars--a third door certainly wouldn't hurt. And I don't know what they mean by "standee-only," but hopefully they aren't removing seats completely. Since the CTA has high peaked demand, there shouldn't necessarily be a loss of seats outside of the rush hour period.

Nevertheless, it is an interesting idea, and I think it's great that Chicago is trying out creative solutions to maximize their capacity given all the constraints on the system. If only BART could get a little creative over here in the Bay Area...

I am always surprised at how narrow the 'L' trains are.

They're narrow, but not quite as narrow as the IRT lines (similar vintage).

Thanks!!!

How much capacity is really added with standing only cars? I mean, I'm guessing we're only talking about a few more people per each car, right? It just doesn't seem like seats take up that much space, plus considering that people are actually sitting in those seats, thus it's not exactly a dead space

This question has nothing to do with seatless cars, Blago or the RTA. After comparing some 'L' car pictures and other cities rapid transit cars I've noticed that CTA cars have that cow-catching scoop thing completely covering the wheels from the front. What is this called and why do we have it yet other systems, i.e. New York do not?

If you'd bothered reading my posts you also would have noted that I said there are systems that have convertible/foldable seats to convert cars to standing room only.

^ Viva, that would be a great idea for Chicago.

On another note, though, I'm assuming the CTA would remove these seats in such a way that they could easily be put back in, no?

It is a snow blade. Snow piles up fast where the trains run over solid ground/embankments rather than much of it falling through the elevated structure.

I had read your post, but for some reason no one including CTA knew which ones. I think I asked that. An I know that CTA will finally put overhead bars/straps in. Never understood their apprehension to having them. For tall people the ones on the back of the seats only helps to throw us off kilter when the lurches happen.

Moving on to funding again...lol

Okay, so this isn't really a Chicago transportation development, but it's a cool photo.

This is Obama's 757 being painted at Midway Airport
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3277/...4abd3dec73.jpg
Photo credit: Rob Olewinski

........a 757 can land at Midway ???????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ok......let's just add "incineration" !!!!!!!! :D

Change we can believe in...

Yeah... ATA flew them for a number of years. I do believe it's the largest plane allowed, though.

I love the CTA. they do what they can at all times to let people know they care and they are trying. I might get pissed off at delays and stuff every now and then, but the fact they are trying their hardest makes me feel very good about the CTA

Today's Crains:
Transportation system needs modern-day Daniel Burnham

Just the lead-in below, nothing too exciting in the whole thing, mostly just a call for inspired leadership.

bustracker looks much much better, good job google.

according to the linked article:

Up to about 90 riders can sit or stand in each car on most standard CTA trains. By yanking out seats and eliminating the aisle, an additional 25 to 50 passengers could be crammed into each car, officials estimated.

^ So we're talking about a capacity increase of roughly 50 to 100 people per train. That's not too shabby, esp considering that it's not costing the agency a penny

is there a way i can read this whole article legally without paying for it?

Yeah, the Library———or a chain book store:)

Don't bother. It's a confused and utterly logic-free op-ed piece (not an article) saying Burnham wrote about transportation needs in the Plan of Chicago, and the railroads ignored him and did what they wanted to, and Chicago has transportation needs today, so who's the next Burnham?

And the guy knows nothing about Burnham to begin with. The parks plan didn't result in Grant Park, and the boulevards plan didn't produce Michigan Avenue.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...0,440746.story

Done four days early, not to shabby.

Last updated: July 23, 2008 10:00am
CTA Expecting $100M in Commercial Development
By Gina Kenny News Tip? | Email | Print | Reprints

CHICAGO-The Chicago Transit Authority has hired Jones Lang LaSalle, based here, to increase revenue for the transit authority by adding concessions and retail to some station locations, as well as possibly redeveloping other stations and CTA-owned property. The term of the $4.2 million contract is five years.

^ This article also mentions the CTA looking for TOD opportunities. Is there any chance in hell that the CTA/Jones Lang Lasalle could actually function as a real estate developer, ie building an apartment/office building on their own property? Just frivolously speculating...

I'm sure there's a possibility, because CTA as a political entity means politicians could make it use its cash reserves, future capital grant income, and resulting bonding power to invest a ton of equity in questionable grandiose projects that sound cool but have serious deficiencies in their financial plan (COUGH block 37 COUGH).

Given the financial position of both the operating and capital budgets, CTA should probably stick to maximizing the use of its existing real estate assets, and fighting tooth and nail to ensure development around stations is friendliest to transit usage, e.g. FAR/unit density bonuses to developers who contribute X amount to support local station facility maintenance/upgrade, fighting on parking ratios, etc. In terms of CTA joint developments, that probably means things like stationhouse redevelopment, air rights (over tracks or yards...i.e. think of a hotel over the Midway yard), etc.

Air rights, baby, air rights!!! Now we're talking.

I'd be pretty surprised if something doesn't happen with Midway Yard, especially in light of leasing the concession to operate the airport. A low-rise hotel with some modest conference space, directly on site would be a significant boost for the airport, and the rail yard is very underutilized and very conveniently located.

That said, I'm not familiar with the intricate details of the site, so it could actually be an incredibly complicated and possibly uneconomical endeavour.

I was mystified that the Dept of Aviation put the new parking garage on 55th instead of building above Midway yard.

I wonder if Midway yard includes space for column footings between tracks or if that will require millions to retrofit.

Well, from thousands of feet in the air, it looks plausible at least over a large portion of the southeastern part of the yard site where you'd want to build anyway:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...=18&iwloc=addr

Don't know what the utility situation is like though, and obviously there would be a fairly low height limit due to the whole airport thing being next door.

Clearly there would also need to be yet more modifications to the parking garage; maybe the opportunity could be seized to also improve and more coherently integrate the connection between the L station and the terminal.

This is a little off-topic, but still transportation-related:

Has anybody watched Wrecked on the Speed channel? The first episodes were shown earlier this week - it centers around O'Hare Towing, and the extreme/dangerous accidents they have to clean up around Chicagoland.

In the second episode, they have to haul away a truck that's lodged itself on Lower Wacker Drive - that was pretty freakin' sweet.

Watching it, I guess I get to see a whole other side to the Chicago expressway system that I almost never see when I use it - accidents and the tow trucks that clean up afterwards. You have to respect these guys, especially since they're basically the "Grabowski" type of Chicagoans.

Steve Goodman would disagree...

I'm not very well-versed in Steve Goodman, which is ironic (see my location).

My dad's always been a big fan, though - maybe I'll have to borrow some CDs (LPs?) from him.

I can't beleive Obama and Durbin are being obstructionist on this.. :rolleyes:

^ Sounds like by and large, a reasonable solution can be hammered out. Projected overall accidents actually decrease (... a good thing, right Dick and Barry?) but are redistributed.

It sounds like the number of 'mandatory' grade separations is pretty manageable, so between CN and the municipalities it should be doable.

He wrote a pretty well-known song called Lincoln Park Pirates about the Lincoln Towing company.

Like the article said, there are 15 grade crossings where mitigation is "strongly recommended". The mitigation doesn't have to be a grade separation, though. The Draft EIS outlined 8 or 9 other strategies, which would be much less expensive.

They aren't necessarily the busiest roads, either, which surprised me - often they occur when the railroad runs parallel to a major road, and a minor perpendicular road crosses them both. The traffic queue on the perpendicular road, waiting to turn or cross on the major road, would block the grade crossing, so mitigation is recommended.

Just to let everyone know, Chicago-l.org has an update on the new Howard terminal for anyone who hasn't seen it yet. It's looks OK, much better than the rats nest that we called a station before. Glassy and modern, slightly cheepo/office parkish modern though, but much better than faux terribleness that is the bus station/parking deck next door. Take a look.

Wasteful El stations
 

This has probably been mentioned many times, but where is the push to get rid of some of the wasteful el stations. The loop seems to have a number of redundant stations, most notably the State/Lake station with Randolph and Wabash around the corner. This slows travel time and costs money the CTA doesn't have. Perhaps there is a need for the station for transfers, but it really seems that R/W station is close enough for all that.

There are other examples, especially in the loop.

This is an excellent question and I'm curious if anyone in here has any knowledge or opinion about the same concept with BUS STATIONS.

Riding the bus I always got the sense there are way too many stations. It makes riding it so slow. But checking out the CTA Bus Tracker this weekend just confirmed this notion as I witnessed that local routes, like my #77 Belmont, have a bus station LITERALLY EVERY 1-2 BLOCKS!

Has removing a good half or even more of the current bus stations to make travel faster ever been proposed, or will it ever be? There is no need to have a bus station along a route every 800 feet! It not only wastes time but I imagine a lot of money.

For several decades, the long term "plan" has been to have two stations on each leg of the loop. As of a couple years ago, the plan was to create a Washington/Wabash station to replace Madison and Randolph.

Elsewhere in places with close station spacing (e.g. the North Main), of course CTA used to operate skip-stop A/B service. This topic was beaten to death a few pages back.

Don't think that the transit planners are unaware of this. In fact, this issue comes up every few years when CTA is looking at cost-cutting to make operations more efficient and more reliable. Back in the early 90s, it was a very big deal when CTA finally "won" and was able to remove bus stops every other block through River North along Michigan, State, Clark, and LaSalle...and of course back then there weren't even that many residents being served by those stops.

Incidentally, the interests, desires, and factor weights (in terms of travel time, transit access time, etc.) of healthy 20-somethings are dramatically different than those of the elderly, moderately-disabled, and the aldermen they lobby.

you fuckers better get this right. hell, i'd pay taxes to the CTA...i have a pass my wallet continually.

Wasteful seems interesting choice of words. Does anyone have last years gate counts for each EL station. Let's see what the daily waste of people who use the stops is.

I would just be happy if they would just reverse the Purple line again in the loop. That would shave 15 minutes off of my commute.

^ Ahem, before u get too touchy, I use that stop (state/lake)everyday... yes, lots of ppl do... I have no problem with walking an extra block to randolph if it saves the city from wasting money. Not a big deal for me, why is it one for you? I'd like to know.

By cutting that station, we don't have to create a new one as these other plans seem to suggest.

Also, I'm looking through the thread from now to catch up on peoples thoughts regarding this. Thanks Viva.