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)

CTA Gray Line Jan 13, 2014 9:37 AM

Audit might get badly needed Metra answers
 
http://www.suntimes.com/opinions/248...a-answers.html

Updated: January 13, 2014 2:12AM

On a chilly Metra platform Friday, a passenger exhausted by numerous train delays and cancellations jokingly asked if the rail agency had somehow offended New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie.

It was a bad week for Metra, as stranded commuters at remote depots shivered during lengthy delays and others stood cheek by jowl in downtown stations waiting for a train — any train — to pull out. Signals, switches and locomotives all were breaking down. Lack of funding for maintenance and improvements is part of Metra’s problem — the region’s transit agencies have a $19.8 billion existing backlog in capital needs — but another problem might be the series of leadership scandals that have rocked the agency in the last few years. If the turmoil has taken a toll, that’s going to show up in the system’s performance.....


....We need to learn if Metra is structured to get the best possible use of its resources. An RTA audit could do that.

CTA Gray Line Jan 13, 2014 10:03 AM

Deep freeze points up Metra's hot mess
 
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...664I0084245F5D

Chicagoans take for granted the railways that car-bound commuters in cities such as Los Angeles and Houston envy. For more than a century, a web of rail lines has whisked passengers past Chicago's crowded streets and highways, carrying them to the Loop and back again. The system has its glitches but, for the most part, the city's rails have been a boon for employers and workers alike.....


....From its earliest days, Chicago has been in the business of moving people and stuff around. It's what we do—and, historically, we've done it well. But the state, the city and the federal government need to better fund rail in particular and public transportation in general if Chicago is to remain a strong metropolitan area that can attract jobs and people.

Busy Bee Jan 13, 2014 2:22 PM

Electrification would be a start.

k1052 Jan 13, 2014 3:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 6404489)
Electrification would be a start.

Metra's intransigence is almost legendary at this point. They never do anything until either embarrassed repeatedly by the press or are required by law.

The agency's leadership need to be rebuilt with people who both know operations and aren't terrified of actually having to implement change that would be of benefit to the customers they serve. I would have a hard time suggesting that they receive billions for a major project until that comes to pass.

CTA Gray Line Jan 13, 2014 8:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 6404554)
Metra's intransigence is almost legendary at this point. They never do anything until either embarrassed repeatedly by the press or are required by law.

The agency's leadership need to be rebuilt with people who both know operations and aren't terrified of actually having to implement change that would be of benefit to the customers they serve. I would have a hard time suggesting that they receive billions for a major project until that comes to pass.

PROTECT YOUR FIEFDOM at A N Y and A L L costs......

chiguy123 Jan 14, 2014 7:19 PM

RPM Project: Getting Closer
 
From Curbed (Crains): Link

The CTA's pending reconstruction of the Red and Purple lines north of Belmont Avenue got some good news yesterday. Congress reached agreement on a bill that would spend $120 M on a transit program and the CTA is expected to get a whopping amount of that. There are still hurdles left. Once the bill is passed the CTA will have to negotiate terms with the U.S. Department of Transportation. If it all goes as planned, reconstruction could double el ridership on the 10-mile stretch of track north of Belmont, which is suffering from century-old stations and track structure.

hygge Jan 14, 2014 8:38 PM

CTA Red/Purple Reconstruction
 
[QUOTE=chiguy123;6406202]From Curbed (Crains): Link

The CTA's pending reconstruction of the Red and Purple lines north of Belmont Avenue got some good news yesterday. Congress reached agreement on a bill that would spend $120 M on a transit program and the CTA is expected to get a whopping amount of that. There are still hurdles left. Once the bill is passed the CTA will have to negotiate terms with the U.S. Department of Transportation. If it all goes as planned, reconstruction could double el ridership on the 10-mile stretch of track north of Belmont, which is suffering from century-old stations and track structure.[/QU

Does anybody know where the other 4 billion is coming from to do a complete reconstruction? Doesn't the CTA preferred alternative (best choice imo) cost at least 4b? If this does happen I hope Chicago really gets its urban planning act together or this will just turn into a giveaway to NIMBYs. This could be a huge opportunity for Rahm.

ardecila Jan 14, 2014 9:27 PM

Yeah, $120M is a tiny fraction of this project's cost. The recent stations renovation cost $80M alone.

Even if this is a new yearly appropriation and Chicago gets 2/3 of the amount, it would still take 50 years of appropriations.

CTA has been examining the idea of private funding, though. The north lakefront is Chicago's densest corridor with significant potential for ridership growth. Obviously getting around the local aldermen to allow intense development around stations is a key part of the proposal.

The new Wilson station will be kind of a test. Once all the kinks are worked out, it could be a template to apply on the other RPM stations to reduce costs without the kind of clumsy cost-cutting we saw on the Brown Line.

Wright Concept Jan 14, 2014 11:00 PM

Has there been any rough order costs of how much it would cost to grade separate Clark Junction which is the where the frequency bottleneck is located?

ardecila Jan 15, 2014 3:57 AM

Apparently CTA is only seeking $1.5B from the Core Capacity program... the remainder would likely be grants from New Starts or state funding, or possibly private funding and/or some bonding against revenue increases.

I believe Viva mentioned an estimate for the Clark Junction flyover of $100M, but that was in 2007 dollars. Not only are construction costs higher now but the value of the land in Lakeview is higher as well, so I wouldn't be surprised if it cost $200M. That's setting aside the thorny political issue of building the thing, which would tower 4 stories above a pretty wealthy neighborhood and require numerous demolitions.

I've always thought it would be better to build a "fly-under" with noise walls, but it would basically require closing the alley and blocking off School St in addition to the demolitions.

oshkeoto Jan 15, 2014 4:12 AM

^ Are they expecting increases in appropriations to Core Capacity, or can they borrow against future outlays?

ardecila Jan 15, 2014 6:02 AM

I don't really know enough about the Federal budgeting process to say for sure. FTA makes often funds projects that include disbursements spread across several years, but I don't know what happens when FTA can't fund all of its commitments at the levels it promised. That's all for New Starts though.

Core Capacity is a new program and the RPM program will probably be its first large project. CTA has the option to break RPM down into smaller projects as funding allows, but that will increase costs and lengthen the timeline. The document I linked to indicates that CTA considers Clark Junction to be its biggest constraint, so they may seek Core Capacity funding in 2014 for the flyover alone. Other big constraints include the Sheridan and Loyola curves, so those may be next in line. Rebuilding the existing stations would expand capacity, but the stations aren't really a constraint on ridership or throughput right now - they're not crowded enough.

jpIllInoIs Jan 15, 2014 1:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6406903)
Apparently CTA is only seeking $1.5B from the Core Capacity program... the remainder would likely be grants from New Starts or state funding, or possibly private funding and/or some bonding against revenue increases.

Is it true that the Core Capacity program is a brand new Federal program and Chicago CTA is the only program in the country that fits the guidelines? Thank you Dick Durbin.

le_brew Jan 15, 2014 7:53 PM

Old Post Office for Transit
 
[QUOTE=We need to learn if Metra is structured to get the best possible use of its resources. An RTA audit could do that.[/QUOTE]

Metra should buy the Old Post Office to renovate, and move the south trains to that facility.

ardecila Jan 16, 2014 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs (Post 6407247)
Is it true that the Core Capacity program is a brand new Federal program and Chicago CTA is the only program in the country that fits the guidelines? Thank you Dick Durbin.

It's not that blatant. Plenty of other projects fit the guidelines, including DC's Red Line and numerous projects in NYC/Boston/Philly.

However, Durbin, Lipinski, and other IL congressmen who work with transportation kept CTA in the loop as the law was being written, so CTA has the inside scoop and will be first in line.

The program is intended to provide funding for older transit systems who are reinvesting in their infrastructure, so that New Starts, CMAQ, and other programs don't get bogged down with those costly projects.

CTA Gray Line Jan 16, 2014 1:58 PM

Metra double whammy: Weather delays spur RTA review, legislative hearing
 
http://www.suntimes.com/24975208-761...e-hearing.html


Updated: January 16, 2014 2:22AM

The chairman of the RTA Wednesday ordered a “post-mortem” on weather delays endured by Metra train riders last week, while lawmakers scheduled a hearing on the same topic.

The double-whammy of scrutiny erupted just as Metra had seemed to have put the buzzsaw of controversy surrounding the up to $871,000 buyout of its ex-CEO behind it.


But last week’s Chi-Beria of a cold snap and snowstorm brought Metra complaints to the forefront again......


.......However, weather-related problems lingered into this week, when UP and other riders experienced “shortened” — and packed — trains while winter-damaged cars were being repaired. Even Orseno conceded that when shortened trains are jammed with riders, conductors are unable to maneuver through them to collect fares.

By Wednesday’s evening rush hour, UP was contrite. Conductors on the UP-North line read to passengers an apology about last week’s weather-related delays and this week’s shortened trains that caused crowded cars.

Contributing: Fran Spielman

Email rrossi@suntimes.com

Twitter @rosalindrossi

Vlajos Jan 16, 2014 6:35 PM

Does anyone know why CTA hasn't updated the ridership reports? They used to do it quite regularly.

http://www.transitchicago.com/news_i...ipreports.aspx

emathias Jan 16, 2014 8:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlajos (Post 6409437)
Does anyone know why CTA hasn't updated the ridership reports? They used to do it quite regularly.

http://www.transitchicago.com/news_i...ipreports.aspx

Maybe because the numbers are down. I wonder how much Divvy hurt them.

Vlajos Jan 16, 2014 8:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias (Post 6409627)
Maybe because the numbers are down. I wonder how much Divvy hurt them.

That would be interesting to know. Divvy certainly seems to have been a success.

Wright Concept Jan 16, 2014 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6406903)
I believe Viva mentioned an estimate for the Clark Junction flyover of $100M, but that was in 2007 dollars. Not only are construction costs higher now but the value of the land in Lakeview is higher as well, so I wouldn't be surprised if it cost $200M. That's setting aside the thorny political issue of building the thing, which would tower 4 stories above a pretty wealthy neighborhood and require numerous demolitions.

I've always thought it would be better to build a "fly-under" with noise walls, but it would basically require closing the alley and blocking off School St in addition to the demolitions.

Via Google Maps, that could work the only problem is will the Brown Line train have enough transition time to "fly-under" the Elevated main line structure and make it to the other elevated Ravenswood branch line ROW BEFORE crossing Sheffield?

ardecila Jan 16, 2014 11:24 PM

Yeah, there's plenty.

EDIT: I take this back. Even with a steepish grade of 3%, you'd need 600' to descend the 18' to ground level. You could jack up the mainline for more vertical clearance beneath, but it would have to go up an extra 10'. A flyover is the better solution. Hopefully it can have parapet walls along it to block some of the sound.

Rizzo Jan 17, 2014 1:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wright Concept (Post 6409923)
Via Google Maps, that could work the only problem is will the Brown Line train have enough transition time to "fly-under" the Elevated main line structure and make it to the other elevated Ravenswood branch line ROW BEFORE crossing Sheffield?

It would be a subway under Sheffield.

chiguy123 Jan 17, 2014 4:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlajos (Post 6409437)
Does anyone know why CTA hasn't updated the ridership reports? They used to do it quite regularly.

http://www.transitchicago.com/news_i...ipreports.aspx

Nah...not because of Divvy. I'm sure the Ventra rollout has messed with their calculations, especially with all the free rides given out with the messy roll-out. I'm sure once it's up and running well in the next month or two they'll be back to normal.

Vlajos Jan 17, 2014 4:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiguy123 (Post 6410921)
Nah...not because of Divvy. I'm sure the Ventra rollout has messed with their calculations, especially with all the free rides given out with the messy roll-out. I'm sure once it's up and running well in the next month or two they'll be back to normal.

Really good point, that's likely the reason.

chiguy123 Jan 17, 2014 7:23 PM

Reddit: AMA with Alderman Scott Waguespack (Right Now!)
 
This is happening right now until around 3pm. I'm hoping he answers some questions as to why he's not very supportive of BRT. Anyone have an account on Reddit that wants to give it a go?

http://www.reddit.com/r/chicago/comm...bout_being_an/

denizen467 Jan 18, 2014 7:09 PM

Big article (and lots of reader comments) in Sun Times today about significant concerns with Ashland BRT plan, as identified by Tom Kaeser, longtime but now-retired city traffic consultant.

The article also links to a PDF of the 10-page letter he wrote to CTA describing his analysis.


http://www.suntimes.com/25000242-761...wont-work.html
Engineer: Ashland Avenue transit project won’t work
January 18, 2014

the urban politician Jan 18, 2014 9:32 PM

^. My question is this: if they allow regular CTA buses run on the BRT lane, won't that slow down the entire system and just make it essentially useless?

le_brew Jan 18, 2014 10:56 PM

and what about overnight hours? does the traffic revert back to those lanes?

chicago must always recall the "state street mall" when considering such. plain foolishness.

the urban politician Jan 19, 2014 12:15 AM

^. I think the State St mall was bus only for the entire street, though. Ashland will still have traffic lanes

ardecila Jan 19, 2014 12:32 AM

The problem with design compromises is that each one will lower the overall speed of the buses.

Of the various compromise ideas I've heard, I think opening the lanes to general traffic outside of peak periods is one of the better ones. It won't prevent a big traffic jam during rush hours but it might make everything flow better at off-peak times. Many people use transit for peak-hour commutes anyway, but it's off-peak shopping and leisure trips that are done by car.

On the other hand, I think we need to accept that, yes, drivers will be screwed by this, and that's acceptable. People like this engineer always seem to ignore that people aren't joined at the hip with their cars, and many motorists can become transit users if the speed and convenience are right.

Chi-Sky21 Jan 19, 2014 2:12 PM

I know it would cost A TON to pay the parking meter company for this, BUT, get rid of parking on Ashland and then you have your extra lane back. Also, keep the buses in the curb lane and then you could still allow lefthand turns in some places.

Mr Downtown Jan 19, 2014 4:10 PM

Buses in the curb lane would frequently be blocked by delivery trucks, right-turners, and even local buses on Ashland. It would be no different from the old X9.

le_brew Jan 19, 2014 8:52 PM

mention of the state street mall is not a direct comparison to "brt" but rather to point out where we have wasted money on a failed project. this "ashland brt" shall also waste money and fail.

we need rail, especially where major connections are concerned like more than 16 miles of ashland ave.

ardecila Jan 19, 2014 9:00 PM

The State Street mall wasn't the failure you seem to think it was.

State Street itself was a failure, mostly because it was built on a customer base of middle-class shoppers that abandoned the city in the mid-20th century. A new design for the street couldn't save the businesses that were dying, just as new facades won't revive a dying shopping center in a declining neighborhood. In cities that didn't see abandonment like Chicago, the pedestrian mall concept worked pretty well (Denver, Charlottesville, etc). That's not to mention the scores of European cities that successfully pedestrianized.

If you're scared that Ashland BRT will lead to blight and failing businesses, don't be. The neighborhoods along Ashland north of Archer are thriving, growing areas that people want to live in. Better transit access will only enhance this desirability, and the business community will adapt to the new traffic situation by adjusting to welcome transit riders, cyclists, and pedestrians.

le_brew Jan 19, 2014 9:42 PM

actually, the city deemed it a failure, not me, therefore they dug it up. state street itself is not a failure, in fact it began to thrive again with the demise of the mall concept and it will yet again rebound given time. your points about the successful downtown pedestrian malls are noted, although some of those markets are quite smaller. ashland avenue is a major n/s thruway. my worry is that if this goes through, the traffic nightmares will cause a re-take, and we'll end up doing the same as with state street, dig it up.

my point is this: ashland was considered major enough to be part of a circle line rail concept not that long ago, and ashland should be considered for something connecting with rail today. i'm not an advocate for "brt" you may guess, especially on a major north-south corridor. why not consider western avenue, if it must be. this would serve to be a more viable option for the experiment.

Buckman821 Jan 19, 2014 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by le_brew (Post 6413508)
actually, the city deemed it a failure, not me, therefore they dug it up. state street itself is not a failure, in fact it began to thrive again with the demise of the mall concept and it will yet again rebound given time. your points about the successful downtown pedestrian malls are noted, although some of those markets are quite smaller. ashland avenue is a major n/s thruway. my worry is that if this goes through, the traffic nightmares will cause a re-take, and we'll end up doing the same as with state street, dig it up.

my point is this: ashland was considered major enough to be part of a circle line rail concept not that long ago, and ashland should be considered for something connecting with rail today. i'm not an advocate for "brt" you may guess, especially on a major north-south corridor. why not consider western avenue, if it must be. this would serve to be a more viable option for the experiment.


This feels like Jarta's cousin who lives in a condo on Ashland.

Whenever somebody argues against BRT because it should have been on Western, you can tell they are really just stretching. The two streets share a lot of similarities. If it would work on one it would work on the other. Aside from the fact that you are personally invested in Ashland and not Western, what makes Western a better choice? The cost differences are immaterial. Please recognize that at some point, a choice simply had to be made. We obviously can't build them both right now.

le_brew Jan 20, 2014 2:10 AM

where i live is not a factor, but i assure you it is not where you imply. i'm against "brt" as a concept in any case outside of the loop. but, matter of fact is that western ave. is wider at most, if not all points.

and actually, did you read this article? for the record, i did: Engineer: Ashland Avenue transit project won’t work
http://www.suntimes.com/25000242-761...wont-work.html

ardecila Jan 20, 2014 2:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by le_brew (Post 6413508)
actually, the city deemed it a failure, not me, therefore they dug it up.

This was an aesthetic choice more than a functional one. Daley the Younger was in love with the Gilded Age look and installed fancy lampposts and black wrought iron all over the city. Shopping malls around the country installed historic-looking elements at that time. Aesthetics are important in shopping areas, as mall owners know very well. Daley could have kept the street bus-only while installing the fancy lampposts, and we'd have the same success today.

Quote:

it began to thrive again with the demise of the mall concept and it will yet again rebound given time.
No, it began to thrive after Broadway shows and Millennium Park lured suburbanites back to the Loop. It has continued to grow as people moved into the downtown area and needed places to shop.

BWChicago Jan 20, 2014 2:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6413787)
This was an aesthetic choice more than a functional one. Daley the Younger was in love with the Gilded Age look and installed fancy lampposts and black wrought iron all over the city. Shopping malls around the country installed historic-looking elements at that time. Aesthetics are important in shopping areas, as mall owners know very well. Daley could have kept the street bus-only while installing the fancy lampposts, and we'd have the same success today.

There were more problems than that though. The ultra-wide sidewalks and lack of movement sucked up all the energy from the street, for one. And was there really much advantage transit-wise to having it dedicated to buses there?

Baronvonellis Jan 20, 2014 7:53 PM

I think the lack of left turns will snarl up traffic on the side streets near ashland. That is a big mistake. I mostly drive on Ashland off peak for shopping trips. It might force me to Western or Damen, which would slow those streets more.

ardecila Jan 21, 2014 2:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BWChicago (Post 6413805)
There were more problems than that though. The ultra-wide sidewalks and lack of movement sucked up all the energy from the street, for one. And was there really much advantage transit-wise to having it dedicated to buses there?

Fair enough. The Denver design reserves a wide strip in the median for landscaping and seating, while the Chicago design was sorta windswept.

I don't know if the sidewalks lacked energy. My sense is that they were just as busy as today during daytime, while they appeared vast and empty at night, enhanced by the lack of auto traffic. But State's sidewalks today are still kinda sleepy at night, especially south of Madison. Other pedestrian malls and plazas are equally sparse at night, but we don't consider them failures.

My point is that the closure of the street didn't kill State Street businesses - racial change and white flight did. The design probably could have used some tweaking, but Daley's redesign threw the baby out with the bathwater by restoring the street to traffic.

BWChicago Jan 23, 2014 1:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6415082)
I don't know if the sidewalks lacked energy. My sense is that they were just as busy as today during daytime, while they appeared vast and empty at night, enhanced by the lack of auto traffic.

Just as busy but diluted over a much larger area - that's the lack of energy.

jpIllInoIs Jan 23, 2014 2:30 PM

South Shore Expansion efforts
 
I give Rep. Pete Visclosky a lot of credit for pushing this boulder up the mammoth hill of Indiana State politics. This time the effort is advocating an incremental approach with stages of expansion of the south shore line starting with Dyer extension.

NWI Indiana Times article January 18, 2014 11:00 pm • By Keith Benman keith.benman@nwi.com, (219) 933-3326
South Shore proponents lay tracks for expansion
In a renewed push to extend the South Shore commuter rail line, proponents are touting its unparalleled economic development potential and saying no new taxes will be needed to build it.

Their enthusiasm is boosted in part by a new study commissioned by the South Shore's operator that finds an extension to Dyer would result in 5,600 new daily riders hauling about $147 million per year in paychecks back to Northwest Indiana from Chicago.

That means extending the South Shore to Dyer, and then to Lowell and Valparaiso..The 8-mile extension to Dyer would include new stations to be built in Hammond and in the Munster/Dyer area. Five trains per day would go into Chicago and five would come back. The first trains could be running by 2023.

j korzeniowski Jan 23, 2014 4:24 PM

well, the good news is everyblock is back.

the bad news, well. . .

LouisVanDerWright Jan 23, 2014 9:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs (Post 6418924)
I give Rep. Pete Visclosky a lot of credit for pushing this boulder up the mammoth hill of Indiana State politics. This time the effort is advocating an incremental approach with stages of expansion of the south shore line starting with Dyer extension.

NWI Indiana Times article January 18, 2014 11:00 pm • By Keith Benman keith.benman@nwi.com, (219) 933-3326
South Shore proponents lay tracks for expansion
In a renewed push to extend the South Shore commuter rail line, proponents are touting its unparalleled economic development potential and saying no new taxes will be needed to build it.

Their enthusiasm is boosted in part by a new study commissioned by the South Shore's operator that finds an extension to Dyer would result in 5,600 new daily riders hauling about $147 million per year in paychecks back to Northwest Indiana from Chicago.

That means extending the South Shore to Dyer, and then to Lowell and Valparaiso..The 8-mile extension to Dyer would include new stations to be built in Hammond and in the Munster/Dyer area. Five trains per day would go into Chicago and five would come back. The first trains could be running by 2023.

Nice, how close will the Munster stop be to Three Floyds? The entire extension is basically worth it if it opens up Dark Lord Day and the brewery to transit. Dark Lord day attracts crowds numbering in the five figures and obviously everyone is there to drink which makes the whole designated driver thing a problem. Same with people driving out there to patronize the brewery.

kolchak Jan 23, 2014 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis (Post 6414566)
I think the lack of left turns will snarl up traffic on the side streets near ashland. That is a big mistake. I mostly drive on Ashland off peak for shopping trips. It might force me to Western or Damen, which would slow those streets more.

Or you could take the new, faster Ashland bus :)

I think the short term effect of increased traffic on certain streets is just part of a very smart long term goal to increase public transit options and use in the city and therefore ultimately reduce Chicagoans automobile dependence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 6413157)
Buses in the curb lane would frequently be blocked by delivery trucks, right-turners, and even local buses on Ashland. It would be no different from the old X9.

Berlin, Germany is a great example of the success of dedicated bus lanes. But they do tend to run on the right side. When passing delivery trucks or other stopped vehicles they drive around them.

le_brew Jan 24, 2014 6:05 PM

Gazette article on Ashland BRT from early Dec.
 
Community discusses Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) at local meeting
January 3, 2014 By Patrick Butler

http://www.gazettechicago.com/index/...local-meeting/

kolchak Jan 25, 2014 4:28 AM

Berlin dedicated lanes -

Passing a stopped truck blocking the right dedicated lane -
http://i44.tinypic.com/dfk6yt.jpg
photo from signalarchiv.de

Bus lane on left side -
http://i40.tinypic.com/8x6iae.jpg
photo from www.autobild.de

They work really well in that city - and Berlin is similar sized to chicago with similar density patterns.

untitledreality Jan 25, 2014 5:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 6419787)
Nice, how close will the Munster stop be to Three Floyds? The entire extension is basically worth it if it opens up Dark Lord Day and the brewery to transit. Dark Lord day attracts crowds numbering in the five figures and obviously everyone is there to drink which makes the whole designated driver thing a problem. Same with people driving out there to patronize the brewery.

The Dyer Amtrak station is 2 miles away, should serve as a good guesstimate.

untitledreality Jan 25, 2014 5:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by j korzeniowski (Post 6419131)
well, the good news is everyblock is back.

the bad news, well. . .

Its like the Chicago Tribune message boards on cocaine.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:38 PM.

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