Why on earth not? The environmental reasons for doing it are if anything more compelling when the land won't be available for public use.

I see a road expansion like this as being a little bit of a moral hazard problem... People move into an area that doesn't have the infrastructure to support them because they know they can get partially bailed out with a new road. New interstates encourage sprawl regardless of whether they lead or trail the new development.

^ a toll road largely avoid that moral hazard, as the people whose presence necessitates the road would be the ones paying for its construction and maintenance.

Yeah, it would be best to build it as a tollway, although obviously toll roads don't make drivers internalize all the costs they make everybody incur. Just wondering, would the construction of a toll road in this case be financed exclusively by a special tax in Lake County?

ardecila,

nice find on the extension map.

I agree that the actual road construction itself doesn't affect a great deal of natural areas, it is the secondary development that i'm very concerned with.

when the 355 extension was a year or so away from completion i got to see some of the HUGE big box retail developments that are proposed for anything within a mile of a new on-ramp/off-ramp. We are talking about some serious swathes of land, like 100's of acres turned into asphalt prairies. Considering the very high volume of traffic on 53, the pressure on the nature preserves and any surrounding land owners is going to be severe. And developers are going to be ruthless at trying to gain control of that land.

And once one goes down, they all follow...

The fact that the only highway is the tristate has done a very good job at keep growth contained at the east end. Compare how sprawled out the west suburbs and southwest suburbs are along 90, 88, 55. Because of the lack of an expressway, rand road is a pretty good western border for typical suburban development in the area. Once you move more north and west the land becomes quite "natural" If you build this extension, all of a sudden the chain o' lakes area becomes threatened for harmful development.

The best way to contain development is to make it difficult to expand. I always thought that san francisco was a decent example of this. (Mountains to the east keep development compact.) I kind of wish we had a nice western border to the chicago area that we could say, definitively, "no development beyond this point".

For now, keep growing more dense near the tristate and let the west lake county area be.

Well, in an ideal world, a tollroad authority might pay some sort of "offset" in compensation for environmental impacts, the cost of which is then passed on the tollroad users whose tolls also pay for construction, maintenance, policing, etc. Aside from the environmental offsets, we aren't too far from this (Illinois Tollway ISTHA does, I believe, contract the Illinois State Police, for example, and receives no state tax revenue).

Presumably, land acquisition and road construction would be financed by a bond issue backed by future expected toll revenues, i.e. like most toll roads. Land acquisition via eminent domain or otherwise, along with necessary easements and so on, would be authorized by the various levels of government via a concession (just like how the Ls were built by private operators, way back when). The beauty of toll roads, toll rails ("transit"), etc: no tax involved, and heck, the government can even make money by selling the concession.

To the extent there would be cross-subsidization, it would be by other users of the same toll road system. Again in an ideal world, the toll road entity would only pursue expansion where it would improve their overall balance sheet, thus avoiding any excess capacity that would drain maintenance expense and necessitate higher tolls, thereby lowering demand, etc. That is to say, the tollway authority would generally have the same incentive as its users in avoiding too much cross-subsidization..

Of course, ISTHA's board is packed with political hacks, which is why tolls are historically set too low to even properly maintain the system let alone expand it. In practice, ISTHA is only marginally better than the state and federal highway systems (conveyances of pork) due to its political nature of having a politicized board and having a monopoly on road-privatization (with exception of the Skyway), but I'll take the progress where available.

^^^^ myself being a generally anti-high capacity road way person, i actually have to agree with you.

I think your key statement is when you say "the toll road entity would only pursue expansion where it would improve their overall balance sheet" Which would translate into building in areas where traffic already exists, rather than building in areas and then creating traffic.

If all of our highway system was built with this idea in mind, they would be the drain on our inner cities that they are now. With the politically motivated system behind highway construction, new roadways are built where they are politically desired. Thus they end up being the "first ones in" to places that have no business having a roadway of that capacity.

If our highway system were built as a more reactive system (high capacity roads get built where high demand exists) instead of a proactive system (high capacity roads get built to try to create demand) we probably wouldn't have the mess we have now.

Since politics isn't going to go away anytime soon, though, i find it easier just to hate all highways. :)

Decibel point: Does L pose risk to hearing?

This is just an assumption on my part, but I'm thinking the CTA rail system is probably the loudest in the country? I'm not exactly sure how SEPTA and the MBTA compare, but it's hard for me to imagine any other system in this country being louder than the L.

I don't see at all how the 53 expansion is proactive. It addresses existing traffic needs in an already heavily-trafficked corridor, running from the existing terminus of the grade-separated portion of 53 to the Libertyville/Gurnee area and north.

The development is ALREADY there. Every time I drive down 83 or 176 or Milwaukee or Peterson, I see more strip malls, subdivisions, industrial parks, and even huge Bolingbrook-style warehouses being built. The fact is that development has progressed in this part of Lake County without any major highways. For an even more extreme example, look at McHenry County. Absolutely no grade-separated highways of any kind (except a short stretch of I-90 in the SW corner), yet development proceeds at a frenzied pace.

What's needed to reduce sprawl is not to halt suburban freeway construction - nothing of the sort. It requires either a strong regional planning drive with urban growth boundaries or something similar (like in Portland), or a major shift in the economics of exurban construction that makes this stuff unprofitable. Halting freeway construction doesn't change the economics enough to halt development, but instead increases smog and travel times and reduces quality of life.

You talk about highways being reactive - infrastructure projects are pretty much always reactive now. The days of empty highways running through cornfields are coming to an end, despite the best wishes of Dennis Hastert. For some real change, we need what VivaLFuego suggested - a highly proactive highway plan that encourages dense nodes around exits and maybe even some form of bus transit.

Take a look here for some of the development that's planned in Northern Lake County, with or without the 53 extension. Lindenhurst Village Green and Lakemoor Village Centre create walkable downtown districts for their respective communities, and Wildflowers/Tall Grass at Prairie Grove are more walkable style developments a little further west.

^ Right. And ISTHA, in theory, would only pursue building the IL-53 extension if the expected traffic demand at the expected toll charge could support the interest on the bond issue to construct the thing. The quasi-political nature of ISTHA makes that an unreliable proposition however: witness the 1980s and 1990s, with tolls kept too low and revenue used for building I-355 rather than maintaining the existing system to the point where it all crumbled and was at full capacity (necessitating the current ~$5 billion program).

My oft-repeated line is that I'm all for cars, roadways, off-street parking, etc. (being a driving enthusiast myself) as long as drivers pay the cost of their actions. Heck, shopowners can even bundle off-street parking if they choose. The problem is when public policy either encourages or outright mandates that vehicle operation and storage be underpriced and therefore overconsumed, as is the case throughout the US. Transit gets a very decent mode share for trips with a tollroad component and/or substantial off-street parking charges (when a transit option is available of course), both of which trigger major elasticity in auto demand. That holds even in uncongested conditions. And in congested conditions, we now have the technology to do variable tolling, which opens a world of possibilities (and by all means, variable fares based on load levels can and should be applied to transit systems as well).

I think it would be best to build it as a trollway...
:shrug: :shrug: :shrug:

I agree there is development already taking place but expanding highways into this area would only be a boon to the consumption of open land. Certainly if you talk about areas to the east of 83 including vernon hills, libertyville, buffalo grove, mundelein, there is plenty of suburban development. But if you look at other expressways and the distance they influence development, a route 53 extension would be devestating. Those areas that i just listed currently exist because of their proximity to 94. I don't mind so much the pockets of crystal lake, mchenry, cary or fox river grove ... but if we build this extension, at least now, i think it would undermind any sense of open space preservation and probably hurt those villages efforts to develop a downtown as retail developers fill in the unused land with big boxes.

Also, from the larger picture, i think it would be wise to at least wait and see what gas prices are going to do to our growth patterns. I have a gut feeling that even with a 53 extension, outlying places like a fox lake, wauconda, or lake barrington are going to become less desirable due to the excessive driving distances required to live there. I just think there are much better areas to spend highway dollars than building this stretch of road. (like fix the potholes on LSD or my own personal express lane on the kennnedy, or better yet, an underground, express version of sheridan road :yes: )

It's about time some of the south side lines shared in the fun derailments.


CTA Green Line train derails on Chicago's South Side
Injuries reported, but not thought serious
By Dan P. Blake | Tribune reporter

Digg Del.icio.us Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo Print Reprints Post comment Text size: A CTA Green Line train derailed on Chicago's South Side Wednesday morning, injuring about 10 people, but none of the injuries was believed serious, fire officials said.

The derailment, which involved the front two cars on a southbound four-car train, occurred shortly after 10 a.m. at a junction near 59th Street and Prairie Avenue, officials said. The 59th Street junction is where Green Line trains switch to head either to the Ashland/63rd stop or the East 63rd/ Cottage Grove branch of the line.

The derailment occurred on elevated tracks, but the cars did not fall to the street.

Thirty-one people were examined on the scene, said Fire Department spokesman Larry Langford, but only 10 were taken to hospitals. Of those, seven were in good condition and three were in fair condition.

A short distance from the tracks, fire crews set up triage areas where paramedics evaluated passengers. In one of those areas, authorities were seeing at least a dozen passengers.

Those who were in need of medical attention were then being taken to area hospitals.

Service was suspended on the Green Line between the two southern branch line terminuses of the Green Line and the 35th- Bronzeville-IIT stop, according to the CTA. A bus shuttle is in place in both directions.

At the spot of the derailment, the first car of the four-car train appeared headed in one direction with the three other cars in another. The first car landed on southbound tracks while the other three were on the westbound segment

^^^ Lovely. :no:

And comparatively new trackage, too. In most countries, a criminal investigation would be opened into this. It's the kind of serious tone that I'll be missing here.

Judging by the location, it looks like it was probably a signal or switching problem rather than bad track per se... The Tribune footage shows the front car on the southbound tracks and the other cars on the tracks splitting off to the west.

Weren't the signals and switches renovated along with the track...?

Edit:

Authorities Wednesday afternoon blamed the accident on operator error.

The train derailed on the CTA Green Line near 59th Street. One train car continued due south, while another decoupled and veered off to the west. CTA President Ron Huberman said Wednesday morning investigators are looking at the signal system. It was later determined that the operator overrode the safety switch and ran a red light.

From: http://cbs2chicago.com/local/green.l....2.734591.html

I don't know if this is "better" or "worse." The CTA's personnel problems are not less severe than its infrastructural ones, in any case.

That is f'in crazy. Don't we have the technology to prevent this: "the operator overrode the safety switch and ran a red light."

If this kind of behavior by operators is widespread, god help us all.

Taft

Well, the other option is to do something completely automated, like in Vancouver or San Francisco. It's really expensive, and it's not foolproof. I believe it took SF years to work out the kinks in BART.

We have operator overrides because sometimes the signals are wrong... but when the signals are right, the override can cause problems of its own.

It's not clear whether or not you're even aware of this, but you're talking about a minimum of three different things in your paragraph above. You keep using "they" in your posts - if you want to be understood, you really, really need to start being specific. It's very hard for people to understand your points when you aren't specific about the subject or object in your sentences. I know grammar isn't very exciting, but it is a very important part of communication.

So, which subjects do you want to talk about?

1) Peotone, the proposed new airport for the Chicago region, about 40 miles from downtown (O'Hare is about 15 miles from downtown, for comparison). This is a State project, not a city one, and the proposed site is still cornfields. The City of Chicago is against this because it would be the State's airport.

2) Gary's airport, with current work to extend a runway. There are other proposals (not plans) around transit links. Currently that have no passenger air service (and I've not heard of any starting, not in June, currently not ever). There are proposals that are almost plans to add a transit-type link to Gary airport, but I don't know that it's been funded yet. Gary does have support from the City of Chicago going for it, though.

3) O'Hare's expansion project, and all it entails.

4) The advocacy by a high-speed rail advocacy group that O'Hare be outfitted with high-speed rail connections? This is not currently planned, just "suggested" by citizen groups.

Well first of all I just wanted any update info having to do with updates and progress to Gary as the third airport. I have now read a few different places that for the time being the proposal of building the new airport is dead and that they are just going to use Gary/Chicago International airport because it will be alot cheaper and it is closer to the downtown area. And I just read online in a news article that starting in July, Viva Aerobus is trying to get flights from Gary/Chicago to Monterrey, Mexico. I hope the plans for the new terminal get approved and eventually get built. It would be great to have another large airport here in Chicago. The city of Chicago is completely in support of the renovation of Gary/Chicago airport!

Skybus had service out of Gary/Chicago for a very brief time before their bankruptcy. I think there have been a few tentative starts at passenger service but nothing that has stuck.

^Until Midway is totally tapped out on capacity (unlikely to be imminent given current capacity cuts) there will be insufficient demand to support scheduled service out of Gary. That said, they would be wise to have their facilities ready to rock and roll when the time comes that new capacity is needed (I would guess about 15 years out, given that O'hare will have some additional capacity for some LCC flights to absorb after OMP)

I think it will start getting really good air service long before 15 years, but I dont think a new terminal would be finished for maybe 15 years or so...that is unless we get the bid for the 2016 Olympics, then I think they will put a rush on getting the Gary/Chicago International airport up to par with the others and making it another large hub for the city. It would be one if not the closest airport to the Olympic Village so I think that will make a big difference too!

I would suggest not rushing to judgment on the 59th Street derailment based on clueless news reports. What I'm hearing is that the motorman, a 30-year-veteran, called in and got permission to move (a "call-on") through a signal that would not clear. This is done every day at various places on the system. The first car took the switch properly, but the second one didn't, suggesting that the switch may have moved under the train as it was going through.

That would be better, I guess. Though still unsettling that a key piece of equipment could fail in such a way.

The way Huberman was talking, though, it really sounded like operator error. I guess the media could have been taking his comments out of context...

Taft

Chicago Olympics will require transit upgrade
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports...0,487667.story

By Philip Hersh | Tribune reporter
May 30, 2008


A senior Chicago 2016 bid committee official said Thursday transportation improvements would be critical to the city's hopes to be chosen Olympic Games host.

According to Doug Arnot, Chicago 2016 venues and games operations director, transportation is a potential weakness, particularly for a bid working with a largely antiquated public transportation system. Among the other strong bids, Tokyo and Madrid have more modern subway systems and more extensive rail networks,

We wouldn't be surprised to see some remarks [in the report] on transportation," Arnot said. "They (IOC members) know there is good infrastructure, but it has a bit of history to it. We expect that is going to be a bit of concern on their part."

Many cities have used the Olympics as a catalyst for improvements in transportation. Salt Lake City found that federal money for highway upgrades suddenly become much more available after it was named 2002 Winter Games host.

..

It seemed really odd that Hilkevitch never mentions the plan to create an off-street bus loading area on that surface parking lot just south of Jackson between Canal and Clinton. I had the impression that was actually being worked on.

Well... wouldn't Amtrak be hesitant to create a loading zone for competitors (Megabus) on their own property? The streets are public right-of-way, so Amtrak can't keep them away so long as the city approves.

Of course, I'm totally supportive of the effort to create a bus loading zone on the parking lot... I saw a conceptual rendering at the "Downtown Airport" website with three lanes (one each for CTA buses, light rail, and intercity buses). I suppose in the absence of light rail, the third lane could be made into a dignified taxi stand, assuming that Amtrak continues to be paranoid about the underground carriageways.

The idea is really good, and it's a far safer way to load buses without snarling traffic. I do agree that Canal needs to be made two-way, so the awkward jersey barriers and contraflow lane can be removed in front of Union Station... :yuck:

One nice thing about putting a bus loading zone there; depending on the cost that the city wants to sink into it (surely a good use of TIF funds), they can build stairs to the underground garage walkway and covered waiting platforms, thus offering a completely dry way to get from train platform to bus/taxi.

The entire situation on Canal street is unacceptable. There should have been a more serious solution to dealing with taxis after Amtrak kicked them out onto the streets; the current melee is unsafe and unfair. Megabus should never have been allowed to berth their buses right in front of the Canal st entrance, which functions both as passenger drop-off and taxi stand for Union Station.

Make Megabus either move to a less congested and safer area, or if they must load at Union Station have them pay a fee to use some of the underutilized space in CTA's bus-only southbound lane on the west side of Canal. I don't know what to do about taxis, other than perhaps get better about enforcing the taxi stands and locating queues at appropriate locations by each exit with enough total space to hold the cabs without them blocking intersections.

None of it is rocket science, and it shouldn't be taking more than a few months of careful study to devise a quick and cheap-to-implement plan to get substantial improvements. Major improvements involving construction can undergo a more substantial planning process.

^^^^ Completely agree. Why the heck can't megabus and all those stupid charter busses load/unload on clinton? one friggin block over.

it's too bad the greyhound station is a few blocks away and kind of ghetto. It'd be nice to have a real serious bus terminal.

and like you said... Huge improvements can be made without construction immediately

all it involves is getting one's head out of their ass

Exactly. The streets slope up toward the east end of the lot, creating a golden opportunity to do underground and ADA-compliant connections between the station concourse level and the buses or taxis. I do hope I live long enough to see the station taxi drives used again, as (Thomas) Rodd intended.

As for the intermodal center, the Amtrak staff I talked with were quite enthusiastic. It's not just Megabus, but Van Galder, charter buses, and CTA buses. Anything that feeds the train station is good from their point of view, though it would be interesting to see if they try to charge Megabus a fee for using a new offstreet terminal, the way airports do.

I take it the replacement of the rail ties in the southbound subway between Grand and Monroe has been completed? Because today the train I was on moved quickly through that area. I can't remember the last time I was on a train that didn't crawl through that portion of the subway at an excruciatingly slow speed.

Having said that, the northbound was still slow. So I guess only one direction has been improved so far.

does anyone know how much the tollways make a year???

Check their budget documents available on their website...

i kind of dig the mega bus Kaoss,,,,is that how u spell it? any way, much needrd life to an old train station. Helps the fed endlessness redevelpnt NOT. just like south state ST.

century building..

edit, wow I screwed up this post trying to quote myself

Crain's is reporting that the city is kicking in additional $20 mil to cover the overruns of the Block 37 "superstation"

New cost estimate is $320 million, and that's not even for completion: just to reach a point where it can be mothballed and finished later.

Someone MAJORLY messed up the cost estimates 3-4 years ago...

^^^^^ i do think the cta is doing a better job of keeping the trains clean. I wish they would give the same effort for the stations. When it gets hot and humid the smell of urine is disgusting (at least the stairs up to the roosevelt platform were last night). They should take a fire hose to each station once a week.

The 18th St. Pink Line station is a nesting site for pigeons and the smell is absolutely choking in the summertime. The entire place is covered in droppings.

i know pigeons make a mess, but my wife and i have an ongoing joke when ever we see a lot of those plastic spikes around that they should make them people sized to keep all the messy people out. It is unbelievable the amount of trash/bodily fluids people discard when they are 3 feet from a garbage can.

They should have a competency test to use the cta. They hand you an empty plastic bottle, if you can successfully place it a garbage can, you're allowed to ride busses and the el. Bonus points for not peeing on the floor.

[quote = pip]
but those trains are clean and are getting faster and more reliable as time goes on. I remember last summer thinking, wow, this is unreal, soooo slow everywhere and unreliable waits, then the CTA went 3 track from 4 for construction. It got better lol. The busses seem to follow a schedule now. Rarely is there crap anymore. People seem to have more respect for the trains or the CTA is doing a sneaky job. I get on a train today and there is no junk it smells clean, again and again - the Red Line none the less. I don't see the plastic chip bags and their remains on the floor, etc. People must have a better attitude.[/quote]

'Beauty shop' gives extreme makeovers to CTA trains


It's like a salon for rolling stock. Almost all the work is done by hand using scouring pads, high-pressure sprayers and a machine called the Greg-o-Matic, which removes bacteria from seats as it suds the cloth cushions and suctions away the residue like a skin-peel therapy.

The treatments are performed by workers wearing yellow plastic jumpsuits to protect them from the acid and other strong chemicals that exfoliate guck from the pores of rail cars.

Johnson, a stocky man who isn't inclined to place cold cucumber slices on his eyelids to smooth away wrinkles, is the equivalent of the CTA's chief beautician at the Linden rail yard, although he prefers his title as team leader.

"It's a pretty tedious process, not exactly what I expected the job to be," Johnson, 36, said Thursday night while overseeing the rejuvenation of four rail cars.

The beauty shop is open from 9 p.m. to 5:30 a.m. Mondays through Fridays, and 12 cars are done each shift. So far, about 280 of the 360 cars used on the Red Line have been to the night spa.

The "before" and "after" comparison is impressive. The interiors of the cars even smell cleaner, and not only because strong cleansers are used. Beauty salon clinicians service the air-return units on board trains that are part of the heating and air-conditioning systems. The units, underneath some seats, are dubbed "doghouses," and after years of neglect they often smelled like kennels.

"We start each job at the snow-plow blade under the train and work our way up to the roof, inside and out," Johnson said.

The use of elbow grease and a special soap developed for the CTA called Super Bright 5000 restores the youthful appearance to old trains, much the way Botox makes aging frown lines disappear.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,1139615.story

Viva, (or anyone) please tell me that the B37 station is usable as a red/blue switching station while we wait for the Airport Express. At least it improves efficiency right!

....and please tell me that B37 is compatible with the long range plan for the Clinton Street/Union Station Super Transit Center!

^ The station will be mothballed, though it will include improvement of the upper level transfer tunnel/pedway between the subways, so the Washington Red/Blue transfer will return...but of course we already had that anyway...

Do you know if there is track laid? Even if the station can't support onloading/offloading, are there tracks in place that could theoretically do something like connect the O'Hare branch to the Midway branch?

To where would you route Forest Park trains? Would you discontinue the O'hare-Midway through-routing if/when the Airport Express service someday starts? There is a service imbalance, because the required service levels for Forest Park + Midway > O'hare so you can't just make them both branches, and further you'd run into some potential capacity issues in the State Street Subway.

Unfortunately I can really only see this station working for its intended purpose, which happens to require about $1+ billion in fairy dust/additional capital investment to be feasible.

What would be the point of a direct O'Hare-Midway route via the Loop anyway? Who would be making such a trip? It would take over an hour and a half to get from one airport to the other. The existing ability to transfer at Clark/Lake is fine. (Connecting the airports via the Mid-City Transitway, though, I could see; then one could possibly make a connection from one airport to the other.)

People, people, people.

I ask a question, throw in an example and you all avoid the question and critique the example.

I ask, for what will be the last time, are there tracks? If you don't know either don't reply at all or say you don't know.

Thank you.

^ I guess our point is, does it even matter? :)

The short answer, I don't know. My guess is that by virtue of the station being mothballed, there will not be fully functional trackage through the station, as this would involve not only the tracks but the traction power system and the signalization of both interlockings (State St and Dearborn St); after everything is excavated/demo'd, I don't see why such things couldn't be added at a later date. There would be some value in having at least one track connection complete to support fleet moves, as right now the only place the Blue Line is connected to Skokie Shops is via the Paulina Connector, but I'm not sure if that alone is worth the value of installing the track and the accompanying infrastructure at this point.

If a private operator could get a (contractual) promise that I-90 will never be widened, I wouldn't be surprised if there would be some interest in a public-private partnership that would involve the private sector kicking in at least some portion of capital costs for express trackage and terminal modifications. From what I've heard, there are already presently on the order of 2000-4000 air travelers daily going from downtown to O'hare on the Blue Line, which is a substantial potential market particularly if travel times by car/van to O'hare can only be expected to increase.

Express service to Midway is a trickier proposition: the volume is less (though the transit mode share for airport trips is better), but the Orange Line is already incredibly fast and already competitive with taxi service: it's only 19 minutes from Roosevelt to Midway station (hence the already solid mode share for such travelers). The only thing a Midway Express service could offer over local service is a much better DCA/National-style connection to the terminal (rather than the current circuitous and unpleasant walkway system). But the capital cost for such a terminal rail station, elevated over Cicero Avenue with accompanying modifications to the existing terminal, would far outweigh the potential revenue from the express service, so it seems like a non-starter.

This is why the Airport Express operational concept anchored at B37, as conceived, is well, ill-conceived: it is dependent on express service to both airports, cycling through the station. O'Hare is the only airport for which there exists a plausible potential market (and thus, potential private sector investment interest) for premium-priced express service.

B37 would have still played a role in an O'hare-only Airport Express concept; as an 8-car siding for express trains to pull into after discharging passengers at Clark/Lake, to turn around and head back, picking up passengers at Clark/Lake. Use the Loop Transportation Center (203 LaSalle) for it's intending purpose as a full-featured Airport Express terminal with downtown check-in, baggage check, rental cars, etc, modifying Clark/Lake station for the various required baggage facilities. Given the lower volume, premium fare surcharge would simply be collected on the train, a la Metra, so little to no modification of Clark/Lake fare arrays are required.

The B37 concept would still involve improving the Washington transfer facilities between the Blue and Red Lines; heck, even put a single platform along the B37 siding to allow discharge of passengers for transfer to the Red Line, the one transfer they can't make at Clark/Lake. But you DON'T build a track connection with the Red Line, because you DON'T run express service to Midway and you make do with the Paulina Connector for fleet moves. And these track connections, which involve mining alongside a live railroad amongst a hundred years of buried utility lines, are the major, major cost drivers of this project.

By eliminating the Midway Express pipe dream, you also reduce the specialized vehicle requirement, as well.

But I guess it's a bit late for all that...so what on earth do you do with the station now?