From the CTA's perspective, it was good to push people away from disposable dip cards because they're expensive to keep making and keep getting thrown away. (As an added bonus, also bad for the environment.) That's partly why the single-rides are now $3 - to strongly encourage anyone who rides more than once to get a plastic Ventra.

Ventra also means that they only have to make two kinds of cards - the heavy plastic one and the single-rides - instead of the dozen or so previous kinds. Instead of having separate cards for regular fare, low fare, seven-day pass, 30-day pass, etc., all of those functions can just be loaded onto a plastic Ventra card. Cheaper, more efficient, environmentally friendly, etc.

Ventra can also be registered, so if you lose your card, you don't actually lose the money on it.

And the longer-term reason is to move towards an open fare system, where people can use regular bank cards and phone apps to pay and don't have to have any CTA fare media at all.

Also, the MTA actually uses the exact same private company to do their cards as CTA uses for Ventra.

Morgan Street 'L' Station Helping Fuel West Loop Boom, CTA Says

Also, it seems like the banks can charge whatever they want. I rode the train about 10 times last month using my bank card. I got charges for $2.25, $4, $4.50, and $5 from ventra.

How do you get charged $4 or $5 when taking the train?

You should talk about this with your bank... maybe they have some weird fee for contactless transactions. My standard Ventra card has worked without a hitch since I got it in January.

For reference, here is the ill-fated Central Area Circulator plan (commonly known as Daley's Trolley) that continues to inform discussions of downtown transit. The north end is cut off here but I believe it was intended to be at Clark/Division.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3356/...a5665b93_b.jpg
flickr/mister scantastic




Then the modified version from 2008's Central Area Action plan:

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/w...tor-Routes.png
src

Well, something eventually needs to happen. Perhaps it will take more population in the core to finally spur some sort of action

What happened? Why they didn't have streetcar or light rail? They should considering this. The traffic is very bad. You will struck on the traffic. Chicago is a busiest city.

But of course this wouldn't work to create the same types of Development on the South Side with a new CTA Gray Line "L": http://bit.ly/GrayLineInfo

No, it wouldn't. The Green Line had a station at Halsted until 1998 but it didn't cause a residential boom. There are still many many L stations surrounded by blighted and vacant buildings.

Unfortunately I think West Loop residential and club/restaurant development was NOT sparked by a new CTA station; the demand was already existing. The station did made Fulton Market into an appealing office/hotel destination, though.

Well, lets watch what happens on Cermak and see if the new station there has any effect.

There have been a few new businesses in the last few years (and an empty Lex building that converted to apartments), but the slow progression from the roosevelt towards south has not reached any real momentum south of 18th. If rapid growth on Cermak follows the completion of this station, I would think it would show these stations do indeed have an effect in already slightly developing at least. Maybe not the sole reason for increased development, but a major push to get it over the hill, so to speak.

Im not sure where any 'gray line' would have a similar effect though along the south lake shore. I think some existing momentum is required. Maybe near oakwood shores? hyde park? It would be rather far from the street and not as accessible as these green line stations though.

Here's the newly designed stairway canopy for the Harrison Red Line station still undergoing rehab.

http://i.imgur.com/OWaIn7zl.jpg

Looks like I unintentionally MC-Eschered the perspective with Jones Prep on that, so here's a bonus:

http://i.imgur.com/yNSHdWDl.jpg

http://cdn.cstatic.net/images/gridfs...isonent_tt.jpg
http://chicago.curbed.com/archives/2...-10m-rehab.php

It really does look like it was designed to go along with Jones Prep.

I tried to persuade the PBC to integrate a new entrance (with elevator) into the new Jones, at the northwest corner of State & Polk, but I didn't get very far. Something about a water line being located there. I'm not sure why the idea of off-sidewalk entrances seems so alien to CDOT when it's so common in other cities with subways. Seems like it would be a good way to get other people to pay for the new elevators and escalators.

You mean like one that is inside the building?

Yup. One that is integrated into a new building, behind the property line. The ones at State Place, Merchandise Mart, and at Thompson Center/203 N. LaSalle are Chicago's sole examples, even though there are lots of places where the city has owned the property adjacent to a station in recent years and then sold it (usually for a song) for redevelopment.

Not so sure i would want all that subway rider traffic going through a school. I would have major security issues with that.

Not really a security risk... the subway entrance would not be connected to the inside of the school. The one at State Place (Roosevelt) is a good example. The school isn't really a terrorism target either.

Mr D, do you know anything about an off-street entrance at Clark/Division? Plans show a entrance to the SRO "hotel" at the southwest corner directly from the mezzanine.

In DC, every subway station I can think of is inside some kind of building. The entrance is usually a doorway at street level where you go in, then down several sets of escalators until you're near the core of the planet. The stations usually don't offer connections to their parent building unless it's a public thing like a mall. I hadn't thought about that in comparison to here.

NYC has a lot of sidewalk cuts though, so it's not like it's totally unusual.

^ NY also offers zoning bonuses for subway improvements, so developers have an incentive to provide them. The one at 53rd/Lex is pretty cool, built into Citicorp Center.

What about the NE corner of State & Grand, inside the property line of the Hilton (or the Weber Grill restaurant, if you will) building? Or is that just an emergency exit?

Higher-quality Englewood flyover video:

This thing is really high when seen from ground level at 63rd. Even higher when seen from the (sunken) Dan Ryan.

• Video Link

I could watch train timelapses all day long (starts at 3m31s).

Question - After the flyover is finished, will they demolish all the old viaducts that it's bypassing, or will those be kept for redundancy and/or extra capacity?

God damn, the city REALLY fucked up Broadway through Uptown with those god-awful bike lanes. Eminate a lane of traffic on a busy artery... yeah, that makes great sense. :koko:

Here's an idea: put the stupid bike lanes on side streets. Jesus...

^ Damn, since when did the Maharishi of design Tom Servo turn into such a pro-car fanatic? I think most of us long ago agreed that road diets, wider sidewalks, bike lanes, and a focus in general in making our ROWs friendly to other means of transportation other than cars is better for our built environment and, all in all, makes for better building design (building to accommodate the automobile, the design philosophy of the past 60 years, has all in all been a miserable failure). Do you disagree with all of this?

just no.......

I'm so happy this finally happened. I used those bike lanes almost daily. If you want a 4 lane road, use Sheridan, only 2 blocks east. No pesky bike lanes there. :tup:

And Broadway busy? you must not live around there because that street through Uptown/Edgewater is most definitely well under capacity

Hah

...

And TUP, sure. I'm all for smart urban design and growth, but I think fucking up Broadway was a bad choice. Clark is already a two lane street w bike accommodations. Sheridan would've been a better choice too since it's far less busy. And the lake front path is what, two blocks from Broadway? It was just foolish tearing up Broadway and creating a constant traffic problem for a few bike lanes.

I'm just sick of all these new bike lanes popping up all over, causing huge traffic problems throughout the city. We didn't have all these overly complicated bike lanes ten years ago, and people got along just fine. It's as if we're accomodating stupid people that don't know how to ride with traffic. It's bad enough we had to go get the stupid bike share, which essentially puts a mass of idiots on the streets and creates a very hazardous roadway. Many streets downtown have become rolling tourist gauntlets in the last year; the neighborhood streets throughout the Northside have become rolling transplant gauntlets all the same. It just seems silly to waste money on bike accommodations. The money should be put into pot hole repair or transit.

Tom, I don't have a dog in this race, but just as a PSA I guess I should say that that position is going to be very unpopular with most people involved with or interested in city planning, transit, and urban development type stuff. The general movement of urban planning is toward a gradual de-emphasizing of auto traffic within a city center in favor of improved pedestrian, bike, and mass transit experiences.

I don't think it needs to be debated in this time and place, and there's nothing wrong with being generally opposed to the idea of it. It just needs to be approached from a frame of reference where it's something that's already happening.

Broadway is not busy from Montrose to Foster. Clark, Halsted, and Lawrence are way more congested by a factor of at least 2. I live on Broadway on this stretch and I thought the lanes would be a headache as well but they have proven otherwise. I think you are just a little grumpy.....

Neither Sheridan or LSD goes through a commercial corridor, therefore would be absolutely useless for anything other than commuter riding. Like others, I have no idea where the idea of Broadway being as busy street comes from. The stretch through Uptown is deserted every single time I travel through the area. Five travel lanes was absurd for the observed traffic counts, and made the area completely miserable as a pedestrian.

God, your posts are becoming increasingly angry, retrograde, and misguided. Anything that doesn't align perfectly with your (increasingly out-of-touch and misinformed) worldview is stupid or awful, from the poorly-implemented but now time-saving Ventra cards to the highly successful Divvy program to allocating a small part of an excess-capacity road (look at the data instead of relying on your extremely flawed perceptions) for a growing, eco-friendly, but vulnerable segment of users.

Chicago is (slowly) moving forward on transit issues. Take a closer look at the benefits of these policies instead of knee-jerkingly rejecting them because they're new. Right now, you're the old man yelling at kids to get off his lawn.

Tom is a 55 year old balding white dude who lives in Wilmette and drives in on LSD and Sheridan to work at an insurance agency every day. Trust me, I've met him.

Metra Ridership Rising Unevenly; Development Could Maximize Its Potential
 

http://chi.streetsblog.org/2014/07/2...its-potential/

Start with the good news: Ridership on Metra, Chicagoland’s main commuter rail service, has grown almost 14 percent over the last ten years......

I'm 47, not 55.

Yes to all of this!!!!

Broadway is such am ore pleasant street to walk along now that the road diet has been implemented. They only recorded 11,00 cars a day on Broadway so it's capacity was way under used. It so much easier to cross on foot now too. Can't wait for them to push this road diet all the way north on Broadway.

Viva la transportation diversity!

Places that are good for cars are bad for people. Rule of thumb: if it's easy to drive someplace or easy to park, it's a rotten place to spend time. (unrelated but similar rule: if the best thing about a place is the weather, it's probably a pretty rotten place)

the road diet and the new Wilson station are putting in place all the ingredients of an Uptown recovery.

I enjoy the new bike lanes on Broadway in Uptown. I use the lane 2-3x a week for my Vietnamese kick. Why would I want to go out of my way and use the LSD bike path? Bike lanes should run through all of the main commercial corridors. I would love to see Irving Park Road get a bike lane.

great post

EDIT: kind of cool that so many posters live in this general area

Wow, that's racist. What exactly does Uptown need to recover from? Or are you just referring to the impending gentrification of the area... ie, less black people. Recovery... sheesh. :uhh:

It's about time one of the most dense neighborhoods filled with seniors and disabled people got an ADA compliant station. I've been in the neighborhood for about 6 years and really haven't seen much in the way of gentrification and I don't see that changing.

Ideally we'll see some up the underutilized lots in and around Wilson upzone and developed...ideally with affordable housing.

This will never happen because of this:

I know we've already clashed on this, but Uptown will always be a shell of its former self as long as this area continues to be the densest concentration of institutionalized housing in the city. For some reason there is a cadre of local residents who thing that we need to pile even more of the poor and institutionalized in the same place and are under the impression that it would be absolutely excellent for the neighborhood...

I'm not really against affordable housing, I'm against basically intensifying the defacto housing project that is Uptown. We already have tried cramming all the poors into one spot several times before. Spoiler alert: it never works.

I agree with you, the LAST thing Uptown needs is more supportive housing. I am a little more optimistic about Uptown's future, on one hand you have the negative, people wanting more supportive housing and on the other I think as more people get priced out of the nearby neighborhoods people will find Uptown desirable.

I will admit I ended up in Uptown by accident, I visited my apartment at night loved it and signed the lease. I came back in the daytime and awoke to a different place! Overall though, I can deal with it and Uptown is a decent hood, would be better with a lower level of supportive housing and a higher level of market rate housing. The biggest issue in uptown in my opinion and experience is quality of life issues like urine, trash etc.

I don't know if you have been to Europe or even NYC lately, but protected bike lanes are standard infrastructure in today's global cities. Divvy had over 1.6 million trips in its first year of operations (6/28/13-6/28/14), which included one of the coldest winters on record. We do have a rather significant biking population here, and this is a relatively inexpensive method of improving transportation and safety for all modes of travel. A recent study of the Dearborn St Bike lane showed a rather large drop in bicycles running through red lights.

Exactly. When bikers follow the rules of the road, like cars, the streets are safe for all. It all works according to plan when there are well timed intersection crossings for each transit mode. Unfortunately, I see a lot of those Tour de France wannabes blow through red lights and stop signs at full speed, and give the drivers or the walkers the finger as they fly by as if it's their fault. Honestly, I wish there were strict bike cops to stop this. As a walker/cyclist/driver in the city, the systems work pretty well; except for the occasional rush hour issues. Then things can get hectic.

I had my first experience driving down Broadway from Edgewater to Uptown a few days ago and it took about 30-50% longer than usual. I had to sit through multiple red lights at a few intersections in the middle of the day, not rush hour. It's annoyingly slow compared to what it used to be, but now I'm much more tempted to ride my bike than I would be otherwise. So if the goal was to make driving more miserable to get people to use other forms of transit - then mission accomplished.

Driving in Chicago is already miserable.

I drive in Chicago all the time because I'm a suburbanite, and I hate it. The roads are shit, the potholes, the lights on every block, the traffic, those pesky pedestrians...

To be honest, I don't understand why so many Chicagoans still insist on driving in the city. It's hell. And it's only getting worse. I view this as a good thing: a city cannot be built around the needs of the car.

If I lived in the city I would probably still own a car, but there is no doubt I would use it as rarely as possible.

The truth revealed! You're actually the suburban politician :)

Yes! They took away my ability to pass idiot drivers.

Oh and TUP, the only thing that makes driving in the city difficult is dealing with all the idiot transplants, the suburbanites, and all the non-Illinois plates (Wisconsin's the worst, Ohio also terrible). The pedestrians are no problem; they're predictable, and I've grown up driving around them. It's all the dumbass slow, NON-Chicago that are making this city's streets so shitty.

Chicago mass transit needs more than tweaks
 

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...e-than-tweaks#

“Make no little plans,” Chicago lakefront planner Daniel Burnham famously once said. “They have no magic to stir men's blood.” Nor, would I add, do they usually get much done.........