Different service patterns associated with each infrastructure alternative are indeed being identified and scored with respect to operating costs and rider impact (travel time, walk time, transfer time, etc.). However, those are only made more concrete as part of the Draft EIS (next step), not as part of the preliminary scoping (current step). As Beta notes, there's a pretty well-defined process to go through vis-a-vis advancing the technical work in concert with public involvement, but these things are definitely being studied.

^^ Good to know. Thanks.

click on link

^ I'm fine with it as long as downtown Chicago remains the hub of the midwest hsr system.

If all rails lead to O'Hare, downtown Chicago loses its infrastructure advantages

Speaking of that process (with Los Angeles dealing with a number of these studies as we speak) there's one alternative that is missing from the list which they need to start thinking about to solve the problem of Clark Junction which is the basis for most of this in the first place.

What happens if you have the Brown Line trains go underground between the Belmont and Southport stations? Would that solve the problem or make matters worse? Could this be done at a far smaller cost than the full tunnel two track tunnel or even the rebuild four track elevated? The point in all this is that in order to get a iron-tight EIR this option needs to be studied and evaluated as early as possible.

So how does having 'Mayor Rahm' as opposed to 'Mayor Chico' affect Chicago's prospects for mass transit improvements? Thoughts?

Assuming CTA chooses an elevated alternative, the problem of Clark Junction can be solved easily by building a rail flyover for the northbound Brown Line track.

It's probably cheaper to go up, since the flyover can span over the existing 4 tracks easily without a column in the middle. This introduces a fairly tall visual blight to the neighborhood and a potential noise problem. It's also possible to go down, building a fly-under track at or close to ground level. This would, of course, close off School Street and require the rebuilding of the whole 4-track elevated structure for about 2 blocks.

IIRC, Viva said awhile back that CTA has indeed looked into the Clark Junction issue when they did the Brown Line rehab, and it turned out to be a few hundred million. It might be possible as part of a multi-billion Red/Purple project, but it was just too expensive for the Brown Line project budget, which was only $530 million. Under the Bush administration, that 20% was easily the difference between getting the money and not. Cost-efficiency is slightly less important now under Obama's USDOT.

EDIT: found the quote.

None of the candidates seemed to think much about transit until they were pressed by various journalists and bloggers, so I wouldn't look forward to a new golden age for the CTA. That said, Rahm was definitely the best choice.

The fact that Chico didn't form an official policy position on transit, even AFTER being pressed, speaks volumes about his commitment to quality transit (or lack thereof).

del Valle also had a decent transit platform, although he was adamantly opposed to major investment downtown. I think this was misguided... all of CTA's recent major projects have been in the neighborhoods, including major rebuilds of the Brown, Green, Pink , and south Red Lines. CTA's current expansion plans are also way out in the neighborhoods... extensions of the Red, Orange, Yellow Lines, the Red/Purple Line, Circle Line, etc. If anything, the downtown area is overdue for transit investment.

His policy statement specifically said "NO Downtown Circulator", which is a bit odd - it's not like anybody else is pushing for a downtown circulator, either. I'm assuming this refers to the dormant Carroll Avenue busway, unless he's opposing a dead 20-year-old light rail plan.

The Gray Line Project Presentation has already been submitted through Rahm's State St. Campaign Office; I will be following up immediately to see if he can attend the first Public Meetings of H I S CDOT's now-in-progress South Lakefront Corridor Transit Study: http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/1245638...+PAC_FINAL.pdf

I think his connections in Washington, D.C. will greatly benefit any and all Transit and Transportation Projects in the Chicago Area.

Ever notice that besides me and my long-time obsession, NOBODY ever mentions improving/providing CTA Rail Transit to the SE Side.

I dunno what you mean by improving... Metra just sank a ton of money into rebuilding all the stations on the South Chicago Branch. Service frequencies are still crappy, but you can't say they haven't invested in the area.

I said improving/providing Chicago Transit Authority Rail Transit ('L' service - fare structure interconnected with the rest of the CTA system) - I lived on the Southeast Side for MANY years, and the in-city Metra Electric services DO NOT fit into the Transit Spectrum for MOST of the residents.

Why do you think ALL the BRAND NEW South Chicago Branch Stations (and trains) you mentioned are _ C O M P L E T E L Y _ E M P T Y _ most of the time - EXCEPT for having many riders O N L Y during the am and pm Weekday Rush Hours.

i.e.: If you are going from 71st & Jeffrey to Loyola University on Devon & Sheridan, or to Stroger Hospital on Harrison & Damen - What good does the MED do you??? (are you going to pay TWO separate Transit Fares)

How will this situation will be better with a CTA-operated "Gray Line"? There's still no connection between the Metra Electric and the rest of the CTA rail system, and there's no good place to add one.

Please read "Access and Transfer Information" 3/4 down on the left side of the "Welcome to the Gray Line Website" Home Page: www.Grayline.20m.com

Does this answer your question ardecila; and I also wonder how E V E R Y B O D Y manages to miss, or misinterpret this information - when I have had it posted clearly for many months now???

aside from the atrocious use of punctuation and caps, all you're saying is that your hypothetical rider should pay less than someone taking the bus, despite the fact that they're taking the same exact train they've been taking for 40+ years. How does adding another layer of bureaucracy help?

I lived for years at 7761 South Shore Drive, and worked near Loyola U. on Devon Ave. Since using the Metra South Chicago Branch 2 blocks away cost about $2.00 to get Downtown, and then I'd have to pay another about $2.00 CTA fare to get on the Howard 'L' to Rogers Park ($4.00 for the total trip) - I never used Metra.

MANY times I had to wait (in 10 degree weather) sometimes 45 minutes for a Westbound 79th St. bus to the Red Line at State St. (a 30 minute trip) - now I've spent 1 hour and 15 minutes, and I have NOT moved ONE FOOT toward downtown.

Then give the Red Line train about 45 minutes (or more) to get from 79th St. to the Loyola 'L' Station.

So now it's taken me approx. 2 HOURS to get to work, but I only had to pay about $2.00.



With the Gray Line trains coming every 10 minutes I could be downtown at Randolph & Michigan within 40 minutes, and then a 2 short block (FREE) walking transfer to the Red Line Lake Station for a 25 minute 'L' trip to Loyola (instead of STILL WAITING there 45 minutes later on the corner of 79th & South Shore Drive - or being on Bus #3 of a Bus Bunch somewhere along E. 79th St.)

A 1 hour 5 minute work trip would seem better than a 2 hour work trip (for the same $2.00 price) - but I guess that's just me.

What is Metra's motivation for operating the MED stops? And btw I completely get your argument about converting the MED to CTA rather than extending the Red Line. Solid argument. But tell me why Metra plays ball with this? Does the CTA pay them 100% of operating? We all know that transit operates at a deficit.

Maybe you shouldn't live at 7700 south and commute to 6500 North? Just a suggestion...

You know I am not sure it is such a good idea to come on here and utilize such childish flaming techniques. I mean think about it; you are on a site where you more than likely will find a audience that is probably more sympathetic to your cause than the general population. SSP'r at least in the Chicago forums tend to be highly pro-transit.

So coming on here and writing in this style just makes you look SHRILL & STRIDENT. (See what I mean) It diminishes your argument.

Don't be so snarky... One of the advantages of living in a dense city is the ability to move easily from one end of the city to the other without a car.

CTA already provides this hypothetical commuter a fast option in the form of two express buses (the 14 and the 147) with a transfer at Congress.

This only works in rush hours, but the rest of the time, the hypothetical person can still get to his job at Loyola with only one transfer - this time at the 79th St Station on the Red Line. Other good options exist as well.