Yes, retrofits of platform doors onto old lines keeping the existing rolling stock (i.e. without automation) are not unusual in that part of the world.

But what is OPTO? Overweight passenger tumbles off (platform)?

One Person Train Operation.

Without conductors, CTA trains have a one- or two-second delay when stopping at (and leaving) platforms where the doors open on the left. The operator has to bring the train to a full stop, then go to the left side of the cab to open the doors.

Looks like the platform door is significantly wider than the actual train door; this gives the operator a 4'-5' window in which to stop the train, which should be doable even for a novice.

But yeah, somehow this is an engineering challenge on par with the moonshot... :rolleyes:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...927-story.html

This city needs to divert all bike traffic through neighborhood streets and away from the major arteries. This is horrible. Every time I see people biking down Western or Ashland or Milwaukee or any major traffic artery I wonder why the city allows it! It's so stupid and dangerous.

I would take an opposing position.

Major streets are the great attractors in a neighborhood and people should be encouraged to arrive and circulate by walking or biking.

What is dangerous is the mindset that cars are the default norm and should be given precedence over other, often more efficient, modes of transport.

We need to re-educate motorists in this city that a suburban "cars rule the roads" mindset is inappropriate and dangerous on city streets.

I've been saying this for a while. Under good conditions things are dicey; add snow or rain or construction or potholes and collisions are guaranteed at some point; you can't legislate it away. Ideally there would be a bike route the next street over from any major artery. It would be comfy and wide; it might cost a lot of money to shift sidewalks or curbs or parking lanes but it would be worth it; bike commuting could be made less stressful and more enjoyable. Then cycles need not necessarily be prevented from using arteries but would have the safer options available.

As, almost exclusively, a pedestrian I could not agree more.

Illinois Transportation Symposium
 

The Illinois Transportation Symposium will be held on Tuesday November 15, in Chicago's Cultural Center at Michigan & Randolph: www.illinoistransportationsymposium.com

The CTA Gray Line Project will be an Exhibitor there, please attend if you can: http://bit.ly/GrayLineInfo

Red Line extension to 130th moving forward

http://chicago.curbed.com/2016/9/29/...ago-south-side

Yeah, I assume the new transit TIF legislation is spurring this development... although there's probably not much tax revenue to be reaped from Roseland these days.

Anyway, as I learned a few years back, CTA needs a new and bigger yard on the South Side to support higher service levels on the Red Line. The current yard in the median of the Bishop Ford has no room to expand, but after the extension CTA will have room for a gigantic yard at 130th.

Still sucks that there is no transfer to Metra Electric planned.

I assume the writer simply used the wrong terminology here...

CTA Announces Next Phase For Red Line Extension
 

The Tribune in its afternoon edition.....The CTA is moving forward on plans for the long-discussed extension of the Red Line to 130th Street, which will include a two-month period of public comment.

The next steps are part of a series of requirements before funding can be sought for the project and construction could begin.

[IMG]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s...g-20160929.jpg[/IMG]
CTA Artist Drawing Showing Planned 103rd St Station.

^ What a massive blowout waste: 2.3b (to start) when the ME runs right by the proposed station stops. i can think of 5 projects that would actually boost ridership, add TOD potential and most importantly add connectivity.
1) extend Green Line along 63rd west to Midway and connect Orange.
2) extend Pink Line to Hines VA Maywood
3) extend Brown Line to Blue Line Montrose
4) build Clinton/Larrabee line including southern leg on Halsted with stop on east side of UIC and at Archer Orange, 31st, 35th, 43rd.
5) Even Gray Line proposal is better use of funds.

You don't live there!! Metra is not even in the ball park! ME is miles away. ME does not go where the people want to go.

DH

It would seem Rahm intends to run for re-election....

Daniel Burnham's Chinatown-To-Downtown Roadway Is Finally Being Built
 

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2016...daniel-burnham

Daniel Burnham's Chinatown-To-Downtown Roadway Is Finally Being Built
By Ed Komenda and David Matthews | September 30, 2016 4:45am | Updated on September 30, 2016 11:06am


CHINATOWN — Daniel Burnham proposed it. Engineers and laborers moved the Chicago River to make room for it.

But more than a century passed before construction got started on a road connecting Chinatown and Downtown.

Work began this week on the long-promised Wells-Wentworth Connector, according to city officials and Ald. Danny Solis (25th).

The new $62 million roadway will realign Wentworth Avenue and Cermak Road, in turn easing congestion for Chinatown and South Loop residents heading Downtown.

https://assets.dnainfo.com/photo/201...extralarge.png

Though modest, the project's initial phase near Wentworth and 18th Street is an important first step toward realizing the city's longtime plan to better connect the area just south of Downtown to the city's core.

I did live there for 58 yrs., and spending $2+Billions on six route miles is criminally ridiculous, and it certainly does nothing for the South Lakefront.

You are entitled to your opinion, just like everybody else is entitled to thiers; and I of course agree with jpillinois.

How will the RLE relieve overcrowding on the Red Line? During the many years I boarded at 87th St., most of the time one had to let 2 or more trains pass before there was one with room to board; now there will be no room to board before they even reach 95th!

The RLE still only leaves one South Side 'L' Line South of 63rd, including Metra Electric's lines would provide 3 parallel 'L' Lines all the way downtown. (like the North Side has)

^ Isn't the yard at 95th St at capacity? So a new, larger yard at the southern terminus would finally allow more frequency during rush hour, presumably.

And serving the South Lakefront - Bronzeville, Hyde Park, South Shore, South Chicago, etc., etc.... The RLE obviously goes nowhere near them!

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s...f/P1130401.jpg

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s...f/P1130397.jpg

The southern Red line yard is called 98th St. yard. It is filled in non-rush periods, but that's due to the extra cars assigned the line.... leftovers from 5000 series. CTA would say more frequency would depend on getting the "flyover" built at Clark Jct. There is no overcrowding on the Dan Ryan trains anymore despite what another poster says. True, there is space for a yard facility should the extension go to 130th St.

David Harrison

Good points. But remember: the CTA is notoriously bad at wasting money on useless projects.

I still fail to understand why the connection at Cermak creates that crazy intersection that lines up with nothing, and creating the need to make two turns within just a few feed.. Wouldn't it be better to blow through that surface parking lot next to the CTA tracks, and create clean connection onto and off of the feeder ramp?

The idea is to create a safer connector between neighborhoods, and serving an expanded Chinatown—not an expressway feeder. The surface parking lot is owned by IDOT, land purchased when the Chinatown feeder was going to go all the way to Wacker & Harrison. The new vision is for a normal street, not a junior expressway. We want Dan Ryan traffic to realize it's on city streets now, and to be split among Canal, Clark, State, and (someday) Wells-Wentworth.

The Red Line Extension is like a $500 Hot Dog, so CTA gets to spend $500 "for us", and we should be just sooooooo grateful!

IF somebody is going to spend $500 (or $2.3B) "on me", I want a choice in what it buys; not a $500 Pro Chef Cooking Set when my refrigerator is empty! The RLE is CORPORATE WELFARE for Walsh, Pepper, or whomever made the biggest Campaign Contributions -- and the Public is supposed to be TOO STUPID to be able to recognize that for themselves.

Even a $50 Hot Dog would be a better use of Funds - but we have little or no choice (like Block 37 - and the continued spending even TODAY on the Idiotic "Airport Express" concept -- $2M to Parsons-Brinkerhoff)!

I know one person will say that I'm WRONG, but what do the rest of you think?

The radio just reported that NICTD is considering double-tracking all the way from Gary to Michigan City.

In fact there seems to be a public meeting on it -- Tuesday night -- in Gary. www.mysouthshoreline.com/news/item/47-double-track-nwi-public-workshops

This could end up being a modest boost to the airport at South Bend too. (And to some extent to the outlet mall in Michigan City.)

privatize it all, right?

I've always disagreed with this approach. There's very little traffic on Wentworth south of Cermak - why does it need to connect to anything?

Also, the T intersection of the feeder ramp into Cermak creates very dangerous conditions for pedestrians, especially since there's an L station right there. Lots of turning movements, large trucks, people transferring from bus to train, tourists, students, etc.

I don't see why Wentworth can't be a surface extension of the feeder. Use lane widths and streetscaping treatments to calm traffic. Or, better yet, link the two severed halves of 23rd Street with a new stoplight, and start calming the feeder traffic before it gets to Cermak.

Thanks. I wasn't arguing that it should be a superhighway, but more that creating an very awkward intersection that requires multiple turns withing a very short distance for those going straight from the feeder onto Wells seems unnecessary, when the land exists to make a clean four-way intersection. I think that idea that the majority of the traffic will continue from Wells onto Wentworth (and the the reverse is a fallacy. Most traffic, IMHO, whether the intent of the project or not, will use the feeder and Wells as a route to Roosevelt and into the loop and the project should acknowledge that.

But this project is making a clean four-way intersection at Wentworth & Cermak. And shifting that intersection 100 feet west should eliminate a lot of the confusion under the L line. Lots more pedestrians are walking along Wentworth trying to cross Cermak than along the expressway feeder.

The current intersection is a cluster. This will make it much better.

Red Line Public Meeting Announcement
 

You're invited to a Public Hearing on the
Red Line Extension Project
Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation Available for Public Review

CTA and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) are proposing to extend the Red Line 5.3 miles from 95th Street to 130th Street. Click here to learn more about the project.
http://www.transitchicago.com/redeis/default.aspx

Tuesday, November 1, 2016
5:30 to 7:30 PM
St. John Missionary Baptist Church
211 E. 115th Street, Chicago, IL 60628
This location is served by:
CTA Bus #34, #115, #119, and Metra Electric Kensington Station

This facility is accessible to people with disabilities.
This meeting will be conducted in an open house format.


CTA and FTA have prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) based on the technical analysis of impacts of the proposed project. The Draft EIS documents the benefits and impacts of the alternatives being considered, which include impacts to parks and wetlands. Click here to review the Draft EIS on the RLE Project website. Hard copies of the Draft EIS also are available for review through November 30, 2016. Click here to learn more about reviewing the Draft EIS.

Comments on the Draft EIS are being accepted until November 30, 2016 at 4:30 PM. Comments on the Draft EIS may be made verbally to a court reporter or in writing during the hearing. You also can submit comments via e-mail to RedExtension@transitchicago.com or by mail to Chicago Transit Authority, Strategic Planning, 10th Floor, Attn: Red Line Extension Project, 567 W. Lake Street, Chicago, IL 60661.

Do you require assistance?
If you require an interpreter, including sign language services, or other accommodations at this public hearing, contact Gerald Nichols, CTA Government and Community Relations, at least 5 days before the public hearing at 312-681-2710 or GNichols@transitchicago.com.

Para más informacion en Español, llame al 312-681-2710
Customer Information: 1-888-YOUR-CTA (1-888-968-7282)

Thank you for your continued interest.

RLE Project Team
Chicago Transit Authority
E-Mail received from CTA 10/06/2016

Yeah, back in the day when this was all empty or falling down you could have just run those ramps from Cermak straight up straddling the red line tracks, over the St Charles Air Line, follow up near Wells and connect them right into Wacker/Frankin at Harrison as a 4-lane street. The only messy part is they would have to straddle right around the Chinatown Red Line. Unless maybe they had at least pushed the lanes all to the east of the station as opposed to the west would have helped a bit.

Is $2 Billion Red Line Extension Best Way to Provide Transit in Far South Side
 

http://chi.streetsblog.org/2016/10/0...ar-south-side/

Thursday, October 6, 2016

"The Chicago Transit Authority released a major study today, he next step in the developing project to extend the Red Line southward from the 95th Street terminal to 130th Street......."

CTA Special Moves This Weekend, 10/15, 10/16.
 

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s...f/P1140986.jpg

Saturday, 10/15, the Cincinnati Cars, #4271-4272 will be used to transport guests to a closed Open House at Skokie Shops. No public access aboard trains. Photography from public areas.

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s...f/P1060753.jpg

Sunday, 10/16, Midway 3200 series cars will run on a charter through subways on Red and Blue lines between 10:30 and 14:00. Rare mileage for these cars.

DH

^^ Metro train running on road level ROW, right?

Yes. "Metro"...used throughout Europe. Old term..."heavy transit"....elevated, el, in Chicago, Illinois "L". Chicago has many miles of surface running, Brown, Purple, Yellow, and Pink lines.
DH

There's been interesting structural work being done on the Wabash el at Madison for several weeks now. One big change is that the section spanning Madison has been replaced and now has a thinner profile, which should look pretty cool from a distance (I wonder if the increased road clearance was a motivating factor or just a useful result). Also, lots of vertical supports up and down Wabash have been sawed off and replaced. I wonder if ultimately there will be fewer of them in the middle of the pavement at intersections; the Van Buren style of shoving the supports out to the curbs would be useful at intersections.

Anyway, I'm surprised there haven't been lots of photos and info here about this.

wish they would build concrete supports to cut down on the noise.

Probably they intended to increase clearance, or they wouldn't have replaced the steel. Usually they just strip/repaint it or sometimes replace the welds or rivets to ensure strength.

Update...Washington-Wabash "L" station under construction
 

http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s...f/P1150125.jpg

View northbound from a private charter 10/16/2016. Elevator towers are up.
DH

A "private charter" excuse me?

I think it was a special event held by the CTA this past Oct. 15th and 16th.

Also, did anyone see this? From the CTA Facebook page:

http://www.trbimg.com/img-58054926/t...17/650/650x366

http://www.trbimg.com/img-58054926/t...17/650/650x366

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...-obama-library

October 25, 2016
The $100 million dream: MacArthur may fund better Loop, Obama library transit

Greg Hinz on Politics

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/apps/...20161025113129


https://www.scribd.com/document/3287...ion#from_embed

CTA will charter a train to individual or groups. http://www.transitchicago.com/chartertrain/

Kippis.....This was not the CTA Skokie Shop Open House 10/15. That was public with reservation required.....sold out. 10/16 was a private charter featuring the Initial Subway tour.

DH

Here's the proposed routing of the plan. This adaptation may have some legs to it (at least the frequent MED Line part of it) since Rahm is interested in it.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cvn108TW8AEYhbv.jpg
Source: http://ccac.org/wp-content/uploads/2...nector-PDF.pdf

Chicago Transit Redevelopment Trust Proposal Video
 

Not sure I like this proposal. The closest analogue I can think of is the Miami Metromover, although this proposal would be about three times as large (14 miles, vs 4.4 miles for Metromover.) Metromover is moderately successful but I think more could be gained from revising Chicago's rail network to be more RER-like.

A particular nitpick: the two east/west lines on Roosevelt and Cermak seem like an awkward and unnecessary bifurcation of service. The obvious solution is to use the St Charles Air Line, but for whatever reason, they didn't even consider it as a possibility.

Probably because a) it's supposedly still in (very occasional) use, b) it's been earmarked for future HSR routing and c) it'd be very difficult to create a transfer to the Wabash elevated lines at 16th street.

The white paper (mostly Ed Zotti) very explictly compares it to Docklands Light Rail in London, which I think is a somewhat better comparison than Metromover.

DLR actually serves as the main form of rail transit for a huge swath of East London and is actually well-used by commuters and residents and well-integrated with a large transit system. It's hard to dismiss DLR as a one-off gimmick like the Detroit or Miami systems, and it was used to solve a similar dilemma in London - how to extend frequent transit to a vast, developing area under the severe fiscal constraints of the Thatcher era.

What's totally unclear to me is how the study authors plan to squeeze a light metro system along much of the alignment. Carroll Street makes sense, but are they proposing to dig a tunnel under Clinton St? Or put some ugly aerial structure? DLR is mostly elevated and terribly ugly, but it was built through totally vacant areas in advance of development. The northern and southern extensions raise similar questions about alignment.