Kyler

I always wondered if it was named after kiki cuyler....prob not but you never know until you do

I don't know whether you are overly optimistic or am I just overly pessimistic, because I cannot fathom the CTA straightening this double curve without blowing up the entire area. I can see them easily demolishing the buildings I have highlighted to just gradually straighten the area and to accommodate 10 car trains.

I hope they don't, but I have a feeling they will. If they do we can only hope for them to really go after building out the Irving frontage under the new viaduct.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-a.../s1000/RPM.jpg

Also worth mentioning that under both proposals Sheridan is listed as a Red Line-only station, so in both cases we’re likely looking at a single central island platform to reduce cost and footprint (it’s probably impossible to squeeze two ADA-compliant ones in there).

That said, I don’t see how either could be done all that cheaply—an Irving Park station could be done without any property acquisition, but you’d probably still need to rework/rebuild the elevated structure to fit in an ADA-compliant center island platform, plus a bit more reconstruction if they get rid of the old platforms to alleviate the s-curve a little bit (a very little bit—is it even all that possible to get any meaningful time/wear-and-tear saving from such small adjustments?)

I’d guess something like emathias’s quick warp of the existing satellite imagery would provide a higher benefit level—you ease the curves some more, you don’t lose access to Sheridan, and although you’ll lose a couple of properties they’ll mostly be west of Irving Park & Sheridan near the “dead zone” (pardon the pun) of the cemetery. I’d say an entrance on Sheridan would, in the long run, do more for that intersection even if there’s some property demolition west of it.

It’s worth noting that the CTA also isn’t a huge landowner—in terms of redevelopment potential, they have yard facilities (being used) and park and rides, but that’s about it. On Sheridan I’m confident they’ll have something, at least like a Dunkin Donuts and newsstand they have in many of their stations (although something more creative would be nice). Assuming they take properties on the south side of Irving I’d love to see something like the viaducts in Berlin.

Although we obviously won’t get something as pretty, there’s also the challenge of how good the retail environment is along Irving Park—currently it’s all-residential, which makes me wonder how strong demand is for retail near the cemetery (even if it’s a major road. Having a solid retailer step in and offer to chip in to develop the demolisheded parcels into a pleasant under-the-viaduct commercial space would be ideal—if that’s not possible, maybe we should hope for a Taj Mahal on irving Park to keep the space under the elevateds from being a dead space.

Thorek + Walgreen's + CTA = systematic destruction of that whole neighborhood.

Crain's is reporting that the suburban House Republicans have broken ranks with the party leadership and are publicly criticizing the recent controversial transportation bill in the House. That's a good sign in a lot of ways, not just transit.

I was thinking the same thing. I would think that actually your view might err on the optimistic side if anything.

I saw this comment from "BP Fan" on Uptown Update, which makes me think this might get pretty ugly:

I'm not sure where to come down on this one exactly. I appreciate the need for modern transit but this area might end up getting decimated. I wish there were another way.

its a tough spot and there are going to be casualties I just hope the improved speed around those bends is worth the loss of those buildings I think it will be. Maybe they could agree to replace whatever is lost with an equal or greater level of density nearby...just a thought

I had looked at the satellite views a couple days ago, and basically came up with the same set of buildings that untitledReality proposed. I would guess a couple more buildings may need to be bought as well.

I see that at 4008 Kenmore a private lot behind the residential building. I'm not sure if the CTA could start the Sheridan curve at that lot or not, considering that the lot is part of the building parcel. In fact, I'm not sure what the city/CTA policy is regarding going over private undeveloped plots such as parking areas -- would a plot need to be subdivided and bought by the CTA, or would the whole parcel need to be bought?

I don't think the houses are in any way historic, but I suppose they could be moved, ala This Old House. They could be moved to the corner of Sheridan and Irving Park, and use the parking lot and the vacant lot on the north side. It could be a token gesture on behalf of the CTA.

Could 70MPH Be Coming to CTA Blue and Orange Lines
 

Mayor Rahm Emanuel hinted last Wednesday during a conference with United Airlines employees that his staff is studying shaving up to 12 minutes off CTA scheduled times between downtown and the two airports: O'Hare International and Midway. Although the overly publicized "slow zone elimination" was included in the discussion, other hard specifics were left out, leading myself to wonder if after operating a complete fleet of high performance cars, since the last 5-50s were withdrawn from service by the CTA in the 1990s, would they at last get to run at their top speed.

At present the entire fleet of CTA "L" cars is capable of 70 MPH. During testing, the trouble plauged Bombardier AC5000s took weeks to reach that speed, but they finally did. I don't know how often that capability has been tested in the years of evaluation that followed, LOL. Capable as they are, CTA trains are limited to 58MPH. There are stretches, all in expressway medians and in the subway where the signals are set at 70 MPH, but only to allow the 58 MPH operation without a brake penalty for overspeeding.

A test run using the then-new 3200s occurred on the Midway line to gauge the advantage of 70 MPH. A ten percent premium was added to curves. Certainly it wasn't a scientific study. I was told that lots of birds got a "surprise", LOL.

Strangely, last week's story flew under the radar. Fortunately, both the Blue and the Orange lines feature long station separation conducive to higher speeds, something overlooked by some who want to retain each and every station in the Red/Purple study. That was one aspect of the subway proposal for the Red/Purple that I liked.

Most CTA "L" lines share one detriment to higher speeds.....rough switchwork. Definately some field trips to examine and learn from other transit properties who do good switchwork is in order.

Here is the news coverage....since they are "all rights reserved" I didn't reproduce them:

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/02/...-ohare-midway/

Note how the speed-up was missed in the official PR:

http://www.cityofchicago.org/content...dunitedai.html

David Harrison

Speeding up the Blue and Orange lines would be nice (especially since it benefits the ordinary commuters who make up the bulk of the CTA’s traffic on those lines), though I’m not sure whether it would save the amount of time Emanuel’s suggesting—I’m guessing it was left out of the official press release because it may have been a little off-the-cuff (i. e. not deliverable at the level of investment we’re able to put in).

The time between Midway and the Loop isn't too bad right now at 20-25 minutes. A far more pressing issue for better airport service to Midway is a less then appealing pedestrian connection between the terminal and the station.

I'm impressed with Rahm and I hope he keeps this up. His focus on the day-to-day things that can make Chicago more livable and attractive for businesses/visitors is worthy of praise.

One thing that the CTA has failed to address that kind of disappoints is the fact that their fare machines are only in English.

For a "global" city with visitors from "around the globe" that is not very inviting. I have seen foreign travelers get frustrated with CTA fare card machines for this exact reason. In New York's MTA you can choose between several languages. Chicago needs to catch up with the times.

If we're gonna go there, I have a whole list somewhere of pronounciation questions; the subject practically could warrant its own thread (nowhere near as much as East Coast cities, but still).
But I'll ask just one here: Shouldn't "Devon" correctly be pronounced with English intonation (accent on 1st syllable) rather than quasi French (or pick your region or dialect) intonation (accent on 2nd syllable)?
Mr Downtown, do your encyclopedic city resources contain any guidance as to pronounciations?

Great and detailed post - thanks.

Going off on a tangent from that, and touching on the Red/Purple project discussion, do people here consider one major downside of subway routing to be that you can't hear a damn thing when the el is roaring through a subway? It's not just a comfort issue, but some people could perceive it as a safety issue (not hearing any suspicious movements behind you, or warnings shouted from other passengers, etc.).

I suppose you could make the case that "Devon" is pronounced strangely in Chicago, since the name (like Berwyn, Bryn Mawr, and Ardmore) comes from the Main Line suburbs outside Philadelphia. I guess I'm of the school that charming regional variations are to be celebrated rather than erased. Next you'll want to pronounce the H in Throop.

As for subway noise, just be glad the cars have sealed windows now. Screeching around the corner at State & Division in the old 6000s on a summer day reminded you that you weren't in no sissy town.

Here's some video I shot from an open cab window of the Holiday Train. You will especially appreciate the shot of the flat car carrying the "Jolly Ole Guy" around the curve in the subway from State ST to Division ST at 4:17. Hint, turn your volume control DOWN a bit.

David Harrison
msibnsf on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cae6pFHuXwI

I mostly agree with you about regional variations -- and yet I arrive at a different conclusion. That's because, LOL, we have a different sense of what's "charming." If the blue collar-y Chicawgo accent is understood to be relegated to certain neighborhoods, groups, classes, or situations, then I consider it charming -- but if we concede that the typical dialect of the whole metro area is the distinct Chicawgo-speak, then it's no longer charming to me and is kind of cockney embarassing. So if over by dere down in Bridgeport, like say Turty-Fift Street, dey don't want nobody nobody sent, dat's fine. But if conventioneers are told to walk down Bowl Mish and root for Da Bears near Da Bean, I'd rather we be a little more vigilant about our collective diction. (I wonder if there is a pronounciation guide used by the 6+ local TV news channels and the various local radio stations?)

As for Devon, that one's not a huge deal to me either way, but it's funny that the Pakistanis and Indians who now give life to a dominant stretch of the street are probably more inclined by default to use the English, and East Coast, pronounciation, bringing things full circle.

Anyhow I appreciate the improvements in subway noise, but for whatever reason I think we're still decidedly worse off compared to other systems.

Wait, what is the Chicago way of pronouncing “Devon?” I (and most my friends) say “De-VON,” but we’re transplants—is it “Devin?”

I once gave tourists directions to the Sears Tower once, although being from northeastern MA it came out “Se-ahs.” As I walked away, I heard them talk about what a funny accent people in Chicago have…

It's De-VON. Another name I find strange is a neighborhood where a friend of mine grew up: Hegewisch (Heg-wish with a hard G). A sone more example, I once read a summary of a White Sox game against Boston that emphasized the local accents of the two cities in the title: Sahx vs. Sawx.

^ Right, where the English and East Coast pronounciation would be something like DEV-un. I think you probably put your finger on the most-mistaken word on the Chicago map - Hegewisch.

Two that I still would like to ask about are Honore and Paulina, both streets that pass through Wicker Park.

Less pressing, but still with a sliver of uncertainty, are Wolcott, Leavitt, and Ada. And is there universal agreement on Racine or not (before we totally go O/T)?

That sawx/sahx story is great.

Paulina rhymes with 'angina'.

I've heard Honore as 'ON-o-ray'.

WOHL-cott

LEV-itt

AY-da

Here's a real puzzler: Goethe.

There's an alternative to ray-SEEN?

Isn't it GER-tuh, like the poet?

GO-thee.

CTA's announcer is the apparently the only fan of German poetry in Chicago.

^^ ray-SEEN / ruh-SEEN (first syllable kind of like first syllable in "LaSalle")

Most unambiguous lexicography that came to mind:
GRR-tuh / GAIR-tuh
I've heard both (not about the street, but about the person and his eponymous institute) and don't know German. Perhaps it's a lost cause; in some cases there will never be agreement on how words ought to be converted from foreign languages. So this one gets clarified only if the City (or maybe the local TV and radio media) have settled on one. Or perhaps the residents and ward. Ardecila, I could be wrong, but maybe the bus drivers aren't the most authoritative? At least the second syllable - not a long E, no?

This is technically correct. At least from historical pronunciations

OMG that is so wrong. :no:

How about Montrose? I mean, I know the pronunciation is MAHN-trows but I hear people from out of town say MAHNT-rowz all the time.

The person who does the electronic stop announcements on CTA buses says "GRR-tuh" like a poetry scholar (at least on the 156) but I've never met a real Chicagoan who used that pronunciation.

The CTA guys are far from authoritative.

I lived on Goethe for two years and everyone I knew pronounced it like GUR-tuh or GRR-tuh as some of you have phoneticized it. The only people I heard say GO-thee were people mocking tourists.

Additional supporting evidence, I never once had a cab driver question my GRR-tuh pronunciation, and I took a lot of cabs home.

Is the New York accent cockney to you? All great cities have their own distinct dialect just as much as they have polished businesspeople with golden General American accents. Chicago's accent should be a source of pride as it reflects the unique roots and culture of our city. It would be far more concerning to me to see us lose our collective accent because then we'd be nothing more than a hinterland like downstate or Iowa. All places with a strong identity have their own strange dialect because they have a history and culture. That's why I'm not insulted when people say I have a Wisconsin accent or mock how I pronounce Chicago (I say it Chicago style). Then again I'm developing a messed up accent of my own that mixes Chicago, Wisconsin, and New Zealand pronunciations (I was horribly dyslexic as a child (still am) and had a phonetics teach from New Zealand. To this day I say words such as "warm" with a horrible Kiwi accent as a result).

Grr-tuh or Gurh-tuh is what I hear and how I say it I have only heard Goe-thee in jest.

its DE -von or Da-von not De-vin

I still have gotten the answer at to whether Cuyler was named after Kiki Cuyler

Kind of getting off topic here.

Waaay off the subject if the subject is still 70 MPH. It's probably this guy.....

Edward Cuyler was a developer who probably subdivided what is now that part of Chicago including Melrose Street.


DH

^^Correct.

According to the fascinating Streetwise Chicago:

Danka!

Any other street names you want looked up before we get back on task?

Semi on-task: the CTA Train Tracker is in beta mode, and I've been having too much fun tracking trains all over the system.

The Hayner and McNamee book Streetwise Chicago is fun, but can't be relied on as total gospel. It repeats a lot of folk-etymology that Howard Brodman used on his filecards in the 50s, and a lot of that is from folk wisdom recorded in Andreas or manufactured by newspapermen through the decades. For instance: "Maple" was named "for the maple trees once found in large numbers in this area." Really? In a swampy lakeshore? And it's completely unrelated to the fact that adjacent streets are named Elm, Chestnut, and Oak?

Some research for Geoffrey Baer recently gave me an excuse to read through Edward Brennan's notebooks at the Historical Society, and I found that neither Brodman nor Hayner & McNamee were as careful as one might hope.

I wonder if any cities with tree street names plant exclusively that sort of tree on each street named as such?

Loyola Transit Plaza

Apparently McDonalds is no longer interested in maintaining a location at the Loyola L station, so there was no need for a building to house them. Therefore, they ditched the earlier, ugly PoMo design and replaced it with a small, open plaza. I believe the 2-story building to the north is just visionary... it's not included in the Loyola Station project.

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/9071/loyolal.jpg

Old design

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/1...olastation.jpg

^^^ Hell yeah, get that trash outta here. I'm not sure that other building is entirely visionary though. I've heard rumblings that LU has found a developer for the North block of Loyola Station that they might be moving forward with. I'd guess it's probably McCaffrey again.

Oh so that's what all the homeless people keep trying to sell me.

:haha:

Well, the maps for the Loyola Station project show that the northern site has a cut-out to accommodate some of the existing buildings on Sheridan. Maybe they're increasing the size of the project? That would be awesome...

With Loyola being designated a transfer station in every RPM option, is this station remodel just a short term (10~ year) solution or does anyone think it will be compatible with the future arrangement?

Either way, its nice to see them pull Loyola west across Sheridan

This is only a short term....If the two track subway is restored, the station would be about 1000 ft south at Devon(Dah VON) and the ramp to the elevated would be at Loyola.....If the four track modernized with transfer station scheme is in place, the platforms (2) would have to be inbetween track 1 and 2 and inbetween tracks 3 and 4. The reason for moving the platforms northward is to get them out of the curve. To get them entirely out of the cuve they would have to be move still farther north than the artists' renderings.

David H>

The subway option is no longer being considered.

I'm guessing that a rebuilt Loyola station will be on aerial structure instead of an embankment. It will allow Loyola to continue straight east-west, and the current diagonal bit of Loyola will be vacated to allow for widening of the station. The new station will require the demolition of the flatiron building between Loyola and the current viaduct, but I think there is enough wiggle room on the east side of Sheridan to prevent any demolition of LUC's buildings. (I would assume the new student center was designed with this in mind).

Hopefully the new station will include an entrance east of Sheridan so students don't need to cross the street.

Is this Loyola station area project actually going to proceed even though the Red Line plans are still in some flux? Or are the portions that would end up being re-done only a comparatively small amount of money?

This project is a rough equivalent of the "patching" project that they're doing at the group of Red Line stations to the south. It's just funded separately, since Loyola wanted some token aesthetic improvements like a new brick facade and this plaza to complement their redevelopment efforts on the surrounding blocks.

As you mention, the reconstruction plans are still "in flux", but the key thing to keep in mind is longevity. The Loyola viaduct, and the embankment running down to Wilson which contains all the other stations, is crumbling apart. The majority of this current work is simply to boost the lifespan of these structures by another 20 years in case the total reconstruction is delayed.

When that reconstruction does come, the intention is to build structures that will last for a century. I'd advocate for double that lifespan, but nobody designs that way in the US.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,4080629.story

Looks like someone at Metra figured out that the waiting room (Great Hall) should be used for...waiting. Better than turning the concourse into a death trap when they have delays.

Thank god - but they can't use the Great Hall as a permanent waiting room, because Amtrak gets a significant amount of money from renting it out.

I'm not saying they shouldn't install much better communications systems in the Great Hall, and more/better benches, to allow it to be used as a waiting room. But Amtrak needs that money, so they'd have to find some way to do without it.

The Oswego extension is interesting. I'm probably gonna take a lot of flak for this, but the extension should go all the way to Plano. Oswego's downtown isn't on the BNSF, so any station there would be in the middle of cornfields. Plano has an existing, sizable downtown with an existing, beautiful station currently served by Amtrak. Plus, it would be easier/cheaper to construct a holding yard in Plano where the land is not under severe development pressure.

An Oswego stop would need to be like Schaumburg's on the Milwaukee West Line where it is basically a park and ride. Which I think given the suburban sprawly nature of Oswego and Yorkville would be acceptable.