Wow, the people who commented on this clip sure do hate Daley.

That video rocks, and Daley is spot on.

I like the concept a lot. The architecture of the station leaves a lot to be desired, but obviously the budget is small, and the design is at least visually-interesting. The amenities in the station, though, are very nice - it puts almost all of Metra's stations to shame, and it has more parking to boot.

However, I'm not sure this station is the panacea for Gary's problems that everybody wants. The station sits right next to the Skyway, so travelers can come off the onramp and drive 1 block into the parking garage, without patronizing any Gary businesses besides the ones in the station. Adding more and safer parking may entice more riders to board at Gary, but I don't think it will do much for the rest of the city.

This seems like an attempt to force Miller residents to visit downtown Gary twice a day, whether they want to or not. Miller handles almost as many weekday riders (504) as Gary (614).

Blagojevich pulls funds meant for mandate on seniors
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=217048&src=109
Yea, our transit gets screwed over once again.

^ ???????

Impeach that bastard

It's no wonder why the legislature trusts Blagojevich less than the shadiest used car dealer you've ever met.

I don't necessarily want to stand up for the governor, but didn't the legislature force him into making cuts? I thought they were giving him a budget that the state couldn't afford, basically to force him into making cuts himself so that he ends up being the bad guy in all of this? I know Michael Madigan actually implied that lawmakers don't need to worry about producing a budget in which expenses equal revenues. He seems to believe it's their job to approve all of these expenses and then force the governor to come up with the money to pay for them or make cuts. And didn't Blago & Senate Democrats want to do something about expanding riverboat casinos & leasing the state lottery to raise revenues, but Madigan has worked against that in the House? Madigan is basically just setting up the governor to make him look even worse. That's not to say I'm a Blago fan because I'm not. I'm still pissed that he forced the RTA into allowing seniors to ride transit for free. I'd prefer he not make cuts that affect transit, but it seems he's being forced into making cuts in many different areas. Though I think he still found room to keep the cost of living pay increase for the legislature which I don't like. But I still think Madigan is as big of a problem as Blago is in all of this.

:hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell:

I don't usually use those smiley things, but I think this deserves it.

What a jerk! I understand we are in the midst of a political pissing contest over the budget. But to use this particular issue as a bargaining chip is political arrogance at its worst. Did he really think we wouldn't notice that he is cutting funding for a mandate he forced into legislation?

Taft

Oh, Madigan is a *huge* problem, don't get me wrong. So is Emil Jones, IMO. Both prime examples of Illinois Democratic politics at its worst.

But the specifics of Blago's cuts make me think he has no respect for the intelligence of the voters. Sure, he needs to "fight back" against Madigan's slimy positioning, but to rip funding away from his own mandates (which are still in effect, BTW) is just stupid.

Taft

http://www.chicagotribune.com/featur...,2044717.story

Life in the fast lane: CTA eyes Cleveland's buses
Chicago set to test its own express lanes, which are cheaper than rail projects

By Jon Hilkevitch
11:37 PM CDT, July 10, 2008

Don't dare dismiss the new $200 million transit service starting up here as just another bus line.

Officials certainly aren't at the Chicago Transit Authority, which is studying Cleveland's experiment before launching its own "bus rapid transit" here in about a year.

Extra-long, hybrid diesel buses featuring stylized touches that resemble sleek high-speed trains pull up to platforms at shiny steel-and-glass stations in the median of a major Cleveland thoroughfare.

Exactly. Blago should go to the people and say "Well, I tried, but there's no money, sorry", and CUT the program. Instead he keeps the program and cuts the funding. And the money is supposed to come from where now?

Hopefully, transit ridership jumps another 10% or so.

Four-track bliss this afternoon at Belmont. They opened up the new inner southbound tracks & platform for red line trains and also still had the old outer southbound tracks & wood platform open for brown & purple line trains. So three of the four tracks & platforms are now finished at Belmont. Just one more to go! :banana: (and they're further ahead than that at Fullerton)

Also I'm excited that over the past two days they seem to have eliminated the slow zone on the northbound red line tracks near Diversey. I'm not sure if the slow zone was in place because of track condition or because of construction work at Wellington, but every day the red line trains I've been on have been slowing down at Diversey and progressing slowly until nearly up to Belmont. But as I said, the past two days the red line has maintained a reasonably decent speed through that area. :banana:

One little scary moment last night on the Red line. I was riding it north from the loop and the train was speeding along the tracks under the river toward Grand. Just as we started approaching that station, we passed through the open area of the subway where the trains can switch tracks if needed (it's just south of Grand). Anyway, I was sitting in the front car and we crossed over where the track switching area is. Those areas aren't usually as smooth going over as the normal tracks tend to be, but at the speed we were going the front car kicked so forcefully to the right (or maybe it was to the left) that I was amazed it didn't go flying off the tracks. I could hear a sort of collective gasp from within the car and as I looked around everyones' eyes were wide open in a kind of semi-shocked look. Funny enough, three little kids were in the same car and as they got off the train at Grand with their mother, I could hear them saying how much they like riding on trains & planes, lol. They weren't phased at all. :haha: But damn that jolt freaked me out for a second or two.

As I was sitting on the red line today, 3 questions came to mind:

1. When will the slow zones on the red line subway be fixed? Why isn't this top priority, being the most heavily used part of the the entire system?
2. Are there any plans to go back to having A/B trains and A/B stops? It's really not necessary to have so many stops so close together on the north line (eg Granville/Thorndale, Wilson/Lawrence/Argyle). It seems like the system was constructed to have trains skip every other stop. Why not go back to that. It really shouldn't take an hour to travel from the Loop to Howard as it does now. Skipping every other stop north of Sheridan can trip over 10 minutes off the commute.
3. Are concrete track ties really that much more expensive than wood ties over the long run in Chicago's climate and with current labor costs? Aren't we setting ourselves up for another slow zone hell when the ties start rotting again?

Skip-stop service wasn't instituted until 1948, after CTA took over and closed a lot of stops. There were once also stops at Schiller, Larrabee, Halsted, Willow, Webster, Wrightwood, Roscoe, Grace, and Buena. When the L was built, it competed with streetcars for downtown passengers, and convenient stops attracted patrons.

When A/B service was instituted, headways were much shorter than they now are. Today, it's not terribly difficult to model the system and calculate whether riders save time when you include the time they have to wait for a train that will stop at their station. By the 1990s, train frequency had declined so much that there was a net loss of time for passengers from skip-stop service.

That's assuming people can't get off at say Granville if they normaly get off at Thorndale (2 blocks away). I think it stems more from the mindset that people need the train to stop directly in front of their house every time.

You'd be surprised just how much lateral force trains can take and stay on the rails... as long as the track gauge (width between the rails) is maintained.

Uh, Huberman has bonded out years worth of future federal capital funds to fix all slow zones systemwide ASAP (spending future money, with interest) . The long slow zone in place between Clark/Division and North/Clybourn is because the ties are currently being replaced. They've already been replaced completely between Roosevelt and Clark/Division. This work has been highly accelerated as a priority at any cost. Further, all subway ties are being replace with concrete, which is part of why it takes so long to replace them (you can only pour and cure the concrete over a long weekend shutdown, and before that you have to remove the old ties and place the wood forms for the concrete). What more could you expect CTA to do on this front, other than place the busiest portions of the system under a multi-week closure like they are doing presently on the O'Hare branch?

Exactly... not much to add here. However, if the Red Line or Brown Line again see service demand warranting headways of 2-3 minutes, A/B service might again be justified (assuming CTA could increase its fleet size, since it's already at the brink in that regard). Further, as with anything, if you institute A/B service on one branch serving one perceived demographic, the other demographics will complain about why they aren't getting special treatment. Of course, if that disadvantaged demographic were the ones proposed to get skip-stop, they'd complain how they are being singled out for this difficult change that will force granny to wait even longer for a train amongst the dangerous hoodlums up to no good in her neighborhood. So, I'm not optimistic it'll happen anytime soon, though I'm a huge proponent of it if headways get down in the 2-3 minute range.

Good point. I sometimes forget that every transit rider is a healthy 23-year-old man, and every day in Chicago is beautiful and 72 degrees. What's most important is that you not be delayed another 45 seconds getting to Evanston.

When you're trying to attract patrons, you don't close stations where lots of people board every day.

Viva, how much more "stable" (is that the right word?) are concrete ties versus wooden ones? Have there been any studies so that we may estimate how long it will be before they'll need to be replaced again?

Amusingly enough, the Dan Ryan and Kennedy extensions were actually built with concrete ties circa 1969-1970... which lasted a handful of years before cracking and disintegrating and requiring replacement... with wood ties. If wood ties come from good stock** and are periodically cared for with creosote, they can comfortably last 40-50 years. Heck, the wooden subway ties lasted nearly 60 years before disintegrating to their current unsafe state. I think the assumption is that properly mixed and reinforced concrete can last indefinitely, but there aren't many comparable examples with which to compare the real-life lifecycle of concrete ties. Going forward, CTA is only installing concrete ties in the subways, and all outdoor ties are being replaced with plastic composite (that recycled-milk-carton material) that should also last "indefinitely."

** The ties on the O'Hare extension wore out after only 25 years because they were installed by a mobbed-up Chicago-style contractor (DePrizio) who cut costs on the ties to pass the savings onto himself to protect the small margin at his poorly run operation, an operation that required a direct loan from the city just to finish its portion of the O'Hare extension contract. Incidentally, the company wound up bankrupt and the owner was found shot in a ditch or something.

True, but that's only applicable for a handful of closely spaced station on the North Main. On most lines, even 1/4-mile spacing is enough that someone wants to take a train to their particular station.

Again, at a 3-minute-or-less combined headway, this becomes pretty feasible. but once headways are widened it becomes an unnecessary burden on travel time. Not that my opinion matters, but I'd be a strong proponent of bringing back skip-stop for on the Brown and Red during peak periods. Another nice advantage of skip-stop is that it reduces your running time, meaning that if you skip enough stops to reduce your running time by a whole headway, then you've saved an entire trainset that you can then use to increase your frequency at no additional operating cost.

Um. Most of the time I actually get off on one of those stops I'm proposing to skip.

And not every transit rider is an 85 year old grandma either. It's mostly the same people you'd readily mock for needing ample parking right next to where they're going, and not being able to walk a few blocks.

To attract riders, the system can't take an hour to travel 6 miles. Most people in Chicago don't take mass transit on weekends because it's too damn slow. Edgwater to the Loop is 15 min by car (25 in traffic) and 50 via red line.

Thiss message board is probably the only place leftin Chicago where the consensus for why people still drive in Chicago is that there is no el stop within 1 block of their house, not that it takes 1/5 the time to drive. I'm not saying the CTA needs to become Metra, but some common sense solutions to decrease travel time may actually attract riders.

Agreed. But I just don't see the CTA reaching the levels of ridership that would warrant 3 min combined headways with the current quality of service. New ridership will follow faster and more reliable service, especially on the weekends and off-peak hours.

I guess I'm just confused. If the red line has the additional trackage to run skip-stop service, then why not just have traditional local/express service? Can't that be done?

^^^ Well they already have the Purple line...

I don't think the Purple line is enough, they should run Red Express Lines that stop at every 4th stop or so or just the major stops like Howard, Loyola, Lawrence (mainly when concerts are letting out), Addison, Belmont, and then go back to normal trains after Fullerton... That would shave probably 15 min off the commute downtown for a great number of riders who could take local trains to the major stops and then catch an express downtown...

I don't think eliminating one or two station stops is going to make the difference. As it happens, I was out on the Brown Line this afternoon, so I timed a few stops. Train stop to train start is generally 10-12 seconds. To roughly approximate total delay from a station stop, I counted beginning of deceleration time to train start (in other words, assuming the acceleration time equaled the deceleration time). I counted 20 to 25 seconds lost to each stop. The longest was at Belmont, where extra time was given for changing trains: total, 27 seconds.

2 blocks is 1/4 mile in Chicago numbering, and 1/4 mile is 5 minutes for the average person. A stop in any given stretch adds about a minute once you factor in deceleration, wait time and acceleration. So you better be skipping at least five stops to make up that extra walking. If the average stations are 1/2 mile apart and the average rail trip is 5 miles, then on average people would only just break even counting extra walk time. That doesn't even factor in extra wait time since many given stations will have 1/2 as many trains.

I'm all for dedicated express service on the north main - I've mentioned it a couple times on here - but A-B service is not a great plan unless you're also planning to increase frequency by at least 50%. Trips will be faster once slow zones are all back under control, and in the case of the Red Line, express buses do a good job coming from the north lakefront to downtown.

Just my two cents.

Finally, after waiting year upon excruciating year, I finally read something in this thread that makes me happy.

^ I would also factor in the likelihood that local trains are probably going to reach lower top speeds because they have to stop more frequently. Ideally, an express train that will skip 6 or 7 stops may actually be able to reach a higher maximum speed and maintain it for much longer.

Yep... the loan from the city was reportedly personally requested/required by Ms. Byrne herself, who subsequently received sizable campaign donations from DePrizio (:tup: ), who couldn't even fully finish the work anyway. The various lawsuits by and between creditors following bankruptcy actually led to a sizable body of corporate case law and a legal concept known as "The DePrizio Doctrine." Apparently, after the Feds were bearing down and ready to indict on RICO, the assumption that he'd roll over in a plea deal was enough for him to wind up dead. And as to who ordered the hit...?

Ah, Chicago.

I think it is a mindset from people who believe that everyone lives in front of a rail stop. Even though the stops are 1/4 mile apart how far did people walk to get to those stations? If you saw me getting on at Western you would assume I could walk the 1/4 mile east to Damian even though I already walked 1 mile to get to the Western Brown line stop.........Or when I lived on Lakeshore Drive...since Belmont is only 1/4 mile from Diversey and Addison...eliminate the Belmont stop even though it was walking or busing 3/4 of a mile to get to Belmont in the first place.

If anyone pays attention....the 1/4 miles stops are normally placed in high density work and or living areas.

Definitely a good point. I've thought the same thing as well.

Yeah. Another illustrative example is provided by Addison and Paulina on the Brown Line, which are quite close but serve fairly distinct markets, particularly as regards bus transfers.

Okay... out of all proposed or even "fantasy" transit projects for the Chicago region, which do you think should be the highest priority? The reason I ask is that every day, Springfield gets more gridlocked and more cash-strapped... setting regional priorities will help stuff get done.

Small List (but definitely not comprehensive)
-------------------------------------------
Circle Line
Red Line Extension
Yellow Line Extension
Orange Line Extension
Mid-City Transitway
Carroll Street Transitway
Blue Line Extension to Downers Grove
Airport Express
West Loop Transportation Center
Metra SouthEast Service
Metra Extensions to:
-Rockford
-Kankakee
-LaSalle/Peru
-Plano
-DeKalb
-Milwaukee, WI
-Burlington, WI
South Shore Extensions to:
-Valparaiso
-Lowell

I think #1 priority should be, by agency:
- CTA system modernization: rebuild the North Main Line, replace railcars and buses so there aren't any more fossils rolling around, do a moderate-to-major renovation of every remaining untouched station. We have a very large rail rapid transit network, probably larger than it needs to be given current demand patterns, so any expansions should really be incremental until that changes. e.g. a 1.5 mile line extension, a major intermodal station reconstruction, infill stations on the Green Line, etc. Some sort of citywide quasi-BRT or bus priority grid to improve the speed of crosstown trips, with the idea that eventually the highest volume corridors such as Western might get true BRT or even LRT.

- Metra: More off-peak service: reverse commute, mid-day, and weekends. More late night service on a few particular branches that justify it (probably ME, BNSF, UP-N). As with CTA, focus on creating a pristine and reliable asset stock (already almost there with Metra) and a few select extensions and capacity enhancements, e.g. MD-N to Wadsworth, new yard in Johnsburg, additional double-tracking, triple-tracking and other signal/junction/grade-crossing improvements.

- Pace: A presentable BRT network with dedicated lanes for fast travel times during congested periods, particularly throughout DuPage county and the Cook Panhandle. Maybe an inner shoulder BRT service along I-55 between Downtown and at least I-294. A BRT service along I-90 instead of the stupid STAR Line. The Heritage Corridor may never be more than a boutique service due to physical constraints. There are numerous major employers of entry-level, unskilled jobs in this corridor in the distribution and manufacturing fields, giving the project the potential to be a flagship JARC (Job Access Reverse Commute) project.

Generally, expansions would be geared towards filling gaps, for example:
Blue Line accessibility to the major employment center in Oakbrook and along I-88.
BRT service on the I-55 corridor
BRT access along the I-90 employment corridor
MD-N extension to major employers such as Abbot, Baxter, Gurnee Mills

1. West Loop Transportation Center (to include integration in Blue Line routing)
2. Red Line Extension
3. Carroll St. Transitway
4. Metra Extenstions/capacity increases (more equipment)
5. BRT corridors

Thank god the 2200 railcars are soon to be eliminated. Didn't you mention that the oldest buses are already set to be completely replaced by early next year? Honestly, although that doesn't sound very glamorous it will do so much to make some routes a lot more bearable. Unfortunately, there are still those articulated buses with such bad suspension problems that I get headaches from riding them. I missed the story with those; can anybody fill me in?

Here's a simple recap: The German-built MAN Artics didn't suck. The new NABI artics suck.

Total lemons. Problems not isolated to a single sub-system; if anything, the few working systems are remarkable for their rarity. Suspension, doors, engine, exhaust, electrical; all a mess. I hope there is money for a major mid-life overhaul of these.

And yes, all buses from 1991 (the TMCs and about half the Flxibles, about 350 buses each) will all be retired by around the end of 2008 or very early 2009, in addition to the experimental New Flyer low-floor buses from 1995 (only about 50 of these). The oldest buses remaining will be about 400 Flxibles from 1995, but these were recently overhauled and are relatively reliable workhorses.

I am trying to follow. These busses are the new articulated busses? Pic:
http://www.busexplorer.com/NABus/Ima...BI-Artic-1.jpg

If so I agree. I never thought in my life I would complain about the quality of construction of a bus. I wonder if they will hold together over any little bump, that middle sections jumps as I watch it move up inches and crash together in a noise that would make a sonic boom a lullaby. Though stalling could prevent that. Also stalling would prevent the overhead areas from collapsing onto passengers. Who the hell made this crap?

Personally, this is what I'd focus on:

0) Region land use, forcing zoning that actually supports rail transit in the city and, where applicable, suburbs. The region should not allow the construction of single family homes near existing "L" stations, and probably not near other high-transit areas, too. Without this happening, long-term results of the rest of the list have an increased liklihood of failure.

1) Finish current rehab of the CTA rail system, including track rehab.
2) Add all-day (but not 24-hour) express service between Evanston and Downtown, but reconfigure it to be a real express, adding stops at Wilson and probably Loyola, and then running on the Red Line tracks between Belmont and the subway portal (skipping Wellington, Diversey and Armitage).
3) More frequent Metra service, at least every 30 minutes from 6am-10pm on most lines, 7-days.
4) Carroll Street transitway (this could be a BRT line)
5) "L" station infills at Madison/Pink, Morgan/Green, southside Green/Orange
6) Orange Line extension
7) Extra stops on Yellow Line
8) Yellow Line extension
9) West Loop Transportation Center + full Clinton Subway as proposed
10) Orange and Red Line extensions
11) Circle Line
12) Use 15th Street viaduct for CTA rail service between UIC/Halsted area and Clinton subway and Lakefront/McCormick Place
13) Re-extend Green Line to Jackson Park
14) Blue Line O'Hare express
15) Mid-city Transitway
16) West Loop/Monroe subway to Streeterville
17) South branch of #15 to McCormick Place

The CTA was a little annoying this evening. They've been closing the subway down after 9pm on weeknights to work on the tracks between Clark & Division and Armitage. However tonight they didn't have the subway closed, something I didn't realize until I was up on the platform at Madison. I initially thought no big deal because I could just take the brown line up to Belmont and transfer to the red line there. But then the brown line pulled up, all 4 cars worth of it, and it was packed. So I crammed myself in there and as we proceeded around the north side of the loop, more people tried to squeeze on. Eventually it got to the point that quite a few people were left just standing on the platforms at the Merchandise Mart and Chicago because the train was too full for them to get on. And actually even when I got off at Belmont, the brown line was still impressively packed for the start of its trip on the Ravenswood branch. What pisses me off is that they were running 4 car trains. If your service is still high after 9pm, then at least run 6 car trains! But even more astonishing to me was that at Belmont when I transfered to the red line, it also came into the station with only 4 cars and it too was jam packed full of riders! Why run such short trains when the passenger load is still quite high? I mean I guess it would maybe cost less to run shorter trains, but doing so at the expense of riders who are either crammed uncomfortably into the train or left waiting for the next train seems wrong. It felt like we were in the middle of the afternoon rush hour, only it was after 9pm!

So the CTA had no recourse in this situation? I wonder if this is a common problem for transit agencies. I'm pretty sure I've never ridden on a bus in any city (in any country) that felt quite as shoddy as those things. Too bad we will likely be stuck with them for a good long time. Oh well, "buy American" I guess.

If it surprised you to see the trains full at that hour, don't you suspect it also caught CTA by surprise? When the Brown Line operator gets to Library and all the seats are taken, he can't pull into a pocket track and call Kimball Yard and tell them to send him four more cars before continuing around the Loop.

I'm pretty sure there actually has been significant legal action, withheld payments, and so forth. But at the end of the day, CTA still has the buses and has to meet service with them, somehow.

It isn't my job to be analyzing passenger loads to ensure the proper amount of trains are running. That's part of the CTA's job. And besides, I've seen the brown line packed on other evenings before... I just haven't complained because I'm generally on the red line that typically has enough cars to not be packed. But they were both just 4 cars last night. And if by chance this was an unusual night, then something must have been happening downtown that the CTA should have been more prepared for. It's called planning. So I don't need you lecturing me on the inability of train operators to get more cars when they're on the loop. It should haven't been like that in the first place. These types of loads don't just suddenly appear out of the blue for no good reason. Either the trains remain full enough to warrant extra cars at that time of the evening, or a special event was happening that the CTA should have been prepared for. So I'm sorry, but I'm not buying your excuses.

^^^+++

This is the kind of crap that gives the CTA a bad name. It should be easily preventable, though obviously at a cost.

I used to work odd hours in the loop, putting my on the brown line from between 8-10 PM. There are consistently a surprising number of riders at this hour. IMO, the CTA knows about crowds at this time and is probably just trying to cut costs. Not that I blame them, given their funding situation, but it *is* annoying...

Taft

What is the incremental cost to run extra cars? Maintenance and electricity is the only expense I can think of.

*back-of-napkin*

$2,000,000 purchase
$1,000,000 mid-life overhaul
$1,000,000 lifetime other maintenance (this may be way low for all I know)

1,000,000 miles in a lifetime (I have no idea if this is realistic or not)

If that's true, it costs $4+electricity, so even if elec is $1/mile (which seems unlikely to me), that's $5/mile, per car. For a married pair, that's $10/mile. Kimball to the Loop is 20 miles, round-trip, so adding 2 cars comes to an incremental cost of $200 per run. Doing that six times an hour for 2 extra hours would be $2,400/day, or probably around $15,000/wk with weekend variation, which computes to a cost of $780,000/year to run 2 extra cars for 2 extra hours each day on the Brown Line. That's a lot, and at an average fare of $1 (counting transfers and seniors, etc), would require a total ridership (24/7 ridership) increase of over 6% to justify it. Which makes it seem to me that it really wouldn't pay for itself, as unfortunate as that is, and as much as I wish it would pay for itself. Now, if the incremental cost is a lot lower, or the average fare late-night is higher, the balance could change ...

Tough call. I've also noticed that CTA is making an effort to run fewer cars during off-hours and increasing the load factor. This is great, as long as there aren't any passengers getting left behind, which is very, very bad news at off-peak headways.

I've also noticed very high loads on the Brown Line all evening until 9:30-10pm, though I suspect things got screwed up because of the canceled Red Line reroute, which sent enough people to the L to overwhelm Brown Line service along the Wabash and Lake legs of the loop while the Red Line was probably being underutilized underground.

CTA to experiment with seatless rush-hour train cars
 

..