SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: Transit Developments (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=101657)

LouisVanDerWright Dec 6, 2013 9:21 PM

It sure sounds like they are planning to do TOD on the Logan Square station. That would be a dream come true if they built a Tower of Pizza Hut esque design there. However, they better not be planning on removing the plaza around the West entrance by Grace's furniture, I actually really like that area underneath the trees with the chess boards. It gets a surprising amount of use. Whenever I happen to be there I always see a lot of people loitering there waiting for people to come out of the train or just hanging out.

Maybe they can take out that nasty parking lot to the North of the station too.

Just for reference, the Tower of Pizza Hut cost $12 million, so a $13 million TOD project would be roughly the same size, possibly taller since this site is more constrained.

paytonc Dec 6, 2013 9:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6366047)
Also: Logan Square Mixed-Use TOD? Are they planning to sell off the station plaza to a developer?

That's about all that I can think of. The city owns the open space* at the NW, NE, and SE corners of the square, but the only site that would require $2M of CTA money would be the bus turnaround. It's about 0.7 acres, or about 10 city lots, with few immediate neighbors, and it's too large relative to the bus traffic it gets.

The parking lot beyond the bus turnaround is also city-owned, but since they're "metered" spaces they're administered by LAZ.

* I'm sure someone will call it "precious"

ardecila Dec 6, 2013 11:25 PM

Well, there's an excess of open space at this intersection but not elsewhere in the neighborhood. The station plaza is also unique as a hardscaped plaza and not a green swath, although it's not very well-designed for what it is.

This type of public space is very rare outside of downtown. I'd prefer improving it before removing it, especially if the alternative is to give the land away to a developer free of charge PLUS a $2M subsidy.

the urban politician Dec 6, 2013 11:58 PM

^. Screw it, let's take the TOD. If it's anything like 1611 Division it will be worth it. We need density around our subway stations, not plazas. Kudos to CTA for planning this.

ardecila Dec 7, 2013 12:50 AM

^ At a net loss to the taxpayer of $2M plus the assessed value of the land?

the urban politician Dec 7, 2013 5:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6366359)
^ At a net loss to the taxpayer of $2M plus the assessed value of the land?

Yes.

Chicago is governed (with some exceptions) by corrupt douchebags, so what's new? I'm so used to tax dollars being thrown away around here that I've developed the mentality that "if you're going to throw my tax money away, then at least build something I like with it"

And I'd rather see a dense TOD than a windswept plaza

denizen467 Dec 7, 2013 9:25 PM

I think I'm more surprised by the $27 million for LTE antennas in the subway. Wtf? I definitely support continuous broadband connections during commutes, but is this so complicated that it costs 8 figures, and if so, that the big 4 carriers cannot pay for it? I don't think that sports stadiums, or places like Times Square etc., pay for special antenna clusters to be installed to handle mass crowds, do they? Broadband in the subways of the world is hardly a novelty anymore.

oshkeoto Dec 7, 2013 10:07 PM

Quote:

Well, there's an excess of open space at this intersection but not elsewhere in the neighborhood. The station plaza is also unique as a hardscaped plaza and not a green swath, although it's not very well-designed for what it is.
That's not really true - literally across the street from this is the square itself, which has both landscaped and hardscaped surfaces, and gets LOTS of use whenever whether permits. Creating more of a wall around it - and increasing opportunities for adjacent retail - would be great. Plus, there's the enormous Palmer Square two blocks south, and the new triangular plaza they're creating at Milwaukee and Diversey two blocks north. Logan Square is going through a huge boom in residential demand; we should be allowing as much new development as possible to absorb it.

Mr Downtown Dec 8, 2013 1:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 6367067)
the big 4 carriers cannot pay for [LTE antennas] ?

They pay for it with substantial monthly fees.

ardecila Dec 8, 2013 5:39 AM

The LTE antennas may in fact be funded by the carriers, but they are included in this project to bulk up the $495M figure. We don't know whether that figure is all tax dollars... the inclusion of the Logan Square TOD suggests it is not.

I'm happy to hear about a tower on the Logan Square station plaza, I just want to keep a dignified entrance to the station. Right now it's pretty unmistakeable where the entrance is, but if they reduce it to some narrow-ass stairs on the sidewalk it will lose that neighborhood centerpiece status.

the urban politician Dec 8, 2013 1:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6367411)
I'm happy to hear about a tower on the Logan Square station plaza, I just want to keep a dignified entrance to the station. Right now it's pretty unmistakeable where the entrance is, but if they reduce it to some narrow-ass stairs on the sidewalk it will lose that neighborhood centerpiece status.

^ Not to get nitpicky, as I agree with you 99% of the time, but what is up with you on this issue?

This is what I don't get about some people on this forum and what causes me to sometimes want to roll my eyes. People rage about the lack of TOD in this city, and now that there is a real proposal to introduce it, a whole bunch of complaining.

That Logan Sq Blue Line station is far from a neighborhood centerpiece. That particular intersection needs density, it needs a relatively tall building to stand out as an exclamation point for that beautiful district. I have no doubt that regardless of what gets built, people will have no problem seeing that there is a CTA Blue Line station there, I'm not sure why you are worried about that.

You've got this, 1611 W Division, the proposal (if it ever gets off the ground) at the Chicago Ave Blue Line station, and the proposal at Clark and Belmont, and I'm actually starting to get excited about a trend towards TOD in this city.

LouisVanDerWright Dec 8, 2013 5:07 PM

Ardceila, I don't think we can look at this as a "$2 million subsidy to a private developer". I have a feeling that any project that would replace the bus turnaround would include extensive additional expenses due to the fact that it needs to integrate a subway entrance. That's not to mention the fact that the developer would have to reserve a significant amount of valuable ground level space for a CTA entrance and the retail, given the booming retail scene in Logan Square, is one of the most valuable parts of a project like this. I see the contribution of the land and $2 million as probably a fair subsidy to make up for the extra expenses of completely rebuilding a subway entrance and permanently turning over a portion of the building to the CTA.

Ideally they would push the subway entrance all the way to the South corner of the lot and keep the retail to the North on both Kedzie and Milwaukee. Hopefully they have a good architect design this, buildings with integrated subway entrances are easy to mess up.

LouisVanDerWright Dec 8, 2013 6:40 PM

Speaking of Logan Square, there is a big push to completely rebuild the streets of the square to make it more pedestrian friendly and increase green space. The section of Milwaukee that passes through the square would be reserved only for Bike traffic and bus traffic and the auto traffic would be routed through the square as if it were a true traffic circle:

http://gridchicago.com/2012/neighbor...tsblog+Chicago)

http://farm8.static.flickr.com/7041/...bd4a5de282.jpg

oshkeoto Dec 8, 2013 7:07 PM

Yeah, I have to agree with TUP; that plaza isn't a neighborhood centerpiece in any kind of positive way right now - the only time I can remember it functioning like that is during the night markets this summer, but otherwise it's pretty barren. And given that there's the little Paseo garden across Milwaukee AND the square just across half of Logan Blvd - both of which are *actually* used as public gathering spaces now - it seems totally unnecessary to keep a third, disused space on the grounds that it might be used at some point in the future.

the urban politician Dec 8, 2013 7:37 PM

LVDW, that proposal to redo the streets around the square is awesome! Thanks for sharing that.

Of all neighborhoods in the city, Logan Square really has the greatest potential to undergo a significant tranformation (ie gentrification). If something like the above were done to the circle, that would be one grand step in such a direction.

ardecila Dec 8, 2013 9:27 PM

Yeah, I like the traffic circle proposal. Seems like that could become a nightmare for drivers tho... roundabouts tend to be pretty nerve-wracking when they are wider than two lanes. Of course, after nearly getting run over several times walking through there, anything is an improvement. I'm sure it would be great with proper design.

It is frustrating that CTA is trashing all of its modernist heritage, even when there's nothing wrong with it (Jefferson Park) but sure, TOD is great. We don't have much track record with integrated station entrances, but the one in the Thompson Center is pretty dec so maybe this won't be so bad.

It's pretty early to tell anyway, I'm sure CTA will want to issue an RFP to developers for the Logan Square site and the competition will hopefully lead to good design.

sammyg Dec 8, 2013 11:10 PM

Logan Square is pretty nerve-wracking as it is. I think it will be easier to navigate without Milwaukee cutting through the middle.

paytonc Dec 9, 2013 2:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6367411)
I'm happy to hear about a tower on the Logan Square station plaza, I just want to keep a dignified entrance to the station.

I suspect that the bus turnaround is what's being discussed. It's much larger and wider, particularly if CDOT (which owns it and the roads) can tighten the roadway geometries at that intersection. Kedzie almost doubles in width on that block, for no discernable reason other than to accommodate what I assume is a CTA vent, and that results in excessive speeds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by oshkeoto (Post 6367112)
literally across the street from this is the square itself, which has both landscaped and hardscaped surfaces, and gets LOTS of use whenever whether permits.

Despite the Paseo Prairie Garden, people always choose to hang out at the monument during the summer -- it's better shielded from traffic. It's worth noting that another hardscape plaza is proposed for the gravel lot at the SE corner: http://www.chicagorarities.org/

LouisVanDerWright Dec 9, 2013 3:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6367749)
It is frustrating that CTA is trashing all of its modernist heritage, even when there's nothing wrong with it (Jefferson Park) but sure, TOD is great. We don't have much track record with integrated station entrances, but the one in the Thompson Center is pretty dec so maybe this won't be so bad.

I don't know if you can say they are "trashing all of their modernist heritage". Most of the South Red Line stations are preserved in more or less original condition after being renovated. I am sure they will keep, for example, the Belmont Blue line station and the Spaulding Exits to the Logan Station intact. Those are some of my favorite modern stations along with the interiors at Logan and Belmont and the Southwest Logan entrance (I can't stress how awesome that little garden is right there, the station entrance lets you out basically into a park which is too cool). The Logan Square station bus turnaround/main entrance, while cool, is frankly just too "urban renewal" for my tastes and for its location.

Also, I agree that Thomson Center is pretty cool, but the other side of Clark and Lake is a clusterfuck and practically never open except for 8 hours during weekdays. They can't integrate an entrance and then let the private owners dictate hours like that.

nomarandlee Dec 9, 2013 4:59 AM

A tidbit from the Tribune on the Blue Line upgrades a few days ago. This stood out to me because I never heard any follow up as to what happened with the Quinn initiative to run express from Union to O'Hare.

Still, the numbers quoted still seem like a remarkable value. It is hard to believe that given the modest financials to run such a service they didn't find it worthwhile supposedly. There has to be more details or explaination to why no follow up........

Quote:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...-hare-branch/2


O'Hare Blue Line to stay open during 4-year renovation


December 05, 2013|By Jon Hilkevitch | Tribune reporter

.......One thing it won’t be is an experience rivaling much-pricier airport express rail service operating in London, Tokyo, Hong Kong and other world-class cities, an idea that Emanuel’s predecessor espoused as recently as 2010........Gov. Pat Quinn has also quietly dropped an idea he floated in 2011, one asking Amtrak to examine the logistics and costs of operating nonstop passenger service between Union Station and O’Hare.

The ridership simply wasn’t there to support the estimated $20 million to $50 million cost, not including building new tracks on right-of-way owned by the Canadian National Railway, to accommodate the trains, Joe Shacter, director of public and intermodal transportation at the Illinois Department of Transportation told the Tribune on Thursday.........
..

Mr Downtown Dec 9, 2013 3:19 PM

^Too much money to move too few passengers, on too few trains, too slowly and unreliably, too far from the terminal.

Amtrak doesn't have any baseline service heading out that way that it could supplement. So even if it continued every Illinois and Michigan train out to O'Hare, there still wouldn't be a train every hour. Amtrak wouldn't be able to turn the equipment for the next long-distance run as quickly, all for the sake of six passengers who would find themselves in Rosemont having to transfer to the ATS. And because the Loop-to-O'Hare segment would come at the end of all the train runs, any problems with timekeeping en route to Chicago would mean unreliable service for people anxious about catching their flights.

ardecila Dec 9, 2013 3:31 PM

Huh? Why wouldn't Amtrak just run a dedicated Union Station-O'Hare service on 20 minute headways? Or Metra could do it. I agree that there's too much freight interference to do through-running of Amtrak. I'm not sure what the travel time would be but it's gotta be faster than the Blue Line.

electricron Dec 9, 2013 5:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6368276)
Huh? Why wouldn't Amtrak just run a dedicated Union Station-O'Hare service on 20 minute headways? Or Metra could do it. I agree that there's too much freight interference to do through-running of Amtrak. I'm not sure what the travel time would be but it's gotta be faster than the Blue Line.

Why duplicate services already being provided by the Blue line? Most commuters given the option will choose to ride on the train with the cheaper fares.

sammyg Dec 9, 2013 6:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by electricron (Post 6368396)
Why duplicate services already being provided by the Blue line? Most commuters given the option will choose to ride on the train with the cheaper fares.

It seems to work in London and Tokyo. Americans who would spend that kind of money might not be the type to consider trains or transit at all.

Mr Downtown Dec 9, 2013 7:10 PM

Amtrak or Metra can't be faster end-to-end unless the station is directly under the terminal. Even if you posit 20-minute headways, you've lost six minutes vs. Blue Line (8 minute headways) before you leave the platform. If you have to transfer to ATS to reach the terminal, you've lost another 10 minutes at O'Hare. The new train service would have to reach 90 mph through the grade crossings of Mont Clare and Elmwood Park.

So back up a minute and ask why no one offers airport bus service* from CUS to ORD if there's so much demand. Traffic congestion only makes the expressway slower than the Blue Line for an hour or so each afternoon. It works in London and Paris because it's a lot faster than the local rapid transit service, not because it's a train.

*Yes, you can ride Van Galder but they don't promote it because most runs have a layover out by the airport.

oshkeoto Dec 9, 2013 11:26 PM

^ Yeah, I have to admit I've never really understood the obsession with an O'Hare express - it seems like Chicago's version of the obsession with value-neutral or -negative streetcar projects in smaller, younger cities. A status symbol (look, we're like London or Tokyo!) rather than something that's actually practical.

Quote:

Despite the Paseo Prairie Garden, people always choose to hang out at the monument during the summer -- it's better shielded from traffic. It's worth noting that another hardscape plaza is proposed for the gravel lot at the SE corner:
Oy, really? That's so dumb. I know it's a weird plot, but there really ought to be development at that corner.

nomarandlee Dec 10, 2013 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oshkeoto (Post 6368828)
^ Yeah, I have to admit I've never really understood the obsession with an O'Hare express - it seems like Chicago's version of the obsession with value-neutral or -negative streetcar projects in smaller, younger cities. A status symbol (look, we're like London or Tokyo!) rather than something that's actually practical..

I dunno. I certainly get it. I mean through much of the day it can take well up to an 45m-hour to get to O'Hare by taxi in snarled traffic. Not to mention the price. The price is right on the Blue Line but it is often cramped as hell and relatively prodding with 15 stops between and on days like this even the cars remain cold.

Not to mention O'Hare is one of the farthest airports from downtown in the US while the Kennedy is the 2nd most jammed highway in the US and its not a good combination. Also its not just the likes of London and Tokyo that are doing airport express. The likes of Brisbane and Sydney have a private company who runs such an express at a profit doing it.

.....Granted I can understand how not running service until the ATS tracks are extended because there is obviously a big missing link there. However afterwards its just hard to imagine how there wouldn't be market to charge people 10-20 for comfortable airport service from downtown to airport in say 20 minutes.

ardecila Dec 10, 2013 12:55 AM

A little tidbit from last week:

Quote:

Ashland, Division and Milwaukee to Be Designated 'Polish Triangle'
By Ted Cox on December 5, 2013 11:01am


A City Council committee formally moved to declare the intersection of Ashland, Division and Milwaukee in Wicker Park the "Polish Triangle" Thursday.

Moreno suggested the Chicago Transit Authority rename its Blue Line stop at Division the "Polish Triangle," and Suarez said those efforts were already underway.

The CTA, however, gave a lukewarm response to actually renaming the station. "CTA has discussed this issue with Ald. Ray Suarez and is happy to assist him in pursing his constituents' goal of highlighting that area's importance in American and Polish history," said CTA spokesman Stephen Mayberry. "CTA has suggested a landmark sign at Division station, prominently designating it as the station for the 'Polonia Triangle.' The landmark sign would be highly visible to our customers and would be in keeping with standard CTA signage policy for such a designation."

nomarandlee Dec 10, 2013 1:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 6368584)
Amtrak or Metra can't be faster end-to-end unless the station is directly under the terminal. Even if you posit 20-minute headways, you've lost six minutes vs. Blue Line (8 minute headways) before you leave the platform.

Not really comparable. Express trains from Union would run on a schedule. Perhaps something like :00, :20,:40 ever hour. Therefor people would go and wait for 8 minutes or 19 minutes for an express train because like most scheduled service they would get there with just enough time they need to make the train.
Quote:

If you have to transfer to ATS to reach the terminal, you've lost another 10 minutes at O'Hare.
Most people fly from either T1,T3,orT5 and have to walk for 5-8 minutes to get to check in or even traverse their way to the ATS to get to other terminals anyway when they arrive by subway.

If the express trains were to be timed with waiting ATS trains then the time atmost it would take to arrive at the check-in at the terminals would be the 10-12 minutes it takes the ATS to make its complete run.
Quote:

The new train service would have to reach 90 mph through the grade crossings of Mont Clare and Elmwood Park.
Presumably still a much cheaper effort then triple tracking the Blue Line and trying to do passes however.

Quote:

So back up a minute and ask why no one offers airport bus service* from CUS to ORD if there's so much demand.
Well for one there the Metra station it would stop at now is pitiful. Number two is the ATS station that would at the very least make it necessary to pull off hasn't been extended yet.

Quote:

Traffic congestion only makes the expressway slower than the Blue Line for an hour or so each afternoon.
I'm not sure if that is supposed to a strike against the Blue Line or a mark against driving on the Kennedy. Either way I think you are somehow underplaying just what a cluster the Kennedy is for much of the day. Sure, during the mid-day (10am-2pm) and late night (11pm-6am) it isn't bad but the rest of the time you are just as likely to get caught into some seriously aggravating delays.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0...e=1_The_Circle

Quote:

It works in London and Paris because it's a lot faster than the local rapid transit service, not because it's a train.
I think its obviously a factor of things. Price. Travel times. Comfort. All of which would obviously be niche that an O'Hare express could beat either/or taxis/CTA. The areas where an Express would be trumped would only be time. That only for over half of the day though compared to taxi's (traffic on the Kennedy is highly unpredictable however so that advantage is mitigated). Price of the CTA can't be beat but the comfort and speed surely can.

Rizzo Dec 10, 2013 6:44 AM

I can't imagine with my current situation of working in the loop and living north of the river, taking a train from union station being convenient. Most people are a closer walk to the blue line and its many stations. Hauling over to union station is always a chore, though I realize folks do it every day. But it seems like a useful concept to a handful of business travelers and a completely useless concept for the majority of Chicagoans that are nowhere close to the station.

Mr Downtown Dec 10, 2013 3:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomarandlee (Post 6368968)
like most scheduled service they would get there with just enough time they need to make the train.

I think the idea was that people would be transferring from incoming Amtrak trains to an O'Hare service. Those arrive at random times.

And of course if Amtrak runs it, they'll make everyone queue up inside the station 20 minutes ahead of time for a pointless ticket and ID check, then close the gates 5 minutes before departure. :hell:

nomarandlee Dec 10, 2013 7:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 6369383)
I think the idea was that people would be transferring from incoming Amtrak trains to an O'Hare service. Those arrive at random times.:

I hardly think that the idea was to primarley service Amtrak/Metra transfers. Having the service from Union would likely just increase the potential clientele given the relatively seamless transfer for Metra/Amtrak riders to such a service.

Blue Line trains arrive at random times. Metra does not. Metra/Amtrak could readjust very slightly some of their schedules if demand warrants in order to best align with express service train runs. Still, if there are 15 or 20 minutes headways I hardly think that waiting 5-15 minutes in most cases for the next express will be something that most will feel is a prohibitive wait.
Quote:

And of course if Amtrak runs it, they'll make everyone queue up inside the station 20 minutes ahead of time for a pointless ticket and ID check, then close the gates 5 minutes before departure.
Well its would be best not to have Amtrak run it. Why it can't run more like a Metra train in that regard where you can get on 1 minute before departure I'm not sure. If they wanted to do airport check-in service or flight baggage check service at Union that would of course take longer but of course that could be optional and that will take approximately the same amount of time for the customer be done at the train station or at the airport. That will just come down to personal preference.

ardecila Dec 10, 2013 11:39 PM

Well, I question the wisdom of using Union Station to handle even more regional traffic than it does currently. It just isn't set uo for the massive commuter flows it handles, let alone Amtrak transfers. That's why the station and its immediate surroundings are so crucial to upgrade - they enable all kinds of future developments.

IDOT is blowing most of a billion dollars on the Circle Interchange while the equally bustling Union Station goes neglected by planners and politicians.

Rizzo Dec 11, 2013 5:55 AM

Union station is a portal out of town. Not a portal across town to another big portal to the world. Psychologically the blue line will always seem more convenient because the complexity of transfers steps up as you arrive to your plane.

Getting to union station is kind of a pain since it's the sw edge of the loop and remote from the majority of hotels. You still need to a hop a bus or taxi to get there. But for most Chicagoans and business travelers that opt to take the blue line, it's within convenient walking distance in the loop or a convenient transfer from the red line.

Walking thru union is hell as an out of towner, and you are always cutting across the daily commuters that have much lighter baggage. I'd just piggy-back existing L service with a vehicle-type that most of the world is familiar with coming to and from airports, and that's anything but improved Amtrak rolling stock. Plus, concentrating passengers in one location after they've left the airport seems ridiculous when theoretically they should be dispersed around downtown closer to their final destination, not add another level burden on traffic for that final mile.

Chi-Sky21 Dec 11, 2013 1:48 PM

Whatever happened to the "Epic" blue line station for express to the airport that was supposed to be built? Didn't they spend 100s of millions of dollars on it and it still isn't even open? Does anyone have pics of what they actually did or what state it is in?

Mr Downtown Dec 11, 2013 3:09 PM

^Remains unfinished. No further work scheduled at this time. Photos.

Chi-Sky21 Dec 11, 2013 3:39 PM

Thanks for the link! Interesting to see the space. Looks like they got a lot of it done. If they are spending so much on rehab of the blue line, they should just tack on a few 10s of million more and get this done! Wishful thinking.

Rizzo Dec 12, 2013 1:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chi-Sky21 (Post 6370557)
Whatever happened to the "Epic" blue line station for express to the airport that was supposed to be built? Didn't they spend 100s of millions of dollars on it and it still isn't even open? Does anyone have pics of what they actually did or what state it is in?

And I've always been more fond of that proposal because at least travelers are more centrally positioned and have near direct access to every cta line and tons of buses, cabs and are in the heart of Chicago's hotel, shopping, and cultural attractions.

LaSalle.St.Station Dec 12, 2013 6:37 AM

Now that Metra's rail lines expansion are hitting up against the geographical funding boundaries of the RTA, I think the State should create a secondary Statewide rail taxing district to allow the existing Metra system to continue to build out operational passenger rail deeper into Illinois outside of Chicago metro.

Chi-Sky21 Dec 12, 2013 1:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaSalle.St.Station (Post 6371791)
Now that Metra's rail lines expansion are hitting up against the geographical funding boundaries of the RTA, I think the State should create a secondary Statewide rail taxing district to allow the existing Metra system to continue to build out operational passenger rail deeper into Illinois outside of Chicago metro.

....and 1 more governing board to make it all run smoothly!

LouisVanDerWright Dec 12, 2013 10:24 PM

Anyone Want a 2200 Series L Car?
 
There's a CTA auction going on at Rick Levin's website. There's a few cool items that even a transit fan on a budget might be able to afford if a whole train car is too pricey:

http://ricklevin.com/Auctions/Online-Auctions.aspx

ardecila Dec 12, 2013 10:41 PM

I assume the 2200 will eventually go to Illinois Railway Museum or the Fox River Trolley Museum, if CTA hasn't already donated 2200s to these institutions. Really, the auction value just has to exceed the scrap value.

LouisVanDerWright Dec 12, 2013 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 6372511)
I assume the 2200 will eventually go to Illinois Railway Museum or the Fox River Trolley Museum, if CTA hasn't already donated 2200s to these institutions. Really, the auction value just has to exceed the scrap value.

Hell, I'd buy one for $4k all day, but the problem is probably getting it delivered. I own a vacant lot that fronts the L, maybe they can drive one to my lot and I can have a crane on site to lower it?

emathias Dec 12, 2013 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaSalle.St.Station (Post 6371791)
Now that Metra's rail lines expansion are hitting up against the geographical funding boundaries of the RTA, I think the State should create a secondary Statewide rail taxing district to allow the existing Metra system to continue to build out operational passenger rail deeper into Illinois outside of Chicago metro.

Uh, no.

Busy Bee Dec 12, 2013 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 6372534)
Hell, I'd buy one for $4k all day, but the problem is probably getting it delivered. I own a vacant lot that fronts the L, maybe they can drive one to my lot and I can have a crane on site to lower it?

It's rather surprising no one in Chicago has used them like this yet. I think its freaking great.

Justin_Chicago Dec 13, 2013 1:33 PM

Boiler Room, one of my favorite pizza bars in Logan Square, uses a CTA car for the bathroom.

http://www.boilerroomlogansquare.com/

tintinex Dec 13, 2013 5:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright (Post 6372483)
There's a CTA auction going on at Rick Levin's website. There's a few cool items that even a transit fan on a budget might be able to afford if a whole train car is too pricey:

http://ricklevin.com/Auctions/Online-Auctions.aspx

Thank you! I just bid in a few items. This is awesome

MayorOfChicago Dec 13, 2013 7:02 PM

They need to figure out venta on the buses. I got on for free every single day this week because it wouldn't read the card, or twice when the woman just said it didn't work (she assumed because of the cold, they're having issues with that). I seriously wonder if bus ridership stats will take a huge dive.

It also takes an incredibly long amount of time to board buses now when the drivers do want you to try and use ventra. I timed it on Wednesday after realizing how delayed everything was getting and it took 48 seconds for four of us getting on the bus to tap our ventra. Every single person including myself took a long long time. The driver said to me "just keep trying, it'll work eventually". I snapped back at her "Well it hasn't worked since day one, why on earth would it work now?".

emathias Dec 13, 2013 7:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MayorOfChicago (Post 6373433)
They need to figure out venta on the buses. I got on for free every single day this week because it wouldn't read the card, or twice when the woman just said it didn't work (she assumed because of the cold, they're having issues with that). I seriously wonder if bus ridership stats will take a huge dive.

It also takes an incredibly long amount of time to board buses now when the drivers do want you to try and use ventra. I timed it on Wednesday after realizing how delayed everything was getting and it took 48 seconds for four of us getting on the bus to tap our ventra. Every single person including myself took a long long time. The driver said to me "just keep trying, it'll work eventually". I snapped back at her "Well it hasn't worked since day one, why on earth would it work now?".

It's worked perfectly for me and everyone I've seen use it on my bus routes and train entrances. I see anecdotes like this in multiple sources, but just haven't witnessed it myself. It's working fine for me, and for my boyfriend and other people I see use it.

Steely Dan Dec 13, 2013 10:07 PM

^ yeah, for all of the large amounts of griping about Ventra, it's worked flawlessly for me every time, both bus & el (knock on wood).


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.