How do you figure? It would even further increase the service on the Pink line to even more unjustified levels, adding even more car miles. That would make things worse. Depending on perspective, the Pink Line caused way too much service to be provided along both the Forest Park and Cermak branches, which were actually about appropriately served at half the O'hare headway. The idea (and Frank K was big on this) was to grow ridership at basically any cost in any way possible.

If any re-pairing should be done, it would probably be Lake Street and Midway which have similar riders per route mile. South Main and Cermak have comparable demand and should probably only be on 10 minute peak and 15 minute off-peak headways, so those could be paired up since they're both overserved in the current arrangement. Brown is in it's own class and basically needs the highest level of rush hour service of any route, at least until the 8-car expansion is complete.

^ Viva, do you anticipate that population growth along the westside or southside lines will ever occur to the point of justifying current levels of service, or is this completely a lost cause? I ask this because, despite current conditions, housing development does appear to be happening (albeit gradually)

IMO, if those areas were fully built out at current zoning, they would at least come close to justifying rail transit service. With a couple exceptions (like Englewood, which is more or less a disaster, and Washington Park), the housing stock in many of these neighborhoods is intact and overall population in those areas will only increase perhaps 20% once the vacant land is re-developed. It's worth noting that in most cases, the "blight" is worst nearest the L tracks, so it will appear worst when viewing the neighborhood from that vantage point. I think this is predominantly resulting from where the concentrations of 1) 1960s riots and 2) 1970s-1990s gang activity were located.

Travel patterns are a significant factor here. Bus routes through some of these "bombed out" neighborhoods are actually some of the busiest bus routes in the system: the #3 King, the #20 Madison, #29 State, and the #63. Poorer neighborhoods will generally have people making local trips (i.e. short trips by bus), with less demand for a trip to service/professional jobs/activities downtown (rail). So even very dense and built-up low-income neighborhoods will have low rail ridership (think Pilsen, one of the densest parts of the city with only about 3700 daily boardings spread across 3 well-located and gorgeous new rail stations....that's about 1/4 of Fullerton's station entries alone).

So, it's a complicated answer, but I think a mix of re-development and moderate levels of gentrification (at least to the point where they are somewhat mixed-income neighborhoods) would lead those lines to have riderships levels that justify their existence. Of course, the City's land-use and zoning planning seem to be almost completely divorced of transit-related considerations, so if and when it happens it will be accidental or through (hopefully) natural market demand for rail access.

^^^nice post

The only thing i would add is this.

Discontinuing service anywhere seems to be a bad idea. How moronic was the destruction of the green line in woodlawn? The area is seeing some redevelopment and you know what they need now? Yep, more transit. It seems better to operate a line at a loss for awhile and hope for redevelopment than to get rid of it and lose it forever. It so hard to build new lines, lets hold onto what we have like grim death.

Governor offers $27 million in transit aid
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,7886174.story

----------------------------------
Governor offers $27 million in transit aid

By Ray Long | Tribune staff reporter
12:34 PM CDT, November 2, 2007


SPRINGFIELD - Seeking to avert a transportation "Doomsday," Gov. Rod Blagojevich today authorized a direct grant to the Chicago Transit Authority and Pace for $27 million to maintain operations until the end of the year, according to a letter he sent to lawmakers today.

Transit officials said they were reviewing the offer, which would need federal approval, and had not yet called off scheduled service cuts and fare hikes set for Sunday.

Blagojevich made clear that the short-term funding is not a loan. "It is new money we are providing them to keep serving their riders," he wrote.

"In the meantime, the four legislative leaders and I will continue our negotiations to find a permanent, long-term solution," the letter said.

The governor said there is a "general consensus that a mass transit plan for the Chicagoland region should be passed in conjunction with a capital plan that would meet infrastructure needs across the state."

Blagojevich also maintained that the regional sales tax package backed by House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) does not have the support to pass. The measure failed previously in the House, and Blagojevich consistently has threatened to veto it if it did pass both chambers.

"There is no question that we need to address the mass transit issue, and it needs to be done quickly," Blagojevich wrote.

Sen. Jeff Schoenberg (D-Evanston), an appropriations chairman, said the governor's action unfortunately represented "another stopgap measure that will do little to ease the legitimate fears of the many people who rely heavily on buses and trains every day."

Schoenberg, who is one of the Democratic senators supporting the sales tax package, said he deeply resents any Downstate colleagues who are withholding votes on the package in exchange for a massive construction plan.

The governor said he was moving forward with the stopgap measure because legislative leaders need more time to come up with a permanent funding solution for mass-transit agencies and a statewide construction plan for roads, bridges, schools and other projects.

"If the CTA and PACE accept the $27 million in short-term assistance I offered them today, transit riders in the Chicago area will be able to continue relying on the service they need while we pass a plan that will ultimately result in stronger and safer roads, schools and mass transit systems across Illinois," Blagojevich wrote.

The administration began briefing the transit boards this morning, according to a source close to the issues.

Meanwhile, the chairman of the CTA signaled that the transit agency is willing to accept Blagojevich's offer of a short-term bailout if the federal government will agree.

CTA Chairman Carole Brown said the governor had offered $21 million to her agency from a federal grant for capital expenditures.

But she said it was not yet clear if the federal government would allow money that is supposed to go for capital expenditures to be diverted to operating expenses.

She emphasized that the new money would not be another loan and would not put the CTA into "a deeper hole."

Brown appeared at a news conference that had been scheduled by Mayor Daley to discuss the transit crisis.

If the federal government does not approve the funds transfer, the CTA is prepared to go ahead with its "Doomsday" scenario, Brown said.

"People have a right to be pessimistic that the actions needed will happen," she said.

"I do want to reiterate that this is a temporary solution," Brown said. "Anything that will help ease the burden on our passengers for even a little longer is something we must seriously consider. However, we are not in a position to accept the proposal yet because we are still evaluating whether or not we can use those dollars."

Pace Executive Director T.J. Ross and deputy Rocky Donahue were among the transit officials conferring in Springfield this morning with the governor's office about the proposal.

As of noon, there was still no decision yet as to whether the offer would be acceptable, said Patrick Wilmot, Pace's spokesman.

Pace officials were "guarded but certainly hopeful," Wilmot said.

At its last meeting, the Pace board of directors gave Ross the authority to defer the service reductions scheduled to begin Sunday on 58 fixed bus and Metra feeder routes if the legislature acted at the last minute or if some other solution to the transit funding crisis was reached.

"Our first responsibility is to our passengers and they expect to know if they will have service on Nov. 4 or 5 or whenever," Wilmot said.

rlong@tribune.com


Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

CTA would postpone 'doomsday' hikes under deal
 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/transpo...110207.article


-----------------------------
CTA would postpone 'doomsday' hikes under deal

November 2, 2007
BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
The CTA agreed today to postpone “doomsday” fare hikes and service cuts until Dec. 31, but only if the Federal Transportation Administration approves a $21 million infusion of capital dollars offered by Gov. Blagojevich.

CTA Board Chairwoman Carole Brown said the mass transit authority reluctantly agreed to accept the money, only after Mayor Daley was assured during a whirlwind of morning phone calls to the governor’s office and legislative leaders in Springfield that the money is a grant and not a loan.

“We couldn’t take another loan. This is a grant — transportation dollars for the state that would be applied to CTA, but it’s not expected that we would have to pay it back. So, it doesn’t create an additional hole for us…We were very concerned about having to take another loan,” Brown said.

Assured that another Band-Aid would not dig the CTA an even deeper hole, Brown agreed to accept the grant to stave off fare hikes and service cuts scheduled to take effect on Sunday. The $21 million would be enough to tide the system over until Dec. 31.
Pace would also receive $6 million in the deal.

But, there’s a catch. The FTA has to sign off on the deal.

“FTA policy is not to allow the amending of those [capital] grants. FTA is gonna have to adjust their policy to allow us to do that,” she said.

The CTA has said it will eliminate 39 bus routes, lay off more than 600 employees and raise fares by as much as $1 on Sunday without a long-term funding solution. Even deeper cuts and steeper fare hikes are scheduled for Jan. 1 without a state bailout.

Brown said CTA riders “have a right to be pessimistic” about the prospects for a long-term solution. And she acknowledged that the CTA could be right back where it started during the last week in December — counting down to doomsday — if legislative leaders and the governor have not reached an elusive agreement by then on how to fund both mass transit and a massive capital plan funded by casino gambling.

But, in spite of all that, it was another down-to-the-wire offer that the CTA simply could not refuse.

“Anything that would help ease the burden on our riders for even a little longer is something we must seriously consider,” she said.

“I feel for the students who may have to go to school in the dark and walk through unsafe neighborhoods to get there. And I feel for the city’s working people—the backbone of our workforce—who must commute both ways and will have to get up far earlier and get home far later.”

At a City Hall news conference flanked by a half-dozen aldermen whose wards depend on mass transit, Brown was asked what will change in Springfield between now and Dec. 31.

“That’s the $64 million question — or the $400 million question, if you will. What will change?” she said.

“While we appreciate that we will not have to unduly burden our riders in the short-term, the reason these aldermen are standing up here is because we know it impacts the entire city and that the entire city wants a long-term solution so that we don’t have to continue to talk about….how people are gonna get to work and school.”

:previous:

From an upated version of the Trib article above:

"On the House floor, Rep. Julie Hamos (D-Evanston), who leads the House mass-transit committee, said she understands the governor's proposal would take "leftover" money available from a bond fund. Because bond funds are usually used for things like buying buses or construction projects, there are technical questions that must be reviewed and approved by federal officials before the money can be used by the transit agencies, she said."

Great. The CTA continues to be forced to cannibalize itself. This is how the CTA infrastructure got to the state it's in.

Update: House Speaker Michael Madigan (D-Chicago) has announced that Regional Transportation Authority Chairman Jim Reilly has told him the authority has received federal approval to use $27 million to keep buses and trains running through year's end. Details to come.


Link, Chicago Tribune.

no worries, i have complete faith in these guys to right the ship in the next few weeks ...

*now, where's the emoticon with a face rolling his eyes so far back into his head his sockets begin to bleed?*

^ Exactly.

You know, what's the point of having a DEMOCRAT contolled legislature and a DEMOCRATIC Governor when they can't even reach a consensus on anything! Aren't things supposed to breeze by when everybody is in the same Party?

What kind of bullshit Government is this?

the best quote of the day goes to a democratic senator from quincy who said, and i paraphrase, "roads and bridges downstate are just as important as chicago's mass transit."

no.

edit for link: http://www.pantagraph.com/articles/2...6055696306.txt

i am "matthew" in the comments, for what it's worth. remember, that quote is from a dem. you would think public transit would be in their (our) wheelhouse.

http://www.ipsn.org/indictments/levine/gov0916_285.jpg

urban politican, how can you say that about a guy, with that kind of hair :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

Question, is Dick Durbin or Obama trying to get federal support for mass trans?????

Good post "Matthew" I hope some of our eloquent foumers can counter the comment before matt's.

“Why should I help out Chicago when they haven’t helped out my area for the last umpteen years?” added Republican state Rep. Bill Mitchell of Forsyth." - www.pantagraph.com

:hell:

If it wasn't for Chicago, Illinois would be fricking Wyoming. We pay for everyhting.

I think its time we renew talks of sucession, because apparently the 1980 constitution didn't fix enough.

Illinois's last constitution was 1970. The question of whether to convene another constitution convention will be on the ballot in Nov. 2008. A 60% majority is required.

But Gov. Tinyteeth and three of the Four Tops are from Chicagoland.

this is the saddest part of all. it is easy to vent at suburbanites and downstaters, but the three most powerful men in the state are chicago democrats. that's just state politics, obviously when you add daley, then the situation becomes even more, well, "depressing" will have to do.

who's your your fifth, mr. downtown? senate republican leader?

ah ... watson: http://www.ilga.gov/Senate/Senator.a...rID=1015&GA=94

Funny thing you mentioned tiny teeth. I was so focused on his beedie narrow eyes I have never focused on his tiny teeth.

This man is a pure inbreed genetically from what I can make out of his features.

How is that recall amendment from coming from Lt Gov Pat Quinn coming?

How this thing got elected is a sad statement on our state govern....

And to think this fool act. had his mind on the bigger stage.

So, now we have a SuperDoomsday in January. I can just see it now. It's January 1st, it's 5 degrees outside and snowing, the wind chill is -20. But the legislators have been bickering. So...the CTA cuts 82 bus routes and raises fares to $3.25, Pace cuts all the threatened routes (close to 100, right?) and raises fares, Metra raises fares...and a bunch of people freeze their fingers off walking 2 miles to the 'L'. After a couple weeks, the Dan Ryan hits a stand still all day...

Ok, so this could never happen. But I can see the threatening news stories of December already. And I kind of think it would be awesome for it to happen...for like a week. Nobody would ever question how vital transit is to Chicago ever again. AND...it'd be kind of like the famous stories about the Blizzard of 1979....where Mayor Bilandic (sp??) got voted out because he didn't do the basic job of making sure the streets got plowed. The same thing could happen to Blagassobitch and Madigan...which would be awesome...

^^^^Yeah blag is no prize but madigan is a bitch...always has been

^^^^I believe chicago succeeds just fine :lol: :yes: :jester: now if you would like to talk of secession ...now that is another story altogether

"without spelling there is no dasein" MARTIN HEIDEGGER :jester: :)

ok a rant against this guy---
Bill Mitchell a republican from Decatur who opposes funding for public transportation because he is essentially a fan of auto-centric, oil driven sprawl. He believes that the US should be beholden to Saudi oil interests as he profits from his connections with ADM. Additionally, for some strange reason he thinks it unsafe for white people to mix with people of color on buses or trains since they could be negatively influenced by such diversity and that they should be driving to and from their destination anyway.

If there is one thing that I hope Mr. Mitchell could learn is that public transportation, similarly to his beloved asphalt projects, are a public good. Public goods are increasingly rare in dying towns like Decatur, where many people now chose planned developments, so as to hide from their fellow man. Nonetheless, public goods are not profit driven! Yes even an arch-conservative like Uncle Milty (Friedman) for those who do not know, or Friedrich Hayak would admit as much. But not Bill Mitchell he is infected with that laughing disease promulgated by the joker himself Arthur Laffer and his supply side shenanigans.

By the way Bill...every and I mean every day..you should get on your knees and ....bow to mecca....or pray ...or say kaddish...or do whatever it is you do to thank whatever it is you thank that Chicago is in your State because without it....well the whole state would be like decatur.

and he's a drunkard

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Mitchell_(politician)

arguably those redevelopments only occurred because the El was torn down. At least, that's what the woodlawn mega-church/TWO that spearheaded the developments would tell you (and arguably, they are right). What I don't understand is why that had to put the residential development right on 63rd street? why couldn't they put it on a side street and leave 63rd st. to the El and retail? Now, granted, there wasn't much retail there to begin with and there was the perception that the El over 63rd precipitated crime under the tracks. Who knows. in any case, at this point, it would be better for Woodlawn if the Metra Electric increased service and made more stops at 63rd (and re-did that hideous excuse for a station they have there). Don't know if the current demand would sustain it, however. and without a universal fare card, commuters from hyde park/woodlawn/kenwood are more inclined to cut their losses, purchase only a CTA card and just take the horribly slow No. 6 bus instead of the Metra.

my question is? is the 21 mill diversion temp or perm, and what capital projects did we lose because of this diversion?

^^^^apparently..as well

...well he likes driving & being held to ONLY driving

...I guess if you drive(die) more its more money in the DUIie coffers (coffins)

I've heard this line of reasoning before... but, i just don't see how any area ever benefits from removing an amenity. If the area under the tracks precipitates crime, why isn't there crime under all the EL tracks? The existence of the EL tracks had very little to do with crime. It is just a good example of how these neighborhoods make poor decisions for themselves. Rather than trying to get rid of the crime, they got rid of the EL. This reminds me of a problem East St. Louis had. People kept getting shot at red lights. So instead of trying to fight the gun crime, they timed their lights to have shorter red lights.

I agree with you on 63rd street development. It has a very weird feel to have those little rowhouses along that street. But i suppose that is the only thing those communities can actually get built. Retail and black neighborhoods in chicago seem a bit like oil and water. Also, you are very right in saying the Metra Electric needs some attention.

A Lake-Midway or a Cermak-63rd route would not be able to make a full circuit of the Loop. If both of those services were implemented, the Wells and Van Buren legs of the Loop would see only Brown and Pink line service, which is an under-utilization.

I computed the riders per route mile (actually I computed the route distance per rider, in feet) a few days ago, using the length and ridership data from the Wikipedia page. Combining Brown and Pink would still give a better ratio than the Purple, Yellow, Orange, or Green Lines. It would have the 3rd-best ratio after Red and Blue.

i would imagine there is support for transit in the 600,000 strong metro east of st. louis. they for the most part seem to embrace transit there with open arms. i don't know how many miles of rail there is exactly, but it's over 20 miles i think. design work for further Illinois extensions is complete, and awaiting funding...

downstate isn't a total lost cause. i think a lot of people from the metro east visit chicago and want the positive aspects of its transit emulated there (more like metra in the metro east of course). the small urban faction in the metro east is probably drowned out in the small city rural thinking downstate illinois, and chicago doesnt hear it.

hell, sometimes i think i would pay taxes for chicago transit funding, im tired of breakdowns and delays of what should be a world class system in an indisputably world class city. it just doesnt make sense.

There is a great new article in the Trib about the stopgap funding measure that just passed - here's a good quote from Huberman:

Too true

The more I hear from Huberman the more respect I have for him. He'd make a great mayor someday (wait Daley has kids. nevermind).

Yes, but who cares if any train line doesn't make a full circuit of the loop. People can walk. It is absurd that the loop has 9 stations. It makes the "circuit of the loop" incredibly inefficient. I once traveled from downtown to Belmont, and, because I was near the Quincy station, thought it would be faster to hop on the Brown Line rather than walk over to the State St. subway. Wrong. Why? because the train made 7 stops before exiting downtown and must wait for various other trains as it makes its way around the loop. The CTA should combine lines where possible and eliminate stations. One on each side of the loop is enough. I propose eliminating Adams, Randolph, Lake/State, and Washington (can't eliminate LaSalle b/c of transfer to Metra; can't eliminate Library because it's renovated).

I would disagree. Those stations are packed to the brim durring rush hour and with so many trains sharring the tracks of the Loop elevated, the system backs up and trains queue behind others. With multiple stations the trains can queue at a station platform and just wait an additional 30 seconds with the doors open if need be allowing additional riders to jump on, rather than having trains sitting still between stations, if the number was to be reduced.

I like the idea, but only if it involves no demolition of historic stations. This can be achieved easily by connecting the platforms of stations, and maintaining both sets of entrances.

Combine Clark/Lake and State/Lake, and introduce a real transfer between the Loop and Red Line, using either the Page Brothers Building or the new theWit Hotel. A transfer staircase/elevator through Page Brothers would be interesting.

Combine Randolph and Madison, and do a historic renovation on Madison like the one at Quincy (but without the vintage advertisements).

If any other Loop station is superfluous, it's Quincy. Service to the Financial District is well-served by LaSalle. It's been renovated, though, so I say keep it. Keep Washington, too - a lot of bus lines run on Washington that will be short-changed with a station cut.

I don't think eliminating stations would be in the best interest of riders. Sure, it sounds good, but I like being able to basically get on any line that is needed within three blocks. It is much easier for the disabled too (not saying every station is 100% accessible though).

Yep. That is exactly why they can't eliminate any platforms downtown, they're all packed at rush hour, and if you get rid of one station you'll need to increase the platform space at others. They do feel packed too closely together, but almost every inch of platform space is needed at rush hour.

Quincy serves Union Station.

The guiding plan for the past few decades has been a target of two stations per leg of the L, which I think is a good balance of efficiency and accessibility. Combine Randolph and Madison into a Washington station, as long as it has entry/exit stairs at both far ends of each platform (so that it still effectively serves Randolph and Madison as well). The preliminary plans I saw sometime back had it connecting to a station facility in the Garland Building (a la Clark/Lake's connections to 203N and JRT or the Merch Mart), which I find annoying because of severely reduced and tedious access for anyone other than tenants of the building it connects to.

then increase platform space at a few stations and get rid of the rest. at state/lake, for instance, the old rickety wooden platform is, yes, packed to the brim - and dangerously narrow. It would make more sense to extend the Clark/Lake platform and get rid of state/lake.

re Quincy: does it really serve Union station? isn't the station across the river? the Clinton Blue Line is probably a more direct connection to Union, isn't it? I may be wrong.

re historic stations. this is same rationale that doomed the project in the 70s to place the loop underground. let's face it, these historic stations are old, rickety and quaint at best. they make chicago an absolute laughingstock among northeasterners. and they're incongruous with the rest of the downtown. the state/lake station looks like an elevated bomb shelter next to the chicago theatre and the television studio.

maybe the solution is to improve the signal technology. it's embarrassing to watch trains sitting on the tracks between and at the stations. or maybe get rid of the pink line (which, I suppose, is the plan if the circle line is ever implemented).

While I completely agree with you, I think we are in the minority. For some reason, people like the el rumbling over head. I've heard it compared to San Fran's cable cars.

Taft

The Franklin subway plan needs to be revived, completing the underground loop. However, I don't think that even then, we should immediately get rid of the elevated loop. Having both loops can make downtown access via CTA very efficient.

I am ALL for keeping the loop elevated, but yes, many of the stations are HORRIBLE.

State/Lake, and all 3 of them along Wabash. I mean one of them has the siding all covered in torn gross green sheet metal. It just looks so 3rd world, very embarassing. They could at a BARE MINIMUM replace that, or better yet just rip it down.

What should have historically happened would be downtown el stations that are fully integrated with the buildings along side of them, essentially part of one or more buildings that completely spans the street with monumental architecture, integrated internal entrance/exits and glass train sheds. That would have been something worthy of this city. The current rundown station hodgepodge with filthy crappy materials covered in about 200 layers of paint is an absolute embarrassment. I just returned from Paris and trust me, they got us beat. Of course they fund transit.

I'm surprised Burnham never dictated more guidelines concerning the "L" structure and station design.

Given the CTA's recent experience at Block 37 I don't think you'll see the pushing for further subway expansion in the loop. Decommissioning the elevated track would also remove a secondary route for the Red Line when the subway is under construction or has an incident.

The money would be better spent on track upkeep and switch upgrades in other parts of the system to keep problems from rippling into the loop in the first place.

^^ I said they should not decommission the elevated tracks, even if and when they complete the subway loop. Having two loops would be beneficial, in my view.

And what do you mean by "Given the CTA's recent experience at Block 37" etc?

As far as I'm concerned, I'm glad that plan died (although the Central Area Circulator should have been built). I honestly don't give a shit what people from other cities think about our mass transit system. NYC, Boston, and Philly are hardly models when it comes to getting rid of decrepit stations. The Loop works, I see no need to bury it. It's not for tourists, it's for us, and apart from the god-AWFUL funding problems we have, it's not a half-bad system.

By the same token, many of the downtown Loop stations have been horribly mutilated. When I said I didn't want demolition, I was referring to the fact that I wanted CTA to preserve both sets of mezzanines and all 8 staircases at the Randolph/Madison/Wabash station, and restore the Madison/Wabash building like they did for Quincy. AFAIK, Madison/Wabash is simultaneously the only Loop station worth preserving and the only one facing demolition. I'd even accept a facadectomy, if it's done properly.

What experience would that be? Dealing with Mills and Freed? I guarantee you, the minor setbacks and arguments in the Block 37 project are nothing close to what CTA would deal with for a full-fledged new subway line downtown. The Block 37 project was a godsend for the CTA, in that the biggest part of the project is Freed's part - therefore, Freed gets ALL the complaints from neighbors. Since there's no feasible plan yet for the Airport Express line, the CTA can take as much time as is necessary to work around Freed's construction schedule.

I recommend taking a look at the new City on the Move book - it really shows just how torn up State Street was for subway construction.

I agree 100%!

^ I actually think that the "rickety old" loop stations in Chicago's downtown elevated are a great asset to the city. The loop overhead reminds you that you're in a city served by trains. And as Ardecila said, it's a system that works, so what's the problem?

I live out east, and I don't see anybody here laughing about Chicago's system ;) . Without being offensive, I would hardly see Boston's or Philly's system as some model of greatness either

They ran into a lot more utility lines than even they expected slowing the process substantially and the lag between budgeting and actual construction has hit them in the pocketbook (just like the Brown Line project).

The CTA has no real interest in doing anymore subway work in the loop after this since they then have the only thing they really wanted (Red-Blue connection). They have other things on the mind like the Circle Line, extending the Red Line to 130th St or thereabouts, addressing the (literally) crumbling Howard branch, and others.

The Airport Express plan will probably sit on the shelf for a long while (if not forever) given the capital expenditure that would be required to implement it effectively. That money would be better spent by the RTA in providing improved METRA service to ORD or making sure the CTA gets the Blue Line into the best possible shape.

So can't they repair any of the stations in the loop?

From what I see, these are fine by my standards:

Washington/Wells
Quincy
Library
Clark/Lake

These need some work:

Lasalle - isn't too bad, just needs some minor cleaning up.

Wabash/Randolph
Wabash/Madison
Wabash/Adams

These are just horrid. You can't see off the sides of the platforms because they've put up random sheet metal, plastics that's all etched up. Paint peeling, the structures look horrible when walking down the cross streets. I don't understand WHY they haven't at least done a cosmetic fixing up of these stations. Blast the paint off and re-paint. Repair the flooring, clean up all the crap they use for "walls" in the center of the stations. I honestly feel like I'm standing in some random shed when I use these.

State/Lake looks better from the street, but could use some cleaning up and repainting, etc. The station is SO thin though, sometimes I feel like I'm going to fall over the edge during rush hour since it seems you only have 4 feet of room, if that.

There's no glory--or federal capital funding--in repairing an existing station, only in building a monumental new one.