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)

jpIllInoIs Jun 11, 2008 3:14 PM

I am very depressed!:( All that money for B37 and it does not even synch up with the vision of a Clinton Street Subway or West Loop Transit Center at Unoin Station which is a long range vision of the Midwest High Speed Rail Assoc.

http://www.downtownairport.com/step05.htm

http://www.midwesthsr.org/

Mr Downtown Jun 12, 2008 2:17 AM

The CTA press release

CTA to Complete Core Work on Tunnels and Station Shell This Year

Chicago Transit Authority President Ron Huberman said that after a
thorough review of the CTA's Block 37 project to develop a transit
center, track connections and direct airport train service, he plans
to recommend to the Chicago Transit Board that the CTA go out to bid
for a private sector partner to building out the station and develop
and operate the service.

ardecila Jun 13, 2008 12:07 AM

This is all covered in the second part of the June 2008 President's Report - and it has pictures!

PDF Warning:
Link

It's great to finally be able to see into the bowels of the station, but it appears that track will in fact not be laid right now. They will probably erect concrete walls to partition off CTA's space, and then pour a basic sub-grade concrete pad, on which tracks can be laid later. They will probably also include a few security doors into the "shell" so that it can be accessed from Block 37's basement levels. And that's it.

After an ungodly sum of money, all we get is a big cavernous space underneath a shopping mall in the Loop, and all the urban legends that this will spawn.

the urban politician Jun 13, 2008 2:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 3610282)
After an ungodly sum of money, all we get is a big cavernous space underneath a shopping mall in the Loop, and all the urban legends that this will spawn.

^ But urban legends are sexy, and they add to the mystique of the place ;)

Damn so much pessimism lately among the Chicago forumers... You can literally feel it in the air and make waves with it

Anyhow, I agree with Honte--this was a great visionary investment and (hopefully) that will become more obvious in the upcoming years/decades

jpIllInoIs Jun 13, 2008 2:54 AM

Just a cursory look on MS Earth shows that the Bloomingdale ROW is still intact and unencroached upon. Could this serve as a route for the O'Hare Express?

pip Jun 13, 2008 5:19 AM

one thing about this shell of a station. It will be in the future one hell of a lot easier to get the station and express service up and running now that the tough part has been done. Imagine doing this when all the above building was completed.

the urban politician Jun 13, 2008 2:09 PM

^ Yeah, my only major criticism of the project is that it's not really the best concept. As many here have said, using the Metra ROW instead as an express train between OHare and downtown seems to make the most sense. Couple that with an underground trolley that goes back and forth between Block 37 and Union Station, and you've got yourself a wonderful set up.

The city could still do that, couldn't it? After all, a "shell" under Block 37 is all that we have at this point..

k1052 Jun 13, 2008 2:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 3611436)
^ Yeah, my only major criticism of the project is that it's not really the best concept. As many here have said, using the Metra ROW instead as an express train between OHare and downtown seems to make the most sense. Couple that with an underground trolley that goes back and forth between Block 37 and Union Station, and you've got yourself a wonderful set up.

The city could still do that, couldn't it? After all, a "shell" under Block 37 is all that we have at this point..

I can't imagine anything more expensive than building an "underground trolley" between Union Station and B37. Unless you're planning to use part of the disused freight tunnel network as a people mover.

Busy Bee Jun 13, 2008 2:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs (Post 3610682)
Just a cursory look on MS Earth shows that the Bloomingdale ROW is still intact and unencroached upon. Could this serve as a route for the O'Hare Express?


I've been saying this for a while now. I wish transit administrators and politicians would read this thread.

emathias Jun 13, 2008 3:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 3611446)
I can't imagine anything more expensive than building an "underground trolley" between Union Station and B37. Unless you're planning to use part of the disused freight tunnel network as a people mover.

Actually, the city has maintained an underground right-of-way (meaning, they'd limited the amount of utilities underground) under Monroe. Since a large part of the expense of a subway in Chicago would be the utility relocation, if they used Monroe it wouldn't necessarily be so bad. The hardest part would actually be getting under the River, I would think.

emathias Jun 13, 2008 3:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs (Post 3610682)
Just a cursory look on MS Earth shows that the Bloomingdale ROW is still intact and unencroached upon. Could this serve as a route for the O'Hare Express?

Not a bad idea, and if they did that they could possibly also lay the groundwork for an "L" line roughly mimicing the old Humbolt Park branch but running further west and instead of routing onto Milwaukee, connecting to a future Circle Line.

jpIllInoIs Jun 13, 2008 3:24 PM

^ I knew I read it somewhere, BB. The issue may be that the blue line terminates in the Ohare terminal, while Metra rows end up well east of that at Mannheim Rd. So a connector tunnel would have to be constructed for the OHare Express into the terminal. Otherwise it is like TUP said, just use a Metra ROW all the way.

k1052 Jun 13, 2008 3:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias (Post 3611520)
Actually, the city has maintained an underground right-of-way (meaning, they'd limited the amount of utilities underground) under Monroe. Since a large part of the expense of a subway in Chicago would be the utility relocation, if they used Monroe it wouldn't necessarily be so bad. The hardest part would actually be getting under the River, I would think.

The Monroe ROW comes up two blocks short of B37, instead of running trains through the Blue line subway northbound you'd have to cut into the Blue or Red at Monroe and run it west under the river to Union. That could end up being a lot of switching especially in a rush period.

I'd much prefer that they build the West Loop Transportation Center and make the easier cuts to connect the O'Hare (where the flyover already exists) and Forrest Park branches under Clinton. Integrating an airport express from a new central terminal that connects to most Metra and the Blue and Red (Washington-Jackson transfers) would be a better investment IMO.

VivaLFuego Jun 13, 2008 6:00 PM

Transit/parking related discussion from the General Developments thread that Steely deemed too off-topic despite having to do with proper amounts of parking in downtown Chicago, which seems like a "General Development" issue to me, but OK...
Quote:

Originally Posted by dagobert (Post 3611775)
Association is not causation, or a more statistical term Correlation is not Causation. In any introductory statistics or econometric analysis course you would learn that there are a number of dependent variables that impact the independent variable.

To say that their is a relationship between amount of parking downtown and public ridership you would have to do a bit of cross-sectional time series data analysis (also known as panel data or longitudal data analysis) which also looks at other contributing factors such as price of oil (we saw a big decline in price of oil in mid 1980s through late 1990s), amount of jobs downtown vs. suburbs, amount of people living downtown vs. suburbs, amount of crime recorded in the city vs. suburbs, amount of crime on CTA trains, cost of driving one mile in a car vs. cost of taking CTA train one mile, cost of parking, etc. Maybe a bigger contributing factor to a decline in ridership after 1984 was decline in price of oil and thus cost of drving and not building of parking in the loop. I might poke around some databases to see if such a study had ever been done for any major American city.

We also have to worry about omitted variable bias (or confounding) since we aren't talking about a controlled experiment but an observational study (looking at historical data). For example we can't measure perception of how safe people feel taking CTA trains as opposed to a car.

Also social attitudes (towards driving, commuting downtown, living in the city) in mid-70s might have been similar to those in early 80s since social attitudes are fairly similar from one year to the next, but they may vary considerably over longer period of time. So if this is true that social attitudes in late 90s are different than in 70s and assumption of independent error terms across observations in a time series is violated. The reason why this is important is because under the classical econometric model error terms for each observation need to be independent of one another. Otherwise error terms reflect omitted variables that influence the demand for parking or public transit ridership. This could also lead to autocorrelation and other problems.

Hope this helps you understand the sheer complexity of analyzing such complex problems as this one, those results are scientific and unbiased.

If you actually read the post of mine that you cited, you'd note that I specifically stated that my stats didn't constitute causal proof, but whatever. I'd consider posting stats on historical transit ridership, gas prices (remember when transit ridership plummeted in the late 90s when oil was $15/barrel? Me neither.) but I hesitate to bother...

dagobert Jun 13, 2008 7:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego (Post 3611836)
Transit/parking related discussion from the General Developments thread that Steely deemed too off-topic despite having to do with proper amounts of parking in downtown Chicago, which seems like a "General Development" issue to me, but OK...


If you actually read the post of mine that you cited, you'd note that I specifically stated that my stats didn't constitute causal proof, but whatever. I'd consider posting stats on historical transit ridership, gas prices (remember when transit ridership plummeted in the late 90s when oil was $15/barrel? Me neither.) but I hesitate to bother...

For your cross-sectional time series analysis on transit ridership to be useful you will want to use more variables than just gas prices, cost of parking downtown, and amount of parking available. Otherwise you'll have omitted variable bias. Preferably you will want to use quarterly data to increase the number of observations since n=30 is the bare minimum for it to be any good and also you should do seasonal adjustments. It might take some time to track down the sources for a lot of pertinent variables but it would make for a fascinating research study. I’m curious of results myself.

VivaLFuego Jun 13, 2008 8:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dagobert (Post 3611967)
For your cross-sectional time series analysis on transit ridership to be useful you will want to use more variables than just gas prices, cost of parking downtown, and amount of parking available. Otherwise you'll have omitted variable bias. Preferably you will want to use quarterly data to increase the number of observations since n=30 is the bare minimum for it to be any good and also you should do seasonal adjustments. It might take some time to track down the sources for a lot of pertinent variables but it would make for a fascinating research study. I’m curious of results myself.

True.... or one can just review any of the multitude of already-existing studies (and resulting multinomial logistic choice models) regarding mode split; included variables almost invariable include not only things like income, travel time, and car ownership, but also variables like out-of-pocket cost and walking/access time, just two of many variables that capture the impact of parking availability on mode choice. All else equal, more parking -> cheaper parking rates + higher availability of parking in proximity to destination. Chicago's core did not empty out in the period 1984-1992, in fact this period encompassed a very substantial real estate boom primarily focused on commercial/office construction....and lots and lots of parking garages in the heart of the loop, in contrast to the previous paradigm of large surface lots on the periphery outside the loop, with no (new) parking allowed inside the loop.

Also, I'm not certain seasonal data would be absolutely necessary to draw conclusions; there is high seasonal cyclic variability of course, but these cycles occur annually, so as long as the annual data measure consistent time periods, they are comparable. To the extent seasonal data would be useful, you could do 12-month rolling averages and more precisely determine the inflection points to correlate to possible contributing events/policies/etc. Unfortunately, the farther back in time you go, the sparser such data, be it transit ridership or employment figures, gets.

honte Jun 13, 2008 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Busy Bee (Post 3611472)
I've been saying this for a while now. I wish transit administrators and politicians would read this thread.

I doubt the yuppies along that line would stand for fast trains speeding past their shoddily-built condo buildings.

the urban politician Jun 14, 2008 2:40 PM

^ I'm pretty sure at some point they considered that alternative.

But my amateur look at this situation leads me to one conclusion: Daley wants the Airport Express hub to be at Block 37, not at Union Station.

The east loop area has been Daley's major focus during his entire time in office. Millennium Park, the revitalized Theatre district, State St, and now the (admittedly weak) final centerpiece--Block 37. I think Daley wants this area to be the center of it all for Chicago, and according to his vision this is the most logical place to put the Airport Express stop. I imagine he sees this area potentially being a much larger draw for leisure & business travelers, etc and attracting even more high-end hotels.

Mr Downtown Jun 14, 2008 6:30 PM

^With some logic. The more we allow the office core to drift westward, the more difficult it is for city-dwellers and south suburbanites to access those jobs. A Block 37 airport terminal helps to keep the traditional Loop at the center of the region.

I was told that the engineers studied both a MILW alignment and a Blue Line express. To their surprise, the costs and speed were about the same. Besides the Loop terminal location, service on CTA tracks can be controlled more readily by City Hall than could a Metra operation.

Taft Jun 14, 2008 6:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 3613472)
^ I'm pretty sure at some point they considered that alternative.

But my amateur look at this situation leads me to one conclusion: Daley wants the Airport Express hub to be at Block 37, not at Union Station.

The east loop area has been Daley's major focus during his entire time in office. Millennium Park, the revitalized Theatre district, State St, and now the (admittedly weak) final centerpiece--Block 37. I think Daley wants this area to be the center of it all for Chicago, and according to his vision this is the most logical place to put the Airport Express stop. I imagine he sees this area potentially being a much larger draw for leisure & business travelers, etc and attracting even more high-end hotels.

Well, 2009 will go along way toward achieving this, IMO. You've got the Carson's building conversion, the shops opening in B37, the new news studio, etc. all finishing. Should be an exciting time to watch this area...

Taft

the urban politician Jun 16, 2008 1:15 AM

I have some questions about Chicago area passenger rail, mostly out of curiosity:

1) Including Metra, S.Shore and CTA, which is the farthest town from Chicago that is served, and how far away is it from downtown?

2) What part of the rail network (all 3 of them) is the fastest, and how fast do trains run on that part of the network? Is there any part of the Metra network in which trains exceed 100 mph?

3) What part of the rail network (again, all 3 of them) is the slowest at this point?

OhioGuy Jun 16, 2008 1:26 AM

I don't know the answer to #2 & #3, but I'm fairly confident South Bend is the furthest town from Chicago that is served by the rail systems you mentioned (it being served by the South Shore train). It's a little over 90 miles from the South Bend Airport to Millenium Station.

Mr Downtown Jun 16, 2008 2:40 AM

South Shore's run to Michiana Regional Airport is the longest "transit" service out of Chicago. Second is Metra/UP service to Harvard, 63 miles.

Metra BNSF's Naperville express runs cover 28 miles in 32 minutes, for a schedule speed of 53 mph. I don't think anything else would come close.

In the old days, there were rumors that the 2200s temporarily in Evanston Express service would exceed 60 mph on the fill north of Wilson, but that was long ago and far away.

Hardly anything in the US ever exceeds 79 mph, which is FRA's limit for trains with trackside signaling. I doubt that any place on Metra's system ever breaks 60, though there's a long stretch of MILW-N south of Lake Forest West where they might come close. I say that because I'm pretty sure that Amtrak trains exceed 60 mph on that same stretch.

Slowest would be CTA's slow zones of the week.

Nowhereman1280 Jun 16, 2008 3:41 AM

^^^ Pretty much right, but if you include the Hiawatha, that is the longest and fastest, and it truly is commuter rail since at least one full car (out of 3 or 4) on that train is completely commuters at any one time. I know that hits 70+ in areas and its ~85 miles. It is scheduled to be upgraded to 115 MPH once the few (10 or so) remaining at grade crossings are separated and some track repairs are completed... I believe some areas where it is grade separated are supposed to hit 115 once track repairs are implemented. It has the best hope of achieving super speeds out of any part of the Chicago transit network...

VivaLFuego Jun 16, 2008 4:35 AM

^Metra operates up to 70mph on most of its lines, I believe... exception being the Metra Electric which is limited to 55mph. Of course there are only certain portions of track that are actually operated at 70mph, not nearly the entire system.

the urban politician Jun 16, 2008 4:59 AM

Thanks for the info, guys. Always appreciated.

On another note, in regards to the CTA Airport Express Station mothballing fiasco, Crains was heavily critical with the city on this one (see this week's edition--Opinion section). Frankly, though, I think they were too critical. Surely Crains editors aren't so clueless about transit that they didn't realize a golden opportunity to build the underground space & tunnel for the future station now rather than later, when it would be next to impossible.

Of course, being the car-driving suburbanites that they are, I'm not surprised. Perhaps Crains should go back to reporting & commenting on what they are supposed to report & comment on: financial & business news.

emathias Jun 16, 2008 9:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 3615942)
Thanks for the info, guys. Always appreciated.

On another note, in regards to the CTA Airport Express Station mothballing fiasco, Crains was heavily critical with the city on this one (see this week's edition--Opinion section). Frankly, though, I think they were too critical. Surely Crains editors aren't so clueless about transit that they didn't realize a golden opportunity to build the underground space & tunnel for the future station now rather than later, when it would be next to impossible.

Of course, being the car-driving suburbanites that they are, I'm not surprised. Perhaps Crains should go back to reporting & commenting on what they are supposed to report & comment on: financial & business news.

Crains is more balanced on transit than a lot of people on this forum give them credit for. What they're mainly attacking the project for is the poor cost management, and the project should be attacked for that. Until this month's president's report to the Board, there had been almost zero public info about the project - hardly good practice for a public agency. They also proceeded with only a slim idea of what they'd do once they had the station finished. it was pretty poorly planned and oversold. If they'd just said, "We're going to carve out connector tunnels because they'll be useful someday," I don't think they'd be getting as much flak.

aaron38 Jun 16, 2008 5:08 PM

I just heard a news blurb on the radio that the Chicago water taxi has added a stop in Chinatown.

That sounds really cool. I think I'll take that next time I go downtown for a walk.

dagobert Jun 17, 2008 3:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 3615695)
South Shore's run to Michiana Regional Airport is the longest "transit" service out of Chicago. Second is Metra/UP service to Harvard, 63 miles.

Metra BNSF's Naperville express runs cover 28 miles in 32 minutes, for a schedule speed of 53 mph. I don't think anything else would come close.

In the old days, there were rumors that the 2200s temporarily in Evanston Express service would exceed 60 mph on the fill north of Wilson, but that was long ago and far away.

Hardly anything in the US ever exceeds 79 mph, which is FRA's limit for trains with trackside signaling. I doubt that any place on Metra's system ever breaks 60, though there's a long stretch of MILW-N south of Lake Forest West where they might come close. I say that because I'm pretty sure that Amtrak trains exceed 60 mph on that same stretch.

Slowest would be CTA's slow zones of the week.

I remeber reading not too long ago, that once CTA finishes repairs on the Blue Line from DT to ORD, the maximum speed will be lifted from current 55 mph to either 60 or 65 mph, and when the new trains arrvie in 2009 (or 2010 I'm not sure) the top speed will be 70 mph. This is supposed to cut the travel time b/t the Loop & ORD to approx. 45 mins from current 1h.
I also wonder how fast the proposed Airport Express train will run, if it is ever build. Will it exceed 100 mph or even 125mph? Does anyone know.

Mr Downtown Jun 17, 2008 4:21 AM

I find it hard to imagine that Airport Express would run faster than 70 mph, and probably much closer to 55. Chicago's rapid transit equipment is essentially high-platform streetcars. They would bounce uncomfortably at high speeds, and it's hard to imagine FRA approving higher speeds for such lightweight equipment with so little buff strength. (Actually, it's doubtful that FRA would have jurisdiction over a new Airport Express, but the safety question would still arise).

To follow up on my earlier post, I am told that Metra's Southwest Service does run close to 70 mph between Willow Springs and Lemont. The timetable shows it covering the 7 miles between stations in 9 minutes.

dagobert Jun 17, 2008 4:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 3617973)
I find it hard to imagine that Airport Express would run faster than 70 mph, and probably much closer to 55. Chicago's rapid transit equipment is essentially high-platform streetcars. They would bounce uncomfortably at high speeds, and it's hard to imagine FRA approving higher speeds for such lightweight equipment with so little buff strength. (Actually, it's doubtful that FRA would have jurisdiction over a new Airport Express, but the safety question would still arise).

To follow up on my earlier post, I am told that Metra's Southwest Service does run close to 70 mph between Willow Springs and Lemont. The timetable shows it covering the 7 miles between stations in 9 minutes.

This is from Feb. 11, 2008 Chicago Tribune article:

Work to eliminate remaining slow zones is scheduled on the Blue, Red, Purple, Brown and Green Lines this year. The longest stretches are from Addison to O'Hare International Airport on the Blue Line, and from Harrison to North/Clybourn on the Red Line. All work is scheduled for completion by late this year or early 2009, officials said. The improved rail lines could eventually improve efficiency and result in extra runs on some lines to help ease overcrowded conditions in the trains, said William Mooney, the CTA's chief operating officer. About 54 miles of slow zones on the CTA system were removed in 2007, allowing trains to once again travel at up to 55 miles per hour on tracks where speeds formerly had been restricted to as slow as 6 m.p.h. Despite that, slow zones increased overall -- by 63 miles -- because of stepped-up track inspections.

About 17 percent of CTA tracks are under slow-zone orders. Huberman's goal is to cut that to a single-digit percentage -- less than 20 miles of slow zones in the 224-mile system -- by late this year, he said. Top train speeds on the rehabbed track are tentatively scheduled to increase to 65 m.p.h. from the current 55 m.p.h. by the end of 2008, then increase to 70 m.p.h. when the first of some 400 new rail cars begin service in 2010, officials said.

----->>> Link to a webpage on the new rail cars
http://www.chicago-l.org/trains/roster/5000mkII.html

The improvements would cut the current travel time from the Loop to O'Hare on the Blue Line from 55 minutes or longer today to less than 40 minutes, Huberman said.


My question would then be, if in 2010 when slowzones are eliminated on the Blue Line to ORD and new 5000 series rail cars are in use that can reach 70 mph, how is the Airport Express supposed to decrease the travel time if trains won't be able to go faster than 70 mph anyway. Seem like a waste of money then to develp the Airport Express.

Mr Downtown Jun 17, 2008 4:56 AM

No stops.

dagobert Jun 17, 2008 5:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 3618038)
No stops.

Makes sense. So how fast would Airport Express be? 20 min from the Loop to ORD?

Marcu Jun 17, 2008 5:02 AM

^ 40 minutes is still a lot to travel that short of a distance so an express wouls be nice. A metra train, without stops, can probably get to the ohare transfer stop in less than 20.

k1052 Jun 17, 2008 1:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcu (Post 3618053)
^ 40 minutes is still a lot to travel that short of a distance so an express wouls be nice. A metra train, without stops, can probably get to the ohare transfer stop in less than 20.

Under 40 minutes to the terminal of the airport isn't too bad compared with the current alternatives (A $35+ cab ride that could take just as long or longer/airport parking rates $$).

Even taking Metra you have to do the bus to ATS to terminal dance.

pilsenarch Jun 17, 2008 2:02 PM

Remember, the proposal not only calls for new cars with a higher standard of comfort never before seen in this system, but also will offer the ability to check bags and go through security at b37....

Mr Downtown Jun 17, 2008 6:29 PM

That, of course, is what we were promised when 203 N. LaSalle (the Transportation Center) was built in the early 80s.

Is there anywhere that the TSA actually permits offsite security clearance?

Soaring_Higher Jun 17, 2008 6:59 PM

http://www.chicagotribune.com/featur...,5138636.story



CTA testing new hybrid electric-powered bus
Vehicle touted to get 7 m.p.g., rather than just 3 or 4

By Jon Hilkevitch | Tribune reporter
11:53 AM CDT, June 17, 2008


The CTA on Tuesday began testing a lighter-weight hybrid electric-powered bus that may achieve double the fuel efficiency of current hybrid buses, officials said.

The key behind the technology is a jetlike turbine that delivers electricity to a battery pack that solely powers the bus.

It differs from traditional hybrid technology that still relies on a diesel engine to power the vehicle but with the assistance of an electric motor that charges batteries for use when the vehicle is coasting.

The bus being tested by the CTA is made by DesignLine International LLC in Charlotte, N.C.

The bus, called the ECOSaver, claims to get seven to eight miles per gallon.

Regular CTA diesel-powered buses average two to three m.p.g., while the CTA's current hybrids get about four m.p.g., officials said.

The CTA faces an overrun of as much as $25 million in its fuel budget this year.

"We will operate the bus on several routes over the next three weeks to evaluate its performance," CTA President Ron Huberman said...

Abner Jun 17, 2008 8:03 PM

So a bus that gets 8 mpg would actually use less fuel than individual cars with an average of only four passengers on board? Or is there more to it than that?

The article also mentions that this new bus has an aluminum composite chassis that makes it three to five tons lighter than a typical stainless steel bus!

spyguy Jun 17, 2008 9:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Soaring_Higher (Post 3619098)
[url]

CTA testing new hybrid electric-powered bus
Vehicle touted to get 7 m.p.g., rather than just 3 or 4

http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/6006/40089811no0.jpg

Haworthia Jun 17, 2008 9:50 PM

Cool! I'm happy to see this on several levels.

So, does anyone have any idea how much one of these costs, particularly compared to a conventional bus? Will the CTA see savings?

Mr Downtown Jun 17, 2008 11:31 PM

For buses, you have to remember deadhead mileage. In practice, that pushes bus gas mileage about 20% lower, although CTA somehow maintains the fiction (for its federal Section 10 report) that all buses are "in service" from the time they leave the barn until they pull in. As someone who spent every weekday morning in the 1990s trying to flag down a southbound #6 leaving downtown, I can testify that this theory is seldom proven correct by the actual bus drivers.

Eventually...Chicago Jun 18, 2008 1:46 AM

you know, as bad as the cta can be, i do think you have to give huberman and the cta credit for doing what they can to improve service and the experience of taking the cta. There isn't whole lot they can do to address the main problem of inheriting an outdated system but i have noticed cleaner cars and busses, and i've not noticed as much bus bunching on the routes i take (from the south loop to the loop).

They are at least being proactive which is loads more than i can say for metra or pace.

I know we covered this away back but it is still beyond me why metra can't figure out ways to incorporate modern technology, you know, like electricity. How the hell does metra get a pass on not accepting credit cards, at all?! If you don't want to have electronic fare collection at least have self-serve ticket dispensers at stations so i don't have to wait for Gladys or Blanche or Leroy to fumble around with a rubber stamp. Ooooooo, what an impenetrable security system, a star denoting male or female. I can't tell you how much i fume when i have to stand in line at union on a weekday morning behind 15 people for 2 open ticket windows. (like this morning, hence the post) I know the logistics are challenging for electronic fare collection, but you know what, i have a freakin' cell phone more powerful than what took man to the moon, figure it the heck out.

And pace, well, they just seem to care less about, well pretty much anything except for putting "Go Cubs!!" on their marquee and installing on-board TV's that tell me the weather in seattle for the mariners game...in spanish. THEY HAVE A DOME!!!! The people in seattle don't even care what the weather will be like for the game. But it's okay cause now they are going to give me the quote of the day telling me "patience is a virtue". Apparently they are being patient with rerouting any of their busses off the edens so they can run only the usual 10-15 minutes behind schedule. In fact, the busses were so late today, that i caught the earlier one. That is, the earlier one running 25 minutes late. Maybe that's their motto, "so late, you won't even notice"

phew, had to get that off my chest, i know my friends & coworkers are certainly tired of hearing about it.

thanks guys! :)

VivaLFuego Jun 18, 2008 3:33 AM

Try the meatloaf folks, it's great tonight. He'll be here all week, 3 shows a night...

But yeah, I mean everyone knows Metra is run by competent, shrewd professionals in distinct contrast to the drunk and/or high patronage hack mouth-breathing knuckledraggers stumbling headfirst into walls at CTA headquarters.... sigh :rolleyes:

(I mean to say, I agree with the general thrust of E-C's argument)

firstcranialnerve Jun 18, 2008 4:05 PM

Train system proposals?
 
I'm curious if there have been any decent proposals for a new subway line or a way to link up the subway systems and/or replace the el.

personally, I think they need a new north south line along the river with stops at say minimally, Olympic village/McCormick, Museum Campus/Central Station, B37, LSE, Streeterville etc. The B37 site could be a transfer site. The metra/cta divide is just horrible.

I recently visited Hong Kong and that system is just light years ahead of what we have... anyone know where I can find proposals to radically overhaul the system here etc..???

much appreciated!

Eventually...Chicago Jun 18, 2008 5:23 PM

well if you go through this thread you'll see dozens of both realistic and hair-brain proposals. I would say the best bets for new cta service would be the circle line or some sort of lakefront line utilizing metra's ROW. This might be useful for someone like yourself in streeterville. Don't hold your breath for anything in the loop or near union station.

and yes, i think we all agree that most any other modern country has better transit then us.

urbanpln Jun 18, 2008 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eventually...Chicago (Post 3621243)
well if you go through this thread you'll see dozens of both realistic and hair-brain proposals. I would say the best bets for new cta service would be the circle line or some sort of lakefront line utilizing metra's ROW. This might be useful for someone like yourself in streeterville. Don't hold your breath for anything in the loop or near union station.

I also believe that street cars or some type of light rail could happen if we are the host city for the olympics. There are some discussions happening about this issue.

jpIllInoIs Jun 18, 2008 11:28 PM

Comiskey Park Metra station
 
Looks like Metra is taking bids for the 35th St station.

Has anyone seen any renders?

Chicago: Metra Rail Station: Rock Island District, 35th Street, new commuter rail station, August 2008.

http://www.chicagorealestatedaily.co...age.pl?id=2166

Mr Downtown Jun 19, 2008 2:51 AM

Based on the cost figures, apparently it will look something like this:

http://www.travel-destination-pictur...mahal_1307.jpg

Busy Bee Jun 19, 2008 3:33 AM

^Taj Mahal probably wasn't built by union laborers in an age of inflated raw material costs.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:23 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.