Isn't that fairly standard in industry? These are not office jobs where work not done one day will still be there the next. Maybe Viva can explain exactly how this works and whether it's solely for the extra board or also applies to regular tricks.

^ I'm not 100% sure but I think that one is only for the extra board (in layman's terms, part of an operator's scheduled work is being available and ready at the garage to run special events service or cover the runs of absentees). The language suggests it's primarily for the extra board ("show up"), as the proposal for the minimum pay guarantee (which refers to the guarantee to be paid for 40 hours even if only picked/scheduled for 38 hours of service, for example) is listed as a separate line item in the proposal list.

Obviously, most of these proposals are smaller items around the margins. The biggest cost drivers, by a very large margin, are the base wage, pension benefits, medical benefits, and the ratio of part-time to full-time work. These latter 4 form the basis of the structural deficit, as they specified by means completely independent from those specifying the exact size of CTA revenue sources.

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2...ons-lines.html

Seems like a brillinat idea to me depending on the terms and as long as they adopt some standards for who is allowed to name things (no names promoting a current political or religious agenda). Aren't they already doing this with a station sponsored by Apple?

The CTA is doing the Apple thing. Anyway, my feelings are mixed. In some cases, I think it makes sense and there are already names related to nearby attractions (for example, Brookfield Zoo). But it would get ridiculous if Borders decided to buy say the Naperville stop and rename it after themselves. You need at least a passing reference to where you actually are geographically, especially on Metra where you're going through dozens of different suburbs.

I also personally feel like naming rights cheapen the experience and the public realm. In any case, who knows if this will even happen. Remember that Metra did a trial run with wrap advertising, and I havent even seen those in a couple years.

I wonder if they'll send a bill for back services to Mars.

You could add the sponsor name to the existing name, eg. the Borders' Naperville station or the Naperville station brought to you by Borders :D like they do with the Tostitos Fiesta Bowl or the FedEx Orange Bowl.

Even better, if you retain the original station name like that it would be more feasible to have annual agreements for some ongoing money instead of a big infusion of money from a one time agreement, then that's it. It'd be a bit ridiculous to have the entire station name change every year, but I don't see the problem with the Border's Naperville station one year and the McDonald's Naperville station the next year. Then, when/if more money is freed up elsewhere, it's not too difficult to drop the sponsor name completely.

Whether or not I agree with you, unfortunately personal feelings and the experience are way down the list of funding priorities. Minimizing service cuts and maximizing funding for infrastructure expansion have to take priority when funding is limited.

Its a public good, funding should remain in the public's hands. Either that or just stop pussyfooting around the issue and privatize the lines entirely.

They also chip away at a little thing called integrity.

The Bureau of Electricity (didn't realize we had something called that) has "White Light Study" signs up along several streets in Wicker Park (Wood just north of Division, et al). There's a several-block stretch where all the streetlights are new, shorter than typical, and have a second, decorative lamp partway up. It would be interesting to see what they look like at night.

Does anyone know what the grand plans are with this? Are these LED fixtures? (Maybe this should be in the Gen Dev thread, but transit aficionados might be more versed in this kind of subject.)

I am kind of impressed with the way the City is using these detailed signs to inform the public.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/antre/3411790584
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3305/...d8cdee8da4.jpg
(Googled this photo by "Antre" on flickr from last spring)

^ I would probably put this in the General Developments thread..

re: the Bureau of Electricity... Somebody has to change the bulbs in streetlights when they go out, to preserve Chicago's status as the world's best-lit city. Streets and San is the logical agency to do this work, since they have a system for covering every street in the city effectively. CDOT is the other logical choice, but they just do large construction projects and pothole filling. Tracking down potholes is easy, since people notice them and report them, but streetlights going out is usually not something that most people will remember long enough to report, if they notice it at all.

I kinda like the yellow/orange sodium vapor lights, so I'm not too excited about a color change, but I would welcome a better-designed reflector so that light from streetlamps is not wasted by being sent upwards or laterally instead of down.

Merely switching to a "white" light is an aesthetic and not a functional change, so I say forget it. If the city does adopt them en masse, though, it will be interesting to see the effects on night-time photography, although it will probably take 5-10 years to replace most of the bulbs.

Thought it was just Streets & San; wasn't familiar with their internal components. Also "Bureau" sounds more important than, say, "Division" or something. I dig it.

Hey, are we really the best-lit, by some measure?

Those light standards are pretty common for all street light replacement projects, but in most places they just receive the sodium orange.

I'm with ardec - not worth the trouble to switch them to white. Sodium is more energy efficient (light output per energy consumed) than the "true white" light sources like mercury, xenon, etc. So being the best lit city requires some sane compromises in the interest of pocketbooks.

I dunno... but we're the Dubai of streetlights, in terms of sheer quantity and excess. Just look at any nighttime aerial shot of the city.

I believe that dates back to one of Daley Sr.'s plans to reduce crime by improving lighting, where pretty much every street in the city was covered to the point of ridiculousness. I'm not sure if it had much of an effect on crime or not. Certainly, it's more difficult to commit crimes unnoticed, but it also makes it more difficult for a gang to attack rivals by surprise, so there's probably more overall gang activity on the street, in terms of drug-dealing and so forth.

CTA union threatens work-to-rule
 

From today's Tribune

"Darrell Jefferson, president of the bus drivers union, said Saturday that if there's no agreement soon to restore service cuts he will ask his membership to adhere strictly to CTA operating rules, including a 35-mph speed limit. . . Drivers also would follow other rules to the letter, such as waiting until all riders are seated or "standing securely" before leaving a stop . . ."

I though almost all street lamps had parbolic deflectors that reflect the light going upwards downwards.
http://www.outdoorlightingn.com/prod...0088295760.jpg
There's also some street lamps that use lenses to refract light downwards too.
http://www.freewebs.com/streetlanter...reet-light.jpg
Even decorative lamps have reflectors, or use lenses.
http://germes-online.com/direct/dbim...treet_Lamp.jpg
http://us.123rf.com/400wm/400/400/Gl...017/874410.jpg
Most of the light pollution you see from space is light reflected back up from objects on the ground.

It's like something out of The Onion.

The aerial nighttime view (especially from an approaching aircraft) of Chicago is one of the planet's most thrilling sights. But I always thought that, to the extent other cities aren't as striking, it's because they are (other than Manhattan, where narrow canyons block the effect) just smaller, less dense, more leafy, and/or less rectilinear -- not because they are equipped less densely with streetlights.

Driving around Chicago's neighborhoods at night I have never thought of the lighting as excessive -- it seems perfect for being able to see what's around you. I've always felt comfortable roaming into unknown neighborhoods at night (other than known war zones, of course). Maybe that itself is an excessive amount of streetlights, you're saying?

Other folks, what do y'all think?

..