I asked for stats so we could carry on this conversation with a little more input from what is actually happening. Just to broaden the discussion with actual facts and figures.

I take the Brownline to Madison/Wells daily so I know that only having two stations on that side works. Hopefully it will happen before 2016. I personally don't see why the Van Buren Station has to be left open. It was shut a few years ago and i think it should be torn down.

The stats request came because a few years ago I found them, but wanted updated ones and have had a hard time finding them online, plus I was thinking this discussion might be tied back to the discussion we had about station placement a few pages back. Would like to see all the station stats. I like stuff like that.

But by cutting that station, won't you run the risk of overcrowding the stations before (Randolph/Wabash) & after it (Clark/Lake) from all of the displaced State/Lake riders?

It seems more than a little silly to me to be talking of dropping some of the most heavily-used stations in the system just because they're close together. Part of the reason you have more stations in the Loop area is that during high-demand times, there isn't platform space for people.

At rush hour, I'd be surprised if eliminating a stop actually saved any time, as any stopping time would be offset by increased unload-load time at the stations nearest the eliminated one.

Building a new station would allow you to design one that helps to mitigate that with wider platforms, etc.

All that said, if anything, I think there should be stations added downtown.

What's the operational break-even point for a station, in riders per week?

Clark/Lake 18,945
State/Lake 9,585
Adams/Wabash 8,867
RANDOLPH/WABASH 7,654
Quincy/Wells 7,332
Washington/Wells 6,683
Madison/Wabash 5,722
Library 4,280
LaSalle/Van Buren 3,253

Loop Totals
East Loop 22,243
North Loop 28,528
South Loop 7,533
West Loop 14,015

I am thinking now I see why CTA hasn't pushed the east side loop consolidation. An argument could be we need to eliminate the southside loop (they can take the Blue or Red lines) if we are going to be going by volume.

If we are that worried about slowness let's get rid of the Pink and Purple lines. Have people from Evanston transefer at Belmont. Have Pink Line people transfer out west.

http://www.yourcta.com/downloads/rid...rts/200805.pdf

WEEKDAY ENTRANCE COUNTS May 2008

Has the CTA and Metra ridership gone up due to high fuel prices? I heard on WABC radio last month that NYC's ridership has increased because of it. Just wondering

If the CTA is ever going to serve as more than a commuter transit system, we need more stations, not less. I'll gladly add a few minutes to a trip for the satisfaction of knowing that 40 lazy people were taking the train because the stop was right next to their destination.

Speaking of making the CTA less of a commuter system: what are the most high-traffic routes that are poorly served by transit? I'm wondering about both routes to downtown and routes between neighborhoods. This could simply mean routes that aren't served by the el (e.g., Beverly to the Red Line), or routes that are served by the el but only in a circuitous way (e.g., Logan Square to Lincoln Park), or routes that have bus service, but the service is slow or inadequate (UIC to U of C, maybe). Of course I realize that you can't identify logical system extensions just by considering the demand for the service without taking cost and logistics into consideration, I'm just curious where the biggest current shortfalls are.

Over 7000 lazy people daily....lol.

This is a tricky chicken-and-egg question, because housing/employment location choices are partially based on transportation services, which in turn are based on housing/employment location.

Journey-to-work data from the Census might give some insight into this, by looking at origin-destination pairs that have both very high travel volume and very low transit mode share. My intuition tells me that most of these are in the suburbs. It's also a question of scale/magnitude: for example, are you asking which routes currently served by bus might be better served by rail? Or, which routes currently lack adequate transit service in terms of capacity, speed, and convenience, relative to demand for that route?

And in the mean time lose 4000 in-a-hurry-to-get-somewhere people to the car because it takes an hour to travel 7 miles on the "rapid transit".

Ironic how that may actually contribute even more to it being a commuter system, since rush hour is already the only possible time when the CTA can compete with the car in terms of time.

If/when slow zones are repaired, this is really only true on the lines in expressway medians. Try driving down State Street, Milwaukee, Sheffield... there's no way you'll beat the train. I'm not sure if you're a rush hour commuter, but things are moving pretty fast lately, with the exception of the Red Line between Clark/Division and North/Clybourn where the track ties are still being replaced.

As an anecdote backing up Marcu's point, my wife and I do exactly this when we go downtown from Oak Park. So, July 3rd, I took the train to Streeterville to meet my wife so we could proceed to some festivities whereas this weekend, we opted to drive to meet friends in Streeterville to watch the Dark Knight. It saved us time this Saturday. It would have been suicide to drive on July 3rd.

That is currently my biggest problem with the transit system, time. The speed and frequency of trains both need to be increased. Of course we could use some more lines too.

.oh good !! ....that was my question ! .....so the CTA has finally eliminated all the slow zones (except clark to north?) on all the lines ??! ..or am I being too optimistic?!

I'm not sure I understand. Both the Green and Blue Lines (especially Green) are actually really fast between downtown and Oak Park, some of the most problem-free track in the city. The Green Line takes 20-25 minutes!

yes. Both have increased. Metra 5% and CTA up 4%. Pace is up but I'm not sure by how much.

Walking, biking and crawling trips have also increased.

..

Well assuming of course they take LSD or at the very least Western or Ashland. Edgewater to the Loop area is still 20-30 min by car via Ashland on a Saturday. They don't have to drive parallel to the el.

Some improvement have indeed been made and the CTA should be commended for it, but Uptown, Edgewater, Rogers Park to the Loop is 40-60 minutes during rush. The threshold question is what does one do if they oversleep for work? Even during rush hour, the answer is for most people to take a cab or drive since that's still going to be faster than the train. Until the answer is a toss up, we really should not focus on adding even more stops to the el to appeal to a few potentially underserved people.

I think a comparison should be made when CTA completes the Fullerton and Belmont trackage and the tie work in the subway. During the brief time earlier this year when there was no construction or slow zones in the subway until after Lake and all 4 tracks were open at Fullerton the Red Line would routinely make the trip from Belmont to Lake in about 10 minutes.

The southbound Red Line tracks will be mostly clear of slow zones except for some around Granville/Thorndale and Sheridan (where trains must slow anyway to negotiate the curves) all the way to Roosevelt once construction is done.

Doesn't focusing only on time ignore a large chunk of the equation? I don't take mass transit downtown to save raw time but to not have to find and pay for parking in the city, pay for gas, and just not drive in the loop.
I'll gladly take an extra 15 minutes on the train to hit the ground running at the station and not have to worry about the car.

Going into the city, particularly during the day, you're right, it's not so bad, especially if our destination is on State St. like the Chicago Theatre for instance. Really, it's coming home in the evening that's annoying. Sometime we wait 20-30 minutes for a Greenline train while watching half a dozen brownline trains pass by. Add in the fact we likely took a Redline train to State and Lake, then that can add up to more than an hour and change to get home. But, that just reiterates the point I was trying to make, during peak driving hours, the train is the way to go, during off hours, driving is the quickest and easiest way. When Columbus is open though, we can get back to Oak Park in about 20 minutes.

I also want security cameras on all trains now. My wife has witnessed her share of purse nappings on the Greenline.

No "L" or subway style line will ever compete with a smoothly-flowing expressway. It's not possible for a train that tops out at even 70mph, but only between widely-spaced stops to beat a car going 70mph with no stops. Then when you count the walk from the Loop to Streeterville, it's a no-brainer that driving from Oak Park to Streeterville in all but the worst traffic congestion is going to be faster, when they can just drive to Congress, take Wacker to Columbus and be right where they need to be.

^^^ You have to remember what happens after you get downtown, I regularly spend 15 minutes just trying to find parking alone, not considering the costs of said parking.

I forget to take that into account. We have a subsidized spot in Streeterville (~$400 a year!) so parking isn't an issue for us. If we didn't have that spot, we would most certainly take the train for probably 95+% of trips.

Amtrak's future in Illinois: a commentary
 

Hinz: Trek to the future — Amtrak's time has come
By: Greg Hinz July 30, 2008
(Crain’s) — A funny thing is happening on the trains between Chicago and Springfield: They’re running out of seats.

The Amtrak route still requires 3¼ to 3¾ hours of your time — when it’s on schedule, that is — the equipment is ancient, the food awful and the seating often filled to capacity, but ridership on the route was up 67% last year. It’s risen another 15% this year, along with the price of gas.

Now imagine what would happen if they put a little more money into new trains, tracks and signals, enough to cut the travel time to Springfield to 2½ hours, and to St. Louis to just four hours — faster than driving.

Some of the brighter lights in local government are beginning to dream that dream. And some of those dreams may be coming true.

Good article. Let's hope Sen. Durbin can pull it off, maybe with an assist from Obama....

I went to Chinatown from the Loop tonight on the Red Line, and it went very smoothly - very nice. But that's not what I'm posting about.

Just south of the portal into the subway between Roosevelt and Cermak, there are work crews on the east side of the tracks. Both ways, it really looked to me like they'd built some sort of rail connector to the CTA tracks. On the way there, I thought so, so on the way back I watched more closely and it still looked that way to me.

The only other rails around there are freight and Metra, so I'm not sure why there'd be connections, though.

This image on Google Maps is the area I'm talking about. I think the images are from a year ago, so they don't show any rails, but they clearly show some sort of prep work.

Anyone know if I'm mistaken or, if not, what the heck is being done there?

I saw that last week. It looked like they had built a short spur where they were staging equipment and materials for the work in the subway.

Ahh, that makes sense.

BTW, the CTA has resumed with the ridership reports, now in a unified bus/rail report.

CTA Ridership Reports

So how would you propose we have "smoothly-flowing expressways"? I know this doesn't happen much in the freeways/tollways around Chicago.

Solarwind's great photo reminds me of something that's been on my mind for a while:

Does anyone know what the little off-ramp "stub" off of Lake Shore Drive was planned or used for? (It's not in the photo but it exists directly west of the curving off-ramp. You can see it very well on foot from underneath the LSD bridge.) Thanks - I've always wondered what this was about.

I'd estimate around 2-3 times as much freeway capacity as downtown Chicago is currently serviced by, just going by St. Louis, which to my horror built its way out of congestion with 4 freeways rammed through victorian neighborhoods from downtown (Mark Twain Expressway, Daniel Boone Expressway, Ozark Expressway, and I-55).

Took the Green Line to Harlem/Lake last week (Oak Park Hospital visit) and was kind of suprised. I didnt see bombed out hoods as described on these forums. Maybe I was expecting something worse, but it didnt look that bad. The housing stock is aging and some areas are in decay, but that potential is vast. I didnt realize there were so many old brick wharehouses that are in the 5-7 story range west of Ashland. This looks like a future West Loop/Fulton Market neighborhood.

^ Yep, nearly endless potential on the West Side. And a lot of improvement happening too.

Looks can be deceiving. Ashland and Lake used to be real tough but gentrification has spread out to there. East Garfield Park has been on people's lists of "neighborhoods to watch" for the last decade, but redevelopment really hasn't taken off there yet. Most of Austin, though, is still one of the worst-off neighborhoods in the city, even though its architecture is very nice and it doesn't have as many vacant lots as, say, North Kenwood. If you doubt the West Side is that bad, just take the Green Line late at night--it's a huge problem area for crime on the CTA.

^ This is getting off-topic.... but, while I agree with you, Austin has seen a lot of investment too. There are many people there trying to make it better. Oak Park is a major stabilizing factor, obviously.

I would probably say that West Garfield Park is the worst section.

Ah. I went to OP in the morning and came back downtown around 3 on a Friday. I know crime is a problem, but I just expected a complete shit hole "bombed out" area from Ashland all the way to OP. Didnt really see it, even if the area isnt exactly safe. What I like about is its gritty urban scenery pretty much the whole length.
In other parts of the city, a suburban feel takes hold near the city limits (North, Southwest, Northwest) but not the westside. I thought that was awesome. Oak Park doesnt really have a suburban feel, as least not near Metra/CTA.

You have to wonder with Metra following the CTA route, how much potential this area really as. Metra can build new stations right next to existing CTA stations, as Oak Park does, possibly creating massive TODs. That being said, I dont see this happening until these areas become (or appear) safer for new Chicago residents coming from other hoods or the burbs.

Have people been describing that part of the green line as bombed out? It's the areas along the southern portion of the green line that are more problematic than the western portion. That's why I've voiced my concern on several occasions about the Olympic Stadium proposal for Washington Park. Olympic spectators won't have the best image of our city when they're riding the green line between downtown and the Garfield exit. It's probably too much to hope for rapid development in that area within the next 8 years.

.......I rode the Ravenswood all the way from the Loop to Kimball today (Sunday).....it was REALLY GOOD !!!! ........no slow zones and 25 minutes from the M Mart to Kimball !

Right. But most of the people on the bid committee and hizzoner haven't actually ridden the transit system they are hyping up in the bid book, which is why there was basically no apparent coordination between the venue plan and the transportation plan. Unfortunately, to most of our elite transit is still somewhat of a niche or novelty (maybe the kids who moved to the north side take it to work, just like grandpa used to). But hey, if the Olympic bid is what it takes the city elite to take transit seriously, I'm all for it. Maybe the mayor will actually ride some of the system downtown and be taken aback at how atrocious many of the station facilities are compared to any peer city. Or, see how difficult intermodal transfers are. Maybe.

Well, I think the stations and track on the south branch are generally fine, it's just that the view is really, really depressing. You're of course right that the Olympic committee doesn't seem to have a clue about the real problems involved with their claims that it will be easy to get to the venues via public transit, but that's a separate issue from the sad ride from downtown to Garfield.

Honte, at least a little discussion of the West Side is tolerable if it relates to the Green Line, I think. There has been some redevelopment in Austin west of about Laramie and north of Madison, but the neighborhood is still probably one of the least safe places to ride the train (does anyone have data that are easier to gauge than everyblock.com?). Part of this might have something to do with the fact that the line is used for drug dealing and trafficking a lot. On the West Side, the Blue Line through North Lawndale would definitely look more the part of a bombed-out neighborhood if you could see it from the train. You're probably right that the worst neighborhood along the line is West Garfield Park and eastern Austin, roughly from Central Park to Laramie. Austin is an interesting place because it developed as a middle-class suburban area pleasantly removed from industry and railyards. I've mentioned before that the Lake branch is great infrastructure and ridership has seen huge gains-you'd have to be crazy these days to talk about shutting the line down--but I do wish they could improve safety on it.

^ Sure. To be fair, I know very little about the green line out there. I only see that neighborhood by car and the limited interaction I have there on foot. But the changes have been tangible.

First of all, I never said we needed perfectly smoothly-flowing expressways. Expressways are mostly anti-pedestrian and diminish local quality of life in favor of a general increase in regional quality of life. It's a balance - you need some, but usually the number it would take to build your way out of congestion would happen partly because of more capacity, but also partly because people would move out of areas with too many expressways, de-densifying and reducing demand. That's not something I'd want to see.

My point is that building transit next to existing expressways, though usually cheaper than building through neighborhoods, is counter-productive. First, bringing cars and pedestrians together is not a great idea, second, expressways are wide and reduce effective density near the stations nearly always, making them less convenient, and during off-peak times, transit users will be treated to watching cars zip by at 70mph while waiting for a train that probably won't get above 50mpg and will stop frequently. Expressway-aligned transit could work for commuting, but that's really about it. Designing systems only for commuters is a little wasteful - when possible, systems should be designed for all-around use whenever possible. That means putting transit where people live and walk, not where people drive.

I'm glad we have a train to O'Hare, but would it be better-used in general if it were aligned through neighborhoods? I'm glad that 95th on the Red LIne is the highest-used station in the system, but wouldn't the Red Line do better if it were aligned over the rail tracks to the west of the Dan Ryan, an easier walk to most of Bridgeport, instead of the middle of an expressway? It would be less duplicative of the Green Line, and closer to residences and pedestrians. That's my point, not that expressways are the answer, but that putting transit next to expressways is silly for anything except commuter transit.

There are patches along the Green Line that are sad and lonely with a lot of empty lots, but I think the Douglas Branch of the Pink Line is just as bad - in places worse.

The vast tracts of now-empty lots that UIC is sitting on is, frankly, disgusting. They certainly don't help the areas on the west part of Douglas Park and Lawndale where there are also blocks with only a couple 3-flats on them.

Green Line south of 35th is sort of a mix, plenty of blocks that could really use some additional development, but also some nice old housing stock that isn't so bad to look at.

The west branch of the Green Line isn't bad to look at, though, with only a few spots of visibly empty blocks.

That's right, I was just reminding LA21st that vacancy/abandonment levels don't always predict crime or general neighborhood deterioration perfectly. And something does need to be done with all the land UIC and the Medical District have been sitting on, but I thought that was all east of Douglas Park, am I wrong?

Expressway medians make for unpleasant public transit, but I think you are a little too dire. Aren't the Kennedy stations on the O'Hare branch still highly used? When the Blue Line is revamped to reach 70 mph it should look pretty competitive with cars for most of the day. I'm guessing the lower cost of lines along expressway medians is pretty compelling given that the right-of-way already exists and the tracks can be laid along the ground. Oh well, for better or worse, we already have just about all the median lines we're going to have anyway (except possibly the Red Line expansion).

Why did you even bring up “expressway flows smoothly” then?

A train flowing smoothly with no stops going at 70 mph = a car flowing smoothly with no stops going at 70 mph.

I think having the trains going down the express ways is great. We need to be more TBD's at the stations....creating urban villages at each stop. For neighborhoods like Jefferson Park who don't want TBD's to be built then they need to be accessed more taxes for the loss or revenue that the City and Transit authority will lose to keep things the way they are.....their own private CTA/Metra Station.

Same goes for all the cities on the Metra who don't want traffice to come in for Park and Rides. Charge those cities taxes to cover the fare loss/parking loss/revenue loss from not building a TBD in order for them to maintain their own little private Metra station.

Except a train caries about 100x more people.

I believe these are actually state-owned, acquired via eminent domain as part of the Illinois Medical District PD. Being held for eventual institutional expansion, in theory.

The expressway median stations on both the O'Hare and Dan Ryan branch have decent ridership numbers, but the wide station spacing means the riders-per-route-mile (a very rough metric of system efficiency) on these branches is quite low. One equitable solution of which I am a proponent is to charge fare premiums (e.g. an extra quarter) to people boarding at the outer reaches of these expressway lines (e.g. O'Hare - Harlem, Forest Park - Austin, 79th - 95th) but CTA would be running into a fire with all the social justice people for raising fares anywhere remotely near a poor neighborhood. Might be better off just putting in an O'Hare Airport surcharge (unpaid by monthly pass users, i.e. employees) and calling it a day. That said, you're right that the lower initial capital cost of using existing transportation right-of-way is very significant as compared to acquisition costs elsewhere, particularly since the environmental impact statement and community vetting process mean new elevated lines through neighborhoods are basically a non-starter these days.

What ever happened to the west loop transportation center? Is that idea dead, or was it always just visionary? I remember seeing something about it in the Chicago 2020 plan.

A train that doesn't have stops is kinda useless and a pointless comparison ... but no, they don't equate, because a car can take you to your final destination, a train can only take you to a (small) subset of possible final destinations. I'm a big transit and rail fan, but denying the obvious isn't any way to mount an effective transit argument.

I'm glad that you enjoy walking across the access road plus six lanes of wind-whipped, exhaust-spewing traffic to get to a rail station, and then standing in the breezy exhaust, but not all of us are such nature-lovers ...

Actually, a lot of cities with Metra are doing a lot more with TOD near their stations than the City of Chicago is doing with TOD near CTA stations. And that will probably remain the case while alermanic privilege remains in effect. Naperville near the rail station is better than many of the "L" stations in Chicago - maybe even better than the majority not counting downtown stations.