Extending the existing CTA system (realistic future?)

[doepack]

There's also been some discussion with having a Clinton or Canal St subway for Union and Olgivie stations, presumably from the Blue line, and the Blue line would no longer go into the Loop.

I don't see the current Blue Line leaving the loop ... but the thought of a "ribbon" shaped has crossed my mind.
Trains headed inbound from O'Hare would turn south under Clinton or Canal St, stop at Union/Ogilvie and then turn east following the path of current trains from Forrest Park they could then run back south at Clinton or Canal St and west to Forrest Park (completing the loop).

Doubling back over one segment? That's weird and unusual...

Trains from Forrest Park would turn north at Clinton St, do the loop and head out to O'Hare. Or the Blue Line could be split into two operating services (O'Hare, Loop, back to O'Hare and Forrest Park, Loop, back to Forrest Park).

Ah, there ya go. Much better. That way, you could have two track service along the new Clinton St. subway with all trains running in one direction (south). One side to O'hare, the other to Forest Park.

Signage would be most important, with trains leaving O'Hare and Forrest Park being signed for "The Loop" then changing to their outlying destination after leaving Union/Ogilvie.

Under the separate routing plan, trains from Forest Park would flip their signs at Clinton, while the inbounds from O'hare would flip their signs at OTC. No biggie...

[justalurker66]

Or the Blue Line could be split into two operating services (O'Hare, Loop, back to O'Hare and Forrest Park, Loop, back to Forrest Park).

Ah, there ya go. Much better. That way, you could have two track service along the new Clinton St. subway with all trains running in one direction (south). One side to O'hare, the other to Forest Park.

I was thinking Forrest Park clockwise then out and O'Hare counter-clockwise then out ... but that wouldn't provide service from the Loop to Union/Ogilvie. A one way loop with one side O'Hare and the other side Forrest Park would work - as long as someone didn't want to go south to LaSalle from the loop (without going north and changing trains at Union).

[ravenswood]

What do you guys think of this as an alternative to the Gray Line project.

Assumptions: IC is not used for high speed rail or anything else and becomes surplus.

A new connection is built between the elevated line and the IC at 16th street before the IC goes under McCormick place. A new CTA station is built to serve McCormick place and the South Loop. From there all existing local Metra stations are ripped up and replaced with new CTA stations along with making the IC third rail. The Green line is rerouted over the IC from 16th street to 69th Street. 55-56-57 would remain a metra stop and be used as a transfer point between the MED and CTA. At 69th street, a new connection would be built between the IC (would become the green line) and the existing South Chicago branch. The Green line would run at grade from 69th street to 93rd using the existing Metra stations. A new yard would have to be built somewhere down there.

Meanwhile, Metra would only stop at 55-56-57, 11th, and Van Buren between downtown and 79th street making the trip quicker and increasing capacity. Instead of crossing over at Kensington, NICTD would run up the IC where new catenary would be hung. At 71st, a new connection would be built between the IC and the current South Chicago Branch allowing NICTD to pass underneath the Metra tracks. Therefore, not only does it separate South Shore trains from Metra trains for a little longer but south bound South Shore trains would not have to cross over north Bound Metra tracks.

Finally, when the federal government allows, the current Green line is demolished.

What do you think?
pros: most of the infrastructure is in place with only a few major construction projects outside of station building. Allows for greater access to the South Lake shore and moves the Red and Green line farther away from each other. Gives direct L access to McCormick and the Museum of Science and industry. Allows for faster travel along the MED and turns the MED into more of a commuter railroad and removes local travel. gets rid of the underused and expensive Green Line. Unlike the Gray line, provides direct access to the Loop and other L lines.

Cons: Still requires heavy construction projects at 16th Street, 71st street and all the new CTA stations. Have to wait for awhile to tear down the Green Line.

[Chicagopcclcars]

My personal opinion, based on my personal preferences is to let the Gray Line proposal rest in peace and "do not resuscitate" in any form whatsoever.

David Harrison

[justalurker66]

What do you guys think of this as an alternative to the Gray Line project.

North of 75th there will be room for something once CREATE builds the Amtrak connection. I'd like to see the CN-IC stay in place as a redundant path (stuff happens).

Between 75th and 95th Amtrak will continue to use the CN-IC main lines. Tracks 3 and 4 are used for the IHB connection. Between 95th and 115th Amtrak will continue to use the CN-IC main lines and tracks 3 and 4 will continue to be used for freight (feeding the IHB and NS connections). Any reuse plan needs to remain north of 75th St/Grand Crossing.

I like the idea of a line using CTA trains and connected to the rest of the network a lot better than the Gray "purchase of service" plan but only in the way that I would prefer to have my leg broken to having it amputated. Neither would be my first choice. (Improve the MED as a Metra line or leave it alone!)

Instead of crossing over at Kensington, NICTD would run up the IC where new catenary would be hung.

We'll see how it goes with the new Kensington connection. The inbound direct connections to track 3 and 4 bypass the worst of the problem. Once NICTD is north of Kensington they can just fall in line with Metra's expresses. Building a bypass track north of 75th St (where neither CN-IC or Amtrak will need the tracks, eventually) might save some congestion but it would come at the cost of either losing the 55th-56th-57th St stop or building a NICTD only station on the CN-IC ROW. The cost outweighs the benefit.

My personal opinion, based on my personal preferences is to let the Gray Line proposal rest in peace and "do not resuscitate" in any form whatsoever.

I agree. I took a look at the "Gray Line" websites last night to refresh my memory and found the plan lacking, although I did find two photos I took in 1998 being used as illustrations (without my permission).

Days like today (where Metra lost track 4 for a good portion of the day due to wire problems) would kill the Gray line. Yes, Metra's expresses from Kensington would still work on the "CTA Gray Line" tracks, but a 5-15 minute headway of locals wouldn't leave much room to handle problems.

Please don't mess with the MED!

[doepack]

What do you guys think of this as an alternative to the Gray Line project.

North of 75th there will be room for something once CREATE builds the Amtrak connection. I'd like to see the CN-IC stay in place as a redundant path (stuff happens).

Between 75th and 95th Amtrak will continue to use the CN-IC main lines. Tracks 3 and 4 are used for the IHB connection. Between 95th and 115th Amtrak will continue to use the CN-IC main lines and tracks 3 and 4 will continue to be used for freight (feeding the IHB and NS connections). Any reuse plan needs to remain north of 75th St/Grand Crossing.

You mean the BRC (Belt Railway) and NS connections in this area, right? IHB/BOCT connects with CN/IC somewhere around Riverdale, IIRC...

Improve the MED as a Metra line or leave it alone!

Amen.

[justalurker66]

You mean the BRC (Belt Railway) and NS connections in this area, right? IHB/BOCT connects with CN/IC somewhere around Riverdale, IIRC...

Correct. I got the wrong belt ...

Improve the MED as a Metra line or leave it alone!

Amen.

[Passenger]

How about one of the less ambitious and actually planned for projects? I'll pick one.

Orange line to Ford City. Can it happen do you think?

[Chicagopcclcars]

How about one of the less ambitious and actually planned for projects? I'll pick one.

Orange line to Ford City. Can it happen do you think?

How about hearing about the Orange and Yellow line proposals "directly from the horse's mouth."
This was a news report from July, 2011.

David Harrison

>>>...."CHICAGO (CBS) — The Chicago Transit Authority is putting two proposed
rapid transit extensions on hold as it tries to cope with its latest financial
crisis.

>>>As WBBM Newsradio 780′s Bob Roberts reports, "Red Line reconstruction
and extension is a priority." But CTA President Forrest Claypool told Newsradio
780 that proposed Orange and Yellow Line extensions won't get past the planning
phase without a turnaround in the agency's finances.

>>>He said the agency has too many other needs that are far too urgent.

>>>"What we need now is a state of good repair," he said. "We have slow zones
now on the Red Line, south side, that are 15 miles an hour. The slow zones
north? You get cattle cars because of that.


>>>CTA officials have said that they have unmet capital repair and
reconstruction needs that approach $10 billion.

>>>He said the Orange Line and Skokie Swift extensions are not dead. Rather, he
said, planning will continue so they can "be taken off the shelf" if finances
improve."

[Mr.T]

In response to ideas for the CN-IC line, I would like to point out that it seems to be getting serious consideration as an alternative to building dedicated passenger tracks along the NS line.

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 70#p998315

It would probably be cheaper than the NS route. I think this would be a better use for the CN-IC line than making it a CTA line.

[MACTRAXX]

How about one of the less ambitious and actually planned for projects? I'll pick one.

Orange line to Ford City. Can it happen do you think?

P: After reading PCC's post with relevant information I was going to mention my previous post about my
thought of extending the Midway Line to Ford City-I mentioned 95/Cicero in Oak Lawn and after further
thought a link with the SWS in that area would be quite interesting...the only drawback to me is if a new
CTA extension would undercut the ridership of the growing SWS or would perhaps enhance it...

I agree that fixing the track on the Howard-Dan Ryan Line should have high priority being the CTA's busiest
line and getting rid of those slow zones...

MACTRAXX

[Jenner]

What seems odd is that the CTA transit doesn't seem to have a master plan, but just a lot of scattered projects, and some big capital projects. It would be nice if someone had a vision of what the transit system is supposed to accomplish, and how to develop that. This seems rather amplified by the Red/Purple Modernization (RPM) by articles here: http://chicago.straightdope.com/sdc20110210.php and http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/ho ... id=3473194 which seem to complain that the RPM doesn't seem to take into account some of CTA's proposals, such as the CTA's proposed circle line.

I have some questions:

1. Why does the Red line south have so many slow zones? I can understand the Brown line given so many of the sharp curves, but this shouldn't be a problem for the Red line south.

2. What are the maintenance/overall cost of the rapid transit vs bus? A bus probably costs 1.5 - 2 million per unit, plus driver, fuel, and maintenance costs. Rapid transit would need to maintain the structure, rail cars, electricity, stations, drivers and station attendants. Given this, bus routes are probably the most cost effective for transporting people, but what is the cost point in which rapid transit makes more sense for given routes?

3. I did try to look on the yahoo group regarding the discussion on the Gray line, but didn't scour all the posts for the discussion. If you happen to have a quick link, I'd be interested in seeing the discussion. I would think that with the mandate of fare integration with Metra and CTA, that this may become a moot point, and we'd have to see if ridership increases on the ME based on fare integration, as it would function as rapid transit.

[Chicagopcclcars]

What seems odd is that the CTA transit doesn't seem to have a master plan, but just a lot of scattered projects, and some big capital projects. It would be nice if someone had a vision of what the transit system is supposed to accomplish, and how to develop that. This seems rather amplified by the Red/Purple Modernization (RPM) by articles here: http://chicago.straightdope.com/sdc20110210.php and http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/ho ... id=3473194 which seem to complain that the RPM doesn't seem to take into account some of CTA's proposals, such as the CTA's proposed circle line.

The CTA did have master plans, that were even published by the CTA when it began back in the 50s and 60s. There are fewer masterplans in later decades as regional planning authorities were created that assumed responsibilities. Today there might be a concentration on a few viable projects as competition for decreasing tax monies increases. To me what was more enlightening about the "Straight Dope" and "Reader" articles what not the material but the 101 comments....shows that for any given "L" issue there are dozens of solutions and ideas. I do think the author there lost the battle to get policy changed and eliminate the east coast term "el"....101 comments shows reader interest. The author should demand an editorial change...."Want future exposes...change your ways." Of course the answer given might be a disasterous "You're fired." That wouldn't be productive, LOL.

I have some questions:

1. Why does the Red line south have so many slow zones? I can understand the Brown line given so many of the sharp curves, but this shouldn't be a problem for the Red line south.

Your combining "slow zones" with "Brown line curves" shows you might not understand what slow zones are. Are you from Chicago? Every place a train slows down is not a "slow zone." "Slow zones" are all temporary conditions, usually because of track or structural conditions. There may be other causes. When the condition is removed or corrected, the "slow zone" is eliminated. The all-time longest running "slow zone" was probably east 63rd ST on the Jackson Park branch...lasted for decades.

My take on the Ryan slow zones is that the subsurface doesn't drain well enough and the space in the median is too small to allow the CTA to lay a railroad like profile to the ballast.

2. What are the maintenance/overall cost of the rapid transit vs bus? A bus probably costs 1.5 - 2 million per unit, plus driver, fuel, and maintenance costs. Rapid transit would need to maintain the structure, rail cars, electricity, stations, drivers and station attendants. Given this, bus routes are probably the most cost effective for transporting people, but what is the cost point in which rapid transit makes more sense for given routes?

I'll leave this to better minds then mine.

3. I did try to look on the yahoo group regarding the discussion on the Gray line, but didn't scour all the posts for the discussion. If you happen to have a quick link, I'd be interested in seeing the discussion. I would think that with the mandate of fare integration with Metra and CTA, that this may become a moot point, and we'd have to see if ridership increases on the ME based on fare integration, as it would function as rapid transit.

Ya gotta go back and dig into this...there are no shortcuts. The subject of the Gray Line is emotional to some, life giving to others. The subject will come up amongst the most diverse topics...so you'll have to dig. There's even an admission by main supporter that he feels the idea "may not come to fruition in his lifetime."
Given the ten years or so....I tend to agree.

David Harrison

[ravenswood]

In response to ideas for the CN-IC line, I would like to point out that it seems to be getting serious consideration as an alternative to building dedicated passenger tracks along the NS line.

http://www.railroad.net/forums/viewtopi ... 70#p998315

It would probably be cheaper than the NS route. I think this would be a better use for the CN-IC line than making it a CTA line.

This is probably the best use of the SCAL and IC. A single dedicated passenger route out of Chicago is the most important piece of any Midwest rail network, however, using this route presents complications with reconnecting back to Union Station that would be difficult to re-engineer.

The reason I like my plan, if the IC is not used for high speed rail, is it allows for the removal of the South Side Elevated without any reduction in service on the South Side. The green and red lines are just too close together and no one uses the green line. By moving the green line to the IC, it separates the two lines and gives direct access to more "destinations" and density. It also extends the line beyond Washington Park for very little money. At its greatest distance, the green line is .6 miles away from the Dan Ryan. Far too close for a low density area.

[Chicagopcclcars]

The green and red lines are just too close together and no one uses the green line.

Who told you this or how did you arrive at this viewpoint?? Anyway, a ride will show you that you are in error.

David Harrison