CHICAGO: Transit Developments

[pottebaum]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

Oh, now I know why I didn't recall the BRT service extending up through Lincoln Park and into Lakeview... the main core with actual dedicated lanes ends at North Avenue. North of there it's essentially BRT-lite. I'd be more exited with continued lane exclusivity and preferably traffic signal priority.

What's the advantage of BRT without dedicated lanes?

[mwadswor]

Originally Posted by pottebaum

What's the advantage of BRT without dedicated lanes?

Marketing.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by pottebaum

What's the advantage of BRT without dedicated lanes?

Depends. If the other improvements, like prepay fare stations, continue after the dedicated lanes stop, then there would still be a speed increase. Crowds of people getting on at busy stops wouldn't slow up the bus as much.

I'm not too worried about the effect on merchants or pedestrians. The dedicated lanes are only in place during rush hours, and IIRC, only on one side of the street (peak direction of travel). Outside of rush hours, cars will still be able to parallel park.

[VivaLFuego]

In general, bus-only lanes are a very easy sell for the morning rush when many retailers aren't open anyhow; for example, Clark Street between Diversey and Fullerton has a bus-only lane that's only in effect 7AM-9AM M-F. In general, I'd say a good place to start with bus-only lanes are those arterials that already have rush-hour parking restrictions. Taking out roadspace that currently serves metered parking for businesses in the PM rush would hit the double-whammy in the political realm of both (a) hurting retailers and (b) compensatory action to the metered parking concessionaire, meaning either paying them or putting in new meters or higher rates elsewhere to compensate. (a) or (b) alone would probably be enough to kill any proposal, so I have trouble seeing how both could be overcome unless there was some major carrot/benefit in exchange.

[pip]

I got to the Belmont train station this afternoon to go downtown and they had these displays which listed each train, their arrival times and the next two after when they arrive(I think 2). Me being the dork I am timed it and purposely missed the first train to see if the estimate was right for the subsequant trains. It was.

[denizen467]

^ long live dorks

Did it list them by line and/or destination (like the test samples posted earlier) ?

[left of center]

Originally Posted by pip

I got to the Belmont train station this afternoon to go downtown and they had these displays which listed each train, their arrival times and the next two after when they arrive(I think 2). Me being the dork I am timed it and purposely missed the first train to see if the estimate was right for the subsequant trains. It was.

haha, awesome. good to see these displays FINALLY going up after being in the works for years

[jpIllInoIs]

I'm going way off topic here, but after a month of discussion on signage I'm about to lose my mind. No disrespect to any of the contributors here cause everyone brings up some salient topics. We collectively in Chicago have got to look at the state of the CTA and get fired up at the complete lack of visionary planning and active implementation of a rail system for this city.

I looked into the NYC transit thread and was amazed (and then embarrassed for us) at the level of expansion that the NYC transit has on track. Right now they are boring a new tunnel for the 2nd Ave subway. They are constructing more new stations and extensions and widening river tunnels and building bridges. And they are in D.C today lobbying for funds for 7 transit lines extensions.

And it is not just NYC. Seattle, LA, Charlotte, Minn all have new transit lines. Our last new CTA line was the Orange line back in the 1993---17 Years Ago;

Meanwhile the CTA is constantly fixing slow zones. True enough, they are also reconstructing stations, but NYC is doing that also while undergoing expansion. And while Chicago built the unused Block 37 station, NYC is building a new LIRR station underneath Grand Central Station.

We have accepted a level of inertia that is appalling to me. It seems that Chicago has a mayor who seeks to appease unions and is uninterested in rail transit. Or maybe there has been too much depopulation in the outlying neighborhoods to justify expansion. Or perhaps we have invested in other areas like school buildings and tiff's for high rises. I don't know, but as a transit fan the current state of affairs at the CTA is troubling and depressing.

OK now back to our signage debate.

[Busy Bee]

This may give you an idea of why the CTA seems to be perpetually behind the times:

CTA board Chairman Terry Peterson says he has not ridden a bus or train in Chicago in "a couple of years" but added he plans "to become a tourist in this city on public transit."

Its been my belief for years that the CTA is essentially run by people who, like Amtrak in the beginning at least, have little to no knowledge of how to develop and operate a modern rail transport system. And thanks to generations of entrenched cronyism, we've gotten rebuilt lines and one expansion, but in the larger scope of things, an ambitious comprehensive vision for an integrated rapid transit network that propels not just the city but surrounding suburbs into an optimistic, robust and evolving future is more or less completely absent. I hate to say it but sometimes I wonder if we should tap some foreign talent to head up the CTA. The ambitious plans for the Paris Metro alone makes the 'L' seem like a creaky old relic.

[VivaLFuego]

^Hey, don't forget the new tunnels under Block 37

... or more seriously, what about rebuilding nearly every Brown Line station, the Howard terminal, completely reconstructing the Pink Line (plausibly an actual New Start project, not as enormous a stretch as the Brown Line).... all in the last 10 years...

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

Or maybe there has been too much depopulation in the outlying neighborhoods to justify expansion.

As I frequently cite, the Toronto subway has significantly fewer route-miles, track-miles, and stations than CTA rail, but has approximately twice the ridership (depending how you measure). Again by any measurement of system scope such as route-mileage or stations, CTA is far and away bigger than systems like Boston or Philadelphia, though those systems aren't too far behind in terms of ridership. And the issue is not poor ridership on the Red, Brown, or Blue Lines.

How often do you use the Pink Line and experience it's brand new stations and structure? What about the modern stations along the quick and smooth-operating Lake Street Elevated?

Or perhaps we have invested in other areas like school buildings and tiff's for high rises.

Also, police stations, fire stations, and streetscaping programs. While it's not enough to support a whole new line, TIF funding could certainly make a large dent in the condition of station facilities and such. For whatever it's worth, I think TIF funds are paying for the new Morgan infill station.

[Busy Bee]

Viva, your right. I realize that the recent Dan Ryan station remodeling and Brown and Pink rebuilds are nothing to scoff at (Pink being executed exponentially better IMO), but whats missing with the CTA are real, active plans to foster interconnectivity between lines that works for residents and tourists. I believe if the CTA was really spears out serious about the Circle Line, we'd be under construction already. I also have a lack of faith in the CTA admin's knowledge of the systems of their contemporaries. And yes, the next train countdown displays is actually an excelent example. Technology that has existed on foreign systems for a generation, the CTA can't seem to even get right present day. How hard is it? Where is the competent aesthetic eye? Just copy someone else's sign and install! As a graphic designer, not transport engineer by trade, the Cta is overwhelmingly poor at understanding not just brand and information design integration, but in transport aesthetics/presentation in general and how that translates to rider comfort and the ability to attract and sustain increased ridership.

If I was at the helm I'd be pushing for a top to bottom reorganization and repurposing—a dramatic shift in how rapid transit in this city is addressed, operated and presented. And I'd start with a way to get from Kimball to O'Hare on the L without going downtown, something that should have been done decades ago. Another would be making sure new railcars delivered in 2011 don't look like new railcars delivered in 1993. Those things matter no matter how many say they really don't. In many respects image is everything.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

I looked into the NYC transit thread and was amazed (and then embarrassed for us) at the level of expansion that the NYC transit has on track. Right now they are boring a new tunnel for the 2nd Ave subway. They are constructing more new stations and extensions and widening river tunnels and building bridges. And they are in D.C today lobbying for funds for 7 transit lines extensions.

And it is not just NYC. Seattle, LA, Charlotte, Minn all have new transit lines. Our last new CTA line was the Orange line back in the 1993---17 Years Ago;

You do realize that the planning for East Side Access, et al. all began 20 years ago? The complexities, both physical and political, of building such extensive projects in the midst of the continent's densest city. Hell, the Second Avenue Subway has been on the drawing boards for 80 years.

Massive infrastructure projects in cities with a dense population and a complex political culture take decades to get off the ground. And that's IF they serve a pressing transport need. The 7 extension didn't take as long, but it was driven by politically-connected developers who see billions of dollars in profit to be made developing the West Side - if only it had subway service. Of the projects under consideration in Chicago, none serve a crucially-important transport need, and none have the strong backing of influential developers.

Meanwhile, CTA's been using its hundreds of millions in New Starts money to renovate the system top-to-bottom. The only un-renovated lines are the North Main and the Blue Line.

[jpIllInoIs]

Alright I was venting a little out of jealousy of the projects going on in NYC.

I will acknowledge that the CTA has been reinvesting into existing infrastructure and rebuilding most of the lines. That stuff is not sexy and doesn't make the headlines that a new start would. I ride the Brown and Red lines so I haven't experienced the Pink or Lake St.

But where is the leadership or vision for the next 10-20 years. What agency will take the lead for the WLTC? Where is the Airport Xpress or the Clinton St subway on the timeline?

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs

I'm going way off topic here, but after a month of discussion on signage I'm about to lose my mind. No disrespect to any of the contributors here cause everyone brings up some salient topics. We collectively in Chicago have got to look at the state of the CTA and get fired up at the complete lack of visionary planning and active implementation of a rail system for this city.

I looked into the NYC transit thread and was amazed (and then embarrassed for us) at the level of expansion that the NYC transit has on track. Right now they are boring a new tunnel for the 2nd Ave subway. They are constructing more new stations and extensions and widening river tunnels and building bridges. And they are in D.C today lobbying for funds for 7 transit lines extensions.

And it is not just NYC. Seattle, LA, Charlotte, Minn all have new transit lines. Our last new CTA line was the Orange line back in the 1993---17 Years Ago;

Meanwhile the CTA is constantly fixing slow zones. True enough, they are also reconstructing stations, but NYC is doing that also while undergoing expansion. And while Chicago built the unused Block 37 station, NYC is building a new LIRR station underneath Grand Central Station.

We have accepted a level of inertia that is appalling to me. It seems that Chicago has a mayor who seeks to appease unions and is uninterested in rail transit. Or maybe there has been too much depopulation in the outlying neighborhoods to justify expansion. Or perhaps we have invested in other areas like school buildings and tiff's for high rises. I don't know, but as a transit fan the current state of affairs at the CTA is troubling and depressing.

OK now back to our signage debate.

Give me my Western Ave Subway damnit!....

Ok I am OCD on this......and delusional but I can dream and be compulsive about it can't I

A non-comprehensive neighborhood sample that focuses on the northside (so far) of what a western ave subway would serve either directly or via easy transfer to brown or blue line and green line

Name Density
Rogers Park 35,000 / sq mile
West Ridge 21,000/ sq mile
Lincoln Square 17,500 / sq mile
Albany Park 30,000 / sq mile

North Center 15,400 / sq mile
Avondale 21,500 / sq mile
LOgan squarew 29,000 / sq mile
Irving Park 19,000 / sq mle
West town 19,000 / sq mile
Humboldt Park 27,500 / sq mile
East Garfield 10,700 / sq ml
West Garfield 17,900 / sq mle

all densities approx
Just these neighborhoods serve a population over 685,000
try and do southside later

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

And yes, the next train countdown displays is actually an excelent example. Technology that has existed on foreign systems for a generation, the CTA can't seem to even get right present day. How hard is it? Where is the competent aesthetic eye? Just copy someone else's sign and install!

...

In many respects image is everything.

Well that's it, in a nutshell; no regard for the proprietary technologies and build dates among the systems being compared. Doing such things right (e.g. Bus Tracker, having a sound and cost-effective fleet replacement cycle, etc.) takes time to design and implement a robust, scalable architecture. Doing things wrong can be done very quickly (those Titan LCD screens, replacing over half the bus fleet in a year thereby ensuring the fleet gets old at exactly the same time while reducing your future ability to pay for it because of interest on the debt issued to buy the buses).

When London first put up next bus LED screens way back when, they were just tied to a schedule and could be manually updated from a control center. Many of the early next train arrival screens worldwide were the same. Is that useful and robust? Next train arrival screens on CTA required fully replacing the entire signaling systems on the entire 200+ track miles of the L system, which has been done on an ongoing basis over the past 30 years at a cost measured in hundreds of millions of dollars, as well as installing new communications infrastructure along the entire right of way to support, among other communication needs, each component of the signalling system communicating instantaneously with the control center. This all had to be done under an incredibly constrained capital project budget, in an environment with fungible money that often went to pay for operations for political reasons rather than in necessary infrastructure investment. The notion that this is all some cut/copy/paste process that should be done yesterday, rather than a decades-long, incremental, systematic project is just absurd.

For the record I agree that design is very important as part of the overall user experience and functionality, and is far too often ignored; not just in transit, but in many areas of civic life. But that's much more a reflection of the culture and politics than of the people involved. There's no need to enumerate some of the more obvious design deficiencies (e.g. Brown Line canopy placement, the old website before the redesign, passenger circulation around railcar doors) other than as an academic exercise, since believe me, there are technical people at CTA, CDOT and others that are quite aware of them and importantly, the history behind how things came to be the way they are.

[Busy Bee]

Point taken Viva.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by lawfin

Give me my Western Ave Subway damnit!....

^ I have been far more impressed with how Ashland has developed in recent times than Western.

I think an Ashland subway would make more sense.

[ardecila]

Exactly, which is why Western needs the boost of a subway line. Of course, you'd probably need to connect it to downtown somehow. I can't imagine the ridership being very high if you had to transfer to get downtown.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Exactly, which is why Western needs the boost of a subway line. Of course, you'd probably need to connect it to downtown somehow. I can't imagine the ridership being very high if you had to transfer to get downtown.

^ I don't get this logic.

Doesn't Chicago need to build rail lines that will generate high ridership right away, as opposed to building lines that may or may not generate high ridership in 20-30 years?

That's why I'm so in support of many of the mass transit elements proposed in the 2009 Central Area Action Plan (Clinton subway, etc). Maybe the city and nation should actually reward people who are already choosing to live in dense environments, instead of those who don't want to have anything to do with density.

[Mr Downtown]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Its been my belief for years that the CTA is essentially run by people who, like Amtrak in the beginning at least, have little to no knowledge of how to develop and operate a modern rail transport system

I think you're both wrong and insulting. Yes, a few people in the front office are mayoral appointees whose expertise is not in transit operations, but you don't have to go very far down the org chart to find dedicated transit pros who are quite knowledgeable.

And I think it's telling that you say "operate a modern rail transport system" when CTA is actually an integrated system. Should we really be spending huge amounts of scarce money just because you're too good to take the Lawrence bus from Kimball to Jefferson Park when you go to the airport? CTA goes to two airports. A New York subway rider can get to, um, no airports at all.

As for signage and graphics, the guy in charge is actually quite competent and knowledgeable. He was hired for the job because Huberman saw passenger information as a way to get a big image change quickly and (relatively) cheaply. But he runs into things like having to work with 17 different models of LED displays, having to borrow a programmer to hack a way to get next train times from a control room system never designed to provide them, or figuring out how to predict next train times at stations near the end of a line, when the next train may not yet have even left the storage track.

. . . The ambitious plans for the Paris Metro alone makes the 'L' seem like a creaky old relic.

So do the taxes Parisians pay.