"Decaying Chicago Transit Infrastructure"

[Amtrak41]

For those who do not look at Trainorders.com, someone did an excellent photo review of the badly deteriorated infrastructure along the entire Red line.

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?4,2475213

[Busjack]

If you look at the CTA Contract Opportunities, some of the bridges mentioned are supposed to be fixed.

I can't figure out why he doesn't transfer to Metra UPN at Ogilvie Station. In fact, I can't figure out why he doesn't take the Metra Electric, and the old trick of using a monthly pass on two lines on one trip. Sure, one would have to walk across the Loop, but that can't be as long as putting up with this stuff.

[BusHunter]

I took a look at the ties on the Dan Ryan branch myself. They look like they do have cracks in the ties, but the blue line had ties in really poor condition. I remember seeing once a train passing under the turn right before the cicero bridge EB and noticing the wood splinters of the ties were actually moving up and down when a train passed over it. The tie when you picked it up would most likely come up in pieces because the tie itself was breaking apart. The Red line does have painful slow zones from 47th to roosevelt. Also the subway seems to move slowly, but that seems to be a capacity issue. The line gets really overcrowded in the subway to the point it slows down service. They probably could use a 10 car train but that would be too expensive expanding subway stations. I was reading an article lately about the pluses of a north side broadway subway. It said by selling the land the old north side main sits on now it would pay for most of the broadway subway making the cost affordable. If they did build the subway I'd be really thinking about building 10 car stations with the addition of purple line riders. There may be difficulty with passengers boarding south of Addison due to overcrowding. Also with the addition of riders that would mean they would need more trains and more frequent service. Somewhere along the line, probably on the old Roosevelt incline, there going to have to address turning trains back because the Dan Ryan doesn't need that much service. I was thinking that may be one of the downsides to frequent service on the Dan Ryan, that you deteriorate the ties faster by giving them more usage. Maybe they should turn back trains now but maybe every third or fourth train but just in the rush hour.

[Busjack]

...It said by selling the land the old north side main sits on now it would pay for most of the broadway subway making the cost affordable. ...

Do you have a link? However, given that undoubtedly, the adjoining property holders have reversion rights if the land is not used for transportation purposes, which, besides being strips, is the reason that most strips can't be sold after the railroads have abandoned them (cf. the Bloomingdale and North Shore Skokie Valley routes), I really doubt that one would get the $4 billion needed to build the subway (if in fact that is the estimate) from selling the right of way.

I did, however, agree with the point that was posted on the CTA Tattler, that it would be time to reappraise running all Red Line trains through to the Dan Ryan branch, if the two ends have become that unbalanced.

[sw4400]

If they did build the subway I'd be really thinking about building 10 car stations with the addition of purple line riders.

The only issue with that is all stations on the rail line(s) for this expansion would also need to be expanded for 10-car service. Otherwise, how would those in cars 9-10 get off at a 8-car station?

[artthouwill]

The only issue with that is all stations on the rail line(s) for this expansion would also need to be expanded for 10-car service. Otherwise, how would those in cars 9-10 get off at a 8-car station?

This actually could be done, but it would require a two man operation. The whatyamacall it the operator uses to open and close the doors has two levers, one operates toe doors to the left of the operator, the second one operates the doors to the right of the operator. The second man, the conductor would have to be positioned either in the second car or the ninth car, and at the shorter sations only operate the doors for the first eight cars 9if he is in the ninth car) or the last eight (if he is in the second car). I don't think CTA would justify that expense, but from an operational standpoint it could be done, just like on Metra and the South Shore.

[chgofan78]

I took a look at the ties on the Dan Ryan branch myself. They look like they do have cracks in the ties, but the blue line had ties in really poor condition. I remember seeing once a train passing under the turn right before the cicero bridge EB and noticing the wood splinters of the ties were actually moving up and down when a train passed over it. The tie when you picked it up would most likely come up in pieces because the tie itself was breaking apart. The Red line does have painful slow zones from 47th to roosevelt. Also the subway seems to move slowly, but that seems to be a capacity issue. The line gets really overcrowded in the subway to the point it slows down service. They probably could use a 10 car train but that would be too expensive expanding subway stations. I was reading an article lately about the pluses of a north side broadway subway. It said by selling the land the old north side main sits on now it would pay for most of the broadway subway making the cost affordable. If they did build the subway I'd be really thinking about building 10 car stations with the addition of purple line riders. There may be difficulty with passengers boarding south of Addison due to overcrowding. Also with the addition of riders that would mean they would need more trains and more frequent service. Somewhere along the line, probably on the old Roosevelt incline, there going to have to address turning trains back because the Dan Ryan doesn't need that much service. I was thinking that may be one of the downsides to frequent service on the Dan Ryan, that you deteriorate the ties faster by giving them more usage. Maybe they should turn back trains now but maybe every third or fourth train but just in the rush hour.

I agree. But, what I've noticed is why are the rail ties so deteriorated in the areas where a shoo-fly was used during the Dan Ryan Rehabilitation Project. It seems like those areas would be near perfect to allow for faster service. I wonder if a rehab project is in the works similar to the Blue Line project. On weekends, trains would either not operate between two points or on a single track on the Dan Ryan branch. Normal service would operate on the Howard branch between Howard and Roosevelt similar to the old rehab project back in the late 1980s and early 1990s on the Howard/Englewood/Jackson Park route. All that would be needed is to install a crossover on the non-revenue tracks leading up from the State Street subway to Tower 17.

[BusHunter]

I agree. But, what I've noticed is why are the rail ties so deteriorated in the areas where a shoo-fly was used during the Dan Ryan Rehabilitation Project. It seems like those areas would be near perfect to allow for faster service. I wonder if a rehab project is in the works similar to the Blue Line project. On weekends, trains would either not operate between two points or on a single track on the Dan Ryan branch. Normal service would operate on the Howard branch between Howard and Roosevelt similar to the old rehab project back in the late 1980s and early 1990s on the Howard/Englewood/Jackson Park route. All that would be needed is to install a crossover on the non-revenue tracks leading up from the State Street subway to Tower 17.

That's what they want to happen (or lobby for) is to fix ties on the Ryan with the same recycled ties on the blue. This way they can run trains at 70 mph, (most likely the #5000's) and speed up service. They could also solve a little of the over capacity problem in the subway with the longitudinal seating. When that will happen is anyone's guess, but they might tie that project in with the extension if both proceed simultaniously. The north branch will be the hardest to complete and most controversal and will probably be lastly done. As far as Busjack's point if they could sell all the real estate on the north side main this article claimed they could get the asking price down to a billion or the price of a regular extension. But what would concern me would be the relocation costs of all the sewerage and utilities on Broadway. After the fiasco they had with block 37 a subway sounds too good to be true for 4 billion. As far as the 10 car trains they could possibly extend a few elevated stations but they would have real issues with the subway, but the continuous platform and harrison would be alright. They could try a skip stop subway service to bypass a few stops. Also any 10 car trains would short turn at roosevelt. Then that idea could work.

[Sam92]

Do you have a link? However, given that undoubtedly, the adjoining property holders have reversion rights if the land is not used for transportation purposes, which, besides being strips, is the reason that most strips can't be sold after the railroads have abandoned them (cf. the Bloomingdale and North Shore Skokie Valley routes), I really doubt that one would get the $4 billion needed to build the subway (if in fact that is the estimate) from selling the right of way.

I did, however, agree with the point that was posted on the CTA Tattler, that it would be time to reappraise running all Red Line trains through to the Dan Ryan branch, if the two ends have become that unbalanced.

As a Dan Ryan branch rider, I can honestly say that short turning trains is a bad idea seeing as you would need those train to comeback and carry us southside riders into downtown. And judging from the very crowded buses I see at 95th terminal, the Dan Ryan is going to have some major gains in ridership when the extention is comeplete

[artthouwill]

As a Dan Ryan branch rider, I can honestly say that short turning trains is a bad idea seeing as you would need those train to comeback and carry us southside riders into downtown. And judging from the very crowded buses I see at 95th terminal, the Dan Ryan is going to have some major gains in ridership when the extention is comeplete

As a native southsider, I know where you are coming from. But if you look closely at the CTA schedules posted, you will notice an imbalance in frequency for each end of the line. A.M northbound rush frequency is about 5 minutes apart, whereas southbound A.M. rush frequency is about 3 minutes apart. In essence, 12 trains an hour are leaving 95th serving south siders going downtown, and 20 trains an hour are leaving Howard serving northsiders going downtown. Those trains are virtually empty leaving downtown heading south. The reverse is true for the P.M. rush. The Blue Line has a great imbalance with the O'hare branch as opposed to the Forest Park branch, thus trains are short turned at UIC Halsted.

You may be correct about major gains in ridership when the extension is complete, but that is a minimum of six years away.

It is possible to short turn trains at Roosevelt by routing NB Dan Ryan trains via the elevated Orange Line tracks and crossing over to the State ST incline and descending to the subway that way. Southbound short turn trains after leaving Roosevelt would switch over to the NB tracks in the extension tunnel either just past Roosevelt or halfway through the extension tunnel where there is a diamond crossover.

[Busjack]

I conditioned my post with "if the two ends have become that unbalanced." Obviously, it is not the situation as when Howard was connected to Englewood-Jackson Park.

The post to which the CTA Tattler was linked was also premised on some sort of improvement on the north side, such as making the Purple a Red Express in the true sense (i.e. make Loyola and Wilson double platform, and route it into the subway, in a manner art suggests).

As far as the Blue Line, CTA knew when they disconnected the Pink Line from it that Congress had about half the load as O'Hare, but touted it as doubling frequency.

The other fly in the ointment suggested by art is that CTA has boarding statistics per station entrance, apparently from how many times the turnstile turns, but does not publish exiting statistics. I guess the rotogates complicate that, although I suppose that counters could be put on them and also measuring the turnstiles going the other way. Also, the published statistics are not by time of day, but average number of entries each weekday.

[Sam92]

As a native southsider, I know where you are coming from. But if you look closely at the CTA schedules posted, you will notice an imbalance in frequency for each end of the line. A.M northbound rush frequency is about 5 minutes apart, whereas southbound A.M. rush frequency is about 3 minutes apart. In essence, 12 trains an hour are leaving 95th serving south siders going downtown, and 20 trains an hour are leaving Howard serving northsiders going downtown. Those trains are virtually empty leaving downtown heading south. The reverse is true for the P.M. rush. The Blue Line has a great imbalance with the O'hare branch as opposed to the Forest Park branch, thus trains are short turned at UIC Halsted.

You may be correct about major gains in ridership when the extension is complete, but that is a minimum of six years away.

It is possible to short turn trains at Roosevelt by routing NB Dan Ryan trains via the elevated Orange Line tracks and crossing over to the State ST incline and descending to the subway that way. Southbound short turn trains after leaving Roosevelt would switch over to the NB tracks in the extension tunnel either just past Roosevelt or halfway through the extension tunnel where there is a diamond crossover.

Roosevelt seems to be a little early to short turn a Northbound train. People would want to go at least to Jackson. Also, where would we get the trains to do that if the southbounds were getting turned around early?

[BusHunter]

As a native southsider, I know where you are coming from. But if you look closely at the CTA schedules posted, you will notice an imbalance in frequency for each end of the line. A.M northbound rush frequency is about 5 minutes apart, whereas southbound A.M. rush frequency is about 3 minutes apart. In essence, 12 trains an hour are leaving 95th serving south siders going downtown, and 20 trains an hour are leaving Howard serving northsiders going downtown. Those trains are virtually empty leaving downtown heading south. The reverse is true for the P.M. rush. The Blue Line has a great imbalance with the O'hare branch as opposed to the Forest Park branch, thus trains are short turned at UIC Halsted.

You may be correct about major gains in ridership when the extension is complete, but that is a minimum of six years away.

It is possible to short turn trains at Roosevelt by routing NB Dan Ryan trains via the elevated Orange Line tracks and crossing over to the State ST incline and descending to the subway that way. Southbound short turn trains after leaving Roosevelt would switch over to the NB tracks in the extension tunnel either just past Roosevelt or halfway through the extension tunnel where there is a diamond crossover.

Also if you figure on the demise of the purple line express, on a typical PM schedule 23 purple line trains enter the loop. (138 cars) If they wanted to keep the same capacity level on the north branch, they would have to run 17 more 8 car trains additionally on the Red line to maintain this. Those trains would have to do something mid route because they would be needed back in the other direction 17 more times. If they were sent to Dan Ryan they would need even more trains to fill the gap. So roughly 3 or 4 more trains an hour would be needed or up to 5 or 6 around peak periods in the rush around 5PM.

[Busjack]

Art did mention NB, but I think he threw in a strawman to which the next two of you reacted.

I was basing my post on this Reader article, which seems to me to be the only credible discussion of whether the north was overloaded compared to the south. It wasn't talking about turning northbound trains short of downtown. That wouldn't be politically possible.

There are enough crossovers in the subway, north of the downtown continuous platforms if one really wanted to use them.

In any event, all of this has a 99% chance of being nonexistent. Maybe we will get the viaduct repairs, but undoubtedly nothing else.

[Wolfman]

I took a look at the ties on the Dan Ryan branch myself. They look like they do have cracks in the ties...

As The Dan Ryan is concerned, the ties on that line have been replaced several times over its short 42 years of service. Does anybody remember the ORIGINAL ties on that line? Concrete (except for crossovers and switches). Do you know why the concrete ties failed and had to be replaced after 2 years service? Well, the elements for one, but the bigger cause is THE ROADBED!

Unlike the Eisenhower (1958) Ike was built with median rail service in mind.

"Dirty Dan" had to be re-engineered (1969) to accommodate the rapid. The original median was grass and mud in most cases, and the highway was built on a slant so that it drained toward the median. Thus, the present roadbed is on soft clay. It'll sink constantly for years until the entire line is rebuilt from 33d - south.

...They probably could use a 10 car train but that would be too expensive expanding subway stations... I'd be really thinking about building 10 car stations with the addition of purple line riders.

Current CTA consists can't handle 10-car trains. Not loaded ones anyway. Under CTA motive power specs, too many cars for safe MU operation, and even worse for safely braking a train with passengers. Won't work. And if it did; yes, you'd need to bring conductors back.

[Sam92]

As The Dan Ryan is concerned, the ties on that line have been replaced several times over its short 42 years of service. Does anybody remember the ORIGINAL ties on that line? Concrete (except for crossovers and switches). Do you know why the concrete ties failed and had to be replaced after 2 years service? Well, the elements for one, but the bigger cause is THE ROADBED!

Unlike the Eisenhower (1958) Ike was built with median rail service in mind.

"Dirty Dan" had to be re-engineered (1969) to accommodate the rapid. The original median was grass and mud in most cases, and the highway was built on a slant so that it drained toward the median. Thus, the present roadbed is on soft clay. It'll sink constantly for years until the entire line is rebuilt from 33d - south.

I wonder why if they knew about the drainage issue 40 years ago, why are they waiting until NOW to do something about that.

[Busjack]

As The Dan Ryan is concerned, the ties on that line have been replaced several times over its short 42 years of service. Does anybody remember the ORIGINAL ties on that line? Concrete (except for crossovers and switches). Do you know why the concrete ties failed and had to be replaced after 2 years service? Well, the elements for one, but the bigger cause is THE ROADBED!

I remember that, but also believe that the Kennedy also underwent the same. People started complaining about the "wavy track" on Internet fora about 2000, which will bring me to my point at the end of this post.

I wonder why if they knew about the drainage issue 40 years ago, why are they waiting until NOW to do something about that.

Maybe then they had $38 million for the line and that was that.

However, do you have any evidence, other than Emanuel posting on his website that he wanted to put another $300 million into the Dan Ryan, which he doesn't have, that they are going to do anything NOW?

The real disgrace is that they supposedly rebuilt it about 6 years ago (when they put the shoeflies into the expressway when the expressway was being rebuilt), but as Kevin pointed out, the slow zones reappeared 6 months later. That bit of b.s. was debated in the CTA Tattler posts of Jan 25 and Jan 26.

[Sam92]

I remember that, but also believe that the Kennedy also underwent the same. People started complaining about the "wavy track" on Internet fora about 2000, which will bring me to my point at the end of this post.

Maybe then they had $38 million for the line and that was that.

However, do you have any evidence, other than Emanuel posting on his website that he wanted to put another $300 million into the Dan Ryan, which he doesn't have, that they are going to do anything NOW?

The real disgrace is that they supposedly rebuilt it about 6 years ago (when they put the shoeflies into the expressway when the expressway was being rebuilt), but as Kevin pointed out, the slow zones reappeared 6 months later. That bit of b.s. was debated in the CTA Tattler posts of Jan 25 and Jan 26.

I never meant right this second. I meant why wait 40 years to address the issue. Also the Dan Ryan project from before was to address power and signal issues as there wasn't enough power to handle our current headways today. The work involved upgrading to a bi-dirention signal system and repalced some special trackwork. There was never really a goal to start addressing track slow zones on this side until recently (about 2 years ago).

[Busjack]

I never meant right this second. I meant why wait 40 years to address the issue. Also the Dan Ryan project from before was to address power and signal issues as there wasn't enough power to handle our current headways today. The work involved upgrading to a bi-dirention signal system and repalced some special trackwork. There was never really a goal to start addressing track slow zones on this side until recently (about 2 years ago).

That's all fine and good. However, the closeout Capital Construction Update said one of the goals (in fact the first one) was "Eliminate slow zones."I don't see there "for 6 months." So your "there was never really a goal" point doesn't hold up.

A supposed accomplishment was "Replaced track work between Cermak and 47th." What, maybe a tenth of it?

So, the question you should ask is why, knowing that there were slow zones before the 2005-2007 project, they either did nothing about them, or tried to fool us that they had.

I'm sure that neither you nor Noelle Gaffney has the answer to that one.

[BusHunter]

As The Dan Ryan is concerned, the ties on that line have been replaced several times over its short 42 years of service. Does anybody remember the ORIGINAL ties on that line? Concrete (except for crossovers and switches). Do you know why the concrete ties failed and had to be replaced after 2 years service? Well, the elements for one, but the bigger cause is THE ROADBED!

Unlike the Eisenhower (1958) Ike was built with median rail service in mind.

"Dirty Dan" had to be re-engineered (1969) to accommodate the rapid. The original median was grass and mud in most cases, and the highway was built on a slant so that it drained toward the median. Thus, the present roadbed is on soft clay. It'll sink constantly for years until the entire line is rebuilt from 33d - south.

Current CTA consists can't handle 10-car trains. Not loaded ones anyway. Under CTA motive power specs, too many cars for safe MU operation, and even worse for safely braking a train with passengers. Won't work. And if it did; yes, you'd need to bring conductors back.

Here's a few pictures of the concrete ties if anyone's interested.

I remember the blue line's were changed to wooden ties in the late 90's. This last tie replacement was the lines third generation of ties. As far as 10 car trains, couldn't a system be adapted to use this method. Because I don't really see the idea of a red line only north main working too well either. If they ran trains 2 minutes apart if there were any type of delay trains would just stack endlessly. I see more gridlock using that method. Knowing CTA, I was thinking perhaps they would run more trains in the rush in the rush direction favoring the north side. (so like for PM rush more trains NB than SB opposite for the AM) But that would require a bigger south yard to store trains in the midday to head north in the PM rush. Then they may not need to turn trains. But it would still be somewhat wasteful to run trains SB on the Ryan in the AM rush in bulk.

[Sam92]

That's all fine and good. However, the closeout Capital Construction Update said one of the goals (in fact the first one) was "Eliminate slow zones."I don't see there "for 6 months." So your "there was never really a goal" point doesn't hold up.

A supposed accomplishment was "Replaced track work between Cermak and 47th." What, maybe a tenth of it?

So, the question you should ask is why, knowing that there were slow zones before the 2005-2007 project, they either did nothing about them, or tried to fool us that they had.

I'm sure that neither you nor Noelle Gaffney has the answer to that one.

They didn't say that it was TRACK slow zones. There were mostly power slow zones and I even remember hearing with my own ears that it was POWER slow zones. Not track. Plus I rode past those very areas on the ride to downtown.

[Sam92]

Here's a few pictures of the concrete ties if anyone's interested.

I remember the blue line's were changed to wooden ties in the late 90's. This last tie replacement was the lines third generation of ties. As far as 10 car trains, couldn't a system be adapted to use this method. Because I don't really see the idea of a red line only north main working too well either. If they ran trains 2 minutes apart if there were any type of delay trains would just stack endlessly. I see more gridlock using that method. Knowing CTA, I was thinking perhaps they would run more trains in the rush in the rush direction favoring the north side. (so like for PM rush more trains NB than SB opposite for the AM) But that would require a bigger south yard to store trains in the midday to head north in the PM rush. Then they may not need to turn trains. But it would still be somewhat wasteful to run trains SB on the Ryan in the AM rush in bulk.

We would still need those extras to convey the south siders to downtown in the peak period as well

[Busjack]

They didn't say that it was TRACK slow zones. There were mostly power slow zones and I even remember hearing with my own ears that it was POWER slow zones. Not track. Plus I rode past those very areas on the ride to downtown.

It seems like CTA was dealing with revisionism, and you have taken it to a new level. Go back to the pdf where they said they replaced TRACK WORK from Cermak to 47th. Then go back to where Kevin said that there were no slow zones at the end of the project, but they reappeared by December of that year.

Basically, though, if the Construction Report parsed it so closely, post the proof of your assertions.

In any event, you can't, in good faith, ask "I wonder why if they knew about the drainage issue 40 years ago, why are they waiting until NOW" but, at the same time, knowing that there was a problem 35 years later, dug up something there and didn't fix it when it needed fixing. That is, unless you worked for the Kruesi administration and are now covering up.

[BusHunter]

I remember when the blue line needed the new ties. They really didn't get going on the project from there being poor drainage, but because the slow zones were unbearable. I remember the O'Hare to addison segment was taking 45 minutes to an hour. That's an entire loop commute time now (45 min) The schedules were way off, there was no accurate schedule. Of course they did improve the drainage, but to me it looked like that part of the project was window dressing. Now the Dan Ryan to me just doesn't seem that bad to work on it. There are cracks, but that just shows there's wear. The ties aren't new. South of 47th the train runs fine. There's a little slow zone on the curve south of 63rd. If they worked on the curves and north of 47th the line should be alright. Seems to me like they want the project more to streamline with this new extension, they have updated stations why not have updated track. This way the entire south line could be viewed as new. Throw in the new trains and they have a complete revitilization.

[Busjack]

...Seems to me like they want the project more to streamline with this new extension, they have updated stations why not have updated track. This way the entire south line could be viewed as new. Throw in the new trains and they have a complete revitilization.

Could be, but they supposedly upgraded the stations, too. Some got elevators, some didn't. Most got paint jobs, but are rusted already.

Anyway, the current slow zone map has 39% of the Dan Ryan in slow zones, and they look like red (track) ones.

Also, for sam92's benefit, the first slow zone map posted (July 2005) only shows red (track) slow zones, too, not gray power ones. So sam, what you say still doesn't square with the CTA.