CTA rail station rehabs and renew crews

[BusHunter]

There's an article in the Chicago Tribune about upcoming station rehabs on the red line and around the loop elevated. I couldn't help but notice, they want to make Clark/Division a 10 car station. I wonder if that is moreless because of an added entrance at Lasalle. I wonder if that would require a excavation of the interior subway wall between the north and southbound tracks at the west end of the station. That sounds expensive and we all know what happened to block 37's superstation. Other station renewal projects include the rehabbing of stations using renew crews. Not a bad idea after what has been done to Logan Square both at street level and at station level. Attention should be paid to stations not receiving a rehab in the last 20 years. There's alot of stations that fit that catagory like division/blue that could use some help. I came across a surprising problem yesterday with a station. You know how there was press lately on Francisco/brown having holes in station platform. (which i didn't really see) Well at the Wilson/Red line there is a plank in the station platform that has broken off (at the north end, SB side) about 1 to 2 feet long (about a 1/3 the size of a standard plank) and you can see the street below. It has a construction cone stuck in it, but anyone can pull it out and a real danger will surface. I would think a repair like this would be treated as an emergency. Hopefully someone fixes this before someone gets hurt or dies.

[Busjack]

Thanks for the link, as apparently this kind of stuff doesn't appear of the Tribune's home page any more.

Also, for a change, they are saying what is the source of the money (CMAQ) and that it is a CDOT project.

On Clark and Division, apparently in addition to having to stretch the station to make it accessible at LaSalle, one also has to consider that the Fullerton and Belmont stations were designed to accommodate 10 car trains on the inside track. So, maybe for a change, someone figured to plan ahead, especially since an excavation will be in the street for probably the next 4 years. The real question is whether they so planned ahead with respect to Chicago and Grand.* Anyone want to get a tape measure and see if those platforms are at least 480 feet long?

The SWAT teams were noted in the CTA Tattler. While Wilson needs some short term work, I wonder if doing something real (like straightening out the tracks and putting in a modern station, like at Addison) depends on TIF money or the messing around with the Red Purple consultants.

I also note here that they are finally getting off the schneid on the Washington-Wabash station, but no indication that the real dump at Lake-State is due for any attention.

_________

*IIRC, State at those locations was closed during construction for considerable amounts of time.

[BusHunter]

Looks like the stage could be setting up for a 10 car red line express. It could actually be done if they used Roosevelt through Lake, Clark/Division, Fullerton, Belmont and Howard. (but they may have to extend Howard) They could shift that to local service if all station rehabs took ten car lengths into consideration. The red's going to be in a world of hurt anyway if something happens to purple line express.

[Kevin]

Hopefully this time it won't be another 8 years until anyone mentions Washington/Wabash again. The last mention of this project was way back in 2003, when CTA provided CDOT with $1 million for preliminary design and engineering work.

[Busjack]

Hopefully this time it won't be another 8 years until anyone mentions Washington/Wabash again. The last mention of this project was way back in 2003, when CTA provided CDOT with $1 million for preliminary design and engineering work.

Well you found out how long was the schneid.

The thing that is unclear here, is that unlike the subway, which was built by the city, originally for use by the Chicago Rapid Transit Co., with WPA money, and Morgan, which is apparently using TIF money, it doesn't appear that the Loop L is city property, and hence not explained why this is a CDOT project.

Also, the Hilkevitch article says that the current grant is only for engineering and design, and they need another $75 million to build it. So one has to wonder what, if anything, came out of the 8 year old agreement.

[Scionic]

Not to diminish from all the other points made here, but if you haven't already, you really should have a look at the rehabbed Logan Square station. It's beautiful now! 40 years of grime washed off that beautiful white subway tile, additional lighting, and clearer signage on the walls.

[BusHunter]

Not to diminish from all the other points made here, but if you haven't already, you really should have a look at the rehabbed Logan Square station. It's beautiful now! 40 years of grime washed off that beautiful white subway tile, additional lighting, and clearer signage on the walls.

IIRC, they did sandblast the bricks once in the last 20 years. Unfortunately, the grime will return in time. I don't know, to me it seems they spent more money there then at any of the other renew stations. Either that or the subway stations are just more noticeably dirty.

[Busjack]

IIRC, they did sandblast the bricks once in the last 20 years. Unfortunately, the grime will return in time. I don't know, to me it seems they spent more money there then at any of the other renew stations. Either that or the subway stations are just more noticeably dirty.

There seems to be a lot of water damage at the subway stations, especially at Logan Square. If you could compare it a week ago to how it looked in 1970....

For that matter, Roosevelt-State appeared to have a lot of leaks.

[BusHunter]

There seems to be a lot of water damage at the subway stations, especially at Logan Square. If you could compare it a week ago to how it looked in 1970....

For that matter, Roosevelt-State appeared to have a lot of leaks.

Nothing beats when it was new. Even though the water leaks may be sealed, take them through an icy winter and we'll see... O'hare seems to be holding up well, but I think I remember seeing a leak there too. The worst I've seen on the system has to be Division/blue. There in the winter you can see icicles frozen from the ceiling over the right of way. I think you can even see water coming down the wall when the snow melts, but Logan had the same problem on the platform. We'll have to see if it comes back. If not they did a good job.

[qwantae]

Nothing beats when it was new. Even though the water leaks may be sealed, take them through an icy winter and we'll see... O'hare seems to be holding up well, but I think I remember seeing a leak there too. The worst I've seen on the system has to be Division/blue. There in the winter you can see icicles frozen from the ceiling over the right of way. I think you can even see water coming down the wall when the snow melts, but Logan had the same problem on the platform. We'll have to see if it comes back. If not they did a good job.

On Blue Line: Grand, Chicago, Division, LaSalle, Clinton really needs to be rehab, last week when I was catching Blue Line from Chicago Stop, I felt an rust leak coming from wall ceiling dripped to top of my head. I don't know why they didn't do the same thing to Belmont like they did to Logan Square.

[BusHunter]

On Blue Line: Grand, Chicago, Division, LaSalle, Clinton really needs to be rehab, last week when I was catching Blue Line from Chicago Stop, I felt an rust leak coming from wall ceiling dripped to top of my head. I don't know why they didn't do the same thing to Belmont like they did to Logan Square.

Once they get done rehabbing the Red line subway stops they might start rehabbing the blue line ones. As far as the leaks, I seem to notice less leaks when I'm standing in a tunnel that has been bored versus a cut and cover method. Maybe the cut and cover method is not so great. I know that whole section around Division drips. (which is cut and cover) In recent years they have installed heat lamps around that area in the subway. I guess the ice was messing with operations. There's a similar problem right before the Belmont stop SB in the subway.

[qwantae]

At Red Line: at North/ Clybourn Stop: I did see an wheelchair fare ramp, I was suppose that were they suppose to add an accessible Elevator at that stop anytime soon?

[Busjack]

At Red Line: at North/ Clybourn Stop: I did see an wheelchair fare ramp, I was suppose that were they suppose to add an accessible Elevator at that stop anytime soon?

That got some uninformed discussion on the CTA Tattler the other day in connection with the Clark & Division stop.

One would figure though that that would have got an announcement, since it seems to be major work to get two elevators to the two platforms, even though there is a common headhouse.

[ryanbytes]

At Red Line: at North/ Clybourn Stop: I did see an wheelchair fare ramp, I was suppose that were they suppose to add an accessible Elevator at that stop anytime soon?

All stations have ramps/gap fillers. I'm going to guess it's for evacuation purposes. They confused me for a while on the Loop platforms. Unless there are a lot of CTA fans in wheelchairs going to stations for pictures and ambiance. I know if I was in a wheelchair I'd probably do that. :)

[BusHunter]

All stations have ramps/gap fillers. I'm going to guess it's for evacuation purposes. They confused me for a while on the Loop platforms. Unless there are a lot of CTA fans in wheelchairs going to stations for pictures and ambiance. I know if I was in a wheelchair I'd probably do that.

I'm surprised someone hasn't come up with an invention to run wheelchairs up an escalator as an alternative to an elevator in places where that may be difficult to achieve. Target seems to have no problem transporting shopping carts on escalators at various stores. If it doesn't exist somewhere, it may exist in the future. The only cons as far as North/Clybourn station are the widths of the escalators one of which I believe is the narrowist on the system.

[Busjack]

I'm surprised someone hasn't come up with an invention to run wheelchairs up an escalator as an alternative to an elevator in places where that may be difficult to achieve. Target seems to have no problem transporting shopping carts on escalators at various stores. If it doesn't exist somewhere, it may exist in the future. The only cons as far as North/Clybourn station are the widths of the escalators one of which I believe is the narrowist on the system.

I haven't been at two story Targets, but at IKEA there is a separate system for the carts in which the cart is essentially "locked in" for the ride, and pedestrians use a separate escalator.

One could only imagine the liability concerns of letting wheelchairs onto current CTA escalators--not only the width but the length of the treads. While the Lake portion of the Green Line has some ramps in tubes to provide wheelchair accessibility, one surely couldn't fit those into the subway escalator positions. Heck, one isn't even supposed to use a baby stroller on an escalator.

[BusHunter]

I haven't been at two story Targets, but at IKEA there is a separate system for the carts in which the cart is essentially "locked in" for the ride, and pedestrians use a separate escalator.

One could only imagine the liability concerns of letting wheelchairs onto current CTA escalators--not only the width but the length of the treads. While the Lake portion of the Green Line has some ramps in tubes to provide wheelchair accessibility, one surely couldn't fit those into the subway escalator positions. Heck, one isn't even supposed to use a baby stroller on an escalator.

Any use of an escalator in an accessible fashion would most likely require a CA to assist, but they would be on scene anyway to assist with the gap fillers. The bigger issue is most likely defeating the different sizes of wheelchairs as well as motorized ones versus the unmotorized. It could be wisely done if a seperate escalator made just for them or strollers were built with an enclosed platform similar to an elevator but smaller that would whisk riders up similar to a handicapped stair lift chair. (the home use version we see on TV for the handicapped needing to climb stairs) It might actually be cheaper than the building of an elevator and it would take all the liability out of the operation.

[BusHunter]

There was alot of personnel last night at Harlem/Higgins Blue line. That station was in real bad shape a few years ago mostly with plumbing issues. They had a leak there that destroyed the original false ceiling and for many years was just left exposed. Now that has all been fixed and they are replacing the lighting in the mezzanine to be more energy efficient. The station is slowly getting back to prime condition. Seems like alot of stations are getting more energy efficient lighting lately. I wonder if the new law restricting the sale of incadescent light bulbs next year has anything to do with it. I don't know if florescent lights are included in that or not.

[Busjack]

I wonder if the new law restricting the sale of incadescent light bulbs next year has anything to do with it. I don't know if florescent lights are included in that or not.

That law supposedly only affects 100 watt incandescent bulbs. Probably more an effect of companies like Luminator pushing LEDs. For instance, last year Ask This Old House had a feature about home centers having LED elements that could be screwed into ordinary ceiling recessed can light fixtures.

[Stupid Sexy Flanders]

Even though this topic's a tad old, just thought I'd add in my 2 cents as someone who is both a transit geek and manual wheelchair user, and reasonably knowledgeable about the ADA plays in all of this:

At Red Line: at North/ Clybourn Stop: I did see an wheelchair fare ramp, I was suppose that were they suppose to add an accessible Elevator at that stop anytime soon?

That got some uninformed discussion on the CTA Tattler the other day in connection with the Clark & Division stop.

One would figure though that that would have got an announcement, since it seems to be major work to get two elevators to the two platforms, even though there is a common headhouse.

Regarding the renovation at North/Clybourn, the reason it wasn't upgraded to ADA compliance was not only structural (the headhouse is to the side, rather than directly above both platforms, which are directly under Clybourn), but also the fact that ADA compliance requirements only kick in for station renovations receiving federal or other governmental funds for renovation. Since the $$$ came in from Apple, technically nothing had to be done with ADA upgrades at said station.

Also, nearly all the work was done on the headhouse, as renovating the whole station would have been impossible on the $3 or so million pricetag that was put on the project. Even if ADA requirements did kick in, only 20% of the $$$ budgeted (~$600,000 in this case) is required for accessibility improvements if less than that is not enough. I don't think that providing ADA access to the NB platform would be too costly, but to get it to the SB platform? Ooo boy. Put that in as part of a full-blown renovation, and it'll dwarf the $67 million spent on Grand/State.

Regarding the "wheelchair" gate, it isn't just for wheelchair users: people pushing strollers, carrying luggage and other large objects can also make use of these things if they can't fit through a traditional turnstyle. Same goes for elevators.

All stations have ramps/gap fillers. I'm going to guess it's for evacuation purposes. They confused me for a while on the Loop platforms. Unless there are a lot of CTA fans in wheelchairs going to stations for pictures and ambiance. I know if I was in a wheelchair I'd probably do that.

This is totally a guess on my part, but the following scenarios may play a role in its necessity:

- Wheelchair user is assisted to/from the street and platform by a friend(s) and/or helpful stranger(s)

- Wheelchair user got on wrong train/needs to transfer to another line or go in the opposite direction

- Congress Blue Line stops that aren't ADA compliant, yet are step-free/have ramps between platform and street (the lack of landings every vertical 30 inches on the ramps is what makes them non-compliant)

I'm surprised someone hasn't come up with an invention to run wheelchairs up an escalator as an alternative to an elevator in places where that may be difficult to achieve. Target seems to have no problem transporting shopping carts on escalators at various stores. If it doesn't exist somewhere, it may exist in the future. The only cons as far as North/Clybourn station are the widths of the escalators one of which I believe is the narrowist on the system.

I haven't been at two story Targets, but at IKEA there is a separate system for the carts in which the cart is essentially "locked in" for the ride, and pedestrians use a separate escalator.

One could only imagine the liability concerns of letting wheelchairs onto current CTA escalators--not only the width but the length of the treads. While the Lake portion of the Green Line has some ramps in tubes to provide wheelchair accessibility, one surely couldn't fit those into the subway escalator positions. Heck, one isn't even supposed to use a baby stroller on an escalator.

Any use of an escalator in an accessible fashion would most likely require a CA to assist, but they would be on scene anyway to assist with the gap fillers. The bigger issue is most likely defeating the different sizes of wheelchairs as well as motorized ones versus the unmotorized. It could be wisely done if a seperate escalator made just for them or strollers were built with an enclosed platform similar to an elevator but smaller that would whisk riders up similar to a handicapped stair lift chair. (the home use version we see on TV for the handicapped needing to climb stairs) It might actually be cheaper than the building of an elevator and it would take all the liability out of the operation.

The issue surrounding this are complicated; there are apparently wheelchair accessible escalators in Japan (see:

), but it is possible to use a standard escalator in a wheelchair; the only requirement is a tight grip on one, if not both, railings. As you can see from the video, the "Wheelchair accessible" escalator is very time-consuming.

I use a lightweight titanium manual chair, which, after some adjustments I made to it while I still lived in Chicago, at a mere 2 ft in width from pushrim to pushrim, now fits on every "up" escalator in the system save for those at North/Clybourn (at least as of June of this year, when I moved to Seattle). I've scared a number of customer assistants while doing so (hey, it's not like you see a guy in a wheelchair on an escalator everyday), but in situations when an elevator is out, filled with human waste, or nonexistent at said station, I often don't have other good options. Plus, oftentimes, the escalator is just simply more convenient.

For what it's worth, I don't use down escalators, but have ways of descending stairs unassisted if absolutely necessary.

All things being equal, it is apparently safer to do so in an electric chair than in a manual (apparently it has to do with the respective centers of gravity when a person is in each chair), but given that those with fully functioning upper bodies tend to use manuals, you're more likely to see persons in manual chairs using escalators.

Keep in mind, that per the ADA, would require that the escalators be at least 3 feet wide; otherwise, there's no way it could fit the vast majority of wheelchairs. (A standard wheelchair, under the ADA, can be no more than 30 x 48 inches in area).

If there is anything you have questions about, or want me to elaborate further on, please don't hesitate to ask. :-)

[Chicago13]

The technology exists for a wheelchair escalator.

Take a run by the Target store at Addison & Sacremento (just west of Gordon Tech High School). The store is on 2 levels. They have an escalator designed to transport the wheeled shopping baskets from one floor to the next. So it's not much of stretch to adapt that for wheelchair use.

[RJL6000]

The technology exists for a wheelchair escalator.

Take a run by the Target store at Addison & Sacremento (just west of Gordon Tech High School). The store is on 2 levels. They have an escalator designed to transport the wheeled shopping baskets from one floor to the next. So it's not much of stretch to adapt that for wheelchair use.

The technology may be there, but the handicapped-accessible escalator is currently feasible only in an entirely new facility construction since the wheelchair-compatible escalators are several times longer than conventional escalators in length. In the case of the CTA subway stations, this would require a complete rebuild of the stations themselves since they were originally built long before the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. The CTA does not currently have the funds to completely rebuild all of the subway stations to this spec.

A wheelchair-compatible escalator can theoretically be built on the exact same footprint as the existing escalators in the CTA subway stations - but that would have made the escalators much more difficult to use by non-handicapped people due to the requirement to use extremely large-sized steps of extremely large height (as in such a step would have been as high as someone's waist). And even so, that still would not have solved the accessibility problem since the current CTA escalators are not wide enough to accommodate many motorized wheelchairs; thus, such a modification would also have made the current two-way stairways one-way-only (as a single one of the new wider escalators would have taken up the entire width of the existing subway stairways). A good analogy to this might be in the PC world, on a high-end Z68 motherboard for the Intel i5-2500K/i7-2600K CPUs that are equipped with an Nvidia NF200 bridge chip: That bridge chip actually takes 16 full-duplex PCI-e lanes and converts them into 32 half-duplex PCI-e lanes. Thus, no additional total bandwidth or capacity is added.

And there will always be a lot of non-handicapped people who use the escalators as if they were faster-moving staircases, climbing up step by step in the exact same manner as regular fixed staircases. Under these circumstances, the CTA must accommodate those people.

[Busjack]

The technology may be there, but the handicapped-accessible escalator is currently feasible only in an entirely new facility construction since the wheelchair-compatible escalators are several times longer than conventional escalators in length. In the case of the CTA subway stations, this would require a complete rebuild of the stations themselves since they were originally built long before the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990. The CTA does not currently have the funds to completely rebuild all of the subway stations to this spec.

IIRC, the L had to be moved to the east and buildings demolished on the DePaul campus because there also had to be sufficient maneuvering room on the platforms.

I use a lightweight titanium manual chair, which, after some adjustments I made to it while I still lived in Chicago, at a mere 2 ft in width from pushrim to pushrim, now fits on every "up" escalator in the system save for those at North/Clybourn (at least as of June of this year, when I moved to Seattle). I've scared a number of customer assistants while doing so

...

Keep in mind, that per the ADA, would require that the escalators be at least 3 feet wide; otherwise, there's no way it could fit the vast majority of wheelchairs. (A standard wheelchair, under the ADA, can be no more than 30 x 48 inches in area).

If there is anything you have questions about, or want me to elaborate further on, please don't hesitate to ask. :-)

What you have might work, but for a station to be declared accessible, wouldn't it have to accommodate scooters and the like?

Since I mentioned liability issues, if you got snagged on the escalator, would you just write it off to experience, or would it be another lawsuit mentioned on the CTA Tattler? I would argue that what you said you did entails voluntary assumption of risk, but I am sure that someone would cite the a carrier's high standard of care, especially if CTA officially said "sure you can use your wheelchair on this escalator."

[Stupid Sexy Flanders]

IIRC, the L had to be moved to the east and buildings demolished on the DePaul campus because there also had to be sufficient maneuvering room on the platforms.

This is true, but only because both elevators at Fullerton (as well as Belmont) are located mid-platform, and thus I believe require 4 feet of clearance (if not more) on each side. I believe the original platforms at both stations were about 12 feet wide, and it would simply be impossible to fit an elevator of 5x5 feet of interior space into that footprint; would require at a bare minimum 14 feet of width per platform.

Had Fullerton and Belmont been rebuilt in a way functionally similar to the Granville Red Line stop (elevator at the end of a what I know is a 12-ft wide platform), the original platform widths could have been preserved at Fullerton and Belmont, minimizing the need for adjacent demolition and track realignment, yet still be compliant with the ADA. That being said, such a design would entirely preclude there being any mid-platform means of egress; any auxiliary exit would have to be at the opposite end of the platform given this design, not across the street from the main entrance as presently exists at Belmont and Fullerton.

What you have might work, but for a station to be declared accessible, wouldn't it have to accommodate scooters and the like?

Since I mentioned liability issues, if you got snagged on the escalator, would you just write it off to experience, or would it be another lawsuit mentioned on the CTA Tattler? I would argue that what you said you did entails voluntary assumption of risk, but I am sure that someone would cite the a carrier's high standard of care, especially if CTA officially said "sure you can use your wheelchair on this escalator."

I'm not sure if you referring to the accessible escalator, or the method by which I use standard escalators, but yes, anything would have to accommodate all mobility devices covering no more than 30" wide by 48" long in area, including power chairs or scooters, in order to be considered ADA-compliant. This, of course, precludes standard escalators from being a means by which to achieve ADA-compliance. And regarding use of a wheelchair on a standard escalator, I'd only recommend it to those who use light-weight manual chairs and have good wrist and gripping strength (and are sober); it is necessary to hold at least one railing while using an escalator in a wheelchair.

Regarding my use of escalators, I accept the risk that comes with it, as I find it often essential to my mobility, even when an elevator is available (but not conveniently located or unhealthily filthy/full of pee). Haven't the slightest how my chair would get snagged on anything on the escalator, once I'm on my way up, as it is of minimalist design; the model I use looks like this: ( http://www.wheelchairsales.com.au/wp-content/themes/shopperpress/thumbs/2P_Ti-7_pic.jpg ). Any mistake (yet to be made on any escalator) I'd have to chalk up to experience, as I'm too busy working to have time for a lawsuit.

For what it's worth, a good visual/video on how to safely ride a standard escalator in a manual wheelchair can be found here:

[BusHunter]

This is true, but only because both elevators at Fullerton (as well as Belmont) are located mid-platform, and thus I believe require 4 feet of clearance (if not more) on each side. I believe the original platforms at both stations were about 12 feet wide, and it would simply be impossible to fit an elevator of 5x5 feet of interior space into that footprint; would require at a bare minimum 14 feet of width per platform.

Had Fullerton and Belmont been rebuilt in a way functionally similar to the Granville Red Line stop (elevator at the end of a what I know is a 12-ft wide platform), the original platform widths could have been preserved at Fullerton and Belmont, minimizing the need for adjacent demolition and track realignment, yet still be compliant with the ADA. That being said, such a design would entirely preclude there being any mid-platform means of egress; any auxiliary exit would have to be at the opposite end of the platform given this design, not across the street from the main entrance as presently exists at Belmont and Fullerton.

This is somewhat true if you look at the Pink line's Damen and Western stops. Western is much wider than Damen. I don't know if Damen's 12 feet, (it might be a little wider) but's it's close. As far as Granville, you would have to take into consideration that that is a 1983 project. ADA standards could have changed in the last 25-30 years. Also when you look at the Fullerton/Red project, part of the project was to restore the old station house. I don't think they could've installed an elevator at the end without drastically changing the station house. The way the station was constructed, although controversial, it would have to be built the way it was, unless they want elevators at the south end, which wouldn't make sense. One way you can buy space with elevators on a narrow platform is to install the elevator to the side of the platform if the platform is the island type. (in the center) I believe this was done at the Cermak-Chinatown stop. This would have to be done to stations like Irving Park blue, which is similar but even more narrow.