If I ran Transit for one day...

[artthouwill]

12 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

• I have always wondered why the 10 doesn't go to Union/Ogilvie. Does the museum pay for that route or CTA?
• 103 and 106 could probably be combined, via 103rd, Michigan, 95th, Wentworth, 103rd
• 100 could probably be cut as well. Alternatives include (I understand these options make it harder to do reliefs)
  • Rerouting the 15 via 95th & Yates
  • Rerouting the 15 via the above or the 71 (every other trip) along 106th, Avenue C, 112th & Avenue B
  • Rerouting the 30 via Ewing, 112th, Avenue C (SB), Avenue B (NB), 106th, Ewing

Mo need to reroute the 15, especially seeing the J14 has limited stops.

No need to reroute the 30 or the 71.

The 103 and 106 will become one route when the Red Line extension to 130th opens.

Like others stated, the 10 primarily caters to tourists along the Mag Mile.  Before the 10, the 6 was the only option, but crowding on the route and walking a block wasn't ideal.

[NewFlyerMCI]

Having just thought about it, I would extend the N4 to Cottage Grove/94th or 95th Red Line

Less important, I would also just send N55 to Midway

[artthouwill]

14 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Having just thought about it, I would extend the N4 to Cottage Grove/94th or 95th Red Line

Less important, I would also just send N55 to Midway

I could be wrong,  but u think the N4 truncation to 63rd was born more out of safety reasons rather than ridership.   The 4 was once CTA'S most dangerous bus route with a lot of late night and owl incidents.   

I understand your point of sending the N55 to Midway.   Owl service has always ended at St Louis.   Cicero and Archer was just an extension of the route during day hours.  That last leg saw an uptick when Midway opened.  I do think extending N55 to Midway would force CTA to add another bus to the route as you are adding about 8 minutes in each direction to the route.

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

I could be wrong,  but u think the N4 truncation to 53rd was born more out if safety reasons rather than ridership.   The 4 was nice CTA'S most dangerous bus route with a lot if late night and owl incidents.   

I understand your point of sending the N55 to Midway.   Owl service has always ended at St Louis.   Cicero and Archer was just an extension of the route during day hours.  That last leg saw an uptick when Midway opened.  I do think extending N55 to Midway would force CTA to add another bus to the route as you are adding about 8 minutes in each direction to the route.

I figured that was probably the reason for it, but it's just so frustrating. There's no equivalent NB service south of 63rd unless you happen to live near the N5. And at that time of night, i'd rather take the bus than the red line

[Anthony Devera]

I've heard many people mention how the South Side Green Line could be demolished and replaced with bus service because its ridership is so low. I've also heard people say the Lake branch needs 8-car trains but can't have them because the platforms at Cottage Grove are not long enough. I came up with an idea that could solve some of the discrepancy of Green Line ridership:

• Green Line Lake branch will be paired with Orange Line. The Harlem-Midway line will be called Orange Line, and will be operated with 5000s. On weekdays it will have 8-car trains.
• Green Line will run only between Loop and the 63rd branches. It will run via Inner Loop like the current Orange Line. It will be operated with 2600s. On weekdays it will have 4-car trains, and on weekends it will have 2-car trains.
• During peak hours, some Green and Brown Line trips will be through-routed, similar to how the Brown and Orange Lines are through-routed now. These trips will have 6-car trains.

This might also allow CTA to retire more 2600s, which I can imagine are costly to maintain nowadays. If the current Green Line 5000s aren't enough for the new Orange Line, then the Pink Line could switch to 2600s and give its 5000s to the Orange Line. I would love to hear everyone's thoughts on this idea.

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 hour ago, Anthony Devera said:

I've heard many people mention how the South Side Green Line could be demolished and replaced with bus service because its ridership is so low. I've also heard people say the Lake branch needs 8-car trains but can't have them because the platforms at Cottage Grove are not long enough. I came up with an idea that could solve some of the discrepancy of Green Line ridership:

• Green Line Lake branch will be paired with Orange Line. The Harlem-Midway line will be called Orange Line, and will be operated with 5000s. On weekdays it will have 8-car trains.
• Green Line will run only between Loop and the 63rd branches. It will run via Inner Loop like the current Orange Line. It will be operated with 2600s. On weekdays it will have 4-car trains, and on weekends it will have 2-car trains.
• During peak hours, some Green and Brown Line trips will be through-routed, similar to how the Brown and Orange Lines are through-routed now. These trips will have 6-car trains.

This might also allow CTA to retire more 2600s, which I can imagine are costly to maintain nowadays. If the current Green Line 5000s aren't enough for the new Orange Line, then the Pink Line could switch to 2600s and give its 5000s to the Orange Line. I would love to hear everyone's thoughts on this idea.

• Well, to be clear, Ash/63rd trains can run with 8-cars, although whether or not they do this consistently I've never bothered to notice
  • Related to this, the capacity at Harlem Yard goes down somewhat if 8-car consists appear more frequently if my rudimentary length calculations are correct. Happy to be wrong on this.
• My wish is that if any lines are going to combine, it would be the Orange & Brown lines
• Ultimately, since the Orange Line, Harlem Branch and Brown Lines are all busier than SSGL,I think better solutions would be
  • probably be to short-turn some Harlem Branch trains at the Loop
  • Alternatively, they could extend the southern platform at Cottage Grove (that's the platform with the issue, a 8-car train is roughly ~384 ft long and the southern platform is roughly ~397ft long) and then run 8-car trains all day.
  • Split the branches btwn Harlem Branch and SSGL (Silver? Gold? Navy?) with the new Green line using the outer ring and the new train line using the inner ring

[strictures]

6 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

I've heard many people mention how the South Side Green Line could be demolished and replaced with bus service because its ridership is so low. I've also heard people say the Lake branch needs 8-car trains but can't have them because the platforms at Cottage Grove are not long enough. I came up with an idea that could solve some of the discrepancy of Green Line ridership:

• Green Line Lake branch will be paired with Orange Line. The Harlem-Midway line will be called Orange Line, and will be operated with 5000s. On weekdays it will have 8-car trains.
• Green Line will run only between Loop and the 63rd branches. It will run via Inner Loop like the current Orange Line. It will be operated with 2600s. On weekdays it will have 4-car trains, and on weekends it will have 2-car trains.
• During peak hours, some Green and Brown Line trips will be through-routed, similar to how the Brown and Orange Lines are through-routed now. These trips will have 6-car trains.

This might also allow CTA to retire more 2600s, which I can imagine are costly to maintain nowadays. If the current Green Line 5000s aren't enough for the new Orange Line, then the Pink Line could switch to 2600s and give its 5000s to the Orange Line. I would love to hear everyone's thoughts on this idea.

It was never supposed to be rebuilt.  

The original plan from the 1960s was that once the Dan Ryan Line was completed, the South Side Main Line was to be moved to two abandoned tracks of the IC Mainline & go to Kensington [115th] & then demolished.  Why it wasn't done was probably money.  But in the 1990s, with the SSML falling apart & in desperate straits running for re-election, Richie Daley, who knew as much about mass transit as Trump knows about human decency, made an unholy deal with a whole bunch of South Side black ministers that if they supported him for re-election, he would rebuild the SSML & make sure there was as much minority hiring as possible for the job.   So now we are stuck with an L line in the wrong place, just blacks from the Dan Ryan line, that was rehabbed in a truly bizarre way, to go south from some stations, such as 43rd, you go to the NB platform & cross over, instead of them moving one track over to create center platforms at Indiana, 43rd, 47th, 51st, Garfield & King.   Until a few years ago, when you got off at Cottage Grove, if the train pulled into the north berth & you wanted to go on a NB #4 bus, you went down the stairs & had to cross 63rd St to get to the bus stop.  Finally someone realized how insane that was & moved the stop to the bottom of the stairs on the NB side of 63rd/Cottage Grove.  A few people, like me, have used that way to get to the University of Chicago Medical Center.

If you want to see the plans, you'll need to go to the Main Library, when it reopens & look through a few years worth of mid 1960s Chicago Daily News or Sun-Times microfilms, because I remember it on the front page of one of them & there isn't a yearly index for them, like there is for the Tribune.  Unless the Tribune did run an article about it then, my father never bought it, so I rarely saw the Trib.

[artthouwill]

6 hours ago, strictures said:

It was never supposed to be rebuilt.  

The original plan from the 1960s was that once the Dan Ryan Line was completed, the South Side Main Line was to be moved to two abandoned tracks of the IC Mainline & go to Kensington [115th] & then demolished.  Why it wasn't done was probably money.  But in the 1990s, with the SSML falling apart & in desperate straits running for re-election, Richie Daley, who knew as much about mass transit as Trump knows about human decency, made an unholy deal with a whole bunch of South Side black ministers that if they supported him for re-election, he would rebuild the SSML & make sure there was as much minority hiring as possible for the job.   So now we are stuck with an L line in the wrong place, just blacks from the Dan Ryan line, that was rehabbed in a truly bizarre way, to go south from some stations, such as 43rd, you go to the NB platform & cross over, instead of them moving one track over to create center platforms at Indiana, 43rd, 47th, 51st, Garfield & King.   Until a few years ago, when you got off at Cottage Grove, if the train pulled into the north berth & you wanted to go on a NB #4 bus, you went down the stairs & had to cross 63rd St to get to the bus stop.  Finally someone realized how insane that was & moved the stop to the bottom of the stairs on the NB side of 63rd/Cottage Grove.  A few people, like me, have used that way to get to the University of Chicago Medical Center.

If you want to see the plans, you'll need to go to the Main Library, when it reopens & look through a few years worth of mid 1960s Chicago Daily News or Sun-Times microfilms, because I remember it on the front page of one of them & there isn't a yearly index for them, like there is for the Tribune.  Unless the Tribune did run an article about it then, my father never bought it, so I rarely saw the Trib.

Your post is very interesting.   I always thought it was feasible to run the SSM as current to Indiana,  then run the abandoned tracks east near 40th to join the IC/Metra tracks.  Money would be a concern,  but my thought was to run the Metras and SS on what is now the inbound tracks.  I would keep the 57th and 59th stations for Metra trains (current inbound platform) open. The current outbound tracks and platforms at Hyde Park,  57th, 59th, and 63rd would be CTA tracks and stations. 

Past 67th, I would rebuild the South Chicago branch to run CTA trains.  I would also have to reconfigure Metra mainline tracks to continue to run immediately parallel to the freight tracks while reconfiguring Island platforms for CTA stations to be on the westernmost tracks.  Metra would retain the Kensington station with CTA trains ending there  and KYD YARD Yard becoming a CTA yard.  This way,  CTA trains could alternate between going to 93rd and Kensington. 

Because of frequency concerns,  I would consider swapping the South ends if the Red and Green Lines  back to their original routing (to at least Indiana on the Red Line).

If I don't swap Red and Green,  I would build a flyover from 58th to connect with the 63rd branch going to Ashland  as a short turn during weekday rushes .

I think these would be great idea's back in the late 69s and early 70s, but would be astronomically expensive today.  

I also understand the racial aspect in that CTA would be removing trains from a predominantly Black Bronzeville ti a mixed Hyde Park.

The other issue would be what is do with the Express buses?  How much pushback would Hyde Park residents have given if the 2 and the 6 were eliminated?

[artthouwill]

11 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

• Well, to be clear, Ash/63rd trains can run with 8-cars, although whether or not they do this consistently I've never bothered to notice
  • Related to this, the capacity at Harlem Yard goes down somewhat if 8-car consists appear more frequently if my rudimentary length calculations are correct. Happy to be wrong on this.
• My wish is that if any lines are going to combine, it would be the Orange & Brown lines
• Ultimately, since the Orange Line, Harlem Branch and Brown Lines are all busier than SSGL,I think better solutions would be
  • probably be to short-turn some Harlem Branch trains at the Loop
  • Alternatively, they could extend the southern platform at Cottage Grove (that's the platform with the issue, a 8-car train is roughly ~384 ft long and the southern platform is roughly ~397ft long) and then run 8-car trains all day.
  • Split the branches btwn Harlem Branch and SSGL (Silver? Gold? Navy?) with the new Green line using the outer ring and the new train line using the inner ring

Remember the Harlem Yard berthed 8 car trains when the Lake St Line was paired with the Dan Ryan.  The Yard has the capacity.   Also, trains can play up in Loomis Yard and on the stub tracks West of the Ashland/63 station if needed.  

There's a proposal to build an apartment building right next to the 43rd street station.   The idea is that the lyxury apartments right next to the CTA will be attractive to Blacks for a convenient place to live and quickly commute to downtown.   I think the project will be done in about 2 years max.  Any hope of revitalizing the area takes a high hit if the Green Line closes.

[Anthony Devera]

12 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Your post is very interesting.   I always thought it was feasible to run the SSM as current to Indiana,  then run the abandoned tracks east near 40th to join the IC/Metra tracks.  Money would be a concern,  but my thought was to run the Metras and SS on what is now the inbound tracks.  I would keep the 57th and 59th stations for Metra trains (current inbound platform) open. The current outbound tracks and platforms at Hyde Park,  57th, 59th, and 63rd would be CTA tracks and stations. 

This would've worked back in the 1960s or 70s when the Kenwood Line structure was still complete. Now some of it has been replaced with houses, so either the tracks would have to run above the houses or go somewhere else. I do wish your plan could've happened before those houses were built; that would bring a connection between Hyde Park and Bronzeville. Maybe an elevated structure on Oakwood Blvd. could solve the problem, but then there would be pushback from residents in that area.

14 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Past 67th, I would rebuild the South Chicago branch to run CTA trains.  I would also have to reconfigure Metra mainline tracks to continue to run immediately parallel to the freight tracks while reconfiguring Island platforms for CTA stations to be on the westernmost tracks.  Metra would retain the Kensington station with CTA trains ending there  and KYD YARD Yard becoming a CTA yard.  This way,  CTA trains could alternate between going to 93rd and Kensington. 

As much as I like this idea, I'm not sure how much demand there would be for rapid transit on both lines, as well as the combined frequency north of 67th. To be completely honest, I'm not even sure how many riders there would be south of 71st.

24 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

The other issue would be what is do with the Express buses?  How much pushback would Hyde Park residents have given if the 2 and the 6 were eliminated?

I don't think Hyde Park residents would mind much. I believe many would prefer to take the Metra but don't because it's too infrequent and/or expensive. However, it might make sense to keep the 28 for the connection to Union Station.

I don't mean to sound rude, but the whole Gray Line/Gold Line proposal has been discussed many times on this forum, and it's been made clear that the costs outweigh the benefits. I can imagine if Busjack was here, he would tell us the proposal is dead and shouldn't be mentioned anymore.

[NewFlyerMCI]

 

2 hours ago, artthouwill said:

Remember the Harlem Yard berthed 8 car trains when the Lake St Line was paired with the Dan Ryan.  The Yard has the capacity.   Also, trains can play up in Loomis Yard and on the stub tracks West of the Ashland/63 station if needed.  

There's a proposal to build an apartment building right next to the 43rd street station.   The idea is that the lyxury apartments right next to the CTA will be attractive to Blacks for a convenient place to live and quickly commute to downtown.   I think the project will be done in about 2 years max.  Any hope of revitalizing the area takes a high hit if the Green Line closes.

They did? Didn't those peak-only red line trains continue onto Howard? The Green Line would've only been running Cottage to Harlem. Regardless, I know the capacity is there, I'm just saying it would be reduced

2 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

This would've worked back in the 1960s or 70s when the Kenwood Line structure was still complete. Now some of it has been replaced with houses, so either the tracks would have to run above the houses or go somewhere else. I do wish your plan could've happened before those houses were built; that would bring a connection between Hyde Park and Bronzeville. Maybe an elevated structure on Oakwood Blvd. could solve the problem, but then there would be pushback from residents in that area.

As much as I like this idea, I'm not sure how much demand there would be for rapid transit on both lines, as well as the combined frequency north of 67th. To be completely honest, I'm not even sure how many riders there would be south of 71st.

I don't think Hyde Park residents would mind much. I believe many would prefer to take the Metra but don't because it's too infrequent and/or expensive. However, it might make sense to keep the 28 for the connection to Union Station.

I don't mean to sound rude, but the whole Gray Line/Gold Line proposal has been discussed many times on this forum, and it's been made clear that the costs outweigh the benefits. I can imagine if Busjack was here, he would tell us the proposal is dead and shouldn't be mentioned anymore.

If that last part was a response to me, I was just suggesting a potential color, not the actual proposals for those lines

---------------------------------------------------------

3 hours ago, artthouwill said:

Your post is very interesting.   I always thought it was feasible to run the SSM as current to Indiana,  then run the abandoned tracks east near 40th to join the IC/Metra tracks.  Money would be a concern,  but my thought was to run the Metras and SS on what is now the inbound tracks.  I would keep the 57th and 59th stations for Metra trains (current inbound platform) open. The current outbound tracks and platforms at Hyde Park,  57th, 59th, and 63rd would be CTA tracks and stations. 

Past 67th, I would rebuild the South Chicago branch to run CTA trains.  I would also have to reconfigure Metra mainline tracks to continue to run immediately parallel to the freight tracks while reconfiguring Island platforms for CTA stations to be on the westernmost tracks.  Metra would retain the Kensington station with CTA trains ending there  and KYD YARD Yard becoming a CTA yard.  This way,  CTA trains could alternate between going to 93rd and Kensington. 

Because of frequency concerns,  I would consider swapping the South ends if the Red and Green Lines  back to their original routing (to at least Indiana on the Red Line).

If I don't swap Red and Green,  I would build a flyover from 58th to connect with the 63rd branch going to Ashland  as a short turn during weekday rushes .

I think these would be great idea's back in the late 69s and early 70s, but would be astronomically expensive today.  

I also understand the racial aspect in that CTA would be removing trains from a predominantly Black Bronzeville ti a mixed Hyde Park.

The other issue would be what is do with the Express buses?  How much pushback would Hyde Park residents have given if the 2 and the 6 were eliminated?

 

2 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

This would've worked back in the 1960s or 70s when the Kenwood Line structure was still complete. Now some of it has been replaced with houses, so either the tracks would have to run above the houses or go somewhere else. I do wish your plan could've happened before those houses were built; that would bring a connection between Hyde Park and Bronzeville. Maybe an elevated structure on Oakwood Blvd. could solve the problem, but then there would be pushback from residents in that area.

As much as I like this idea, I'm not sure how much demand there would be for rapid transit on both lines, as well as the combined frequency north of 67th. To be completely honest, I'm not even sure how many riders there would be south of 71st.

I don't think Hyde Park residents would mind much. I believe many would prefer to take the Metra but don't because it's too infrequent and/or expensive. However, it might make sense to keep the 28 for the connection to Union Station.

I don't mean to sound rude, but the whole Gray Line/Gold Line proposal has been discussed many times on this forum, and it's been made clear that the costs outweigh the benefits. I can imagine if Busjack was here, he would tell us the proposal is dead and shouldn't be mentioned anymore.

The 2 would most likely be eliminated or service reduced to just something like the 1, with inbound trips along Cottage Grove and 51st/Hyde Park in the morning and the reverse in the evening. I, personally, am in favor of the 28 going downtown at all times, but realistically, it's Hyde Park detour would probably end and so would the rush hour extension. The 6 would probably remain unchanged, there's still a strong contingent of riders south of Stony/63rd and the 26 isn't a good replacement

[Anthony Devera]

55 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

If that last part was a response to me, I was just suggesting a potential color, not the actual proposals for those lines

No, that was a response to @artthouwill's proposal of an L line along the Metra Electric. I've seen that pretty much every time it is mentioned on this forum, the conversation doesn't really go anywhere, and an entire topic about it was shut down for that very reason. I like the proposal, but I'm just afraid the conversation could get out of hand and admins would have to intervene like they have before.

1 hour ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

The 2 would most likely be eliminated or service reduced to just something like the 1, with inbound trips along Cottage Grove and 51st/Hyde Park in the morning and the reverse in the evening. I, personally, am in favor of the 28 going downtown at all times, but realistically, it's Hyde Park detour would probably end and so would the rush hour extension. The 6 would probably remain unchanged, there's still a strong contingent of riders south of Stony/63rd and the 26 isn't a good replacement

If there is an L line along the South Chicago branch, there isn't much of a point in keeping the 6 when the L runs parallel. I don't see the point of a unidirectional 2; the reverse peak trips are usually for riders going to and from the University of Chicago, and I often see them full (before the lockdown, of course).

But since the L line isn't happening anytime soon, there should be other ways to reduce crowding on the Lake Shore express routes. If an all-day 28 to downtown is implemented, it should run via Lake Park at all times to serve the more central parts of Hyde Park. People on Hyde Park Blvd. still have the 6.

[artthouwill]

4 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

This would've worked back in the 1960s or 70s when the Kenwood Line structure was still complete. Now some of it has been replaced with houses, so either the tracks would have to run above the houses or go somewhere else. I do wish your plan could've happened before those houses were built; that would bring a connection between Hyde Park and Bronzeville. Maybe an elevated structure on Oakwood Blvd. could solve the problem, but then there would be pushback from residents in that area.

As much as I like this idea, I'm not sure how much demand there would be for rapid transit on both lines, as well as the combined frequency north of 67th. To be completely honest, I'm not even sure how many riders there would be south of 71st.

I don't think Hyde Park residents would mind much. I believe many would prefer to take the Metra but don't because it's too infrequent and/or expensive. However, it might make sense to keep the 28 for the connection to Union Station.

I don't mean to sound rude, but the whole Gray Line/Gold Line proposal has been discussed many times on this forum, and it's been made clear that the costs outweigh the benefits. I can imagine if Busjack was here, he would tell us the proposal is dead and shouldn't be mentioned anymore.

Concerning the last part, I know how much the Gray/Gold Line had been discussed.   I wasn't an advocate of that.  That concept was based on running Metra trains like a CTA service.   This includes Toni Preckwinkle's subsiy to lower Metra fares, etc.  I was responding to @strictures post concerning the history if what was supposed to happen to the SSM when the Dan Ryan opened.  I said what could have worked had it been done back in the '70s.   Of course it wouldn't make sense now   But my process included using CTA cars with separate row,like the Green Line and UP-W 

[strictures]

1 hour ago, artthouwill said:

Concerning the last part, I know how much the Gray/Gold Line had been discussed.   I wasn't an advocate of that.  That concept was based on running Metra trains like a CTA service.   This includes Toni Preckwinkle's subsiy to lower Metra fares, etc.  I was responding to @strictures post concerning the history if what was supposed to happen to the SSM when the Dan Ryan opened.  I said what could have worked had it been done back in the '70s.   Of course it wouldn't make sense now   But my process included using CTA cars with separate row,like the Green Line and UP-W 

I believe the original plan was to have the trains use the St. Charles Airline to get to the IC Mainline, but that's 50 years ago & I was about 20 at the time I read about it. 

I have read that the Canadian national wants to abandon the Airline, as only two of the four tracks are in use.  If the city or CTA don't use eminent domain to at least preserve the ROW, they are totally incompetent!

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 hour ago, Anthony Devera said:

No, that was a response to @artthouwill's proposal of an L line along the Metra Electric. I've seen that pretty much every time it is mentioned on this forum, the conversation doesn't really go anywhere, and an entire topic about it was shut down for that very reason. I like the proposal, but I'm just afraid the conversation could get out of hand and admins would have to intervene like they have before.

If there is an L line along the South Chicago branch, there isn't much of a point in keeping the 6 when the L runs parallel. I don't see the point of a unidirectional 2; the reverse peak trips are usually for riders going to and from the University of Chicago, and I often see them full (before the lockdown, of course).

But since the L line isn't happening anytime soon, there should be other ways to reduce crowding on the Lake Shore express routes. If an all-day 28 to downtown is implemented, it should run via Lake Park at all times to serve the more central parts of Hyde Park. People on Hyde Park Blvd. still have the 6.

Didn't know about the U of C service, I've only taken the 2 along the Cottage Grove and 51st streets. Always wondered why it was set up like that.

The 28's rush hour alignment along Hyde Park is to help ease congestion on the 6, otherwise some buses would probably have to start/end at MSci most likely. The X28 was the 5th busiest "X" route for a reason (beat by the X49 & X9 ofc, then the X54 & X80). The 28 ending at 47th/Lake Park outside of rush hour makes it the only N/S route east of the Ryan to not go downtown or serve a CTA station. While I'm sure there are a number of people going to Hyde Park, I'm also willing to bet there's a also a number of people that would opt to take the 28 over whatever E/W bus route was near if the 28 went downtown at all times. Right now, I don't think there's much to change for the South LSD Express routes outside of the 28. In order of best/most feasible to worst/least feasible

1. Ideally, all 28 trips would go downtown at all times, the Hyde Park rush hour alignment would remain. Riders who can't/won't walk the extra two blocks can transfer to the 15, as I'm sure they do now if they ride during rush hour
2. Bring back the X28, all 28 trips would serve Lake Park, all 28 trips would end at 47th/Lake Park when X28 is running and at Union Station when it is not.
3. Discontinue the 43
   • Like someone's earlier proposal, The 44 would be routed via 43rd to 47th Red
     • The 28 would be extended to Indiana Green via 47th, Drexel, 43rd, Indiana, Pershing, Michigan, 47th, return OR
     • The 28 would be extended to 47th Red via 47th, Drexel, 43rd, Wentworth, 47th, LaSalle, return
4. Bring back the old 47/28 alignment with both routes ending at 47th Red (15 & 51 would still serve the WB bridge, 28 & 47 would serve the EB bridge)
5. Extend 28 along Hyde Park/51st to 47th Red (or Garfield Red since there are 3 routes already serving the WB bridge)

[artthouwill]

45 minutes ago, strictures said:

I believe the original plan was to have the trains use the St. Charles Airline to get to the IC Mainline, but that's 50 years ago & I was about 20 at the time I read about it. 

I have read that the Canadian national wants to abandon the Airline, as only two of the four tracks are in use.  If the city or CTA don't use eminent domain to at least preserve the ROW, they are totally incompetent!

I think they will.  I think I read a plan that would build apartment buildings over the Metra Electric tracks South of Roosevelt.   Part of this plan was to have a connection between that area and Union station,  presumably using the St. Charles Air Line.  Assuming that it would be a Metra service   I think turning trains to get from the Air Line to Union station would be difficult.   Dont Amtrak trains that use this route have to reverse course?  I'm not sure if this plan calls for diesel trains or if the SCAL and other tracking would have to be electrified. 

If the original plan called for use of the SCAL, was it to connect to the SSM to the Loop L, State St subway or elsewhere?

The next question is what CN does with their freight trackage along the ME?  There's a connecting flyover between the freight tracks along the Skyway and the CN tracks at Grand Crossing.   It might be easy for CN to abandon this, but how will Amtrak be affected?

[NewFlyerMCI]

6 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

I think they will.  I think I read a plan that would build apartment buildings over the Metra Electric tracks South of Roosevelt.   Part of this plan was to have a connection between that area and Union station,  presumably using the St. Charles Air Line.  Assuming that it would be a Metra service   I think turning trains to get from the Air Line to Union station would be difficult.   Dont Amtrak trains that use this route have to reverse course?  I'm not sure if this plan calls for diesel trains or if the SCAL and other tracking would have to be electrified. 

If the original plan called for use of the SCAL, was it to connect to the SSM to the Loop L, State St subway or elsewhere?

Yes, the City of New Orleans locomotives are next to the terminal entrance instead away from it at the south concourse in Union Station (as a child, I was always scared walking past them because of the noise and the loud VWORP! sound the locomotives made). The train either backs out (or is pulled out, never saw) to about just after the Halsted stop on the BNSF. Then, the train then moves forward to join the ME at or near McCormick Place. I think that's part of the reason the train leaves so late (8p) because it sits there at Halsted for some time before moving foward (I'm pretty sure there's also a bridge that needs to be lowered? Might be confusing it with the Capitol & Lake Shore Limiteds)

[artthouwill]

7 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Yes, the City of New Orleans locomotives are next to the terminal entrance instead away from it at the south concourse in Union Station (as a child, I was always scared walking past them because of the noise and the loud VWORP! sound the locomotives made). The train either backs out (or is pulled out, never saw) to about just after the Halsted stop on the BNSF. Then, the train then moves forward to join the ME at or near McCormick Place. I think that's part of the reason the train leaves so late (8p) because it sits there at Halsted for some time before moving foward (I'm pretty sure there's also a bridge that needs to be lowered? Might be confusing it with the Capitol & Lake Shore Limiteds)

It does cross the south branch of the Chicago River, so I think you are right, though I think the UP tracks stay lowered across the river near Lawrence Fisheries.

[NewFlyerMCI]

35 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

I think they will.  I think I read a plan that would build apartment buildings over the Metra Electric tracks South of Roosevelt.   Part of this plan was to have a connection between that area and Union station,  presumably using the St. Charles Air Line.  Assuming that it would be a Metra service   I think turning trains to get from the Air Line to Union station would be difficult.   Dont Amtrak trains that use this route have to reverse course?  I'm not sure if this plan calls for diesel trains or if the SCAL and other tracking would have to be electrified. 

If the original plan called for use of the SCAL, was it to connect to the SSM to the Loop L, State St subway or elsewhere?

The next question is what CN does with their freight trackage along the ME?  There's a connecting flyover between the freight tracks along the Skyway and the CN tracks at Grand Crossing.   It might be easy for CN to abandon this, but how will Amtrak be affected?

If I understand correctly, CREATE would have the CoNO, Illini & Saluki trains use Norfolk Southern's Chicago Line from Greater Grand Crossing to Union Station (via this flyover I believe), and CN would switch operations to the EJERR and abandon the SCAL. I guess after that Metra could acquire it?

[Tcmetro]

That must be a long-term plan. I walked past the SCAL today along Wabash and it is currently being renovated. 

[artthouwill]

3 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

If I understand correctly, CREATE would have the CoNO, Illini & Saluki trains use Norfolk Southern's Chicago Line from Greater Grand Crossing to Union Station (via this flyover I believe), and CN would switch operations to the EJERR and abandon the SCAL. I guess after that Metra could acquire it?

Where's the EJE?  I'm trying to figure out how much track age besides the SCAL is CN willng to give up?

[artthouwill]

2 minutes ago, Tcmetro said:

That must be a long-term plan. I walked past the SCAL today along Wabash and it is currently being renovated. 

I know Michigan Ave is closed between 14th and 16th due to the work.

[NewFlyerMCI]

4 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

Where's the EJE?  I'm trying to figure out how much track age besides the SCAL is CN willng to give up?

I'm guesstimating because I can't tell exactly, but those train yards near Jeffery Manor and Trumbull Park is about where the trackage ends. This is the "Eastern" portion of the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway

[artthouwill]

4 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

I'm guesstimating because I can't tell exactly, but those train yards near Jeffery Manor and Trumbull Park is about where the trackage ends. This is the "Eastern" portion of the Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway

If so, the EJE crosses under the ME near 95th    I can't remember if there's a connection between the CN and EJE tracks there.  

[NewFlyerMCI]

1 minute ago, artthouwill said:

If so, the EJE crosses under the ME near 95th    I can't remember if there's a connection between the CN and EJE tracks there.  

The EJE doesn't get that far. When I said that's where the trackage ends, I meant that's the northern/eastern end. The connection between the EJE and any CN trackage is much further out south.

There is a connection from tracks passing under the ME at 95th, but not one that can accessed from the EJE tracks after you leave that yard near Trumbull Park