If I ran Transit for one day...

[MetroShadow]

On 1/5/2022 at 6:51 PM, NewFlyerMCI said:

Did a mock-up of what I think a redesigned LaSalle Street Station should look like:

• The two adjacent parking lots would be bought up and razed
• LaSalle & Clinton stations get rehabbed, with LaSalle getting an auxiliary entrance
  • Harrison as well just cause it's as old as the other two
• SWS being rerouted

Benefits are:

• 12 & 18 get better(ish) access to downtown, along with a better layover point for all routes in terms of driver relief.
• Riders going to/from LSS get better access to the rest of downtown, including new one seat rider to Illinois Center, Merchandise Mart & the Mag Mile
  • Other 1-seat ride areas include the parts of UIC & IMD served by bus, and the Far North side (if someone needs to go that far out for some reason)

Things I considered

• Initially, all routes were stopping on Financial Pl, but since 2/6 routes are full time artic and another one is part-time or better, I moved two of the routes to create more space
• I wanted the LaSalle Express routes to start here so they could properly queue up to depart in the evening, but again, space constraints
• Same as above for 148 & Pace 755
• Thought about moving the 28 to here so it wouldn't have to travel as far, but I don't know how many riders take it to/from Union, so I decided against it.

Point of clarification - what'd you use to draw these, because they're slick. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

5 hours ago, MetroShadow said:

Point of clarification - what'd you use to draw these, because they're slick. 

Just Adobe Illustrator. I needed the line work practice for a bus system I was drawing up for Chicago's extended urban core.

[Sam92]

4 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Just Adobe Illustrator. I needed the line work practice for a bus system I was drawing up for Chicago's extended urban core.

Oh? Ok I want details ?

[NewFlyerMCI]

10 hours ago, Sam92 said:

Oh? Ok I want details ?

Sure lol ?

Around 2012-2013 (when the draft of this was made), about 4 or so years after my mother moved us from Chicago to DC, I started getting more interested in public transit than I already had been. DC has this bus system called The Circulator, which basically acts as a frequent bus & shuttle service for popular, developed and/or developing neighborhoods, with commuters & tourists being the primary focus.

It was my thought that Chicago could use a system like this, and CTA could offload a bunch of routes that ran minimally, and this system (to be run by CDOT) could pick up the slack for those routes and boost service along side other routes. Routes like the then 1, 124, 125, 130, 156, 157 and similar ones would basically get picked up by this system, while other routes like the then 11, the then 38 (or 37, not sure), 18, 21, 152 and others would get additional service along parts of their corridors. Service would emulate the Circulator, so buses every <10 mins and fares for $1, along with integration with the ChicagoCard (typing that makes me feel old and yet I'm probably still one of the youngest on the forum lol)

Obviously, a lot of this wouldn't fly today (although I wouldn't have known that almost a decade ago lol), but this was one of the first transit projects I'd ever done, so I wanted it to be more than some lines on Google MyMaps. The maps are attached for anyone to see

[Sam92]

4 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Sure lol ?

Around 2012-2013 (when the draft of this was made), about 4 or so years after my mother moved us from Chicago to DC, I started getting more interested in public transit than I already had been. DC has this bus system called The Circulator, which basically acts as a frequent bus & shuttle service for popular, developed and/or developing neighborhoods, with commuters & tourists being the primary focus.

It was my thought that Chicago could use a system like this, and CTA could offload a bunch of routes that ran minimally, and this system (to be run by CDOT) could pick up the slack for those routes and boost service along side other routes. Routes like the then 1, 124, 125, 130, 156, 157 and similar ones would basically get picked up by this system, while other routes like the then 11, the then 38 (or 37, not sure), 18, 21, 152 and others would get additional service along parts of their corridors. Service would emulate the Circulator, so buses every <10 mins and fares for $1, along with integration with the ChicagoCard (typing that makes me feel old and yet I'm probably still one of the youngest on the forum lol)

Obviously, a lot of this wouldn't fly today (although I wouldn't have known that almost a decade ago lol), but this was one of the first transit projects I'd ever done, so I wanted it to be more than some lines on Google MyMaps. The maps are attached for anyone to see

Ok before I input is this hypothetical of any existing L lines not being in some places? 

[NewFlyerMCI]

35 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Ok before I input is this hypothetical of any existing L lines not being in some places? 

All L lines exist as they are, and unless I missed any (other than Clark/Division, I think), all direct connections are listed on the map. Like I said, had I made this today, there's a lot I wouldn't have added, including the lines mirroring the Blue, Pink & Green Lines 

[Sam92]

On 1/25/2022 at 4:41 PM, NewFlyerMCI said:

All L lines exist as they are, and unless I missed any (other than Clark/Division, I think), all direct connections are listed on the map. Like I said, had I made this today, there's a lot I wouldn't have added, including the lines mirroring the Blue, Pink & Green Lines 

Well You got good ideas. I would modify a few that are near a rail line to avoid duplication though cause the rail lines nearby (such as washington park) aren't exactly crowded. The soldier field and navy pier service is gold as well as the UIC replacing 157, 124 and possibly even allowing 146 to not have to deal with solider field.

[NewFlyerMCI]

CTA/Metra should buy the vacant lot next to 93rd/South Chicago Metra and turn it into a transit center. Have the 87 & 95 end there, with the 71, 30 & 26 providing thru-service. 87 could probably still operate via Buffalo to preserve service. Provides a better relief point for at least the 87, and a central location where all routes stops instead of just 2-3 of them at various stops located near, but not next to each other. An additional benefit, although it'd probably be underutilized is transfers from the 30 to Metra, for riders who either need to reach Hyde Park, or don't want to take the Red Line

Extra thoughts: 71 short turns can end there, if such a service pattern is deemed necessary, along with the 30's weekend service if for some reason it's cut back from 79th. Also unlikely, but possibly feasible, is an extension of the 6, in part because such a location would be closer to 103rd.

[Sam92]

On 3/1/2022 at 8:09 PM, NewFlyerMCI said:

CTA/Metra should buy the vacant lot next to 93rd/South Chicago Metra and turn it into a transit center. Have the 87 & 95 end there, with the 71, 30 & 26 providing thru-service. 87 could probably still operate via Buffalo to preserve service. Provides a better relief point for at least the 87, and a central location where all routes stops instead of just 2-3 of them at various stops located near, but not next to each other. An additional benefit, although it'd probably be underutilized is transfers from the 30 to Metra, for riders who either need to reach Hyde Park, or don't want to take the Red Line

Extra thoughts: 71 short turns can end there, if such a service pattern is deemed necessary, along with the 30's weekend service if for some reason it's cut back from 79th. Also unlikely, but possibly feasible, is an extension of the 6, in part because such a location would be closer to 103rd.

I'd do it even if metra wasn't there. My gf tried to go through there and had to take an unnecessary walk because the 26 and 95 are close but don't connect as you said. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

Back again with another fantasy proposal. This one is definitely more fantasy than realistic. Attached is the Twitter thread with the project description. I’ll note now that the express section can effectively be ignored, I hadn’t realized how ineffective it’d be with a branched line until I’d done 95% of the drawing.

[Busjack]

4 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Back again with another fantasy proposal. This one is definitely more fantasy than realistic. Attached is the Twitter thread with the project description. I’ll note now that the express section can effectively be ignored, I hadn’t realized how ineffective it’d be with a branched line until I’d done 95% of the drawing.

Some parts have been discussed before. South Chicago would make more sense from 61st Yard via rail along the Skyway (no way Woodlawn interests would allow rebuilding east of Cottage Grove, and you can't put third rail in the middle of 71st St). I suppose to 79/Western could work, but extending the Orange Line from 51st near Western would make more sense. I don't see the point of linking the Pink Line, and one would have to ascertain that the 4 branches balance.

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

I don't see the point of linking the Pink Line, and one would have to ascertain that the 4 branches balance.

To substantiate this, the Feb 2022 Ridership report indicates (weekday):

Pink Line: 8403

Lake: 11200

South Main: 3370

Englewood: 609

Jackson Pk: 563

(Total South side: 4542)

As it is, the South side is short about 6500, and if the Pink Line were added, 15,000. Extensions might cut it back, but not that much.

 

 

[NewFlyerMCI]

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

To substantiate this, the Feb 2022 Ridership report indicates (weekday):

Pink Line: 8403

Lake: 11200

South Main: 3370

Englewood: 609

Jackson Pk: 563

(Total South side: 4542)

As it is, the South side is short about 6500, and if the Pink Line were added, 15,000. Extensions might cut it back, but not that much.

 

 

The lack of density means it was never going to be a 1:1 match, and that’s the only solution to even it out. But I don’t think it would be so terribly unbalanced, and maybe even better than the green line today. Lake St is already unbalanced as it is, all the ridership comes from Oak Park and West Loop. Thank you for the ridership report.

[Busjack]

1 hour ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

The lack of density means it was never going to be a 1:1 match, and that’s the only solution to even it out. But I don’t think it would be so terribly unbalanced, and maybe even better than the green line today. Lake St is already unbalanced as it is, all the ridership comes from Oak Park and West Loop. Thank you for the ridership report.

The only relevant take I got was that with the south Green Line being overserved, there's no point to running the Pink Line down there.

Of course, the real reason the south Green Line is light is that the Red Line has the ridership.

[artthouwill]

2 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

The lack of density means it was never going to be a 1:1 match, and that’s the only solution to even it out. But I don’t think it would be so terribly unbalanced, and maybe even better than the green line today. Lake St is already unbalanced as it is, all the ridership comes from Oak Park and West Loop. Thank you for the ridership report.

 

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

The only relevant take I got was that with the south Green Line being overserved, there's no point to running the Pink Line down there.

Of course, the real reason the south Green Line is light is that the Red Line has the ridership.

So pairing the SSM with Pink instead of Lake Street would be lesser of an imbalance,  but an imbalance nevertheless.   What would spitting the Green Line in two do interesting than possibly add trains to the loop? 

I have long been a prominent if adding service along South Chicago to at least 92nd, but preferably 108th and the State Line or even 112th and Avenue O, but that would require doing away with the 63rd branches altogether ir making the branches shuttles to Garfield.   That way you could still thru route the Green Line to Lake or separate from Lake and justifiably make the SSM South Chicago its own route. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

Did a mock-up of what 63rd St L would look like

- the eastern portion will be familiar from the last mock-up I did, same idea applies (CTA rolling stock, no more ME-SS, etc)

- I added CTA’s auxiliary entrances logo, it’s a underrated map element

- Crossovers would be present after each station west of Woodlawn and existing ones kept south of Woodlawn

- Woodlawn & Ashland would be converted into 3 track dual island platforms instead of adding a pocket track (see WMATA’s DCA or West Falls Church Station). Green Line branch frequencies work in my favor for once

- Midway would have a track added for 4 tracks, 2 island platforms

- 67th would most likely be underground, with a direct connection to the MED platform

- 63rd/Dan Ryan would probably need high speed elevators (see WMATA’s Forest Glen station)

- Since much of the corridor has nite owl service, along or adjacent, I made the line 24 hrs. Original service hours were going to be identical to the Orange Line’s

- No drastic bus changes. Probably would result in reduced frequencies on the 6, 26, 63 & maybe 71, shifting the 52 terminal slightly north and extending the 349.

- Route is about ~14.30mi long and would take approximately ~47 mins to go end of end via some very janky math

[Busjack]

There was once a proposal to extend the  Englewood to Midway. Nothing happened,

The two man community objections are:

• Nobody wants an L structure in their neighborhood; especially rebuilding the one at 63-Dorchester.
• Due to the fractionalized and segregated neighborhoods on the South Side (compare, say, Chicago Lawn and Englewood) there is little demand for distant crosstown travel. Something like the X55 bus could take care of demand between Hyde Park and Midway.

Besides, I see a bit of racism in your proposal. The X80 bus was promoted in car cards as connecting la Linea Rojo and la Linea Cafe to O'Hare, but I don't see you proposing an L over Irving Park from Marine Dr. to Pulaski. If anything would be defensible, it would be a subway between Kimball and Jeff Pk.

[NewFlyerMCI]

14 minutes ago, Busjack said:

Besides, I see a bit of racism in your proposal. The X80 bus was promoted in car cards as connecting la Linea Rojo and la Linea Cafe to O'Hare, but I don't see you proposing an L over Irving Park from Marine Dr. to Pulaski. If anything would be defensible, it would be a subway between Kimball and Jeff Pk.

You see nothing. You think because I haven’t made a map about it, I don’t support it? I’ve came up with or support many ideas on this forum alone for years; I only just started making maps within the last year and some change and I don’t exclusively do Chicago maps.
 

It’s already taxing enough that you never want to even attempt to see something positive in an idea, but to insinuate that I or this proposal is racist because I didn’t also do one for the north side is beyond me. For the record, I’ve always been in favor of a Brown Line extension to Jeff Pk and I’m sure I’ve said as much on this forum. The only reason I’ve never done a mock-up is because such an extension wasn’t significant enough to warrant one: it’s a 2-3 mile extension with 2-3 additional stops. With no other changes, it wasn’t worth doing a whole map. You also wouldn’t have known if I had planned to one anyway. 
 

My focus has primarily been on the south side because that’s where I’m from and that’s where I take transit the most. That doesn’t mean I’m ignorant to transit needs in other parts of the city. Kimball to Jeff Pk is arguably the most requested L change before/after a Western crosstown line, and it’s the next capital project I think CTA should take on. But, since I haven’t made a map about it, I must be racist. Thanks for the insight.

[Tcmetro]

I like the idea of a 63rd St L. At the very least it can be extended to Western on the west, and the ME on the east. That would be very cheap to do. Also the concrete structures keep the noise down a lot better than the old steel ones.

If anything, the CTA should be a lot more grid like. Rail market to downtown is pretty much tapped out, more crosstown lines will help the city reduce car usage and connect the neighborhoods better.

[Busjack]

27 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

It’s already taxing enough that you never want to even attempt to see something positive in an idea, but to insinuate that I or this proposal is racist because I didn’t also do one for the north side is beyond me. For the record, I’ve always been in favor of a Brown Line extension to Jeff Pk and I’m sure I’ve said as much on this forum. The only reason I’ve never done a mock-up is because such an extension wasn’t significant enough to warrant one: it’s a 2-3 mile extension with 2-3 additional stops. With no other changes, it wasn’t worth doing a whole map. You also wouldn’t have known if I had planned to one anyway. 
 

My focus has primarily been on the south side because that’s where I’m from and that’s where I take transit the most. That doesn’t mean I’m ignorant to transit needs in other parts of the city. Kimball to Jeff Pk is arguably the most requested L change before/after a Western crosstown line, and it’s the next capital project I think CTA should take on. But, since I haven’t made a map about it, I must be racist. Thanks for the insight.

No, you have it exactly backwards. It's racist because you propose carving up Black and Brown neighborhoods with providing little justification for the benefits compared to displacement costs and environmental issues (visual, noise).

You say you ride on the South Side, but, despite the community guidelines, don't really say what population centers or industries need to be served. Instead the map continues such 20-year old hackneyed ideas as "the ME South Chicago branch is a craw in my throat, so, I gotta do something with it in 2 maps." If nothing else, show why Preeckwinkle's South Cook Transit Program doesn't take caew of that problem. ME riders are now riding at half fare.

[NewFlyerMCI]

2 minutes ago, Busjack said:

No, you have it exactly backwards. It's racist because you propose carving up Black and Brown neighborhoods with providing little justification for the benefits compared to displacement costs and environmental issues (visual, noise).

You say you ride on the South Side, but, despite the community guidelines, don't reers ally say what population centers or industries need to be served. Instead the map continues such 20-year old hackneyed ideas as "the ME South Chicago branch is a craw in my throat, so, I gotta do something with it in 2 maps." If nothing else, show why Preeckwinkle's South Cook Transit Program doesn't take caew of that problem. ME riders are now riding at half fare.

“Carving up” is an extreme, it’s not like an impassable iron curtain is being dropped on 63rd st. The proposal is so large that the population centers are fairly obvious, you even named some and the justification is equally present: there’s a need for rail transit that isn’t going downtown, as that’s pretty much covered and 63rd is an ideal corridor as it’s already busy and evenly located on the south side. So sorry I didn’t strictly adhere to the guidelines for you, I’m sure it absolutely devastated your reading experience. 
 

the ME-SS was not my only idea, I had initially considered using South Chicago as art previously discussed, but I decided to stick to something familiar.

Blame Metra for FTSC, it’s a great idea, only hampered by lack of fare integration and transfers btwnthe service boards. There would be more riders if Lori wasn’t afraid of Metra stealing CTA ridership. Until then, solutions like these are what people are going to think of.

Your initial feedback is valid, but suggesting that I’m racist toward my own people is still wildly offensive with no real basis in reality. Sure, there are visual and environmental concerns and maybe some people might have an issue with new construction, but it can’t be that much of an issue, or more L lines would’ve been torn up and the Red Line extension would’ve made no headway

 

[MetroShadow]

17 minutes ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

“Carving up” is an extreme, it’s not like an impassable iron curtain is being dropped on 63rd st. The proposal is so large that the population centers are fairly obvious, you even named some and the justification is equally present: there’s a need for rail transit that isn’t going downtown, as that’s pretty much covered and 63rd is an ideal corridor as it’s already busy and evenly located on the south side. So sorry I didn’t strictly adhere to the guidelines for you, I’m sure it absolutely devastated your reading experience. 
 

the ME-SS was not my only idea, I had initially considered using South Chicago as art previously discussed, but I decided to stick to something familiar.

Blame Metra for FTSC, it’s a great idea, only hampered by lack of fare integration and transfers btwn the service boards. There would be more riders if Lori wasn’t afraid of Metra stealing CTA ridership. Until then, solutions like these are what people are going to think of.

Your initial feedback is valid, but suggesting that I’m racist toward my own people is still wildly offensive with no real basis in reality. Sure, there are visual and environmental concerns and maybe some people might have an issue with new construction, but it can’t be that much of an issue, or more L lines would’ve been torn up and the Red Line extension would’ve made no headway

 

Technically, we've had seamlessness in 25 years. It's affordability and transfer integration is something that the service boards (especially Metra) need to fix. 

30 minutes ago, Busjack said:

No, you have it exactly backwards. It's racist because you propose carving up Black and Brown neighborhoods with providing little justification for the benefits compared to displacement costs and environmental issues (visual, noise).

You say you ride on the South Side, but, despite the community guidelines, don't really say what population centers or industries need to be served. Instead the map continues such 20-year old hackneyed ideas as "the ME South Chicago branch is a craw in my throat, so, I gotta do something with it in 2 maps." If nothing else, show why Preeckwinkle's South Cook Transit Program doesn't take caew of that problem. ME riders are now riding at half fare.

I'm inclined to say that it isn't racism until you start dealing in absolutes and shovels to the ground. Would 63rd benefit from a subway? Yes (in the sam vein that BRT on 79th is also necessary). We know that crosstown routes are slow, and definitely could benefit from transit; but also realizing that we should look at how agencies suck at helping Black and Brown communities especially in transit deserts. Gentrification and displacement are real things that could result by dissecting the street in half (and perhaps designing transit to mitigate that is the right way to address that). 

You're both right in this case (not the racism one) - Also, folks: let's tone it down a notch or six.

[artthouwill]

Rather than quoting everyone,  I'll just refer to @NewFlyerMCI  mockupmap.

I'm not sure how the alignment west of Ashland follows 63rd.  Is it supposed to be built over 63rd?  If I recall correctly there are very few, if any, alleys running east west along the 63rd corridor between Damen and Cicero.   Also,  there was once a law passed prohibiting future L lines being built over streets,  which is how we got Ls running through alleys.  However one of the proposals for extending the Orange Line to Ford City had that line running over Cicero especially south of 67th.   I don't see residents west of Damen wanting an L over there 

The most expensive part comes between Harvard and King Drive.   How do you build a structure to connect this line to the Red Libe, and now this structure has to soar over a railcars and a Metra flyover?   That's a tall task    i would rather just use the existing structure and build a south connection at 59th Junction and either build a new Harvard Station or forego a Red Line connection altogether  

As @Busjack mentioned,  we know the residents of Woodlawn didn't want the L, otherwise the Green Line would be operating to Dorchester instead of Cottage Grove. 

Finally, someone would call the idea of removing ME SC service to downtown racist, which is why that low ridership branch is still in existence as a daily operation.   And to replace it with a service that really goes nowhere? 

If money weren't an issue, I'd rather bore a subway under 79th, possibly 63rd, but definitely 79th between South Shore and Midway serving Ford City.  But I think the City would be better served by crosstown North south service along Ashland,  Western,  and Cicero.   The X routes handle that currently,  and cheaper, but I'm sure a subway would be popular along those corridors.

Oh yes, the Brown line extension to Jefferson Park.  I think everyone likes the idea, but how do you build it?  L structure over Lawrence?  Subway under Lawrence?  Grade level Leland?  No matter what,  the price tag would be too high.

[YoungBusLover]

I'll just add my two cents here, Although I like the idea @NewFlyerMCI proposed on paper in reality I don't see much good it would do for residents west of 63rd and State. Most will still take 63rd to the red line and go downtown nonetheless to any other N/S route. What I wouldn't mind seeing is the Green line cottage grove branch getting extended to run alongside South Chicago to 92nd/Commercial. 63rd needs bus lanes in the worse way added with more frequent service to support the demand it already has currently. I've lived in Englewood/Woodlawn for the good portion of my early years and a lot of the residents that I remember talking to about it the east side of the green line was they wished that the green line wasn't torn down. They always felt the faith leaders, U of C and other sources we're more of a hindrance than a helpful resource to the demise of the green line. The notion of "Tearing down the Green line will cut down on noise,create an economic boom for the community and rid of all crime centered around the "L". 20+ years later and not much has been developed that has benefited Woodlawn. Transit is still lack luster. Don't even mention the Obama Library because last time I checked that's all in Jackson Park. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

14 minutes ago, YoungBusLover said:

I've lived in Englewood/Woodlawn for the good portion of my early years and a lot of the residents that I remember talking to about it the east side of the green line was they wished that the green line wasn't torn down. They always felt the faith leaders, U of C and other sources we're more of a hindrance than a helpful resource to the demise of the green line. The notion of "Tearing down the Green line will cut down on noise,create an economic boom for the community and rid of all crime centered around the "L". 20+ years later and not much has been developed that has benefited Woodlawn. Transit is still lack luster. Don't even mention the Obama Library because last time I checked that's all in Jackson Park. 

That was part of the impetus for this. My mother and grandmother talk about how the Green edit used to go to Stony Island all the time. Like every 3rd conversation about the CTA (that, and they still talk about the 27 South Deering).

it’s the same thing when people oppose bus projects over parking; the bus will bring you more customers (economic boom) than any parking spaces directly in front of your business will do (of which there aren’t many, even counting the other side of the street).