Circle Line / Gray Line

[Busjack]

...

ONE OVERALL TRANSIT AGENCY would see the South Lakefront Electric Rail Line for what it IS -- A Rapid-Transit Physical Plant, and they would utilize it as such.

To which I said, get the support of 30 state senators and 60 state representatives to break from their entrenched political patronage backers. No number of Lexmark flyers is going to change that reality. Especially when an overwhelming number of voters in the Second Congressional District didn't vote in the Feb. primary.

Where the the political organization to oust Emanuel for closing down the Red Line? Does Karen Lewis for Mayor support your cause, or even hers?

[Mike Payne]

To which I said, get the support of 30 state senators and 60 state representatives to break from their entrenched political patronage backers. No number of Lexmark flyers is going to change that reality. Especially when an overwhelming number of voters in the Second Congressional District didn't vote in the Feb. primary.

Where the the political organization to oust Emanuel for closing down the Red Line? Does Karen Lewis for Mayor support your cause, or even hers?

Since the Gray Line is NOT costing ANYBODY else ANY MONEY -- WHAT IS THE PROBLEM??

If ANY of YOU want to BURN Each and Every Dollar you have, it's NO skin off my back -- GO FOR IT!!

So why is ME wasting MY OWN MONEY [ AND N O B O D Y ELSE'S ] a Capital Crime??

HOW MUCH is the Gray Line costing YOU Personally busjack, artthouwill, ANYBODY (in 2013 dollars)??

[MetroShadow]

Free 99?

I mean, even if it is cost-neutral (which, on the surface doesn't seem like it), it isn't still necessarily a good fit for what the South Shore needs. If we can barely get BRT-lite on Jeffery, along with the South Lake Shore routes that head into the loop, and still clicking the heels to get service to 130th, the choice boils down to choice of paying a premium to use the commuter rail.

I'm sure if you line-item the breakdown on the Electric District (cars, labor, electricity), this is something I still wouldn't recommend the CTA to takeover.

[Mike Payne]

Free 99?

I mean, even if it is cost-neutral (which, on the surface doesn't seem like it), it isn't still necessarily a good fit for what the South Shore needs. If we can barely get BRT-lite on Jeffery, along with the South Lake Shore routes that head into the loop, and still clicking the heels to get service to 130th, the choice boils down to choice of paying a premium to use the commuter rail.

I'm sure if you line-item the breakdown on the Electric District (cars, labor, electricity), this is something I still wouldn't recommend the CTA to takeover.

But I suppose you CAN see spending 1.5 BILLION Dollars for 6 New South Side stations instead of 200 MILLION Dollars for 40 stations (VERY Logical and Financially Responsible): http://www.grayline.20m.com/photo.html

[Busjack]

Since the Gray Line is NOT costing ANYBODY else ANY MONEY -- WHAT IS THE PROBLEM??

If ANY of YOU want to BURN Each and Every Dollar you have, it's NO skin off my back -- GO FOR IT!!

So why is ME wasting MY OWN MONEY [ AND N O B O D Y ELSE'S ] a Capital Crime??

HOW MUCH is the Gray Line costing YOU Personally busjack, artthouwill, ANYBODY (in 2013 dollars)??

I'm sure that the only expenditure now is for your printer, ink, and paper.

But if this were a free good, why did you need and then disown the consultant (an expenditure of federal taxpayers' dollars)?

And if providing it were a free good, why (1) your posts about the additional stations that would be need for fare separation and then fare barriers (2) and CTA having to purchase the service. It sure wouldn't have been a free good. And, obviously, Metra is not going to reduce fares to Zone C (now $4.25) or D ($4.75) to CTA fare ($2.25), Despite Metra saying it wants the business, the Red Line replacement plan indicates that it isn't going to do anything to attract it.

So, this proposal was going to cost somebody something. Just because it is an indirect picking of my pocket by some tax authority doesn't mean that it is cost free.

[Busjack]

But I suppose you CAN see spending 1.5 BILLION Dollars for 6 New South Side stations instead of 200 MILLION Dollars for 40 stations (VERY Logical and Financially Responsible): http://www.grayline.20m.com/photo.html

You still have no documentation of your cost structure. Remember, you disowned the consultant before getting any.

Also, you seem to put better odds on Emanuel getting the $1.5 billion than anyone else, including Emanuel has.

[Mike Payne]

You still have no documentation of your cost structure. Remember, you disowned the consultant before getting any.

Also, you seem to put better odds on Emanuel getting the $1.5 billion than anyone else, including Emanuel has.

I disowned the Consultant because they came up with the negative results that they had been D I R E C T E D to by City Hall -- Just like the Consultants who came up with all the "Positive Results" on the Block 37 Project -- which got our busy and profitable Airport Express SuperStation constructed.

How is the $300 Million plus that Chicago spent for it working out for us taxpayers??

[Busjack]

I disowned the Consultant because they came up with the negative results that they had been D I R E C T E D to by City Hall -- Just like the Consultants who came up with all the "Positive Results" on the Block 37 Project -- which got our busy and profitable Airport Express SuperStation constructed.

How is the $300 Million plus that Chicago spent for it working out for us taxpayers??

Since the Gray Line is dead, I'll be leaving this, especially since you did not answer the question directed to you that was in your power to answer (i.e. documentation of your 12 year old cost estimate).

[Mike Payne]

Since the Gray Line is dead, I'll be leaving this, especially since you did not answer the question directed to you that was in your power to answer (i.e. documentation of your 12 year old cost estimate).

You are quite selective about which questions YOU answer, and which ones YOU IGNORE jack -- So I don't feel too bad.

And I DON'T HAVE "Detailed Cost Estimates" -- But I do know that even $600 Million for 40 stations on 25 miles, is way less (and more cost efficient) than $1.5 BILLION for 5 stations on 6 miles.

Now YOU explain how and why the wonderful Block 37 got $300 Million spent on it (one of those questions YOU'LL IGNORE jack)

Goodbye.

[artthouwill]

Since the Gray Line is NOT costing ANYBODY else ANY MONEY -- WHAT IS THE PROBLEM??

If ANY of YOU want to BURN Each and Every Dollar you have, it's NO skin off my back -- GO FOR IT!!

So why is ME wasting MY OWN MONEY [ AND N O B O D Y ELSE'S ] a Capital Crime??

HOW MUCH is the Gray Line costing YOU Personally busjack, artthouwill, ANYBODY (in 2013 dollars)??

I pay every day in taxes in addition to my fare to support the system. That does not give the agency carte blanche to do as it pleases with the money I pay.

Here is the difference between extending the Red Line to 130th and converting the inner city ME to CTA commuter rail:

1. CTA is extending an EXISTING rail line to better serve current riders of its system. Every east- west street from 95th south that has a CTA route has at least one route that connects to 95th/Red Line, not to mention heavy Pace routes that serve 95th. Think of the travel time saved for these customers who may live near the city limits or south suburbs that can catch the Red Line much sooner. This will somewhat alleviate the bottleneck that is currently the 95th Red Line terminal.

2. You mentioned BNSF. Metra has a purchase of service agreement with them to provide METRA service, with BNSF crews and Metra rolling stock, with fares set by Metra. Metra is in the rail business because other railroads that ran commuter service either went bankrupt, abandoned service, or sold to a railroad not interested in passenger service. Thus Metra is paying for that service. Metra runs ME because the IC was sold to CN (who wants nothing to do with ANY passenger rail service). In fact, truth be told, BNSF and UP both would like nothing better than getting Metra to operate their own trains and just pay them for trackage rights. Thus Metra would not be interested in paying CTA to run a service that it has run itself, and we've already stated the reverse is also true.

3. Let's suppose CTA and Metra went along with this and said CTA can have the entire South Chicago branch, and the inner tracks on the mainline to 111th. Let's suppose Metra ceded to CTA enough cars to handle this Gray Line service. Where does CTA store its cars? Certainly not 18th St, where Metra stores its cars during the midday hours. Not 93rd, since it can only berth two trains there. If the Gray Line ends at 111th, where do the cars get stored? I suppose you would suggest ceding the Blue Island branch also. OK, at least there is a yard at the end of that branch, though not big enough to store as many cars as you would like to run a high frequency operation. Then you run into Metra, that has high frequency rush service with express trains running about 5 minutes apart to serve the 4 express zones it has on the mainline in addition to the NICTD trains. Since Metra still owns the outer tracks, and the trackage at 115th, CTA's schedule would be subject to Metra. And that's at just 115th St. We haven't even begun to discuss loading zones and fare collection at Millenium Park Randolph station and Van Buren and 11th St/Museum campus. Let's also talk about the electricity CTA would have to pay Metra. Then there is the issue of dilapidated stations at 11th, 107th, 103rd, 95th/Chicago State, 91st/Chesterfield, 87th/Woodruff, 83rd/Avalon Park, 79th/Chatam, 75th/Grand Crossing, 63rd, 59th University of Chicago., 27th, and 18th St. At some point, those stations would have to be redone or rebuilt completely or demolished. How much would that cost?

The only reason those stations exist in the first place is because those areas including Hyde Park were once suburban areas before being annexed by the city. The only reason Metra hasn't abandoned the SC branch and the inner city stations is because someone would cry racism, even though the majority of ME riders are south of 115th Street. So Metra runs these near empty trains out of political necessity, not because it makes sense. Metra isn't really interested in running this service and neither is CTA. And based on ridership for the SC and Blue Island branches, the riders clearly vote for CTA expresses, and buses and Red Line respectively.

Whereas a Red Line extension could attract new riders, the Gray Line will attract very few to none..

[Mike Payne]

I pay every day in taxes in addition to my fare to support the system. That does not give the agency carte blanche to do as it pleases with the money I pay.

Here is the difference between extending the Red Line to 130th and converting the inner city ME to CTA commuter rail:

1. CTA is extending an EXISTING rail line to better serve current riders of its system. Every east- west street from 95th south that has a CTA route has at least one route that connects to 95th/Red Line, not to mention heavy Pace routes that serve 95th. Think of the travel time saved for these customers who may live near the city limits or south suburbs that can catch the Red Line much sooner. This will somewhat alleviate the bottleneck that is currently the 95th Red Line terminal.

2. You mentioned BNSF. Metra has a purchase of service agreement with them to provide METRA service, with BNSF crews and Metra rolling stock, with fares set by Metra. Metra is in the rail business because other railroads that ran commuter service either went bankrupt, abandoned service, or sold to a railroad not interested in passenger service. Thus Metra is paying for that service. Metra runs ME because the IC was sold to CN (who wants nothing to do with ANY passenger rail service). In fact, truth be told, BNSF and UP both would like nothing better than getting Metra to operate their own trains and just pay them for trackage rights. Thus Metra would not be interested in paying CTA to run a service that it has run itself, and we've already stated the reverse is also true.

3. Let's suppose CTA and Metra went along with this and said CTA can have the entire South Chicago branch, and the inner tracks on the mainline to 111th. Let's suppose Metra ceded to CTA enough cars to handle this Gray Line service. Where does CTA store its cars? Certainly not 18th St, where Metra stores its cars during the midday hours. Not 93rd, since it can only berth two trains there. If the Gray Line ends at 111th, where do the cars get stored? I suppose you would suggest ceding the Blue Island branch also. OK, at least there is a yard at the end of that branch, though not big enough to store as many cars as you would like to run a high frequency operation. Then you run into Metra, that has high frequency rush service with express trains running about 5 minutes apart to serve the 4 express zones it has on the mainline in addition to the NICTD trains. Since Metra still owns the outer tracks, and the trackage at 115th, CTA's schedule would be subject to Metra. And that's at just 115th St. We haven't even begun to discuss loading zones and fare collection at Millenium Park Randolph station and Van Buren and 11th St/Museum campus. Let's also talk about the electricity CTA would have to pay Metra. Then there is the issue of dilapidated stations at 11th, 107th, 103rd, 95th/Chicago State, 91st/Chesterfield, 87th/Woodruff, 83rd/Avalon Park, 79th/Chatam, 75th/Grand Crossing, 63rd, 59th University of Chicago., 27th, and 18th St. At some point, those stations would have to be redone or rebuilt completely or demolished. How much would that cost?

The only reason those stations exist in the first place is because those areas including Hyde Park were once suburban areas before being annexed by the city. The only reason Metra hasn't abandoned the SC branch and the inner city stations is because someone would cry racism, even though the majority of ME riders are south of 115th Street. So Metra runs these near empty trains out of political necessity, not because it makes sense. Metra isn't really interested in running this service and neither is CTA. And based on ridership for the SC and Blue Island branches, the riders clearly vote for CTA expresses, and buses and Red Line respectively.

Whereas a Red Line extension could attract new riders, the Gray Line will attract very few to none..

Here is the difference between extending the Red Line to 130th and converting the inner city ME to CTA commuter rail:

>> Interesting phrasing "CTA commuter rail" -- It would be a CTA 'L' service operated with different equipment, like Boston's Orange, Red, and (Overhead powered) Blue Line; and Philly's Broad St., and Market-Frankfort Lines.

1. CTA is extending an EXISTING rail line to better serve current riders of its system.

>> City Hall is seeking $1.5 Billion in Corporate Welfare for "Connected" Construction Companies, Consultants, and Campaign Contributors (Using the excuse of "providing New CTA Rail Service" to the Far South Side).

Every east- west street from 95th south that has a CTA route has at least one route that connects to 95th/Red Line, not to mention heavy Pace routes that serve 95th. Think of the travel time saved for these customers who may live near the city limits or south suburbs that can catch the Red Line much sooner. This will somewhat alleviate the bottleneck that is currently the 95th Red Line terminal.

>> Unless I'm seriously mistaken, on this Map the proposed Gray Line extends to Downtown Blue Island, and the Hegewisch Shuttle (not shown on the Map) would have stops at Kensington, 130th & the Bishop Ford Expy.(Atlgeld Gardens, and Terminal of the Red Line Extension), 130th & Torrence (the Ford Plant - unserved by Public Transit), and Terminate at Hegewisch: http://community-2.webtv.net/GLRTS/Routemapproposed/

The Gray Line also crosses every E/W CTA Bus Line (all the way Downtown); and also serves Blue Island, South Shore & the USX Development, Hyde Park, and all the South Lakefront Attraction (ALL of which the Red Line Extension obviously doesn't)

2. You mentioned BNSF. Metra has a purchase of service agreement with them to provide METRA service, with BNSF crews and Metra rolling stock, with fares set by Metra. Metra is in the rail business because other railroads that ran commuter service either went bankrupt, abandoned service, or sold to a railroad not interested in passenger service. Thus Metra is paying for that service. Metra runs ME because the IC was sold to CN (who wants nothing to do with ANY passenger rail service). In fact, truth be told, BNSF and UP both would like nothing better than getting Metra to operate their own trains and just pay them for trackage rights.

>> Then why don't BNSF and UP do that, why don't they let Metra crews run Metra trains??

Thus Metra would not be interested in paying CTA to run a service that it has run itself, and we've already stated the reverse is also true.

>> You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and Thank You for the input.

3. Let's suppose CTA and Metra went along with this and said CTA can have the entire South Chicago branch, and the inner tracks on the mainline to 111th. Let's suppose Metra ceded to CTA enough cars to handle this Gray Line service. Where does CTA store its cars? Certainly not 18th St, where Metra stores its cars during the midday hours.

>> If for the sake of discussion, there are 100 Metra cars stored daytime in 100 spaces at 18th presently -- Then there would now be 50 Highliners with Metra decals on the side, and 50 Highliners with CTA decals on the side for the 100 spaces; where is the storage problem there?

Not 93rd, since it can only berth two trains there.

>> There will be some new storage facilities needed, and a few new platforms.

If the Gray Line ends at 111th, where do the cars get stored? I suppose you would suggest ceding the Blue Island branch also. OK, at least there is a yard at the end of that branch, though not big enough to store as many cars as you would like to run a high frequency operation. Then you run into Metra, that has high frequency rush service with express trains running about 5 minutes apart to serve the 4 express zones it has on the mainline in addition to the NICTD trains. Since Metra still owns the outer tracks, and the trackage at 115th, CTA's schedule would be subject to Metra. And that's at just 115th St. We haven't even begun to discuss loading zones and fare collection at Millenium Park Randolph station and Van Buren and 11th St/Museum campus. Let's also talk about the electricity CTA would have to pay Metra. Then there is the issue of dilapidated stations at 11th, 107th, 103rd, 95th/Chicago State, 91st/Chesterfield, 87th/Woodruff, 83rd/Avalon Park, 79th/Chatam, 75th/Grand Crossing, 63rd, 59th University of Chicago., 27th, and 18th St. At some point, those stations would have to be redone or rebuilt completely or demolished. How much would that cost?

The only reason those stations exist in the first place is because those areas including Hyde Park were once suburban areas before being annexed by the city. The only reason Metra hasn't abandoned the SC branch and the inner city stations is because someone would cry racism, even though the majority of ME riders are south of 115th Street. So Metra runs these near empty trains out of political necessity, not because it makes sense. Metra isn't really interested in running this service and neither is CTA. And based on ridership for the SC and Blue Island branches, the riders clearly vote for CTA expresses, and buses and Red Line respectively.

Whereas a Red Line extension could attract new riders, the Gray Line will attract very few to none..

>> You know what, I have been trying -- but I DON'T have to explain myself or my ideas to anybody, I certainly don't put anybody else through THE SPANISH INQUISITION about anything they say -- Have the Project canceled if you can, and have a nice day.

[trainman8119]

Perhaps one thing that is really being overlooked is that currently Metra is considered a Class I railroad and subject to rules of the
FRA. Currently CTA is not. If CTA were to run over the Metra Electric, they would then have to be goverened by the FRA and said railroad rules...something I am sure CTA wants nothing to do with. The Electric district is a step child for the boys at 547 and is really ignored...just look at some of the stations out there...a real disgrace. Even though they are getting new equipment, it is garbage and it is a case of be careful of what you ask for, you just might get it.

As for why the UP and BNSF don't just cede to Metra, its simple....$$$$. Metra pays for signal upgrades and track maintenance. When the UP took over the CNW, they would have just dumped the passenger end, until they found out how much money they don't have to put into maintenance. It is well worth it for them to suffer with the passenger trains and reap the financial benefits and not have to worry about a small section of their universal system. In the case of the CN...they are Canadian, they don't care. They stuck it to Metra on the North Central when they took over the WC and that is why you'll never see Saturday, Sunday or extended weekday service on that line. Metra spent a ton of money to upgrade B12 to Antioch under agreement with WC. CN took over and basically said, "thank you, but we run freight, have a nice day".

Just my 2 cents. Personally, I think the idea of a Gray Line is silly.

[Busjack]

....

As for why the UP and BNSF don't just cede to Metra, its simple....$$$$. Metra pays for signal upgrades and track maintenance. ...

....

Which was my point with regard to CN being a PITA with regard to the North Central Service, even though the feds, through Metra, paid to rebuild that railroad (or at least brought it up to standard for two way service).

But, does anyone know why CN was so willing to sell the IC commuter division to Metra, other than that those commuter tracks were separate from the freight?

[trainman8119]

I don't think the CN ever had the Metra Electric tracks. I think Metra got it from the IC when it took over the passenger operation way back when.

addendum...From Wikipedia:

On May 1, 1987 Metra bought the line and its branches for $28 million. Two inter-city freight tracks retained by the ICG are now part of the Canadian National Railway, used by Amtrak's City of New Orleans, Illini and Saluki trains.

[Busjack]

Then the question is why the ICG unloaded it.

[Mike Payne]

Perhaps one thing that is really being overlooked is that currently Metra is considered a Class I railroad and subject to rules of the

FRA. Currently CTA is not. If CTA were to run over the Metra Electric, they would then have to be goverened by the FRA and said railroad rules...something I am sure CTA wants nothing to do with.

>> No matter how many times I've explained this (and it is explained on multiple website pages), it is still misunderstood -- the Gray Line would be operated using ONLY Metra Electric Highliners operated ONLY by Metra crews BECAUSE Metra is a Class I Railroad.

It is STRICTLY Forbidden by FRA Regulations for CTA type equipment to run in common with Class I type Rolling Stock at any point.

Using the E X I S T I N G Class I Railroad Rapid-Transit Physical Plant, and Class I Rolling Stock is the WHOLE point of the Proposal -- and why there is such a low Major Capital Project implementation cost.

CTA would ONLY send Gray Line Train Schedules to Metra for Implementation by Metra Class I Trains and Crews.

Neither CTA Equipment, nor CTA Personnel, would be in any way, shape, or form involved in Train Operation; this is stated quite clearly in the first few lines of this Gray Line website Published way back in December of 2006; http://community-2.webtv.net/GLRTS/GRAYLINECONVERSION/

I simply do not / cannot understand how people keep missing (or ignore) that very important point.

I M P O R T A N T -- PLEASE READ >> CTA WOULD HAVE N O T H I N G TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL OPERATION OF THE GRAY LINE TRAINS.

Since the Gray Line would be Operated with the same Class I Equipment, by the same Class I Crews, on the same Class I Physical Plant, under the same FRA Jurisdiction -- Where would there be a conflict??

Please tell me if this did, or didn't address your concerns trainman.

The Electric district is a step child for the boys at 547 and is really ignored...just look at some of the stations out there...a real disgrace. Even though they are getting new equipment, it is garbage and it is a case of be careful of what you ask for, you just might get it.

Just my 2 cents. Personally, I think the idea of a Gray Line is silly.

Thanks for your opinion, and comments..

[Sam92]

>> No matter how many times I've explained this (and it is explained on multiple website pages), it is still misunderstood -- the Gray Line would be operated using ONLY Metra Electric Highliners operated ONLY by Metra crews BECAUSE Metra is a Class I Railroad.

It is STRICTLY Forbidden by FRA Regulations for CTA type equipment to run in common with Class I type Rolling Stock at any point.

Using the E X I S T I N G Class I Railroad Rapid-Transit Physical Plant, and Class I Rolling Stock is the WHOLE point of the Proposal -- and why there is such a low Major Capital Project implementation cost.

CTA would ONLY send Gray Line Train Schedules to Metra for Implementation by Metra Class I Trains and Crews.

Neither CTA Equipment, nor CTA Personnel, would be in any way, shape, or form involved in Train Operation; this is stated quite clearly in the first few lines of this Gray Line website Published way back in December of 2006; http://community-2.webtv.net/GLRTS/GRAYLINECONVERSION/

I simply do not / cannot understand how people keep missing (or ignore) that very important point.

I M P O R T A N T -- PLEASE READ >> CTA WOULD HAVE N O T H I N G TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL OPERATION OF THE GRAY LINE TRAINS.

Since the Gray Line would be Operated with the same Class I Equipment, by the same Class I Crews, on the same Class I Physical Plant, under the same FRA Jurisdiction -- Where would there be a conflict??

Please tell me if this did, or didn't address your concerns trainman.

Thanks for your opinion, and comments..

And again...... Why go through all that hell when a few tweaks to Lake Shore service does the job as well.

[Mike Payne]

And again...... Why go through all that hell when a few tweaks to Lake Shore service does the job as well.

And again....... How many New Jobs and Economic Development is that Lake Shore service creating within the Southeast Side Communities it serves? Per Month? Per Year?

During all the years ( 50+ ) that I lived on the South Side, I saw NOWHERE that bus service created any New Economic Development ( "Our convenient new store is right on the 75th St. bus line" ) -- NOR any New Jobs.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, and describe all the many South Side Community improvements based on adjacent bus services.

[Busjack]

And again....... How many New Jobs and Economic Development is that Lake Shore service creating within the Southeast Side Communities it serves? Per Month? Per Year?

Tell us where the L brought economic development.

Since you keep bringing up this bogus argument, you have it in your power to get real numbers--where are they?

This ain't Field of Dreams. You need a market study--not some aldercreature who promised development of the South Works but only signed her husband's fraudulent tax returns, for instance.

[Mike Payne]

Tell us where the L brought economic development.

Since you keep bringing up this bogus argument, you have it in your power to get real numbers--where are they?

This ain't Field of Dreams.

Most Recently -- Large residential developments next to the Red Line at Bryn Mawr and Granville, at Halsted & Grand on the Blue Line, at Chicago & Franklin, they are LOUDLY advertising how the new Cermak Green Line stop will re-invigorate Motor Row and the new entertainment area around McCormick Place (or am I wrong?).

These are not "real numbers" -- these are "real" "Large Concrete Buildings" constructed specifically because of their proximity to an 'L' Station (now tell me that their location was "just a coincidence").

Here from another Board is another person with a similar outlook: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=6112330&postcount=10197

[Busjack]

Tell us where the L brought economic development.....

Most Recently -- Large residential developments next to the Red Line at Bryn Mawr and Granville, at Halsted & Grand on the Blue Line, at Chicago & Franklin, they are LOUDLY advertising how the new Cermak Green Line stop will re-invigorate Motor Row and the new entertainment area around McCormick Place (or am I wrong?).

These are not "real numbers" -- they are "real" "Large Concrete Buildings".

Here from another Board is another person with a similar outlook: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=6112330&postcount=10197

Proving my last point, the CTA Tattler just reported a survey on median income near L stations.

The Tatter pointed out an anomaly near Sedgwick, but anyway, if one goes to the source, it points out the Red Line number is not so high near Loyola and Lawrence, suddenly jumps at Sheridan, then plunges at 47th and only moderately rises down to 95h.

The Green Line plunges between Austin and California, rises, then plunges again at Pershing. It does not plunge as much as the Red Line, but I also assume that that is because there are further people to average or that Bronzeville is seeing some development away from the L.

The Blue Line (Forest Park) plunges Kedzie to Austin.

The Pink Line plunges between Kostner and 18th.

The places you cited on the north side are gentrifying already, and the Motor Row stop is being touted by Emanuel to justify the expenditure of TIF funds,

Not only do you lack any market data for the target market (South Side south of 67th), you don't have anything concrete being built.

Oh, I forgot, there is a Walmart being built in Pullman, apparently without the benefit of the Gray Line.

But to summarize:

• You don't have the proof necessary to influence anyone who could do something with your argument.
• If we believe you that City Hall sent a consultant to kill the project--the project has been killed.

[Mike Payne]

Proving my last point, the CTA Tattler just reported a survey on median income near L stations.

The Tatter pointed out an anomaly near Sedgwick, but anyway, if one goes to the source, it points out the Red Line number is not so high near Loyola and Lawrence, suddenly jumps at Sheridan, then plunges at 47th and only moderately rises down to 95h.

The Green Line plunges between Austin and California, rises, then plunges again at Pershing. It does not plunge as much as the Red Line, but I also assume that that is because there are further people to average or that Bronzeville is seeing some development away from the L.

The Blue Line (Forest Park) plunges Kedzie to Austin.

The Pink Line plunges between Kostner and 18th.

The places you cited on the north side are gentrifying already, and the Motor Row stop is being touted by Emanuel to justify the expenditure of TIF funds,

Not only do you lack any market data for the target market (South Side south of 67th), you don't have anything concrete being built.

Oh, I forgot, there is a Walmart being built in Pullman, apparently without the benefit of the Gray Line.

But to summarize:

• You don't have the proof necessary to influence anyone who could do something with your argument.
• If we believe you that City Hall sent a consultant to kill the project--the project has been killed.

I knew I was wasting my time -- I just played along.

NO MATTER WHAT I SAY, you'll remain UNconvinced -- Why bother?

Have a nice day -- IGNORE MY POSTS -- And you won't have to be bothered.

[Busjack]

I knew I was wasting my time -- I just played along.

NO MATTER WHAT I SAY, you'll remain UNconvinced -- Why bother?

Have a nice day -- IGNORE MY POSTS -- And you won't have to be bothered.

Like I said, I was ignoring anything having to do with the dead project as far as rail and fare barriers were concerned.

But if that is your attitude, no wonder you have gotten nowhere in the 13 years since CATS gave you a bit of credibility. You don't have facts that anyone of influence would buy now. Not to mention your wasting time trying to convince commenters on various internet boards, all of whom have no influence.

[trainman8119]

I M P O R T A N T -- PLEASE READ >> CTA WOULD HAVE N O T H I N G TO DO WITH THE ACTUAL OPERATION OF THE GRAY LINE TRAINS.

Since the Gray Line would be Operated with the same Class I Equipment, by the same Class I Crews, on the same Class I Physical Plant, under the same FRA Jurisdiction -- Where would there be a conflict??

Please tell me if this did, or didn't address your concerns trainman.

The only question I have is, if this is all true, why even get the CTA involved with it at all ? After that, if you want increased frequency, then so be it, but it'll come at a cost as railroad personnel (keep in mind 3 per train, minimum) make about twice as much as a CTA person, then you would have to multiply that by 3...and that is just the labor.

Your argument mirrors a lot of problems I have with the so called BRT. It's nothing but a gimmick on an express bus costing millions of dollars to implement which could be better used in other areas. As for the grant aspect of that, shame on the feds for giving the excess dollars for all of this. I'd rather see it given to purchase more equipment and employ more people to put on the street and increase frequency. If people want to get downtown 6 minutes earlier, then leave 6 minutes earlier...I did it for years !

[Mike Payne]

But if that is your attitude, no wonder you have gotten nowhere

>> What "attitude" should I have when dealing with folks who have decided ANY answer is give is invalid before I even open my mouth.

And if I do make a valid point, you make sure to ignore that and jump to something else -- to get some other answer you'll ignore.