Circle Line / Gray Line

[Busjack]

8 minutes ago, juelzkellz said:

Spending billions of dollars on an extension that will shave 5 maybe 10 minutes of a commute from that area seems crazy to me.

The only transit justification that seemed to me was that it would reduce congestion at the 95th bus terminal, but I have always said that spending $240 million of borrowed money to expand it either is a waste or a concession that the extension will not happen.

11 minutes ago, juelzkellz said:

The only way I can see it being a benefit is if the CTA were to implement express service a/la the Evanston Express.

The Evanston Express is no longer express, the Dan Ryan isn't 4 track, and the loss of population on the south side indicates there really isn't demand for it.

12 minutes ago, juelzkellz said:

An idea that might work would be to make send the 34 and 108 downtown via the Dan Ryan expressway express from 95th. That way, less money is being spent and the quality of service greatly increases.   

Buses via the Dan Ryan, such as 6X and 111AX were cancelled when the rapid transit was opened in 1969. 34 was cut off from 36A (State to 119-Morgan) at the same time.

The posted timetable says the trip from 95th to Roosevelt is 21 minutes. How does it speed up trips if a bus is stuck in 30 minute travel time on the expressway? The whole point of the Dan Ryan segment and rebuilding it a couple of years ago was to provide a quicker way than the expressway. Certainly, CTA is not going to duplicate it with buses.

[artthouwill]

51 minutes ago, juelzkellz said:

As far as the Red Line extension is concerned, I think it is a pointless waste of money. Spending billions of dollars on an extension that will shave 5 maybe 10 minutes of a commute from that area seems crazy to me. The only way I can see it being a benefit is if the CTA were to implement express service a/la the Evanston Express. Other than that, the commute from that area really doesn't shrink that much compared to the amount of money being spent. An idea that might work would be to make send the 34 and 108 downtown via the Dan Ryan expressway express from 95th. That way, less money is being spent and the quality of service greatly increases.   

As far as the Grey Line proposal, it's one of those ideas that sounds great on paper, but the logistics involved make it a non starter. Besides, the existing transit options in the area are good enough for the majority of the riders and when you really think about it, the time savings are really not worth the logistical headache . 

Depending on where you will board,  a Red Line extension could shave 30 minutes off the commute one way, especially from 115th and southward.  That could be the difference between paying one fare vs two fares if your destination is along Pace routes 606 or 626.   This is better than the proposed Flyover for the Brown Line. 

I've already stated my view of the Gray Line proposal.   I won't beat a dead horse. 

[juelzkellz]

3 hours ago, artthouwill said:

Depending on where you will board,  a Red Line extension could shave 30 minutes off the commute one way, especially from 115th and southward.  That could be the difference between paying one fare vs two fares if your destination is along Pace routes 606 or 626.   This is better than the proposed Flyover for the Brown Line. 

I've already stated my view of the Gray Line proposal.   I won't beat a dead horse. 

I think the Brown Line flyover is the best project that CTA has lined up. What people don't understand is that the flyover does not really speed things up, but provides more capacity. The amount of Red Line trains are constrained by the Clark junction. Build the flyover, and you can add more Red Line trains. I think Red Line riders will appreciate the additional trains during rush hour. 

[BusHunter]

31 minutes ago, juelzkellz said:

I think the Brown Line flyover is the best project that CTA has lined up. What people don't understand is that the flyover does not really speed things up, but provides more capacity. The amount of Red Line trains are constrained by the Clark junction. Build the flyover, and you can add more Red Line trains. I think Red Line riders will appreciate the additional trains during rush hour. 

The flyover speeds things up, how else would they have space to put more red lines in service? They can also put more browns because they are not being held up at Clark Junction. What they have now is like putting a traffic light at the Dan Ryan at 55th/Garfield. it just slows down everything. 

The Red line extension needs to get built because there is no alternative besides buses along that corridor. At least the ME runs where the Gray line would run.

[artthouwill]

12 hours ago, juelzkellz said:

I think the Brown Line flyover is the best project that CTA has lined up. What people don't understand is that the flyover does not really speed things up, but provides more capacity. The amount of Red Line trains are constrained by the Clark junction. Build the flyover, and you can add more Red Line trains. I think Red Line riders will appreciate the additional trains during rush hour. 

I disagree.   The Red line already runs at 3 minute intervalid and if the system was in a state of good repair,  the Red line could run at 2 minute intervals without a flyover.   It once did run that way. Eliminating some thirty second waits will not add capacity. 

 

On the Gray Line,  I  think CTA and Metra would rather keep the current status quo. 

[jajuan]

On 6/30/2016 at 9:50 PM, BusHunter said:

The flyover speeds things up, how else would they have space to put more red lines in service? They can also put more browns because they are not being held up at Clark Junction. What they have now is like putting a traffic light at the Dan Ryan at 55th/Garfield. it just slows down everything. 

The Red line extension needs to get built because there is no alternative besides buses along that corridor. At least the ME runs where the Gray line would run.

It's a better marketing strategy though to sell the flyover by emphasizing extra capacity than speeding things up. You mention speed things up and folks ask 'what speed up is needed? Trains get through there relatively fast.' Gray Line is a total waste of money and that idea needs to die once and for all. On the Red Line extension just concede it's not going to happen just like Ashland BRT appears dead with the X9 restoration and implementation of traffic signal priority accompanying that restoration. 

[Busjack]

58 minutes ago, jajuan said:

It's a better marketing strategy though to sell the flyover by emphasizing extra capacity than speeding things up.

It essentially comes down to whom it is marketed. About the only entity to which it must be marketed, in the sense of getting $220 million in federal money, is the FTA or Congress (I'm assuming that the TIF would kick in the rest).

My original thought was that the demolition of the condo building would be a roadblock in the environmental review process. However, since the agendas of CT Board meetings say that purchases of the necessary property have been approved, I assume that CTA already has the money for property acquisition and that demolition will be fait accompli by the time it comes to get the construction funds.

[Mike Payne]

On 6/28/2016 at 5:12 PM, strictures said:

The problem with the so-called Gray Line is that it was proposed in the late 1960s & was supposed to use two tracks of the IC Mainline south to Kensington, when the Dan Ryan Line opened. The IC didn't need 10 tracks there anymore. They were going to eliminate & demolish the SSML & route it over to the IC, I think using the St. Charles Airline. Why it never happened then is a mystery, although money is the likely answer.

And when Richie Daley paid of the South Side reverends that supported him by rebuilding the SSML & turning it into the Green Line, that killed any possibility of ever using the abandoned parts of the IC Mainline.

But Payne refuse to believe that this was proposed & insists that he created the idea. One of these days when I have time to burn, I'll go to the main library & hunt through the microfilms of the late 1960s Sun-Times, which I remember had this on their front page, complete with a large map.

Strictures, do you understand the differences between constructing a totally new 20 to 25 mile tin-can CTA "L" Infrastructure ADJACENT to the existing Class I Metra Electric operations.

And using the EXISTING Class I MED Infrastructure I T S E L F with N O new major construction of any type; those are two very, very different concepts Strictures!

I also remember those pictures of 'L's along the Lakefront, and thinking "what a ridiculous waste"!

I guess all the folks involved in the current efforts are wrong also; 14 different Organizations, and they're all mis-lead and wrong:   www.modernmetraelectric.org

[garmon757]

@Mike Payne There's nothing wrong with making a valid point but please keep it down a notch, especially being aggressive in response towards other members.

[Mike Payne]

I can understand when my ideas get discounted for various reasons; but when a large collection of Organizations group together, pay to make a Video, print  their own Publications, and feel the need to address Metra and RTA's Boards, and probably CTA too. I don't understand how some folks can also disparage their efforts: 

http://chicagoreporter.com/revamped-metra-electric-could-put-south-side-on-the-fast-track/

I think as residents in the Communities along the line (as I was for many years) they would have a much better grasp of what is needed there. Look at that viaduct in the Video, who the heck would want to enter there (a woman alone at night)! I am working with CMME, but I certainly have no control whatsoever over their actions:   http://www.modernmetraelectric.org

[Mike Payne]

For those who say the MED couldn't be used as rapid-transit, check out this Video; same 1/2 mile station spacings as the 'L', high-acceleration AC powered equipment, close CTA bus connections: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc9pplGpFNk

(Thanks to Amtrak fan 90368)

 

[jajuan]

2 hours ago, Mike Payne said:

For those who say the MED couldn't be used as rapid-transit, check out this Video; same 1/2 mile station spacings as the 'L', high-acceleration AC powered equipment, close CTA bus connections: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc9pplGpFNk

(Thanks to Amtrak fan 90368)

 

I saw this video and about the only it shows is that the ME South Chicago Branch is ridiculously slow and that its passenger base has dropped significantly due to a combination of demographic changes and population loss. Based on that, why would CTA want to put money toward taking this over from Metra? 

[Mike Payne]

Because CMME and I believe that if it were operated in a different format, it would create Jobs and Economic Development within those communities using those existing facilities, and that also includes the Main Line neighborhoods along the Kensington Line.   Especially with the new TIF Regulation possibilities.

[sw4400]

What is the status of this Circle Line/Grey Line anyway? I thought that pretty much has been put on a shelf collecting cob and spider webs? If I recall correctly, Circle Line will connect all "L" Lines through a central point somewhere downtown, the Grey Line is some South Side Extension of service.... correct if wrong.

 

As far as the North Side Main Line Flyover, I still think it's a waste of money and time..... it's a 30 second wait for trains to pass(people can't wait 30 whole seconds for a train to pass the junction?). Hardly worth the millions of dollars to demolish and build the flyover.

[Mike Payne]

42 minutes ago, sw4400 said:

What is the status of this Circle Line/Grey Line anyway? I thought that pretty much has been put on a shelf collecting cob and spider webs? If I recall correctly, Circle Line will connect all "L" Lines through a central point somewhere downtown, the Grey Line is some South Side Extension of service.... correct if wrong.

>> Info about the now defunct Circle Line:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_"L"#Circle_Line

>> The Gray Line is an ongoing effort by South Siders to improve service on the Metra Electric: http://chicagoreporter.com/revamped-metra-electric-could-put-south-side-on-the-fast-track/   http://bit.ly/GrayLineInfo  http://www.modernmetraelectric.org

 

As far as the North Side Main Line Flyover, I still think it's a waste of money and time..... it's a 30 second wait for trains to pass(people can't wait 30 whole seconds for a train to pass the junction?). Hardly worth the millions of dollars to demolish and build the flyover.

>> I agree 1,000% -- I lived in Rogers Park at Granville on the Red Line for 3yrs, and at Kimball for 4 yrs; all while working downtown for IBM.  I rode through Clark Junction on either line twice every day, and only anecdotally  remember any delays -- even during rush hours!

 

[jajuan]

3 hours ago, Mike Payne said:

Because CMME and I believe that if it were operated in a different format, it would create Jobs and Economic Development within those communities using those existing facilities, and that also includes the Main Line neighborhoods along the Kensington Line.   Especially with the new TIF Regulation possibilities.

CTA already acknowledged local transit concerns in that part of town by expanding service hours on bus route #26, which in this case is a more efficient use of CTA's money. If Metra's operations of that line branch isn't spurring development, giving ME South Chicago branch over to CTA sure as heck won't. Nor will changing that line over to CTA as a nine rapid transit line miraculously make ridership dramatically increase especially if it's using the same cars as it is as a Metra line and inching along at a snail's pace due to the high number of grade crossings with south side roadways it has to pass in between stations. It doesn't seem as if anyone has considered that CTA would have the added headache of still having to coordinate around Metra with the Main Line to University Park and Blue Island Branch services as well as around NICTD with the South Shore Line because the same exact tracks would still be used with those two TAs instead of a separated track right away like with the Green when it moves onto the embankment with UP-W but still has its own separate tracks or the O'Hare Branch of the Blue Line having the UP-NW running parallel with it from that Metra line running parallel with the Kennedy Expressway. The Grey Line proposal is asking for an inefficient and wasteful use of limited CTA dollars. 

[strictures]

On 7/3/2016 at 0:55 AM, Mike Payne said:

Strictures, do you understand the differences between constructing a totally new 20 to 25 mile tin-can CTA "L" Infrastructure ADJACENT to the existing Class I Metra Electric operations.

Normally I've stopped replying to you, but since when is 16th St. to Kensington "20 to 25 mile" of tracks? It's just under 13 miles.

[Pace831]

1 hour ago, jajuan said:

CTA already acknowledged local transit concerns in that part of town by expanding service hours on bus route #26, which in this case is a more efficient use of CTA's money. If Metra's operations of that line branch isn't spurring development, giving ME South Chicago branch over to CTA sure as heck won't. Nor will changing that line over to CTA as a nine rapid transit line miraculously make ridership dramatically increase especially if it's using the same cars as it is as a Metra line and inching along at a snail's pace due to the high number of grade crossings with south side roadways it has to pass in between stations. It doesn't seem as if anyone has considered that CTA would have the added headache of still having to coordinate around Metra with the Main Line to University Park and Blue Island Branch services as well as around NICTD with the South Shore Line because the same exact tracks would still be used with those two TAs instead of a separated track right away like with the Green when it moves onto the embankment with UP-W but still has its own separate tracks or the O'Hare Branch of the Blue Line having the UP-NW running parallel with it from that Metra line running parallel with the Kennedy Expressway. The Grey Line proposal is asking for an inefficient and wasteful use of limited CTA dollars. 

Absolutely correct. The one thing that has been discussed on here that might make sense in terms of system efficiency is convert the South Chicago branch to a CTA operation and connect it with the Cottage Grove branch of the Green line. But again, there is the question of whether it's worth the cost. If bus service to that area is sufficient, why bother?

[jajuan]

44 minutes ago, Pace831 said:

Absolutely correct. The one thing that has been discussed on here that might make sense in terms of system efficiency is convert the South Chicago branch to a CTA operation and connect it with the Cottage Grove branch of the Green line. But again, there is the question of whether it's worth the cost. If bus service to that area is sufficient, why bother?

It's not only a matter of buses being sufficient given the bus (#26) came after the train in that area. It's also the matter that the proposal as structured would leave CTA with having to work train schedules around the remaining Metra Electric Main Line and Blue Island Branch services and the South Shore Line. That's a headache from the start, and the current ridership on the South Chicago Branch makes it even more of an unneeded headache that CTA is best served steering far clear of. It's not worth the effort or money. There are a number of other reasons we discussed in past years  of why this idea is flawed like CTA having to pay Metra for maintenance of the cars since these are Metra's cars starting out and obviously CTA maintenance personnel would have no experience fixing the cars. This is one of those ideas that sounds good on paper but in reality is impractical. As such folks just need to let this idea die and finally rest in peace for good. 

[Mike Payne]

On 7/3/2016 at 5:45 PM, jajuan said:

CTA already acknowledged local transit concerns in that part of town by expanding service hours on bus route #26, which in this case is a more efficient use of CTA's money. If Metra's operations of that line branch isn't spurring development, giving ME South Chicago branch over to CTA sure as heck won't. Nor will changing that line over to CTA as a nine rapid transit line miraculously make ridership dramatically increase especially if it's using the same cars as it is as a Metra liet

 

On 7/3/2016 at 1:33 PM, Mike Payne said:

Because CMME and I believe that if it were operated in a different format, it would create Jobs and Economic Development within those communities using those existing facilities, and that also includes the Main Line neighborhoods along the Kensington Line.   Especially with the new TIF Regulation possibilities.

I've already answered everyone's questions with this statement, there is no point in any further discussion or explaination -- because you DON'T (or refuse to) hear what we're saying anyway!

[jajuan]

11 minutes ago, Mike Payne said:

 

I've already answered everyone's questions with this statement, there is no point in any further discussion or explaination -- because you DON'T (or refuse to) hear what we're saying anyway!

I heard and understood your position quite fine. The current dynamics of the current transit options in that area simply lead me to disagree even more than I already did for my reasons given about it being a practical idea for execution off paper. As such I think the mayor could have chosen a different proposal to use to try garnering or shoring up voter support in that area. 

[Mike Payne]

On 6/28/2016 at 5:12 PM, strictures said:

1 hour ago, jajuan said:

I heard and understood your position quite fine. The current dynamics of the current transit options in that area simply lead me to disagree even more than I already did for my reasons given about it being a practical idea for execution off paper. As such I think the mayor could have chosen a different proposal to use to try garnering or shoring up voter support in that area. 

You are of course entitled to your opinion -- right or wrong; as are we!

btw: The #26 runs only in the rush direction, and not on weekends or holidays.  If you want to go to a show Downtown on a Saturday night the #26 doesn't exist.

 

[jajuan]

1 hour ago, Mike Payne said:

 

It still wouldn't justify turning over ME South Branch operations to CTA. If the ridership on those trains is low on a weekday, those numbers are not likely to be all that high on weekends.

[Mike Payne]

1 hour ago, jajuan said:

It still wouldn't justify turning over ME South Branch operations to CTA. If the ridership on those trains is low on a weekday, those numbers are not likely to be all that high on weekends.

If it is the same Metra Branch operation, you are correct!  

A CTA Gray Line South Chicago Branch however with integrated local CTA transfer privileges, and 10-15 min. headways (like the rest of the 'L') would create a huge increase in ridership (which like I said you will still refuse to listen to or believe)

btw: The upgrade I and CMME seek would also include the Kensington and Blue Island services, and a new shuttle to Hegewisch (serving Altgeld Gardens and the Torrence Ave. Ford plant - the Kensington & Eastern R.R. is wholly owned by Metra) -- NOT just the South Chicago Branch by itself.

[jajuan]

3 hours ago, Mike Payne said:

If it is the same Metra Branch operation, you are correct!  

A CTA Gray Line South Chicago Branch however with integrated local CTA transfer privileges, and 10-15 min. headways (like the rest of the 'L') would create a huge increase in ridership (which like I said you will still refuse to listen to or believe)

btw: The upgrade I and CMME seek would also include the Kensington and Blue Island services, and a new shuttle to Hegewisch (serving Altgeld Gardens and the Torrence Ave. Ford plant - the Kensington & Eastern R.R. is wholly owned by Metra) -- NOT just the South Chicago Branch by itself.

And it's still not worth pursuing. because it still says nothing about how CTA is supposed schedule around ME Electric Main Line and South Shore Line trains. Nor does it explain where CTA is supposed to get the money to pay for such a transfer or how to pay to build its own separate grade right of way of trackage if there was any thought to do so, which if memory serves of how you were proposing this years ago there was no such thought. So again the mayor should have left this dead idea in the dust and not have resurrected it out of the ashes.