Here are the simple steps needed to make Chicago's transit system world-class

[HomrQT]

Here's a "futuristic" Chicago CTA map I found on this website where the blogger describes in detail their modifications and why. I found it interesting, but could be improved upon still.

http://www.gapersblock.com/detour/a_cta_map_for_2055/

image hosted on flickr


cta_map_for_2055 by HomrQT, on Flickr

[Northsider]

We can all dream, right?

Seriously though, unless we get some help from the feds (**cough** Mr President!), it'll be a struggle to simply keep the system running, let alone expand.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by Northsider

We can all dream, right?

Seriously though, unless we get some help from the feds (**cough** Mr President!), it'll be a struggle to simply keep the system running, let alone expand.

Why would the CTA need assistance from the Federal government? Are ridership fees not covering costs?

[honest86]

Originally Posted by HomrQT

Here's a quick jot of fantasy lines I would throw down if we had a few billion $ to spare. (In Red) Not to scale, I'd love to see a line running along the west side of Lincoln park and cut through the eastern side of Streeterville.

image hosted on flickr

cta fantasy additions by HomrQT, on Flickr

You seem to be missing the pink line on your map.

Also, regarding the topic of improving the L i think they need to build a transfer station between the pink and blue lines.

[Northsider]

Originally Posted by HomrQT

Why would the CTA need assistance from the Federal government? Are ridership fees not covering costs?

Farebox recovery (ridership) only covers 50-ish% of the budget...and that's being generous to what they consider 'farebox' (last I checked, stuff like advertisements and stuff like that was bucketed into this). I think this is also only for operating costs (someone correct me if I am wrong).

As for capital (construction) costs, the CTA relies on the RTA formula funding, which is from the federal/state government. As for a completely new line (or a rebuild of a line), that requires 'New Starts' money, which is federal money.

What you really need to know: there's no self sufficient transit agency in the US, let alone the world (except for Hong Kong maybe, Tokyo's various agencies, perhaps a few others)...so they rely on state and federal dollars.

[skyduster]

Originally Posted by Northsider

What you really need to know: there's no self sufficient transit agency in the US, let alone the world (except for Hong Kong maybe, Tokyo's various agencies, perhaps a few others)...so they rely on state and federal dollars.

Exactly.

It's extremely rare for transit systems to be "self sufficient" (operating solely on fare revenue). They're crucial services, but usually cannot rely solely on fares. Free-market pricing would hurt a lot of people in the lower portion of the socioeconomic scale who have no other means of commuting to work and/or getting around. Indirectly, it would also drive many middle-class folks to using their cars (if, say, gas taxes are dropped so as not to pay for transit, or just for political reasons), putting more cars on the road, and causing traffic chaos. Metro systems often supplement income through advertising (like station billboards), but still require additional subsidy from municipal, regional, or national governments.

Ironically, metropolitan areas like Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Paris, Moscow, Tokyo, Shanghai, etc, pay more in federal/national and regional taxes than they get back...so financial aid from their respective national governments is -if you think about it- actually a tax refund for those cities. Unfortunately for the United States, rural areas are overrepresented in national government, giving them more power to block transit projects in Chicago and Los Angeles, while the big city funds all those lightly-used roads in rural areas.

In Tokyo, both metro agencies (as Northsider mentioned, there's two different agencies operating the various lines in Tokyo) make an operating profit, and my guess is that this has to do with the city's unique characteristics (high population/kilometer of metro track ratio in combination with average incomes that are higher than, say, Shanghai). Although not as dense as Tokyo: Paris, Moscow, and New York are also a very dense urban areas, but their metros don't make an operating profit.

Additionally, Tokyo's metro has long term capital costs (from both expansion and maintenance) according to this article, which can theoretically be paid off with the operations profits, but it'll take a while. Japan has a state infrastructure investment bank which probably provided low-interest loans for expanding the metro. Such a bank would be a very good idea for the US (Europe has one too, the European Investment Bank which is doing well in these hard times, and I believe Brazil is creating one or already has); Obama has actually proposed it for the US, but it's not entirely up to him, unfortunately.

[yankeesfan1000]

^

Well put, on all accounts.

Not even the Interstate Highway system in the US is self sufficient, so it doesn't make sense to hold mass transit to the self sufficiency benchmark.

[PointDuSable]

Have been thinking about this for a long-time. With all the recent (past decade+) development of the South Loop, how is it that the city has not looked to develop any stops between Roosevelt and Cermak-Chinatown on the Red line, or between Roosevelt and 35th on the Green line? It seems like the South is grossly under-served by train lines.

Are there any plans, or even discussions regarding this? Surely the South Loop could use a stop or two; indeed, I think it would actually be further boon to the area.

[Mr Downtown]

New Cermak Green Line stop opens a year from now.

[randomguy34]

I'm surprised no one has brought this up yet but how about a Mid-City Transitway line? The idea is exactly how it sounds, there would be an "L" line starting from the Oakton-Skokie stop, traveling along Cicero avenue, which would allow transfers to all "L" lines that stop at Cicero, then stop at Midway and Ford City Mall at which point it would then transfer to the Red Line at 87th. Former Mayor Daley commissioned a study for it back in 2002 and Mayor Emanuel said he likes the idea(of course, he hasn't done anything about it). Here's a link to the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-City_Transitway. Nothing about it has been done yet so there are still a lot of possibilities that could occur instead.
Here's an image of what it would look like(plus the proposed Circle Line, Red-Orange-Yellow Line extensions, Block 37, and an express train from the Blue Line which you can barely see since the Blue line is covering most of the line so look for a silver edge on the O'hare branch).
image hosted on flickr

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by randomguy34

I'm surprised no one has brought this up yet but how about a Mid-City Transitway line? The idea is exactly how it sounds, there would be an "L" line starting from the Oakton-Skokie stop, traveling along Cicero avenue, which would allow transfers to all "L" lines that stop at Cicero, then stop at Midway and Ford City Mall at which point it would then transfer to the Red Line at 87th. Former Mayor Daley commissioned a study for it back in 2002 and Mayor Emanuel said he likes the idea(of course, he hasn't done anything about it). Here's a link to the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid-City_Transitway. Nothing about it has been done yet so there are still a lot of possibilities that could occur instead.
Here's an image of what it would look like(plus the proposed Circle Line, Red-Orange-Yellow Line extensions, Block 37, and an express train from the Blue Line which you can barely see since the Blue line is covering most of the line so look for a silver edge on the O'hare branch).
image hosted on flickr

That would be such an amazing thing to happen to this city.

[Răng Đông Ri]

OMG!

[sloopchi]

Although it looks nice, the population does not support the need for the train line.

I suggest a Red Line "B" subway that breaks off at Clark/Division and follows Clark St. all the way up to Howard's train lot. There will be some points where one could argue its too close to Red Line "A" (existing) but with Clark on a angle it would serve a very high density area in east Gold Coast/LP/Lakeview and then also serve areas such as Andersonville. Heck, I would even work with the Cubs to have the last B line stop at Addison and use underneath the triangle/Mcdonalds lots as a sitting station until it goes back south.

This B line would ease A line congestion while also easing congestion on the 151 and other bus lines that serve east LP commuters because its too far to walk to the existing red line.

[randomguy34]

Interesting thing is that there is a planned Clinton street subway where the 'B' Red Line leaves North/Clyborn and then travels under Clinton street instead of State street and will connect to the 'A' Red Line tracks at Cermak-Chinatown. Just like the Mid-City Transitway, it's only an idea right now and there is no funding for the project now.
Also, I would argue that the Mid-City Transitway would be beneficial for Chicago for several reasons. First, there is no other 'L' train that runs mainly north and south other than the Red, Brown, and Purple lines but the Brown line doesn't extended that far into the northwest and the Purple line, other than the Evanston branch, runs along the Red and Brown tracks. Second, it will connect to every current 'L' train, except the Brown and Purple line, so the line will be extremely useful for transfers, the Yellow line will get a lot more use since I live in Rogers Park and it's really inconvenient how if I want to get from Howard to O'hare by train, I would have to go all the way to the Loop, transfer to the Blue line, and then go all the way to O'hare. To add on, the line would be able to connect the Blue and orange lines which would be helpful for anyone wanting arriving at O'hare and then getting to Midway quickly and vice-versa. The same can be said if you want to go from the Blue line(O'hare branch) to the Green, Blue(Congess branch) Pink, Orange, and Red Line(Dan Ryan branch). Lastly, the Mid-City Transitway will be able to cover a majority of the gaps(except the southeast side) that there are between each line. The Mid-City Transitway would greatly benefit the 'L' and of of course will easily increase ridership.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by sloopchi

Although it looks nice, the population does not support the need for the train line.

I suggest a Red Line "B" subway that breaks off at Clark/Division and follows Clark St. all the way up to Howard's train lot. There will be some points where one could argue its too close to Red Line "A" (existing) but with Clark on a angle it would serve a very high density area in east Gold Coast/LP/Lakeview and then also serve areas such as Andersonville. Heck, I would even work with the Cubs to have the last B line stop at Addison and use underneath the triangle/Mcdonalds lots as a sitting station until it goes back south.

This B line would ease A line congestion while also easing congestion on the 151 and other bus lines that serve east LP commuters because its too far to walk to the existing red line.

This alternative train line would greatly ease ridership on other lines.

[untitledreality]

Originally Posted by sloopchi

Although it looks nice, the population does not support the need for the train line.

Agreed, especially at the proposed scale, with so few other improvements made to the system before hand. A line along Cicero should be way down the priority list when it comes to system expansion for the CTA. And even if it were to happen, I see no need for it to connect to the Yellow... just have it terminate at Jefferson Park Blue.

In no particular order I would suggest the Circle Line, Clinton Street Subway and the Brown Line Lawrence Ave Subway to Jefferson Park Blue to have the highest priority. Each has been researched by the CTA, each fills a distinct need and each could be finished much sooner than a new line build.

[Northsider]

Originally Posted by HomrQT

This alternative train line would greatly ease ridership on other lines.

The "circle line" would not be a rush hour line. People generally aren't commuting crosstown during the rush, when trains are congested. During off-peak hours, trains are mostly empty anyways, so there's no need to ease ridership. Hell, the Pink line is sort of crosstown, and it's ridership is pretty weak.

I'd LOVE to see this happen, but it just ain't gonna happen. Even NYC's crosstown routes are the weakest lines in the system. Our system is so underutilized as it is, we don't need another line that nobody will use.

[HomrQT]

Originally Posted by Northsider

The "circle line" would not be a rush hour line. People generally aren't commuting crosstown during the rush, when trains are congested. During off-peak hours, trains are mostly empty anyways, so there's no need to ease ridership. Hell, the Pink line is sort of crosstown, and it's ridership is pretty weak.

I'd LOVE to see this happen, but it just ain't gonna happen. Even NYC's crosstown routes are the weakest lines in the system. Our system is so underutilized as it is, we don't need another line that nobody will use.

What I see in this circle line is a good portion of the population being able to access O'Hare and Midway while circumventing the downtown area. That has to count for something.

[untitledreality]

Originally Posted by Northsider

The "circle line" would not be a rush hour line. People generally aren't commuting crosstown during the rush, when trains are congested. During off-peak hours, trains are mostly empty anyways, so there's no need to ease ridership. Hell, the Pink line is sort of crosstown, and it's ridership is pretty weak.

I tend to disagree. The estimated ridership numbers that CTA consultants concluded on were fairly large. The circle line could bring a lot of new riders into the system simply because trips between work centers would be much shorter and more direct.

During the rush, commuting to IMD would be improved for South/Northsiders and commuting to Midway/O'Hare would be improved for Westsiders. Off-Peak the circle line would catch many riders who normally would drive or taxi between the Northside and Milwaukee Ave corridor... or North/Southsiders traveling to events at the United Center and nightlife in Pilsen.

Extend the Circle Line through Bridgeport and watch projected ridership improve even more.

Originally Posted by Northsider

I'd LOVE to see this happen, but it just ain't gonna happen. Even NYC's crosstown routes are the weakest lines in the system. Our system is so underutilized as it is, we don't need another line that nobody will use.

The problem with the G is that it doesnt go anywhere. And where it does go, it doesnt go frequently enough.

[Northsider]

The problem with the G is that it doesnt go anywhere. And where it does go, it doesnt go frequently enough

What's to say the Circle line won't be similar? The number of people wanting to go from the Northside to Wicker Park can't be that high, certainly not during the week. Similarly, those going to IMD is a very specific population, and also I can't see that being very high. To make/build an entire line for that just doesn't seem cost worthy, considering the rest of the areas the line would go through.

The time savings to use the Circle line to go to the airport/s is so small it's really insignificant (10-15 minutes?!).