Do you think the EL will ever be expanded or new lines added? (Chicago: versus, shop)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why draw a line in the sand and portray this as suburbia v. city here? ...
Population density in the suburbs, with only a few exceptions, is far, far too low for CTA rail service. When balanced against the alternatives, it's certainly not worth the money it would cost.
Even in the city, most of the City isn't dense enough to support additional rail, and the City isn't showing much resolve in improving that. Just in the past 10 years they've approved large-scale single-family homes within blocks of CTA stations.
Misguided zoning approvals don't exactly the help the city or the CTA. There are plenty of places in the city that aren't near rail stations that could use single-family infill. Walking distance to CTA stations should be reserved for dense, multi-family housing in order to support the existing investment in infrastructure. Until the City decides to zone in ways that support transit, building more transit lines will only increase the overall cost, and increase the precarious nature of the CTA budget.
Infill lines that support areas already dense and filled with transit-users make the most sense because their ridership will be highest. They'd cost the most to build, but their operation would generate a much higher revenue stream relative to cost of operation.
Following that model, a subway from the West Loop to Streeterville is probably the most appropriate new line the CTA could build. Unfortunately, despite the need, and despite the fact it was proposed in the 1960s and 1970s when it would have been cheaper to build, it isn't currently under proposal. The second-most important line would probably be a line that is currently proposed, the Clinton Street subway, connecting the North Side and South Side to the high-dollar employment district in the West Loop near the Metra stations.
How about you take advantage of Chicago's extensive bus network and save our city hundreds of millions of dollars? Sure, I'd love an el line that goes through my favorite places and runs 24 hours a day, but I'm not going to get my hopes up.
It has nothing to do with "my favorite places," it has to do with improving commerce by reducing travel times and regional gridlock.
The bus system will never be a viable option until you either get rid of half the stops so the bus isn't constantly in start-stop mode, or make bus-only lanes so the bus isn't fighting traffic in rush hour.
Try taking public trans from OHare to Midway sometime on the bus.
It's not making it a "city vs suburban" thing, but since it IS the CHICAGO Transit Authority, plug the holes in the city that the CTA themselves have been talking about filling for years before expanding suburban service. The suburbs are supposedly already served by Metra/Pace in the first place. I'm not against expanding suburban service, but it shouldn't be top priority. Like someone else said, I'm sure any L train extensions are truly a pipe dream at this point in time, anyway.
Because it provides an easy jump off point into the CN line, which could provide convenient rail service to many along an existing rail line, thereby eliminating the need to condemn vast quantities of property.
The plan will look even better once we replace the current lumbering "L" cars with faster and more streamlined trains. Of course, for that to be feasible, larger parts of the current L network will have to be improved to handle that.
I think the best way to improve Suburban transit options is to provide more METRA trains; particularly more off-peak and weekend service, more reverse commute trains, including reverse commute express options to stations that are close to employment centers, more trains on undeserved lines like the Southwest and North Central line. I doubt there would be much demand to take the blue line all the way out to Oak Brook or Woodfield (the other branch).
Here's an alternative proposal. Extend the blue line from Forest Park over the Des Plaines river to the Maybrook court house (el stop here) running at grade. Then turn south and cross the Eisenhower, run above grade through the Forest Home cemetery, over Roosevelt Rd into the Forest Preserve but just east of 1st Avenue. Cross over 1st Avenue, still above grade into the parking lot at the south end of Loyola University Medical Center (el stop here). Then the line can merge with the CN line just south of LUMC and continue along this ROW.
This route is a bit shorter than the pink line extension and also runs closer to the Eisenhower allowing for potential park-and-ride facility at 1st Ave. Its a better route for Maywood (but worse for Berwyn and North Riverside Mall.)
I know these are all pure fantasy, but its fun to think about.
Hmmm. Interesting. Both of concepts look pretty close in terms of land impact. To self-serve my own proposal though, one key advantage a Pink Line connection into the CN would seem to be six stops at Central, Austin, Ridgeland, East, Oak Park, and Harlem.
These stops would be in dense areas where commuters -- many of whom are economically disadvantaged and underserved by public rail transit -- could walk to the stations, or get to them by established bus service along those major arteries. And the Harlem stop would serve a major shopping area consisting of Cermak Plaza, the North Riverside Mall, and the new development Berwyn is planning at the NW corner of Harlem and Cermak, providing additional opportunities to economically disadvantaged consumers along the Pink Line.
Other than around the park and ride at 1st Ave. and Roosevelt Rd., your Blue Line connection to the CN would seem to have no stops at major streets that are served by bus or surrounded by dense populations. And the 1st Ave. Park and Ride would still be auto dependent -- and what groups do you see using it?
Still though, interesting idea. If the CN Line is ever turned into commuter rail, I don't see why you couldn't do both. Then you could connect another batch of commuters into that expanded system too. Also, either expansion would effectively connect Rush, U of I Medical Center, and Cook County Hospital in Chicago to Hines VA and Loyola in Maywood. There has to be some advantage in that.
Obviously, we would need a cost/benefit analysis on these to decide which should be first. Both are worthy of serious discussion. Sadly, given the state of things, the energy and cash will likely be spent on a new high tech superhighway with under-pavement sensors for future self-driving cars that will connect Somonauk, Sandwich and Plano into I-55, heh. Hopefully that changes and ideas like these get serious study.
Hmmm. Interesting. Both of concepts look pretty close in terms of land impact. To self-serve my own proposal though, one key advantage a Pink Line connection into the CN would seem to be six stops at Central, Austin, Ridgeland, East, Oak Park, and Harlem.
These stops would be in dense areas where commuters -- many of whom are economically disadvantaged and underserved by public rail transit -- could walk to the stations, or get to them by established bus service along those major arteries. And the Harlem stop would serve a major shopping area consisting of Cermak Plaza, the North Riverside Mall, and the new development Berwyn is planning at the NW corner of Harlem and Cermak, providing additional opportunities to economically disadvantaged consumers along the Pink Line.
Other than around the park and ride at 1st Ave. and Roosevelt Rd., your Blue Line connection to the CN would seem to have no stops at major streets that are served by bus or surrounded by dense populations. And the 1st Ave. Park and Ride would still be auto dependent -- and what groups do you see using it?
Still though, interesting idea. If the CN Line is ever turned into commuter rail, I don't see why you couldn't do both. Then you could connect another batch of commuters into that expanded system too. Also, either expansion would effectively connect Rush, U of I Medical Center, and Cook County Hospital in Chicago to Hines VA and Loyola in Maywood. There has to be some advantage in that.
Obviously, we would need a cost/benefit analysis on these to decide which should be first. Both are worthy of serious discussion. Sadly, given the state of things, the energy and cash will likely be spent on a new high tech superhighway with under-pavement sensors for future self-driving cars that will connect Somonauk, Sandwich and Plano into I-55, heh. Hopefully that changes and ideas like these get serious study.
If you look into doing this for the west suburbs, then you need to look into expanding all the CTA lines into all of the suburbs. Obviously, the Blue Line/O'Hare branch to Woodfield would be an obvious one, but why not all of the others? The Yellow Line could be expanded to Hawthorne Mall in Vernon Hills, the Purple Line to the Great Lakes Naval Base, the Brown Line to Golf Mill Mall in Niles, the Orange Line to Orland Square Mall, and the Red Line could be split off at 95th St, one branch running down I-57 to Lincoln Mall in Matteson, the other branch running down the Bishop Ford to Balmoral Park race track in Crete. I mean since we're speaking about pipe dreams.....
If you look into doing this for the west suburbs, then you need to look into expanding all the CTA lines into all of the suburbs. Obviously, the Blue Line/O'Hare branch to Woodfield would be an obvious one, but why not all of the others? The Yellow Line could be expanded to Hawthorne Mall in Vernon Hills, the Purple Line to the Great Lakes Naval Base, the Brown Line to Golf Mill Mall in Niles, the Orange Line to Orland Square Mall, and the Red Line could be split off at 95th St, one branch running down I-57 to Lincoln Mall in Matteson, the other branch running down the Bishop Ford to Balmoral Park race track in Crete. I mean since we're speaking about pipe dreams.....
No objection here. The cost/benefit of expanding CTA lines in multiple directions should be studied. This, versus highway expansion, should take priority in our transportation policy, I always say. Look at the NYC subway system. It is vastly more extensive than ours.
No objection here. The cost/benefit of expanding CTA lines in multiple directions should be studied. This, versus highway expansion, should take priority in our transportation policy, I always say. Look at the NYC subway system. It is vastly more extensive than ours.
It's vastly more extensive than ours in large measure because the vastly broader reach of high-density neighborhoods justifies it. Expanding into some suburbs doesn't mean you need to expand into all of the suburbs. "All or nothing" is a false choice. The reasons are much less compelling for expanding the CTA all the way out to Vernon Hills or Great Lakes versus inner-ring suburbs that are much closer and have roughly the same population density as many city neighborhoods.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
