# This week on the CTA Red Line



## Metra Electric Rider (Sep 30, 2016)

So I'm feeling a little verklempt, I'll give you a topic:

This week on the CTA Red Line.

First there were reports of either bed bugs or body lice on some cars on the Red Line (I'll let you google those on your own).

And then more positive news about the extension to the far south side.

CTA moves forward on planned Red Line extension to Far South Side - Chicago Tribune

Discuss amongst yourselves...


----------



## SarahZ (Sep 30, 2016)

This quote at the bottom caught my eye:

"We had hoped for 2016 back when we started talking about this in 2009," said Reed, whose organization also favors *turning the Metra Electric District Line into a rapid-transit line, with more frequent stops*."

Is she talking about the Gold Line? I happened upon that last night; I'd love to see that come to fruition.


----------



## Eric S (Sep 30, 2016)

SarahZ said:


> This quote at the bottom caught my eye:
> 
> "We had hoped for 2016 back when we started talking about this in 2009," said Reed, whose organization also favors *turning the Metra Electric District Line into a rapid-transit line, with more frequent stops*."
> 
> Is she talking about the Gold Line? I happened upon that last night; I'd love to see that come to fruition.


Gold Line, or Gray Line, another similar semi-developed concept, or just running more "local" Metra trains. These concepts have been floating around for quite some time but have struggled to get the attention of planners and elected officials - in part because of the funding arrangement for RTA services, where Metra's local funding only comes from the suburbs.


----------



## brianpmcdonnell17 (Sep 30, 2016)

If a rapid transit line was built on the Metra Electric ROW would the current tracks remain? If so, I think it is a good idea. However, the current tracks must remain for University Park, Blue Island, and South Bend trains to access downtown Chicago. The South Chicago Branch is short enough that it could be feasible for the CTA line to operate to South Chicago.

I have also heard plans of just increasing frequency on the current Metra Electric and fare integration. This could also work, the main problem being the lack of a direct connection to any CTA lines.


----------



## MisterUptempo (Oct 1, 2016)

Plans to turn the Metra Electric into some sort of rapid transit service come in three different flavors-

1) The *Gray Line*, as mentioned by Eric S., was proposed by Mike Payne about twenty years ago; Payne still actively promotes the plan to this day. The Gray Line would use modified Metra Electric Bi-Levels (removing the restroom and the moving of an interior wall or two to make a larger vestibule) running on the Electric Main Line (as far as Kensington/115th Street) and South Chicago Branch every 10-15 minutes, and the Blue Island Branch every 20 minutes (due to that branch's single track). Trains would continue to terminate at Millennium Station. The plan envisions fare integration with the CTA with transfer discounts.

Payne advocates activating the Gray Line over building the CTA Red Line extension.







Image Source - http://grayline.20m.com

2) The *Gold Line*, as mentioned by Sarah Z., takes the Gray Line proposal and reduces its scope. The Gold Line would run on the Electric Main Line to just south of 63rd Street, where it would continue on the South Chicago Branch only. It would not continue south of 63rd on the Main Line or on the Blue Island Branch. Those lines would continue to be serviced as they are now, once every hour on the Main Line south of 63rd during non-rush periods and once every two hours on the Blue Island Branch in non-rush. This plan also suggests CTA fare integration. No recommendation as to rolling stock, very likely running Bi-Levels as they do now. All trains would still terminate at Millennium Station.

Transit Future, backer of the Gold Line, also supports building the CTA Red Line Extension.






Image Source - http://transitfuture.org

3) The Midwest High Speed Rail Association has incorporated a rapid transit-like component for the Metra Electric into its CrossRail Chicago plan. Called *Metra City*, MHSRA takes Payne's Gray Line idea and expands upon it. Metra City would provide trains every 15 minutes on the Main Line to Kensington, the South Chicago Branch, the Blue Island Branch, as well as on NICTD/South Shore trackage to service Altgeld Gardens and the Hegewisch neighborhood.

Unlike the Gray Line and Gold Line proposals, some or most Metra City trains would not terminate at Millennium Station, but instead turn onto the St. Charles Air Line at 16th Street and continue onto a not-as-yet built connector to Union Station's south tracks, stop at Union Station, then continue to O'Hare Airport. All Metra Electric Suburban trains would then bypass most of the stations within city limits, save for a few transfer stations, and terminate at Millennium Station.






Image Source - crossrailchicago.org

As the graphic shows, MHSRA envisions a similar Metra City treatment for the Metra Rock Island Beverly Branch to Blue Island (using DMUs as opposed to the Electric's EMUs) at some point in the future. It is also mentioned that the UP-North and UP-Northwest lines could provide Metra City service, with 15 minute frequencies as well.

There is no definitive position on CTA fare integration, but MHSRA does advocate for a lower fare structure for Metra City as well as better coordination with CTA and Pace (suburban) buses. Rolling stock is not specified, though the Metra City service is represented in the presentation by a single-level EMU, and the vehicles are described as, "lighter, more nimble trains".

MHSRA does not argue for or against the CTA Red Line Extension in its CrossRail Chicago presentation.

For reference sake, I am including a graphic of the Red Line Extension route -






Image Source - http://transitfuture.org

The Red Line Extension would add 5.3 miles of track, terminating at 130th Street and the Bishop Ford Freeway, in the same general vicinity as the Metra City stop for Altgeld Gardens would be located. Estimated cost for the extension is $2.3 billion.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (Oct 3, 2016)

None of this is going to happen for the foreseeable future - Illinois has NO spare money* and massive gridlock in Springfield. The Gray Line is a totally half-baked plan which doesn't take into account the suburban passengers or infrastructure costs, etc.

http://ctagrayline.com/#

(can't take credit for the site)

I'd also be surprised if the St. Charles Air Line got used for anything since the South Loop Organization (or the like) wanted to the embankment removed unless that has changed. They might be amenable to transit rather than freight.

None of the proposals serve Roseland (especially egregious since I-57 was built with room for the L from the start) well except the Red Extension.

My source at the CTA says that there is support for the gold line or similar but that might be because there is no money so it's all talk. Simplest of all things is simply find more money to run more frequent service mid-day and evening (every 20 minutes rather than every hour would be perfect). I also think if service were more frequent single-level cars would be required (I suspect that the bi-levels/highliners allowed the IC to cut service a bit but keep the same capacity) outside rush hour - two doors per side would be good for quicker boarding. But there doesn't seem to be political support in Springfield at the moment.

*As it is now we're losing money from the Feds because we don't have a budget...


----------



## MisterUptempo (Oct 4, 2016)

I've always been a little cynical about promises to build the Red Line out to Altgeld Gardens. The recent announcement about the Red Line extension mentions that work on the project wouldn't even begin until 2022, at the earliest. Push it back just a little further, and you're talking about two Chicago mayoral election cycles (2019 and 2023) taking place before any groundbreaking ceremony. I see Rahm looking to get elected once, maybe twice, more, then bailing from City Hall and dumping the problem in someone else's lap. A transit TIF was formed for the purpose of generating funds for the extension, but I can't imagine that the area will see an appreciable rise in property values or new development for a long time.

Back in 2012, when the announcement was made that the CTA was spending $280 million to double the size of the 95th Street Red Line terminal/bus depot (which is currently under construction), I thought then that project was the bone City Hall was tossing the far South Side for _not _extending the Red Line. And it might still be. We'll see.

The original plans for the Dan Ryan Red Line actually called for the line to split in two south of 95th Street - one branch running in the median of the Bishop Ford Freeway, terminating around 103rd and Stony Island, the other branch running in the median of Interstate 57, terminating at 119th Street and Ashland. You're right about getting transportation out to Roseland. I wonder whether having the Red Line run through the area far earlier might have saved Roseland from an unfortunate cycle of decline.

Regarding the St. Charles Air Line, there had been talk 7 or 8 years ago about converting it into a High Line/Bloomingdale Trail-like path. As mayor, Rich Daley was keen on the idea. Haven't heard anything about that idea since, save for complaints from people who, when they purchased their South Loop residence, were told by real estate agents that converting the Air Line was a done deal, which it clearly isn't.

When CN bought the EJ&E, one of the conditions for approval from the feds was that CN would be responsible for maintaining the Air Line for as long as Amtrak chose to run its trains on it, so the Air Line isn't going away any time soon. One of the four South of the Lake alternatives includes the Air Line, with a connector to Union Station's south tracks, similar to the idea put forth by MHSRA. Considering how much potential there is in a direct connection between Union Station and the IC/Metra Electric tracks, getting rid of the Air Line seems like a monumental mistake that we'd regret for a long time.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Oct 4, 2016)

One of the CREATE projects is to connect the CN-IC to the NS at 79th Street/Grand Junction using some old bridges that were once used by the Nickel Plate Railroad to access LaSalle Street station. Amtrak trains would then be able to directly access Union Station without a backup. This would allow the abandonment of the CN-IC north of 79th Street as well as the St. Charles Airline, since CN would presumably use the EJ&E for its freight trains. As far as I know, there has been no actual work on this project since other CREATE jobs have taken precedence. The actual removal of the St. Charles line was a pet project of Mayor Daley. Since Rahm took over, it has fallen off the city's wish list.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (Oct 4, 2016)

Yeah, Rahm reputedly already has major buyers regret on that second term of his.... I don't see a third term, though no idea who will run. Country President Thelma Harper (Toni Preckwinkle - she's stealing Thelma's pearls and fashion) has her sights on national office (or maybe Springfield) since mayor is a terminal position (i.e. you ain't goin' no further in elected office from that position) so she's out.

I don't see an advantage to running MED trains to Union - it's farther from all the in-city connections (i.e. indoor connections to the Red and Blue lines, etc) and jobs/entertainment than Union. I also don't see a huge market for convention goers from O'Hare to McPlace either. South Shore trains might make more sense - but even then most of the riders are local commuters.

CN has done, and continues to do, regular maintenance work on their tracks, so I don't think anything is imminent there either.

I'm not sure if having the el to Roseland would have helped - the south side in that area was heavily block busted by realtors in the 60's and 70's. But that's another forum.


----------



## bretton88 (Oct 5, 2016)

The gold line does have some momentum in Chicago. Emmanuel has latched onto it for cheap political points so it's getting some serious consideration as a cheap way to serve the south side better.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (Oct 7, 2016)

bretton88 said:


> The gold line does have some momentum in Chicago. Emmanuel has latched onto it for cheap political points so it's getting some serious consideration as a cheap way to serve the south side better.


Only because there is no money to actually do anything.


----------



## neroden (Oct 8, 2016)

You'll notice the common element in ALL these proposals -- some of which date to the 1980s -- is to run the "inner part" of Metra Electric at "subway" frequencies with fare integration with the CTA. This is such a no-brainer that it's embarasing that it hasn't been done yet. It costs next to nothing. Though it would have been simpler if they'd done it back when Metra inherited the IC system which was *already* running at subway frequencies (Metra reduced frequencies) and which had faregates and "subway" pricing and so on.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (Oct 11, 2016)

neroden said:


> You'll notice the common element in ALL these proposals -- some of which date to the 1980s -- is to run the "inner part" of Metra Electric at "subway" frequencies with fare integration with the CTA. This is such a no-brainer that it's embarasing that it hasn't been done yet. It costs next to nothing. Though it would have been simpler if they'd done it back when Metra inherited the IC system which was *already* running at subway frequencies (Metra reduced frequencies) and which had faregates and "subway" pricing and so on.


Not really true. All new stations would be required to separate the suburban from the "subway" since they share platforms, at least at local/express stations. In addition, another platform would be required at Van Buren since there are only three tracks there and then separation at Randolph would be a mess. In addition, I suspect that ADA would be triggered by a "conversion" which would mean rebuilding a few of the South Chicago stations and certainly 18th, 27th, 59th, etc. It's just not as straightforward as people like to claim it is.

I think the IC reduced frequencies when they switched to the highliners since they had higher capacity than the single level cars (and ridership was going way down anyways) - I don't remember them ever running more frequently than they do now and I've been riding MED since it was the IC.



MisterUptempo said:


> The original plans for the Dan Ryan Red Line actually called for the line to split in two south of 95th Street - one branch running in the median of the Bishop Ford Freeway, terminating around 103rd and Stony Island, the other branch running in the median of Interstate 57, terminating at 119th Street and Ashland. You're right about getting transportation out to Roseland. I wonder whether having the Red Line run through the area far earlier might have saved Roseland from an unfortunate cycle of decline.


Was thinking about this, unfortunately, several neighborhoods with arguably better transit (Englewood, Woodlawn, etc) also declined, so there's more to it than just transit access. As an aside, there was a theory about Watts in LA, that it had been at the center, more or less, of the electric railway network and their elimination caused Watts to be cut off, as well as being far from the Freeways, creating job losses and being an indirect cause of the riots.


----------



## Eric S (Oct 11, 2016)

Why would new platforms be necessary if the only change is running trains more frequently? (Ignoring for the moment Van Buren Street and Millennium stations)


----------



## Metra Electric Rider (Oct 12, 2016)

Eric S said:


> Why would new platforms be necessary if the only change is running trains more frequently? (Ignoring for the moment Van Buren Street and Millennium stations)


Most of the proposals are for adding faregates (removed about ten years ago - were always a hassle due to South Shore Line using stations and fare jumpers which required conductor checks anyway - Metra removed them and saved maintenance on them) for the "subway" services. Since the suburban and "subway" (maybe it should be "metro") service would have to be fare segregated new platforms and stations would be required to separate the two groups of fare payment (which would make for a total of three payment types, CTA Ventra cards, Metra tickets/Ventra App and NICTD ticketing, on the line).

Just increasing frequencies, no, no changes at all. I'm all in favor of simply increasing frequency, especially after 7:20 when the trains are hourly (the bus services can still be standing room only at those hours), later evening services and a few more during the day to fill in the gaps and more Sunday service - Saturdays are only slightly reduced from weekday service.


----------

