Hyde Park Urbanist

Is the Gold Line More of a Shelbyville Idea?

Yeah, maybe I need to sell this a different way when I introduce the idea to people.  "Never mind.  The Gold Line's more of a..."  Not Shelbyville, though.  Oh, I know.  "The Gold Line might not be right for Chicago.  It's probably more of a Rio de Janeiro idea..."

RTA Projects Include Southeast Chicago Study

From the RTA list of submitted projects (.pdf):

City of Chicago

South Lakefront Corridor Transit Study: This project will study a range of transit service options in the South Lakefront Corridor, an area that extends from the Stevenson Expressway on the north to 95th Street on the south and from the Dan Ryan Expressway and Cottage Grove on the west to Lake Michigan on the east.  The City will undertake this work as a first step in identifying alternatives that would improve public transportation services for better access to jobs and other activities, and would lead to enhanced economic vitality and quality of life for the communities served.  The overall goal of the study is to recommend one or two candidate projects with the high net benefits for a more rigorous evaluation that would take place within the federal New Starts process.

Hmmm.  What project fits that geography?  This is how something like the Gold Line gets going-- a line item in a list of transit studies.  A list of public hearings on these projects is here (.pdf).  You can leave a comment for the RTA about these projects here (e-mail). 

A lengthy article (with maps) promoting the Gold Line is here.  Arguments that transit officials should consider include:
1) Densely populated areas of southeast Chicago should enjoy rail transit equivalent to densely populated areas on the north and west sides of the city and
2) Employees in southeast Chicago suffer from longer commutes than most areas of our region and rail transit would mitigate that inequity (see map).

Fare Media & the Gold Line

CTA Tattler pulled an interesting section out of the CTA press release concerning the conversion of fare media from CTA-issued cards to typical credit cards:

The farecard would be a smart card containing a computer chip that allows customers to pay a fare and also serves as a standard credit or debit card tied to a customer's bank or credit card account. A prepaid card could provide the option for customers who choose not to have the card tied to a bank account.

I'm not sure what that "prepaid card" would resemble, actually, but I assume that the CTA and/or currency exchanges could sell prepaid cards much as they do now.  The only difference would be the replacement of a magnetic strip with a smart chip, I guess.

Lifted from the comments to my Wednesday fare card article, JJ writes:

I don't feel like we'd necessarily need the Gold Line if there were universal fare. That's really my only issue with Metra--I don't want to pay a cash fare when I have a CTA card sitting in my wallet.

Just off the top of my head, I'd guess there are four chief issues regarding a trip that uses both Metra and the CTA:

1) Do the services cross paths?  The Gold Line would have zero effect on this.  It simply augments Metra/CTA service connections that already exist.  One could imagine working the Gold Line into the Central Area Action Plan by taking it under Monroe to the proposed West Loop Transportation Center, but the present connections make the Gold Line quite viable.

2) Can you use one fare medium on both Metra and the CTA?  Right now, no.  But if credit cards become the fare medium, then definitely yes.

3) Can you transfer from CTA vehicles to Metra vehicles (and vice-versa) for a quarter?  Now, no.  And the fare medium is separate from this issue. 

4) Is Metra's frequency of service enough that you wouldn't have to consult a schedule for a combined CTA/Metra trip?  During rush hours, probably.  But if the Metra trains ran every 10 minutes all day, then yes.

The twin pillars of the Gold Line are #3 and #4-- 10-minute service and 25-cent transfers.  With those enhancements, we'd have el-level train service without building any new tracks. 

But each of the four items contribute and each of us places a different value on each of the items.  Like JJ, a single fare medium is pretty important to me.  I'd probably use Metra a lot more if I could use my credit card, even if service were unchanged.  Certainly during rush hours.  Since I have to go past a Metra station to catch the #6 bus, anytime I saw riders gathered on the platform during the day I might figure I'd be better off catching the train.  (Photo credit)

The difference between $1.75 and 25 cents for a Metra/CTA transfer is relatively unimportant to me because I figure I'd generally save 10 minutes taking the train.  I net more than $9 per hour at my job and $9 divided by 6 (60 minutes divided by 10 minutes) gives me that break-even point.  But that $1.50 difference is very important to some people.  Even with me, it's a matter of principle.  It's mostly an accident of history that Metra runs the South Chicago lines.  Northsiders get rail transit without the added expense, so why shouldn't I?

Again, different folks value each of those four items differently.  Thing is, rail transit thrives on volume.  Fixed costs are high and marginal costs per rider are low, relative to buses.  Satisfy the folks who care about #1 and #2 and #3 and then it's much easier to justify #4-- the 10-minute service.  The Gold Line's package of improvements will produce great synergy.

CTA Tattler

The CTA Tattler has a new location.  That's a daily stop for me.

Tattler's Kevin O'Neil will have 45 minutes with CTA President Richard Rodriguez next week and was soliciting questions to ask this morning.  He also passed on the news that year-over-year ridership slipped during May, led by a decrease during rush hours (which suggests unemployment).  Weekend rider was still up, though. 

I'd especially suggest checking out this week's post on the CTA's rail extension plans for the Red, Orange and Yellow Lines.  Please note that each of these three enhancements will cost far more than the Gold Line proposal and create 4, 1 and 1 new rail stations, respectively.  They're important improvements, but none of these areas has the kind of proven transit ridership our neighborhoods do.

Complete the Advertisement

Chicago 2016 paid for an advertisement in the Herald this week.  The idea is that Olympics supporters should cut out the ad and post it in their front windows so the international visitors will think the neighborhood supports Chicago's bid.  I'd suggest clipping the advertisement and then completing it by drawing a big black circle with a line thru it, bold enough to be visible from the street, as below.  Or, if you prefer not to buy the Herald, you can always visit this webpage and print out your own.

The Olympics

On Thursday, Crain's reported that Olympics 2016 had come to an agreement with the Communities for an Equitable Olympics.  As many of you may remember, CEO is an association of groups organized to obtain legacy projects so our neighborhoods will be stronger after the Olympics are over.  As Crain's put it:

If Chicago is chosen to host the 2016 Olympics, it will require a multibillion-dollar buildout of sports venues and a village for athletes, which will be turned into private housing after the games. Community groups had been pressuring the city and the bid committee for guarantees that residents of neighborhoods directly affected by the events would share in the economic benefits of the games and would not be displaced by development.

Chicago 2016 agreed to set aside 30% of the Olympic Village for affordable housing, using a variety of tax credits and vouchers.

The bid committee also agreed that a minimum of 25% of the contracting and procurement would go to firms owned by minorities or people with disabilities and another 5% to women-owned firms, standard set-asides for city contracts. But Lori Healey, president of the bid committee, who led the negotiations, said the goal was to top Atlanta’s mark of awarding 40% of contracts to minority firms when that city hosted 1996 Summer Games.

Affordable housing and minority set-asides were two of the three major demands from CEO.  The third was the Gold Line transit proposal.  So, what happened to the transit component?

The deal doesn’t address transportation, such as increased train service to the South Side neighborhoods where venues would be located. Ms. Healey said the bid committee could not make such an agreement because “we don’t directly impact transit funding.”

Ms. Healey is right, of course.  Never in the history of Chicago Olympics have transit improvements been funded.  On the other hand, no Olympics in Chicago has ever not funded transit, either, since this would be our first Olympics.  She would have been just as accurate to state that they don't do affordable housing or minority set-asides. 

Olympics 2016 could decide to fund whatever legacy projects they wanted and they've simply chosen not to do anything for transit.  Out of the billions that will be spent on the Olympics in Chicago, apparently nothing could be set aside for this or other neighborhood capital improvements like dedicated bike lanes.

Olympics 2016 has given our neighborhoods zero reason to believe they'll leave us better off than we are now.  We should oppose the Olympics and I'm available for protests.

(The Facebook group for No Games is here.)

Southside Rail Transit Gets Some Press

The newest issue of the Chicago Weekly features a cover article by Sam Feldman entitled "Next Stop: The future of the CTA on the South Side".  It's all about proposed rail enhancements-- the Red Line extension to 130th Street, a Green Line stop somewhere between 18th St. and Cermak, the Orange Line exension to Ford City and a little thing we like to call the Gold Line.

The Gold Line portion of the article focuses on the proposal itself.  However, anyone can come up with a plan, but it takes teams of people to get something like a rail enhancement done.  The organizers & leaders at SOUL deserve just as much credit as I do and our local politicians are moving this along nicely.

Gold Line Advocacy

There'll be some opportunities to hold some community meetings about the Gold Line transit proposal that SOUL is promoting, but right now we're concentrating on informing & getting support from our elected officials.  That's gone so well so far that we haven't needed to assemble any large groups to urge them on.

Ald. Hairston arranged a meeting on Monday for staff of several local politicians and we presented the Gold Line proposal to about a dozen people.  Aldermen Jackson and Preckwinkle sent representatives, as did state Rep. Currie, state Sen. Raoul, Congressman Jackson, Senator Durbin and the Chicago Dep't of Transportation.  A couple minor issues were raised, but the meeting went very well and a couple of the staff, whose jobs are usually to keep people away from their bosses, told us privatedly that they'd try to get us appointments to make our pitch.  (License info for graphic here.)

Tuesday night, SOUL arranged a delegation to attend the RTA southside regional 2009 budget hearing and two of our people spoke on the Gold Line's behalf, with Ald. Preckwinkle also sending a representative to extend her praise for the proposal.  Our delegation of about twenty people dominated the audience and the RTA master of ceremonies praised our diligence, especially the cost estimates for our proposal that Linda Thisted has assembled from experts.

I'm not going to pretend that this is some kind of slam-dunk; we still have Metra to talk to.  But, the early stages of this advocacy have gone as well as it could.  I'm very grateful to have an organization like SOUL leading the charge on something that's so special to me.

Gray & Gold

As you may remember, I've been working with a power organization called SOUL (Southsiders Organized for Unity & Liberation) to advance the Gray Line Lite rail transit proposal.  SOUL is then part of a coalition called CEO (Communities for an Equitable Olympics) which is demanding a communities benefits agreement with the folks promoting the 2016 Olympics.  This transit proposal, which I've been working on for several years now, has been adopted by CEO as one of its Olympics legacy projects.

SOUL, including me, realizes we need to start calling this something besides the Gray Line, so we've been bandying around some other names.  Internally, we've been jokingly referring to it as the Soul Train, but "Gold Line" will probably become the operational name for the project.  That brings in the Olympics angle and suggests that southeast Chicago will, sooner or later, place first.

(Quick refresher: the Gold Line would make two changes to the Metra South Chicago branch, which runs from Millenium Station thru Hyde Park and then along the lake to 93rd Street.  Trains would run every ten minutes and fares would be integrated into the CTA structure so that we could transfer to buses for a quarter.)

I spent last week learning about leadership in a SOUL-associated training course.  The course is based on the Saul Alinsky model of organizing so now I have the same resources to draw on as Barack Obama, if you overlook his law degree, intellect, eloquence, good looks and wife.  Oddly enough, the training was held at a Cedar Lake, Indiana, bible retreat-- hence the photo here of a duck blind on the lake.  (Those are fake ducks, btw., a fact I learned during an embarrassing moment.)  Anyway, last week's posts were written ahead of time, which was important because our online access was spotty and they kept us busy.  I have plenty of catching up on the news to do.

The Gold Line project is advancing along.  We've gotten endorsements now from Alderman Hairston, who's been arranging meetings for us with important officials, as well as Alderman Preckwinkle, state Rep. Currie, state Rep.-elect Burns, state Sen. Raoul, the Hyde Park-Kenwood Community Conference and the head of the Hyde Park Chamber of Commerce.  A couple weeks ago, we also met with Doug Arnot, who reports to Pat Ryan at Chicago 2016 and he said he felt our project was "consistent" with the kinds of legacy projects the Olympics should have.  I'll try to keep my loyal readers updated on future developments.

The Gold Line Proposal

(Gray Line is the name Mike Payne from Chatham has given to a similar but somewhat more ambitious proposal than mine.  You can read about his idea here.  Mike's been indefatigable about pushing his proposal and we owe him a great debt, but the name of the proposal below was changed from Gray Line Lite to Gold Line in November of 2008.)

Currently, Metra offers commuter rail service along the South Chicago line, with trains running to and from the Loop every 20 minutes during rush hours and hourly service at other times.  Using the same rail tracks, these neighborhoods along the lake would be served by the equivalent of CTA el lines if two changes were made:

1) Passengers could transfer between the South Chicago line and CTA vehicles for 25 cents with a single fare card. and

2) Service on the South Chicago line was increased to every 10 minutes from 7am to 11am.

The South Chicago line is quite an anomaly.  While it lies completely within the City of Chicago, the line is owned and operated by a commuter rail service agency whose primary concern is transporting suburbanites from their homes to the Loop in the morning and then back home again in the evening.  Their funding comes from a mix of sales taxes collected in the suburbs and state matching funds. Obviously, expecting Metra to pay for increased service is a non-starter.  The likely scenario would probably revolve around the CTA taking over the line but contracting with Metra to run it.

Would this be expensive?  It would take a study to answer that and no one so far has been willing to put together the funding for one, but CTA officials have never told me that they think the long-term costs are prohibitive. Instead, they've expressed interest, even calling this approach "innovative", but their immediate priorities at this cash-strapped agency lie elsewhere.  Since Metra is a suburban agency that simply doesn't run el lines, they have little motivation to pursue this.  The obstacles in our way are short-term political in nature, not long-term financial.

One way of looking at this is to stand back from the present realities and imagine we were starting from scratch.  Would anyone in the region argue that a rail line existing completely within the city should be run by a suburban agency with a separate fare structure requiring a different fare card?  The present situation is the result of historical accidents rather than rational planning, but we don't have to look back very far to see how the region dealt with an analogous situation.

In 1993, the city (not the CTA) paid for, and still owns, the Orange Line.  The city could have set up the Orange Line with entrances separate from other el lines, charging a whole fare for transfers.  Would that have brought in more revenue for the Orange Line?  I doubt it.  By adding the Orange Line to the rest of the CTA system, it made the Orange Line a good choice for more riders.  And, the addition made the entire CTA system more valuable as well because transit users could get to Midway faster.  A CTA study done in 1995 found that public transportation use in the neighborhoods near the Orange Line had increased by 25% and I think we'd see substantial gains along the South Chicago line if it, too, were added to the CTA system.

Also, moving riders by rail can be less expensive than buses if ridership is high enough.  Rail has large fixed expenses, but the variable expenses-- mostly personnel-- can be much less per rider because trains can carry more riders per operator.  Just as importantly, trains move riders more quickly.  A trip from Hyde Park to Randolph Station is about 25 minutes by Metra, but closer to 40 minutes by bus, depending on traffic.  On an operator-hour basis, rail expenses per rider can be substantially less than bus expenses.  And Gold Line marginal costs would not include most of the track maintenance expenses since Metra already has to pay those.  The number of trains on the line would have to be doubled over their rush hour highs, so there would be some capital and maintenance expenses there.  A modest capital investment would lead to sextupling the quantity of daily runs.

The Gold Line would result in some bus route reconfigurations as rail travel would draw riders away from some routes.  (Again, the Orange Line provides a good analogy.  The CTA still runs local bus service along Archer Ave, but express routes were clipped.)  Many southeast Chicago riders take long bus rides west to the Red Line.  The Gold Line would provide a quicker alternative, again resulting in some CTA savings as operator-hours per rider would be reduced.  A quicker trip for CTA customers can be a less expensive service for the CTA to provide.

I'm not going to claim that the Gold Line would save the CTA money.  But I think there's a very good chance that extra expenses will accompany increases in transit usage in the affected neighborhoods and a small increase in transit use elsewhere in the city.  CTA per-ride subsidies may actually be lower.  The long-term financial consideration is not whether the Gold Line would pay for itself, but rather how it would affect the 50/50 split the state mandates for fares and public subsidies.

The map on the right shows that the Gold Line would mostly run through high density neighborhoods.

I've made a case for subsidizing public transit elsewhere, so I'll just make a couple arguments about the advantages to our communities that the Gold Line might bring about. The first is that Chicago has horrible asthma problems and we're pretty sure that more than half of urban air pollution is vehicle exhaust.  Taking the bus cuts pollutants on a per ride basis substantially, but electric rail is the most environmentally-friendly method of travel, except for biking and walking.

The second is that these neighborhoods in southeast Chicago were built with the trolley in mind.  In the automobile age, we struggle mightily with parking issues which affect residents, customers and employees.  Trains are much more popular than buses as a method of transit because their schedules are largely unaffected by personal vehicle traffic.  Train stations are usually more comfortable places to wait.  Development along Chicago's el lines over the last 15 years confirms this.  Making transit a more pleasant and less costly alternative will gradually decrease the proportion of travelers driving and parking in our neighborhoods.

The stations along the South Chicago line are generally considered safe places to be, so it's not imperative to employ personnel at these stations.  That could make the Gold Line the most cost-efficient el line in the city (besides the Red Line).  Population density along this route looks higher to me than along the Brown Line, probably more like the O'Hare branch of the Blue Line.  These considerations make this branch a better place to start than the Blue Island branch.

Obviously, there are quite a few details to work out, but I'm confident that political will is what we're lacking.  The key components of the Gold Line are 25-cent transfers and 10-minute service.  Any plan which includes those components will greatly improve our neighborhoods.