Comments on: Instead of extending the Red Line, some see promise in the Metra Electric

By: TRPCLRMNTCST

TRPCLRMNTCST — Mon, 09 Jul 2018 21:29:00 +0000

Important to note that the development along the metra electric is already transit oriented (has been for over a hundred years). the possibility of the revitalized transit line improving the area is ten fold over the oppressive and depressing scene that is the dan ryan redline

By: writing some stuff

writing some stuff — Mon, 09 Jul 2018 19:16:00 +0000

Mildly irritating but still related issue is you can’t get a $10 weekend two day pass for Metra Electric in 2018? Every other Metra line is included but not the South Lakeshore line.

This would start bringing money in and eventually the added ridership to fund the additional station or maybe even a spur line station to the far South? Ventra is a great thing as far as it goes, but the CTA/Metra/Bus line lack of synergy really becomes frustratingly apparent from 11 PM to 5 AM?

By: southsidecyclist

southsidecyclist — Wed, 20 Jun 2018 21:15:00 +0000

In reply to david vartanoff. I knew there had to have been a station on 130th street. IMHO a station could be built at 130th and Indiana for a modest cost. Or have a bus line that runs from the Riverdale area to the Blue Island line station at 121st and Michigan. That's a 5-7 minute ride. It will help the rest of Roseland by taking bus traffic off Michigan avenue from the 111/115 and 119 routes.

By: Harvey Kahler

Harvey Kahler — Mon, 18 Jun 2018 21:12:00 +0000

I failed to mention the funding issue which is the gorilla in the room with fare integration, even if the technology is available. Metra gets none of the sales tax revenue collected in the City; yet Metra serves 79 stations and terminals within city limits and brings almost 260,000 commuters downtown each day, about half of the number of CTA rail boardings. A purchase of Metra Electric services to South Chicago, Blue Island, and intermediate stations by the CTA would relieve a burden for the suburbs; but increase the operating cost for the CTA for two routes rather than for a redundant extension of one. Expanded rail service would allow a reduction in both Pace and CTA bus operations and costs.

By: Harvey Kahler

Harvey Kahler — Thu, 14 Jun 2018 22:37:00 +0000

I’m glad the more economical idea of improving Metra Electric service as an alternative to the CTA’s self-serving Red Line Extension has gained an audience. Many of the positive aspects were mentioned.

Mike Payne’s original idea required segregation of City from suburban Metra services, eliminating the integration still possible today. Turnstiles and fences would pose architectural problems and possible elimination of suburban Metra train stops.

The Idea of converting local services to CTA equipment not only would require a costly fleet of cars, but also conversion to a lower voltage 3rd-rail electrification and signaling that are incompatible. Moreover, this would violate FRA standards for separation of heavy rail and rapid transit operations.

The most expedient program would be for a CTA purchase of service from Metra for South Chicago and Blue Island routes and intermediate stations – two routes for much less than the cost of one. This avoids the current issue of coordinating fares and division of revenue between Metra and CTA. Metra has sufficient equipment for more frequent all-day service and is close to implementing PTC. In order to be compatible with CTA and Metra, Ventra cards can be used to issue a proof of payment card for onboard inspection rather than unlocking a turnstile. Suburban passengers can board or alight at any City station without restriction and use the Metra mobile app for passage. As I understand it, the Metra app is not currently compatible with tapping in on CTA buses and turnstiles.