+WorldWhirl So basically it's just a small bridge that goes over the former junction so the trains don't have to wait for clearance? Wow, buzzkill... I thought it would be cooler. I thought they were going to replace the massive curve in the red line tracks up north before Sheridan (if you know where I'm talking about) with straight tracks and take it down a different route/path temporarily to increase the speed rather than slowing down to 5 mph on a tight turn. At least that's what I've been hearing for years from riders and operators, but that plan was WAY more expensive than this little bridge somehow because that would mean totally new paths and different stations, and would create a different traffic pattern boarding at new streets because there would be no turn. I think a new path that totally avoids the brown line (making a whole different Belmont stop let's say two streets down or something of a different street name like Clark Station etc.) is much better than building a bridge that would only really somehow serve the brown line better, not red line? Which means the junction would still be there but just not used, tracks would stay fairly the same I assume. I don't see how removing the obstacle of a junction would help that much more with crowding, if the trains are still going to go fairly slow at some points. I would add new tracks with minimal turns and no sharp curves on the Red Line (formerly northwest union- I know my train history) path, and replace the big turn before Sheridan with a straight track and the red line going on a different path, somehow meeting up with Addison, or maybe at least adding an option of a red line 1 or red line alternate/red line 2 just like the green line splits at some point if riders don't have to use certain stations. Now THAT would cut times MASSIVELY! At least building a 3rd or even 4th rails that would divert a bit away for a while and join back up later. That way you can have lots of more trains going in a similar direction but on different tracks, some alternate connections, and some sticking maybe to the original turn if CTA doesn't completely want to demolish it. Or even cheaper, just make a smoother "bypass" over the sharp turn so that trains don't have to slow down (as much?). Make a smooth bridge just like they would at Belmont go up and over the turn and have the tracks join up at Sheridan somehow, or maybe bypass Sheridan all together (maybe only leave it for Purple Line Express, ooohhh, aahhhh) and make the bridge go all the way to Addison and meet up than making enough time for a smooth decline back to original track level to join up of tracks at some point along the straight tracks before Addison or just at the station, maybe making something beautiful out of the bridges design promoting the Cubs or something (like the BP Bridge at Millenium Park but Cubs logos etc, and usable for trains of course. maybe? By 2020, lol? Lots of $$$$$$$?), and that would just mean some trains avoiding the turn, and some doing it if the turn remains for some trains to still serve Sheridan, but that way trains have a choice and you can run two trains side by side. Still, the outcome is once you get over/ "fly over" the horrendous turn that really slows down trains, the tracks would meet up like I said and at least a minute or more would be saved slowing down before the turn, screeching trains slowly along the turn trying not to derail the trains on this century old track etc.. Again, just my thoughts and options that are better than the bridge at Belmont, avoiding the brown line being the best option with an alternate red line route splitting at one point and converging back together later. That would probably be a lot more money to build totally new portions of tracks above streets, or just a giant tunnel, but that too is probably impossible depending on building codes, digging up streets, and so forth. What do you guys think as long time Chicagoans and commuters like myself? I want to hear!
That proposal called for a 2 track subway to replace a 4 track elevated line, it would cost in excess of 4 billion dollars and mean less capacity on a line that is already reaching its full capacity.
@@tuele4302 Back when the CTA was announcing plans to upgrade the Brown line tracks and stations to make them accessible for disabled riders and add two more cars to the former six, I remember some teenaged guy wrote on an online public message board "We don't need new stations! We need the train for work and school!" I *really* wanted to say that the tracks were so old that they have to *_slow the trains down to a crawl_* so they don't crumble under the strain! But I figured he wouldn't "get it" no matter how it was explained to him...
Instead of operating the Red and Purple lines as 2 seperate lines why not simply extend the red line to Linden and only run the purple line as express? That would elimante the need for seprate trains and crews.
Yeah when I used to work in Evanston, that Howard transfer used to KILL me. Red line would pull in right as the purple line was leaving and vice versa. SO ANNOYING!!!!
To all the comments saying how you don’t like what the CTA is doing y’all need to shut up for real because it is bot benefiting you guys and it’s not putting money in your pockets they are just taking the steps necessary to improve the rail system and if you don’t like it then don’t take the CTA let them be great and let them do whatever they can to keep their system efficient I don’t know why you guys are complaining like if you want a cooler transit system then go to MTA but the CTA is doing a fantastic job of keeping the system updated
@@seanharan9521 No I do not, but I know that they are not going to entirely destroy the old infrastructure and spend many billions on underground subways when it isn't needed. Especially after literally modernizing the elevated infrastructure. That seems very counterintuitive.
I believe they said this new development can last between 60-80 years. So this whole project is make something that will have a shorter lifespan than what was already in place.
@@pomerlain8924 Well what's in place *IS* crumbling and trains have to tip-toe along/over them so as not to cause a collapse, so what do you think should be done? (Current state of _Loyola_ train tracks... www.ctatattler.com/images/crumblingviaduct.gif )
I dont like how they keep doing this. First in Uptown and now Lakeview putting those walls up on the tracks it no longer looks like the famous el we grew up with and that Chicago is famous for! It looks boring now. They should have them look the same. Better yet they should have gone with the double Decker tracks like New York has all over it looks so cool!
So basically it's just a small bridge that goes over the former junction so the trains don't have to wait for clearance? Wow, buzzkill... I thought it would be cooler. I thought they were going to replace the massive curve in the red line tracks up north before Sheridan (if you know where I'm talking about) with straight tracks and take it down a different route/path temporarily to increase the speed rather than slowing down to 5 mph on a tight turn. At least that's what I've been hearing for years from riders and operators, but that plan was WAY more expensive than this little bridge somehow because that would mean totally new paths and different stations, and would create a different traffic pattern boarding at new streets because there would be no turn. I think a new path that totally avoids the brown line (making a whole different Belmont stop let's say two streets down or something of a different street name like Clark Station etc.) is much better than building a bridge that would only really somehow serve the brown line better, not red line? Which means the junction would still be there but just not used, tracks would stay fairly the same I assume. I don't see how removing the obstacle of a junction would help that much more with crowding, if the trains are still going to go fairly slow at some points. I would add new tracks with minimal turns and no sharp curves on the Red Line (formerly northwest union- I know my train history) path, and replace the big turn before Sheridan with a straight track and the red line going on a different path, somehow meeting up with Addison, or maybe at least adding an option of a red line 1 or red line alternate/red line 2 just like the green line splits at some point if riders don't have to use certain stations. Now THAT would cut times MASSIVELY! At least building a 3rd or even 4th rails that would divert a bit away for a while and join back up later. That way you can have lots of more trains going in a similar direction but on different tracks, some alternate connections, and some sticking maybe to the original turn if CTA doesn't completely want to demolish it. Or even cheaper, just make a smoother "bypass" over the sharp turn so that trains don't have to slow down (as much?). Make a smooth bridge just like they would at Belmont go up and over the turn and have the tracks join up at Sheridan somehow, or maybe bypass Sheridan all together (maybe only leave it for Purple Line Express, ooohhh, aahhhh) and make the bridge go all the way to Addison and meet up than making enough time for a smooth decline back to original track level to join up of tracks at some point along the straight tracks before Addison or just at the station, maybe making something beautiful out of the bridges design promoting the Cubs or something (like the BP Bridge at Millenium Park but Cubs logos etc, and usable for trains of course. maybe? By 2020, lol? Lots of $$$$$$$?), and that would just mean some trains avoiding the turn, and some doing it if the turn remains for some trains to still serve Sheridan, but that way trains have a choice and you can run two trains side by side. Still, the outcome is once you get over/ "fly over" the horrendous turn that really slows down trains, the tracks would meet up like I said and at least a minute or more would be saved slowing down before the turn, screeching trains slowly along the turn trying not to derail the trains on this century old track etc.. Again, just my thoughts and options that are better than the bridge at Belmont, avoiding the brown line being the best option with an alternate red line route splitting at one point and converging back together later. That would probably be a lot more money to build totally new portions of tracks above streets, or just a giant tunnel, but that too is probably impossible depending on building codes, digging up streets, and so forth. What do you guys think as long time Chicagoans and commuters like myself? I want to hear!
I could be wrong. But I think any effort to straighten the Sheridan curve is a long way off. It seems that a lot of the real estate in a straighter path has been recently built or renovated. Buildings that are older look like they still have high levels of occupancy. That would not be going on if there was a pending deal to buy those properties. It would start to look like a ghost town.
AGAIN A 2 TRACK SUBWAY CANT REPLACE A 4 TRACK EL THAT'S ALREADY AT OTS CAPACITY AND THE BRIDGE IS FINE THIS IS WHY THEY ARE USING PHASES. TO BUILD WHAT THEY CAN WITH THE FUNDING THEY HAVE
Thats sad. I loved looking at the tracks they way they are and the surrounding area! This city keeps ruining too much of what there is to like about it! I wonder if Houndstooth tavern will be gone next
I think this will do very well for CTA customers.
+WorldWhirl So basically it's just a small bridge that goes over the former junction so the trains don't have to wait for clearance? Wow, buzzkill... I thought it would be cooler. I thought they were going to replace the massive curve in the red line tracks up north before Sheridan (if you know where I'm talking about) with straight tracks and take it down a different route/path temporarily to increase the speed rather than slowing down to 5 mph on a tight turn. At least that's what I've been hearing for years from riders and operators, but that plan was WAY more expensive than this little bridge somehow because that would mean totally new paths and different stations, and would create a different traffic pattern boarding at new streets because there would be no turn. I think a new path that totally avoids the brown line (making a whole different Belmont stop let's say two streets down or something of a different street name like Clark Station etc.) is much better than building a bridge that would only really somehow serve the brown line better, not red line? Which means the junction would still be there but just not used, tracks would stay fairly the same I assume. I don't see how removing the obstacle of a junction would help that much more with crowding, if the trains are still going to go fairly slow at some points. I would add new tracks with minimal turns and no sharp curves on the Red Line (formerly northwest union- I know my train history) path, and replace the big turn before Sheridan with a straight track and the red line going on a different path, somehow meeting up with Addison, or maybe at least adding an option of a red line 1 or red line alternate/red line 2 just like the green line splits at some point if riders don't have to use certain stations. Now THAT would cut times MASSIVELY! At least building a 3rd or even 4th rails that would divert a bit away for a while and join back up later. That way you can have lots of more trains going in a similar direction but on different tracks, some alternate connections, and some sticking maybe to the original turn if CTA doesn't completely want to demolish it. Or even cheaper, just make a smoother "bypass" over the sharp turn so that trains don't have to slow down (as much?). Make a smooth bridge just like they would at Belmont go up and over the turn and have the tracks join up at Sheridan somehow, or maybe bypass Sheridan all together (maybe only leave it for Purple Line Express, ooohhh, aahhhh) and make the bridge go all the way to Addison and meet up than making enough time for a smooth decline back to original track level to join up of tracks at some point along the straight tracks before Addison or just at the station, maybe making something beautiful out of the bridges design promoting the Cubs or something (like the BP Bridge at Millenium Park but Cubs logos etc, and usable for trains of course. maybe? By 2020, lol? Lots of $$$$$$$?), and that would just mean some trains avoiding the turn, and some doing it if the turn remains for some trains to still serve Sheridan, but that way trains have a choice and you can run two trains side by side. Still, the outcome is once you get over/ "fly over" the horrendous turn that really slows down trains, the tracks would meet up like I said and at least a minute or more would be saved slowing down before the turn, screeching trains slowly along the turn trying not to derail the trains on this century old track etc.. Again, just my thoughts and options that are better than the bridge at Belmont, avoiding the brown line being the best option with an alternate red line route splitting at one point and converging back together later. That would probably be a lot more money to build totally new portions of tracks above streets, or just a giant tunnel, but that too is probably impossible depending on building codes, digging up streets, and so forth. What do you guys think as long time Chicagoans and commuters like myself? I want to hear!
That proposal called for a 2 track subway to replace a 4 track elevated line, it would cost in excess of 4 billion dollars and mean less capacity on a line that is already reaching its full capacity.
I know, but a bridge isn't any better!
@@michaelundas1212 it is better
2:37
>Video takes place in Chicago
>Shows car with European license plate
Logic 6374929038452628748291038465648191048685371417490/10
I gotta admit the rebuilding of the Wilson Avenue Station and tracks is pretty nice!
Robbi496 yep!
Robbi496 Yeah, for gentrification
@Jaden Is Hatin So it is better to let everything deteriorate, then?
@@tuele4302 Back when the CTA was announcing plans to upgrade the Brown line tracks and stations to make them accessible for disabled riders and add two more cars to the former six, I remember some teenaged guy wrote on an online public message board "We don't need new stations! We need the train for work and school!"
I *really* wanted to say that the tracks were so old that they have to *_slow the trains down to a crawl_* so they don't crumble under the strain! But I figured he wouldn't "get it" no matter how it was explained to him...
@@themirrorsofmymind i guess you don't know the difference between "stations" and "tracks"
Instead of operating the Red and Purple lines as 2 seperate lines why not simply extend the red line to Linden and only run the purple line as express? That would elimante the need for seprate trains and crews.
The Purple Line has much lower ridership per-station and all of its platforms north of Howard can only berth 6-car trains.
Yeah when I used to work in Evanston, that Howard transfer used to KILL me. Red line would pull in right as the purple line was leaving and vice versa. SO ANNOYING!!!!
@@WakkoKakko Extend them for 8 cars and terminate some service at Howard.
wow red purple bypass been in plans since 2014 now in 2021 they constructing the new brown line tracks.
To all the comments saying how you don’t like what the CTA is doing y’all need to shut up for real because it is bot benefiting you guys and it’s not putting money in your pockets they are just taking the steps necessary to improve the rail system and if you don’t like it then don’t take the CTA let them be great and let them do whatever they can to keep their system efficient I don’t know why you guys are complaining like if you want a cooler transit system then go to MTA but the CTA is doing a fantastic job of keeping the system updated
What is RPM phase 2 supposed to be?
complete destruction of the elevated tracks and convert them into proper subways
@@AngelLopez-jl9ep no way, seriously?
@@seanharan9521 absolutely not what is happening
@@predther5652 do you know what it actually is?
@@seanharan9521 No I do not, but I know that they are not going to entirely destroy the old infrastructure and spend many billions on underground subways when it isn't needed. Especially after literally modernizing the elevated infrastructure. That seems very counterintuitive.
If the number of trains on red are increased, perhaps you could reestablish skip stop A-B service and thus speed up trip times
The CTA needs to start from Lawrence to Howard station the project starts later this year and will last until 2025
They might be old but that this line lasted 100 years was a good investment. I doubt if if the new development has the same lifespan.
I believe they said this new development can last between 60-80 years. So this whole project is make something that will have a shorter lifespan than what was already in place.
@@pomerlain8924 Well what's in place *IS* crumbling and trains have to tip-toe along/over them so as not to cause a collapse, so what do you think should be done?
(Current state of _Loyola_ train tracks...
www.ctatattler.com/images/crumblingviaduct.gif )
I dont like how they keep doing this. First in Uptown and now Lakeview putting those walls up on the tracks it no longer looks like the famous el we grew up with and that Chicago is famous for! It looks boring now. They should have them look the same. Better yet they should have gone with the double Decker tracks like New York has all over it looks so cool!
double-decker sounds and looks boring
@@crazyexpresso No its just the opposite
So basically it's just a small bridge that goes over the former junction so the trains don't have to wait for clearance? Wow, buzzkill... I thought it would be cooler. I thought they were going to replace the massive curve in the red line tracks up north before Sheridan (if you know where I'm talking about) with straight tracks and take it down a different route/path temporarily to increase the speed rather than slowing down to 5 mph on a tight turn. At least that's what I've been hearing for years from riders and operators, but that plan was WAY more expensive than this little bridge somehow because that would mean totally new paths and different stations, and would create a different traffic pattern boarding at new streets because there would be no turn. I think a new path that totally avoids the brown line (making a whole different Belmont stop let's say two streets down or something of a different street name like Clark Station etc.) is much better than building a bridge that would only really somehow serve the brown line better, not red line? Which means the junction would still be there but just not used, tracks would stay fairly the same I assume. I don't see how removing the obstacle of a junction would help that much more with crowding, if the trains are still going to go fairly slow at some points. I would add new tracks with minimal turns and no sharp curves on the Red Line (formerly northwest union- I know my train history) path, and replace the big turn before Sheridan with a straight track and the red line going on a different path, somehow meeting up with Addison, or maybe at least adding an option of a red line 1 or red line alternate/red line 2 just like the green line splits at some point if riders don't have to use certain stations. Now THAT would cut times MASSIVELY! At least building a 3rd or even 4th rails that would divert a bit away for a while and join back up later. That way you can have lots of more trains going in a similar direction but on different tracks, some alternate connections, and some sticking maybe to the original turn if CTA doesn't completely want to demolish it. Or even cheaper, just make a smoother "bypass" over the sharp turn so that trains don't have to slow down (as much?). Make a smooth bridge just like they would at Belmont go up and over the turn and have the tracks join up at Sheridan somehow, or maybe bypass Sheridan all together (maybe only leave it for Purple Line Express, ooohhh, aahhhh) and make the bridge go all the way to Addison and meet up than making enough time for a smooth decline back to original track level to join up of tracks at some point along the straight tracks before Addison or just at the station, maybe making something beautiful out of the bridges design promoting the Cubs or something (like the BP Bridge at Millenium Park but Cubs logos etc, and usable for trains of course. maybe? By 2020, lol? Lots of $$$$$$$?), and that would just mean some trains avoiding the turn, and some doing it if the turn remains for some trains to still serve Sheridan, but that way trains have a choice and you can run two trains side by side. Still, the outcome is once you get over/ "fly over" the horrendous turn that really slows down trains, the tracks would meet up like I said and at least a minute or more would be saved slowing down before the turn, screeching trains slowly along the turn trying not to derail the trains on this century old track etc.. Again, just my thoughts and options that are better than the bridge at Belmont, avoiding the brown line being the best option with an alternate red line route splitting at one point and converging back together later. That would probably be a lot more money to build totally new portions of tracks above streets, or just a giant tunnel, but that too is probably impossible depending on building codes, digging up streets, and so forth. What do you guys think as long time Chicagoans and commuters like myself? I want to hear!
I could be wrong. But I think any effort to straighten the Sheridan curve is a long way off. It seems that a lot of the real estate in a straighter path has been recently built or renovated. Buildings that are older look like they still have high levels of occupancy. That would not be going on if there was a pending deal to buy those properties. It would start to look like a ghost town.
AGAIN A 2 TRACK SUBWAY CANT REPLACE A 4 TRACK EL THAT'S ALREADY AT OTS CAPACITY AND THE BRIDGE IS FINE THIS IS WHY THEY ARE USING PHASES. TO BUILD WHAT THEY CAN WITH THE FUNDING THEY HAVE
Thats sad. I loved looking at the tracks they way they are and the surrounding area! This city keeps ruining too much of what there is to like about it! I wonder if Houndstooth tavern will be gone next
Agreed
I can smell the urine just watching this
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂