Far South Siders Weigh in the Proposed Red Line Extension and Metra Conversion

Residents discussed whether they'd accept the Metra solution as a cheaper, quicker route to rapid transit.

Lelea Herring by the Union Pacific tracks near 103rd and Eggleston, the proposed site of a new Red Line station. Photo: John Greenfield
Lelea Herring by the Union Pacific tracks near 103rd and Eggleston, the proposed site of a new Red Line station. Photo: John Greenfield

[Streetsblog Chicago editor John Greenfield publishes a weekly transportation column in the Chicago Reader. We syndicate the column on Streetsblog Chicago after it comes out online.]

Thanks to Donald Trump, the funding outlook for the long awaited, $2.3 billion Red Line extension looks pretty bleak right now.

The proposal to lengthen the spine of Chicago’s el system from its current 95th Street terminus to the south end of the city has been talked about since the Nixon era, but in recent years the project picked up speed. On January 26 Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced the planned route, winding 5.3-miles across Roseland and Pullman to Altgeld Gardens, with stations proposed near 103rd, 111th, Michigan at 116th, and 130th streets.

At the time the CTA was hoping to apply to the Federal Transit Administration for upwards of $1 billion from its New Starts grant program, the main source of federal funding for public transportation expansion projects. But on February 11 when the Donald released the legislative outline for his much ballyhooed $1.5 trillion infrastructure bill, it was revealed that the plan called for only $200 billion in federal money for infrastructure – largely highway expansion – with the rest expected to come from local and state governments, plus private investments.

Moreover, much of that $200 billion would come from cuts to Amtrak and transit funding. To make matters worse, Trump’s 2019 budget proposal, released the same day, calls for slashing $3.7 billion from New Starts. It looks like it might be impossible to fund the extension until a Chicago-friendly Democrat is in the White House again.

But for decades transit experts and advocates have pointed to a much cheaper alternative for bringing rapid transit to the far south side. The Metra Electric District line runs more or less parallel to the Red Line and makes eight stops in the neighborhood that would be served by the extension. While the Electric Line runs only sporadically during nonrush hours, boosting its frequency to, say, every 15 minutes and integrating its fare system with the CTA would make it much more useful and affordable. And while the Red Line project breaks down to $434 million per mile, local policy analyst Daniel Kay Hertz has estimated that the Metra conversion would cost only $27 million a mile.

map of Metra Electric district and proposed Red Line extension
A map shows the proposed Red Line extension in yellow, and nearby existing Metra Electric lines in blue. Image: The Chicago Dispatch

Even in a best-case scenario, construction of the new Red Line elevated tracks and stations – which would require purchasing some 150 properties — wouldn’t begin until 2022, and service wouldn’t start until 2026. The Electric Line conversion, which would involve retrofitting existing infrastructure, could doubtless be accomplished much sooner.

Granted, a major advantage of the Red Line expansion over the Metra conversion would be the ability to take a one-seat ride from the far south side to any Red station on the north side. And a sticking point of the Electric Line scheme is that Metra and the CTA aren’t particularly good at collaborating. But, as Whet Moser discussed in a recent Chicago Magazine article, in light of the grim federal funding picture, recently transportation pundits like myself have noted that the Electric Line solution might still be the better approach.

However, it seems like this conversation has been missing some important voices: those of the residents who’d stand to gain the most from the new el service. Would they be willing to trade a longer Red Line for cheap, frequent Metra service if it meant getting the improvements sooner than later? To find out, I rode the el to 95th and traced the path of the proposed extension, buttonholing neighbors near the planned station locations.

From 95th the new tracks would run south along the Dan Ryan, and then bend west along the north side of I-57 for about half a mile. Near Eggleston Avenue the Red Line would head south along the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad corridor.

A rendering of the 103rd Street Red Line stop. Image: CTA
A rendering of the 103rd Street Red Line stop. Image: CTA

At 103rd and Eggleston I met Lelea Herring, a retired surgical technician who lives nearby. She regularly takes the 103rd Street bus to the Red Line, rides north to Roosevelt, and then takes another bus west to Damen to see her doctor on the Illinois Medical District campus.

Herring was somewhat familiar with the Red Line extension plan. “It’s convenient for me because it brings the train closer.” But when I told her that it wouldn’t be ready to ride until at least 2026 she wondered, “Oh Lord, will I even be here?” However, she noted that rapid transit service on the Electric line wouldn’t do her much good either since, the 103rd Street/Rosemoor Metra station is about the same distance from her home as the 95th Street terminal.

Around 108th the new Red Line route would cross to the east side of the Union Pacific tracks and continue south. Near the planned 111th station location I encountered Bruce Huskin, 58, who lives just south and does handyman work. While he’s enthusiastic about the possibility of having an el stop right by his house, he said inexpensive, frequent service on the Electric Line would also be useful for getting downtown, since he could ride a bus about a mile east to the 111th/Pullman Metra stop. “Whichever comes first, I’d be really excited for.”

After 111th, the Red Line would continue to hug the Union Pacific line as the railroad turns southeast and climbs an embankment to an overpass near 116th and Michigan. There I met Anthony Brown, 34, who lives near 115th and State and serves as a Safe Passages worker for Curtis Elementary, which is right by his home. He said his neighbors and coworkers are looking forward to getting a Red Line stop nearby.

Anthony Brown. Photo: John Greenfield
Anthony Brown. Photo: John Greenfield

“We’d kind of given up because we hadn’t heard anything for a while, but now the city is buying properties and asking questions,” Brown said. On February 13 the CTA held an open house about the extension at nearby Gwendolyn Brooks College Prep. “That’s something a lot of us are really happy to see.”

On the other hand, Brown said that if the Red Line extension wouldn’t open for another eight years or more, the Electric conversion would be a good consolation prize. It would still be fairly convenient for him since the 115th/Kensington station is about a ten-minute walk east from his house. And because the current Metra fare from that station to the Loop is $5.50, paying the $2.50 CTA fare instead would be a significant savings.

After Michigan, the Red Line extension would continue southeast, cross the Electric Line and join the South Shore Line corridor on its way to the future 130th Street station, located just northeast of Altgeld Gardens. Residents of that community would benefit greatly from the new el stop, since it would cut an estimated 20 minutes from their downtown commutes. The nearest Chicago Metra stop is at 121st and Michigan, about a ten-minute ride from the middle of the housing project via the #34 South Michigan bus.

At the point where the South Shore tracks pass under 130th, the street is a high-speed four-lane road with no sidewalks and little foot traffic, so I headed west a few blocks to Rosebud Farms grocery store to talk with locals. There I spoke with Sam McCarthy, 33, a construction worker who lives three miles northwest at 122nd and Elizabeth, right by the Electric Line’s Racine station.

Although the Metra solution would give him inexpensive, frequent train access, he favors the Red Line extension. “[The Electric conversion] would be a good idea too, but it wouldn’t create as many construction jobs.”

Obviously the pros and cons of the Red Line project and the Metra Electric conversion depend on where you live and where you need to go. But the latter definitely deserves further consideration. Far south siders shouldn’t have to wait until the Trump administration is just a bad memory before they get rapid transit service.

  • Jeremy

    How many miles of Metra Electric track would need to be upgraded? The $27 million/mile number applies to more miles than the $434 million/mile Red Line project.

    I think the Metra Electric upgrade should be done in conjunction with 2 or 3 east-west BRT lines connecting the ME with the Rock Island line. That should make a real difference in transportation access on the south side.

  • johnaustingreenfield

    More on the subject from the Daniel Kay Hertz post:

  • Dennis McClendon

    Four random people. That’s how we assess transit proposals nowadays? Where’s some actual origin-destination data for these neighborhoods?

  • johnaustingreenfield

    It’s hard to cover all the bases in a thousand-word newspaper column (this version is a little longer.) Since none of the recent coverage I’ve seen of the Metra conversion idea included input from the residents who would be most affected by the decision, these conversations shed some more light on the subject. It would be great to see some origin-destination data as well.

  • Harvey Kahler

    As was pointed out, there is a great discrepancy between Metra and CTA one-way fares which has been instrumental in the spiraling decline from Metra’s predecessor’s once-substantial ridership and service frequency before the CTA took over buses and the L-subways in 1947. With the CTA, one could transfer between its buses and trains at a reduced cost not available to customers of what eventually became the Metra Electric District. CTA exploited this fare discrepancy by instituting competing express buses.

    Metra fares have risen on the same model for many years; and Metra just this fall began a study of its costs and how that relates to fare structures. Way back around 1970, the IDOT Office of Research & Development found that while CTA passenger-mile costs were low, thanks to rush hour standees, suburban diesel lines had a substantially lower seat-mile cost; and the IC Suburban (Metra Electric’s predecessor) seat-mile cost was about the same as CTA rail.

    “Converting” the Metra Electric to CTA services between Millennium Station (downtown Chicago at Randolph & Michigan) and both South Chicago an Blue Island may cost only $9M initially for both lines, not some $500M. CTA could purchase service provided by Metra trains and crews and maintaining its stations, tracks, signals, and electric power system “at cost” since this would relieve Metra’s unfunded burden to serve City neighborhoods. Granted this would increase the CTA’s budget; and additional or increased revenue souces would be needed as an alternative to a general fare increase.

    Some of the CTA’s cost for the Metra Electric service purchase could be offset by reducing competing CTA bus services, especially on the Southeast Side. Furthermore, 93rd-95th and 103rd buses don’t have to be routed to 95th to be better coordinated with NICTD South Shore and Metra University Park and Joliet trains.

    Pace could save money by going to 115th & Kensington rather than 95th & Dan Ryan. Some Pace customers could transfer to Blue Island trains at 121st rather than 95th for a faster trip downtown and convenient to lakefront destinations.

    About $9M would go for purchase and installation of proof of payment despensers and Ventra and Metra ticket vending machines for 36 stations. On-board ticket inspection would allow coordination for travel between Chicago and Metra suburban zones without costly reconstuction to segregate City and suburban trains for turnstile fare control. Ventra card use would register the appropriate initial ot transfer fare debit.

    Metra has equipment for about 10 trains for the current 20-minute peak headways, but would need to add five more (assuming 2-car trains with 260 seats) for about $60M for 15-minute headways; but interim service would possible until new trains arrive.

    Another cost will be for elevators at 13 stations and ramps at 6 others for ADA compliance that I’m guessing might run to $30M. This is another reason in addition to unfunded service to Chicago neighborhoods for Metra to discontinue services to South Chicago and Blue Island in the face of declining ridership in the current and unsustainable situation.

    IMO Metra’s tracks are in better shape than CTA’s, provide a smoother ride, and don’t need extraordinary improvement to begin as a CTA service.

  • Harvey Kahler

    CTA proposed closing and “consolidating” Red Line stations with more boarding passengers than the projected boardings at 103rd and 111th on the extension – just saying. The whole purpose of the extension is to poach suburban riders from Metra with lower combined CTA-Pace fares to fill seats on the south end of the Red Line. Never mind that Metra has a better farebox recovery than either CTA or Pace. Never mind that flat fares represent the cost for an average distance traveled of about seven miles, and these South Suburban trips are three times longer. Some of the declining ridership on the Red Line is due to the lower fare and one-seat ride on buses rather than the cost and time to transfer to the Red Line as originally planned, the same as affects the Metra Electric.

  • Harvey Kahler

    Roseland still as north-south routes on Michigan and Halsted to 95th; but 93rd-95th and 103rd buses can be run straight through for better cross-town service and Metra connections rather than funneling into 95th.

  • Chicago60609

    No where is there a mention of the depopulation of the south side, and whether it is wise to spend any money on an expansion of rapid transit until Chicago makes the structural reforms necessary to halt its population decline.

  • rohmen

    Though it’s far from the only issue, the fact that jobs have left that area, and sufficient transportation options do not exist to get people to other job centers in the loop and elsewhere, has certainly played a role. In other words, this is arguably a structural reform aimed in part to halt population decline, though I do think it’s fair to ask whether improvements to the Metra Electric could accomplish the same thing cheaper.

  • neroden

    Really, the Metra Electric *track* is just fine. The station platforms, which are crumbling, would need to be fixed; quite a lot of handicapped access would need to be added.

    And the fare system would need to be integrated, which is actually the most important point, and doesn’t cost anything.

  • david vartanoff

    Hertz and others are right. Puting ventra vendors and readers on MED platforms programmed to honor CTA fares as if MED is the L, and running trains at better frequencies is cheap. Adding trains down to Hegewisch and putting stations between there and Kensington will cost vastly less than building a ull new elevated AND NO houses businesses need be demolished.
    As to the number of interviewees, of course a wider sample is better; but the major points are clear. One person hopes for “more construction jobs” which is nice but why employ them to build the wrong thing?
    Sixty years ago South Shore Line trains stopped at a station exactly where CTA wants to build the southern terminal of the RedLine. Put the platforms back and run the trains. Next should be integrating the Rock Island trains from Blue Island into the CTA fare system.
    To the commenter who asks about building transit into under populated areas, much of the South Side was demolished over the last 60 years–some for the Dan Ryan, some to build the nasty welfare storage bins, some because the areas were torched. What that means in the present is that residents have to travel further to find jobs, see doctors, or shop–which is why more and better transit options are necessary. Even if the entire claimed cost of RedX were in hand today, the money would achieve more benefit integrating MED an RI into the CTA fare structure and running more trains on tracks already owned by Illinois.

  • Hugh Shepard

    Why are there so many people in suits in the rendering?

  • buddah

    The cost for A red line extension could be cut in half if the CTA decided to make it a light rail line but it would be pointless to have only one light rail line in Chicago. If the city can decide on other corridors routes ( say western ave, stony island, North Irving park rd, Garfield blvd., 95th st., Cicero ave, etc.) where light rail could be installed it would make the use of light rail lines a more viable option for the city of Chicago.


Roseland Resilient in Face of Decades-Delayed Red Line Extension

The Chicago Transit Authority has been planning an extension of the Red Line from its current terminus at 95th Street for decades and I joined a tour group at the Congress for New Urbanism’s transportation summit last week to see the proposed station locations. Development Communities Project’s board member Phyllis Palmer led the tour because […]