Sandy Johnston: Interview
“Metra Electric is special, and it doesn’t fit into the paradigm that RTA and Metra have tried to fit it into for the last 35 years.”
TCD: So maybe we should start with this: What’s wrong with the Metra Electric today?
Sandy Johnston: Not enough trains!
I mean, that’s the really easy answer. The more complicated, broader one is that starting in the 1970s, and coincidental with greater public sector involvement in running the line, it was re-envisioned and transformed from a real rapid transit line to a “commuter” rail line.
And where there was once frequent operation all day, it became very specialized and focused on transporting suburban commuters on a 9-to-5 schedule.
People in Chicago are sort of conditioned to think of the L and Metra as two completely different beasts, but in fact there is—or at least was—more overlap than you might think. What was Metra Electric service like, say, before World War Two?
Yeah. And to be fair, the commuter services today mostly look like they always have—except Metra Electric.
There’s a really useful chart of the decline of service on the Metra Electric in John Allen’s 1998 paper, which I reproduce in my master’s paper.
The South Chicago branch had service every ten minutes (and every 20 on weekends and evenings) in 1946. There was a Rand McNally map in 1947 that included the Illinois Central (now Metra Electric) along with the ‘L’ lines as rapid transit.
And what about the differences in fares with the L?
The fares were pretty comparable right up until 1969. When the Dan Ryan line (the South Side Red Line) opened, IC lost a lot of ridership and started to raise fares. By 1973, the differential between fares was 40%.
So, just to summarize: Trains every ten minutes, which is roughly the same service as the Green Line today, and the same price as the L. That’s on the South Chicago branch, which runs close to the lake down to 93rd St. What about the main branch?
Ah, that’s where you see the priorities flipping. In 1946, the main line had service every 40 minutes all day, plus additional peak service. In the ‘70s that increased to every 30 minutes all day, but since 1982 it’s been cut back to once an hour.
So you alluded to the fact that the Metra Electric lines were owned and operated by a private, for-profit company until relatively recently. Of course, the L lines were too, originally, but they switched over to public ownership earlier. How important is that fact?
That’s a good question. I think there was a lot more populist attention to the “surface” lines (streetcars, then buses), which were a huge source of political tension and even violence in Chicago, and the L, than there was to the “mainline” railroads that are today’s Metra lines.
And a lot of that had to do with class dynamics that go back way further than we might think. The Illinois Central trains were seen as being for the rich as far back as the 1880s.
How did the Metra Electric come to be the public transit of the rich, and why did that matter? Especially when the difference in fares was pretty small.
Excellent question. I know the IC made a major push in the 1920s when they modernized and electrified the line to present it as high-class and luxurious, but the reputation goes back farther than that.
In some ways, it’s more understandable with lines like the CB&Q (today’s BNSF) and C&NW (today’s UP-North), which served suburbs that even in the late 19th century were quite wealthy.
I think some of the South Side neighborhoods the IC served were, at one point, among Chicago’s elite, though it’s hard to think of them that way now.
And one of the advantages of the IC was that it extended well past the end of the South Side L (today’s Green Line), reaching into areas that were perhaps colonized by wealthier folks more tolerant of a long commute in return for more rural living.
So if Metra Electric was the train for the elite, why has its service declined so precipitously?
Well, I think the “eliteness” declined a lot starting around the time it was electrified and modernized, actually. Those neighborhoods began to change.
Right. It was the 1960s when white flight really began in earnest in South Shore. Was IC’s ridership ever mixed-race?
Unfortunately, I don’t have data on that. Some of the ‘70s planning documents imply that by the late ‘60s it was largely black, which makes sense given that even some of the suburbs the IC served (Harvey, etc.) were and are heavily black.
And especially after the war, as in other places in Chicago, the racial transitions were incredibly rapid. So there was less incentive to preserve good service, because the people living in those neighborhoods didn’t have the same kind of voice.
At the same time, the southern suburbs were exploding—everything from Homewood south. And those people did have a voice, and were vocal about re-orienting service to fit their needs. And the service began to need public subsidy, which introduced a certain moral hazard into decision-making.
One of the broader themes of my research is that since public authorities have become involved in running commuter rail systems, they have been incredibly solicitous of the desires of their perceived ridership class.
Which has led to a determination to preserve an exclusivist paradigm of service instead of trying to make it work for everyone.
But—for better or worse—those pressures were somewhat mitigated when the trains were run by private companies.
Because they had to chase ridership wherever they could find it?
There was still pressure—there’s a long record going back to the 19th century of wealthy commuters using government to pressure companies—but the companies had every incentive to chase ridership.
In a sense, private ownership gave them the freedom to pursue a more comprehensive vision of ridership.
So ironically, the transition from private to public allowed the railroad’s governance to become captured by a smaller, whiter, richer group. Could you talk a little about the sort of institutions of governance that allowed that to happen?
Yes, I would argue that’s accurate. “Commuter rail” has always been white and wealthy, but you’d think public ownership would mitigate that, and if anything it’s intensified the dynamic.
As for governance, I think you have to look at the Regional Transportation Authority as a really sadly dysfunctional institution. There really was a tension between the RTA and CTA from the very beginning, where they were competing for riders and funds rather than trying to create a system that worked together.
There was a report by Eno Center and Transit Center a couple of years ago that really laid out how dysfunctional the structure is.
This isn’t a Chicago thing—it’s pretty common in American transit. But I think by the point the RTA was created, there was already a sense of there being “city” and “suburban” interests, and each needing to protect their own. The idea that some assets crossed that line didn’t really penetrate anyone’s heads.
We’re talking, by the way, about the mid-1970s here?
Yeah. The big fights over the RTA were basically from 1975 on.
Even before the RTA, there had been several attempts to create subregional agencies to support private transit—there was a Chicago South Suburban Mass Transit District that coordinated subsidies and capital improvements to the IC, Rock Island, and local buses.
You say the death blows to Metra Electric as rapid transit were dealt from 1979 to 1981.
Yeah. I mean, it wasn’t just Metra Electric—the RTA had this huge fiscal crisis in 1981, and they hiked fares across the board. I think they doubled within 1981 alone. And the schedules were cut to essentially what they are today, which is the really damaging thing.
They did recognize the special nature of Metra Electric and bring the fares way back down soon thereafter, but the damage was done.
There are several different organizing campaigns to get the South Chicago branch reconverted to rapid transit. What would people on the South Side gain from that, and what are the barriers to doing it?
I think that’s a really hopeful development, that people are really interested in that today.
The South Chicago branch is essentially a light rail line—it runs in the median of a city street! Service every two hours midday is absurd.
Let’s start with the barriers, then we can talk about the benefits.
I think one of the biggest barriers is this dynamic of competition between Metra and the CTA. The beginning of the tailspin for the line was the opening of the Dan Ryan back in 1969, both because it took away a lot of traffic directly, and because a lot of South Side bus routes were restructured to exclusively serve the L.
But in the meantime, the CTA has, to their credit, developed some alternatives to the IC line that are pretty competitive. The express buses that use Lake Shore Drive are pretty time-competitive if traffic is decent, and the Jeffrey Jump bus runs frequently all day and has similar competitiveness.
CTA has zero incentive to help rehabilitate the Metra Electric line or feed passengers to it if it’s competing with one of their proudest achievements. You see this very clearly in the South Lakeshore transit study they did in 2012—they totally sandbagged the option of restoring frequent service on the Metra Electric.
They claimed it wouldn’t be cost efficient. You think they were wrong?
In a word, yes.
There are a lot of problems with the study. You could start running more off-peak service tomorrow, with existing rolling stock, for zero capital cost. It wouldn’t be ideal, but you could do it. They said it would cost $350 million.
And it uses CTA’s loading standards—which measure current ridership—to determine there’s no need for more service, while not dealing with the fact that the line had four or five times more ridership historically [when it ran more frequently] than it does today.
In terms of transit-oriented development, studies from the ‘70s argued that the line should be downgraded because there were too many vacant lots; this study says there aren’t enough for development opportunities.
The blog Transport Notes thinks that the operating costs are estimated three times higher than they really have to be. I’m not an expert on that, but I do know the study doesn’t mention crew reform [reducing the number of crew members per train], which would be necessary and is one of the big sticking points.
So what about the benefits of actually doing the conversion?
The most obvious benefit is that bringing back rapid transit style service could save a lot of people a lot of time.
Right now, if you don’t have access to the J14 or one of the Lake Shore Drive buses, you have to slog over to the Red Line or the Green Line on a local bus. And we know how slow those can be.
It would also be an immense benefit to the University of Chicago, which currently doesn’t have a rapid transit link.
And thinking beyond the South Chicago branch—restoring rapid transit on the Metra Electric main line would likely mean there’s no need to build the Red Line extension to 130th, which would save a billion dollars or two in capital costs.
In other words, whatever investment you make in Metra Elecric, if it avoids building the Red Line extension, it’s already paid for itself.
I also wouldn’t be surprised to see a building boom in South Shore if frequent service comes back. It probably wouldn’t be as aggressive as it has been in some places—black Chicago neighborhoods don’t really gentrify along the same lines as others—but that’s something to be considered, and won’t be popular with some peple.
So given everything, do you see the Metra Electric reclaiming its old glory as a true rapid transit service?
I think it could. There’s a lot of momentum in that direction, and the logic is kind of self-evident.
One thing that I find encouraging, but that will take work, is that the various activist attempts at making this happen have come from different perspectives.
Some have come from the black community, some from advocates like the Center for Neighborhood Technology, and some from business and university interests. And it’s kind of disjointed, and interests might not fully align.
So I think there’s a lot of work left to do there in terms of getting everybody on the same page. And not everyone is going to accept my logic that this is an opportunity to spend less money on the Red Line extension. And obviously there are a ton of institutional barriers.
But there’s one thing to remember, which is that Metra Electric is the only example in the country of a mainline rail line that was once run as rapid transit, and has since been reduced to commuter rail.
Bringing back frequent service is restoring past glory, not doing something new—and that’s what I think the political messaging should be. Metra Electric is special, and it doesn’t fit into the paradigm that RTA and Metra have tried to fit it into for the last 35 years.