This discrepancy in rail service leaves thousands of South Side residents without the easy, reliable rail access North Siders can take for granted. South Siders instead face longer commutes and restricted access to various parts of the city. Politicians today are aware of Chicago’s transit issues, and a few proposals have been made to address the South Side’s lack of rail access. But an obvious, albeit partial, solution lies in the existing Metra Electric (ME) line, which offers a much-needed track – figuratively and literally – to improving transit access in Chicago.
The ME, one of 11 commuter rail lines in the Chicago region, sadly but ironically serves as one of the major reasons why the South Side does not possess a robust, North Side-style CTA system. From the mid-19th-to-20th century, the ME – then called the Illinois Central Railroad (IC) – operated as a rapid transit line in the South Side. Its trains offered frequent service, low fares, and easy boarding, similar to the CTA “L” trains that were simultaneously developing in other parts of the city. This similarity was made possible by the IC’s unique infrastructure: the line was completely electrified, had an automatic ticket collection system, and featured stations about one mile apart. Though the ME now operates as a standard commuter rail with hourly trains, these earlier customer-friendly features made the line instrumental in providing transit access to South Side residents – thousands of whom used it as a form of daily transportation. As the ME devolved from city rapid transit to commuter rail, the access of South Siders to rail service declined.
Rail activists and community organizers, along with some university and business interests, have been leaders in advocating for the restoration of frequent service to the ME as a way of increasing South Side rail service. They have petitioned to add train stock to the ME so cars can run more frequently, integrate schedules and fares with the CTA to facilitate transfers with other lines or buses, and add turnstiles or automated fare collection systems to match CTA boarding protocols.
The benefits of Metra restoration could be profound. Bringing rapid transit back to communities that no longer have it could address the transit deserts that exist in Chicago’s South Side. The ME not only covers the southern regions CTA rail ignores, but extends even further into the suburbs. An improved ME line could therefore reconnect entire neighborhoods to the rest of Chicago and bridge the gap between South and North Siders: more frequent service means shorter commute times and greater access to a wider range of employment, educational, and healthcare services within the city.
The infrastructure for ME restoration is already in place, making the process timely and cost-effective; however, as with most public works projects in Chicago, barriers have stood in the way of actual implementation. Transit agencies have cited budgetary concerns as a primary reason for reluctance. But most ME restoration proposals estimate costs ranging from $160 million to $500 million, compared to the $3.7 billion price tag of the proposed Red Line Extension Project—an extension that would overlap significantly with current ME rail service.
Interagency tensions between the CTA and Metra have also stifled conversations towards ME improvements. Their relationship has been marked by years of framing the two agencies as competitors, in the face of a lack of oversight from the Regional Transportation Authority (the agencies’ impotent parent company). Concerns with “taking away ridership” from one agency to give to the other – as expressed by Chicago officials – are one of many examples of the shortsighted perspectives that hinder the development of meaningful transit improvements and keep projects like ME restoration in gridlock.
But not all hope is lost. Recognition of Chicago’s transit problem and momentum for ME restoration is growing, and in the past 10 years support has come from Cook County leaders, local elected officials, and even state representatives. In the aftermath of COVID-19, both agencies have revealed post-pandemic recovery plans with goals of increasing ridership and service frequency that align with the proposals put forth by ME restoration advocates – a potential launch pad for improving transit access in Chicago on a grander scale. The agencies must now set aside their bureaucratic differences and recognize the ME’s potential for transforming public transportation in Chicago, creating a more equitable and interconnected city with transit for all.