5000-series: On seats and aisles

Photo credit: Ben Meyerson

Chicago's new 5000-series railcars are quite controversial amongst the riding public, but the CTA is not giving in. 

The seating arrangement, the so-called "bowling alley" style, allows for more passenger standing room. But Chicagoans are expressing displeasure at the "New York-style" seating, bemoaning the fact that they are often face-to-crotch and can no longer look out the window easily.

This raises all sorts of interesting points about the design or railcars and the context in which they're used.

Deconstructing the seating arrangement

One of the most disappointing aspects of the 5000-series is the lack of imagination. They look identical to the old cars, with the exception of the LED signs and new seating arrangement. The interior is the same drab beige of the 1980s, the seats are the same beige molded buckets. 

On this blog, I will write plenty on why I think design matters for transit. But let's talk about the seating arrangement specifically. 

Source: Wikimedia Commons

In New York, the R142(A) is the most comparable car to the 5000-series in terms of size, although CTA's cars are notably shorter. NYC got rid of the molded bucket seats and installed a flat bench from end-to-end, allowing people of various girths to negotiate a seating arrangement that is comfortable. 

Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Older cars like the R62 have molded seats much like the 5000-series do, and social interactions often get heated when someone sees an individual "seat" available and attempts to take it when their own seat doesn't really fit in it, squishing passengers on either side. The R142 does not delineate individual seats, instead letting people negotiate for themselves what an appropriate passenger distribution is.   

Another issue with the 5000-series approach to bowling-alley seating is that the CTA kept the biggest bottleneck of all—the forward-facing seats that still exist at one end of the alley. This sort of defeats the purpose of the alley-style seating, which is partially to encourage people to move towards the center of the car.  

On context

The 'L' is one of the most distinctive parts about Chicago. One of the best parts about riding the 'L' is that it is not (for the most part) underground. In Manhattan, nearly the entire subway is buried, and there is really nothing to look at except for beams and lights as you zip through the earth. (The 7 line through Queens, on the other hand, has some spectacular views.) 

When I lived in Chicago, one of my favorite things to do was stare out the window as the city goes by, especially on the Brown Line, which curves precariously through a variety of beautiful neighborhoods as it plods its way downtown.  Once downtown, the Loop trains take incredibly sharp winds through the massive skyscrapers and you can watch the pedestrians and the cars zip about as the financial powerhouse roars below. One of my favorite parts of my commute was passing an orthodontist's office just north of the Wells/Lake junction and watching people leaning back in the chairs with the jaws cranked open under operating lights being worked on by doctors. 

The aisle-facing seats do, sadly, take away from this uniquely Chicago experience. 

On balance

Munich's Class C subway cars make a compromise: At the end of each car is bench seating, and the middle has forward/backward seating. In addition, the 6-car trains are articulated, opening up additional standing space in the vestibule. I can imagine a similar layout for Chicago in 4-car sets with a cab at each end, allowing for both 4 and 8-car sets.