SkyscraperPage Forum
Viewing Page 358 of 820
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: Transit Developments (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=101657)

bnk Sep 27, 2010 6:38 PM
Probably old news....

Quote:
http://www.japantoday.com/category/b...-160-rail-cars

Nippon Sharyo receives U.S. order for 160 rail cars

Sunday 26th September, 04:42 AM JST

TOKYO —
Nippon Sharyo Ltd has jointly received an order with Sumitomo Corp for 160 rail cars from a U.S. train operator worth around 48 billion yen, the major rail car maker’s largest ever export order. The two companies will deliver the rail cars to Chicago-based Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corp from 2012 through 2015.

They plan to conduct final assembly of the double-decker rail cars with around 140 seats in the United States, the manufacturer said, adding it will consider building a plant there to raise the ratio of local production.

Busy Bee Sep 27, 2010 6:53 PM
This is the railcar order that will kill off the rest of the StLC Highliners - unfortunately they will look just like the ones that were delivered a few years ago. The Highliners were much paraded for their modern design and were really great looking cars when they were new in the orange and dark brown/black ICRR livery. The new electric bi-levels as you know look just like a standard 40 year old Metra gallery car except equipped with pantographs on the roof. One giant step back IMO.

http://www.railroad.net/articles/rai...a/metra_06.jpg
railroad.net


We'll miss you Highliners:

http://www.davesrailpix.com/ic/jpg/ic087.jpg
daverailpix.com

VivaLFuego Sep 27, 2010 9:55 PM
The existing zoning code is plenty "transit friendly" around just about every transit station, particularly along the south branch of the Green Line. Near the Green line, commercial streets are almost universally zoned for relatively dense (FAR 2.2+) mixed-use, and nearby residential streets are zoned for multi-family (at generally 3-4 units per city lot, which adds up quick if it's fully built out as in the north side). The issue there is that in practice, the bulk of development just makes an end run around the zoning, either as a "Planned Development" or through a zoning change to the C2 auto-oriented commercial zoning to allow the gas stations, drive-thru fast food, and strip malls that constitute economic development in those neighborhoods.

That said, existing zoning in most of West Pullman and Roseland is decidedly less transit-oriented than that farther north in Grand Boulevard, Englewood, Woodlawn, etc., with most far south side residential zoning being for small-lot single family houses and commercial zoning generally only allowing ~2 story buildings.

ardecila Sep 27, 2010 10:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 4995358)
^ :multibow :thrasher:

That would be so incredible if Chicago were to achieve anything close to this
Shanghai has a maglev for an Airport Express. It cost the equivalent of $1.33 billion dollars - and that's with virtually no land acquisition costs and low, low Chinese labor prices.

Here, the same thing would easily cost upwards of $6 billion to find an ROW and build a guideway durable enough for a Chicago winter.

I'm just hoping we can get investors to fund $100-200 million for upgrades to the Metra NC-S to allow O'Hare express trains and an extension/redesign of the O'Hare People Mover.

ardecila Sep 27, 2010 10:41 PM
I am happy that CTA is putting the Red Line Extension at the top of the priority list... it has a compelling narrative behind it, unlike the somewhat ho-hum, value-engineered, watered-down one-station extensions to the Orange and Yellow Lines.

It provides transit service to poor areas that are fairly dense, so ridership should be respectable. It has the potential for a big park-and-ride off the Bishop Ford at 130th.

The line's design also seems to be in line with its projected ridership - it's not like the Circle Line, where the massive cost of a subway is balanced against only moderate ridership gains.

If the line is successful, it can be used as a tool to pitch further rail expansion in the city. Since the Orange Line was successful, I fully expect this similar project to succeed as well.

sammyg Sep 28, 2010 4:54 AM
As great as extending the Red Line is, I'd rather see them restore the express buses that got cut last year, like the X9, X80 and X49.

Of course, that's not how funding works, but if there was a way to do it, it would be great.

Nexis4Jersey Sep 28, 2010 6:36 AM
How many Metra Expansions do they have planned? 4-8? Ikno here there restoring alot of lines , is it the same there?

denizen467 Sep 28, 2010 7:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marcu (Post 4995392)
I believe that this bridge is slated to be replaced in the next 5 years. It's part of the ongoing UP-N bridge replacement project being discussed. In other words you won't see any paint.
No it is not part of that project. The Addison/Lincoln viaduct is very conspicuously omitted. The first phase is 11 bridges north of there and the second phase is 11 bridges south of there.

VivaLFuego Sep 28, 2010 3:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey (Post 4996259)
How many Metra Expansions do they have planned? 4-8? Ikno here there restoring alot of lines , is it the same there?
In terms of new routes, the only 2 on the drawing board are:
1) the SES (SouthEast Service) through Chicago Heights and Crete: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SouthEa...ce_%28Metra%29 This would be roughly a "restoration" albeit with different routing on the city/terminal end

2) the STAR Line: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suburba...te_%28Metra%29 which suburban politicians seem to love and everyone else just scratches their head.

The other major expansions planned are on the UP-W and UP-NW lines, projects which are primarily capacity expansions via signalling, trackwork, and yard expansions to provide greater levels of express service and more frequent peak period service.

the urban politician Sep 28, 2010 9:17 PM
If a privately funded express train from O'Hare to downtown is ever built, I will eat my underwear.

Let that be known.

denizen467 Sep 29, 2010 3:15 AM
^ Even if it's just 1 or 2 bypasses along the Kennedy? What if they do zero construction and just outfit the B37 terminal and run 45-minute-ride premium railcars? Please let it be known.

LaSalle.St.Station Sep 29, 2010 6:01 AM
Does anyone have a diagram of Metra Electric's existing operational right of way under Millenium Park and Illinois Center? Is it still feasible to run transit cars up to the river ?

denizen467 Sep 29, 2010 7:01 AM
Not sure about what's at the bottom of 1IC and 2IC, but theoretically it could snake up the Beaubien alignment all the way to the river.

Mr Downtown Sep 29, 2010 7:23 PM
Don't forget that the existing Metra Electric tracks extend almost all the way to South Water.

In the early 70s, space was supposedly saved for a future subway station on the lower level of Illinois Center, though I've never checked exactly where. A similar easement was put in the Cityfront Center PD (because I remember Chicago Dock & Canal demanding a sunset date on that). These anticipated an alignment under Stetson, though, for the Monroe Distributor subway.

Busy Bee Sep 29, 2010 7:50 PM
Miesian architecture aside, Illinois Center is such a miserable failure when it comes to urban design. Horrible circulation, bad juxtaposition/interaction between buildings and drab and uninviting grounds. It was really a product of its era. I wish a more urban friendly [mega]development could occur that pulled people from the corner of Mich and Wacker (either side of 333Mich) instead of walled them out - and yes a rail station entrance at that corner would be fantastic.


PS - anyone have an image of that old rendering of the proposed Illinois Center back in the 20's before the crash killed it?

bnk Sep 30, 2010 10:16 AM
Can this be right...??? http://www.ceosforcities.org/pagefil...artXSFINAL.pdf

Quote:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...n-urban-sprawl

Your commute could be worse

Chicagoans spend less time in rush-hour traffic than any other major city, report says


September 28, 2010|By Jon Hilkevitch, TRIBUNE REPORTER

Phil Velasquez, Chicago TribuneA new study has found that commuters travel shorter distances to work in the Chicago region on average compared with residents of other metropolitan areas in the U.S., resulting in less time wasted in morning and evening rush-hour traffic here than any other major city.

The report by the nonprofit group CEOs for Cities does not downplay the negative impact that traffic congestion causes to the economy and to the quality of life across northeastern Illinois.

But it points out that weak or nonexistent land-use policies in many other regions of the country, resulting in urban sprawl, carry a higher price, including longer commuting times between home and work.

The report's ranking of mobility in 51 cities found that Chicago-area residents spend the least time in rush-hour travel. In Chicago and some of the other best-performing cities — including New Orleans, New York, Portland, Ore., and Sacramento, Calif. — commuters typically spend 40 fewer hours a year in peak-hour travel than the average American, the report said.

In metro areas with the worst urban sprawl — including Nashville, Detroit, Indianapolis and Raleigh, N.C. — residents spend as much as 240 hours per year in rush-period travel on average because commuting distances are much longer, said the report, which was produced with the support of the Rockefeller Foundation.

...

ardecila Sep 30, 2010 4:28 PM
I don't think the results of that study are impossible. Although we have one of the smallest highway lane-miles per capita of any major city, we have a massive transit system, second only to New York in terms of daily ridership.

While the highway/arterial system is terrible at serving suburb-downtown commutes, it meets the needs of suburb-suburb commutes quite nicely. The major transit system meets the needs of the heavily concentrated traditional commute into the city.

More importantly, CEOs for Cities didn't start as part of the Texas Department of Transportation, so it doesn't produce studies that advocate more and more highways in response to increased population.

ardecila Sep 30, 2010 4:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 4991749)
Can somebody make these North Shore people aware that $80 million is all it will take to maintain uninterrupted service during construction AND give Metra a third track to allow for future expansion?

I'm sure the $80 million would magically materialize from somewhere, with all the influential people who ride that train.
Looks like I called it (sort of).

Metra press release from today:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metra press release
UP North bridge project postponed, original schedule to be reinstated Oct. 3

UP North bridge project postponed, original schedule to be reinstated Oct. 3

Feedback from riders and communities along the Union Pacific North line regarding recent schedule changes has prompted Metra to postpone the project to rebuild 22 bridges on the line until next spring and reinstate the line’s original schedule with a two-track operation starting Sunday, Oct. 3.

Metra’s new Union Pacific North schedule will begin Sunday, October 3. The new schedule can be viewed here.

Metra changed the UP North schedule on August 22 in order to accommodate an unprecedented plan to use a single track for inbound and outbound trains in the construction zone. Metra would not normally have taken the drastic step of using a single track, but that approach is more economical than trying to maintain a two-track operation and we felt our limited resources required us to attempt to make it work.

But while we made a good-faith effort to use that approach, our riders made it clear that the new schedule was not meeting their needs. And while we tried to address that schedule’s deficiencies, it was not possible to fix the problems in one area without adversely affecting other areas.

We will now revert to the schedule that had been in use before August 22. And we are exploring engineering options that provide for maintaining a two-track operation when construction resumes in the spring.
I can only assume the postponement means an engineering change, which could mean a reinstatement of the third track. Metra quoted a cost difference ($80 million) to Aaron Renn of keeping the third track, so clearly they had already considered the possibility with some detail.

Of course, it's also possible that Metra will find another avenue to keep two tracks through the construction zone. Logistically, however, it will be much more complicated unless they reduce the track centers, which would allow for the possibility of a third track in the future.

denizen467 Oct 2, 2010 4:58 AM
^ Nice call.

Presumably they can improve the schedule a lot by just shortening the length of the single-tracking. I think it was going to be single track from the construction zone all the way to Clybourn or Ogilvie or something, but if they allow for a switchover closer to the construction zone, they can bunch fewer trains.

jpIllInoIs Oct 2, 2010 3:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 4999525)
Looks like I called it (sort of).


I can only assume the postponement means an engineering change, which could mean a reinstatement of the third track. Metra quoted a cost difference ($80 million) to Aaron Renn of keeping the third track, so clearly they had already considered the possibility with some detail.

Of course, it's also possible that Metra will find another avenue to keep two tracks through the construction zone. Logistically, however, it will be much more complicated unless they reduce the track centers, which would allow for the possibility of a third track in the future.

If your right Ardecila then I take back all of the bad things that I have said about you.....;)


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:21 PM.
Viewing Page 358 of 820
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.