You're right, the Orange Line is a great candidate intuitively, but you'd need to seek zoning changes. Any Toronto-esque TOD would probably come as a PD, since the TOD ordinance only applies to C and B zoning, I think -4.5 to -6 FAR. Industrial parcels do not fall into these categories so they'd need aldermanic permission both for the zoning change and the PD.

The idea that is being discussed has more to do with higher density, minimal parking developments allowed under the recent ordinance that is letting 1601 Division get built. I dont think that similar proposals could exist along Metra lines outside of the CTA's network. Fact is that living in the suburbs is extremely difficult without personal transit. Metra essentially only offers transportation to the city core and even then runs on an extremely limited schedule.

Compare that to any site near the 35th/Archer L station (for example), which offers immediate access to a city wide rapid transit rail line, Archer Ave bus, 35th bus, Western bus (hopefully soon to be true BRT) along with local retail, dining, open space and typical amenities all within walking distance. Providing a dense development with near zero parking is much more feasible in such a setting.

Everybody keeps talking about this 'TOD ordinance'. I never heard of such a thing. When was it passed?

Can somebody point me to some details?

Maybe I am all alone on this one, but I dont think that Toronto-ish TOD should be the goal here in Chicago. The economic factors needed to create such large scale developments would prevent it from happening anywhere in the system other than the Howard Red/OHare Blue, neither of which really needs much more traffic...and where such large scale development is nearly impossible. I think 1601 is about as good as things can get for medium/large parcels... and that additional density could come from smaller parcels used as 6-12 flats

But for most of the city, I feel that even a development such as 1601 would be overkill, and completely necessary. Boosting ridership along the Pink/Orange/Green lines could be as simple as focusing development of dense four to six floor structures either on single, double or corner lots in these underused areas. Going straight to the 'shock and awe' of large development seems counter intuitive... these areas must first be made attractive to the market before drawing in the masses and larger projects.

I havent been able to find it... only the June 27th City Council meeting that changed the site to RM6.5 and a handful of mentions regarding Moreno looking to propose a minimal parking variance around the beginning of July and then the ArchPaper story August 16th saying:

I'm not sure what the obsession is with Toronto TOD is here. Sure, some highrises outside the core our nice, but last I checked those places are largely devoid of humanity and scale. Think Le Corbusier’s The City of Tomorrow and its Planning. Also, not to rag on Toronto, but what area are you thinking of?

I'm not the one who mentioned Toronto, and it's not what I had in mind. The central part of Toronto has good use, but outside of the central area, it's not that much more dense near the stations than Chicago is. I'd be more interested in TOD the way Portland or LA has done it. Or New York outside of Manhattan for that matter.

Here you go.

St. Clair mainly.

DC's Friendship Heights and Columbia Heights are great models for how tower developments can be inserted into low-scale residential neighborhoods. DC has other good TODs, but most are way out in the suburbs or built on large tracts of vacant land.

New Jersey has been successfully pushing TOD since the Early 90s to boost Transit Ridership. The Hudson Bergen LRT Network has generated over 16 Billion in TOD since 2000 , and Regional Rail Station TOD has generated close to 10 billion since 1995. Each town has its own plan , its mostly infill with the Railroad towns in the Downtown area , while the Auto - sprawlly suburbs get the huge 1-2 SQ mile TOD's. There are currently 17 TOD projects underway in NJ that connect into a nearby station or stop. With Extensions of the Light Rail and Regional Rail further into the Urbanized Suburbs I can only see more TOD. Their are some Towns jumping the gun , and allowing TOD before the LRT or Rail Extension like Englewood,NJ and Kearny,NJ...there sites currently have bus service.

St. Clair? On the YUS Line? St. Clair West? The St. Clair Streetcar ROW?

Really, I'm not trying to "gotcha", or keep this thread off-track, I just do not think Toronto is a model for good TOD design. Look at the Bloor-Danforth line east of the Don, its been the same density around the stops since the day that line was built and the neighbors fight like heck to keep it that way. (gross generalization)

^ St Clair at Yonge is a good model for TOD... I've always thought such a center could grow along Ashland by the United Center.

Greg Hinz is reporting that USDOT has revoked the EIS for the Prairie Parkway, and has allowed IDOT to re-purpose some $209 million that was earmarked for the project by cheerleader Dennis Hastert. :banana: Now if we can just kill the Illiana or at least move it northward...

Unfortunately the Parkway money will still be spent on sprawl-inducing projects in the lower Fox Valley - river bridges, upgrades to IL-47 and US-34, etc. The Parkway opposition was a flashpoint for the battle against sprawl, but Kane and Kendall will continue to have massive suburban growth, and in lieu of a new expressway it will simply create miles of congestion on local roads. :koko:

Holy cow is right. When the Red North Interim Station Improvements project was announced, us riders and transit watchers were expecting the modest "facelifts" that the CTA talked about. But the work by Kiewit Infrastructure and its subcontractors has been extensive, including major rebuilds of concrete viaducts and columns, all new track and ballast near the stations, complete replacement of the old wooden platforms with new concrete foundations and decking, and, biggest surprise of all, complete gut jobs of the 90-year-old stationhouses.

At Morse, they tore out the glazed-brick walls and columns, ripped up the battered 90-year-old terrazzo floors and threw away all interior furnishings, then replaced them with new glazed brick, new terrazzo and plenty of durable stainless steel or galvanized fixtures. Riders are delighted.

We're following it very closely at CTA Station Watch, a crowd-sourced website covering work at 10 North Red stations. So far, very impressive reinvestment, though it must be said that the trains are running like molasses on weekends when two of four tracks are taken out of service and crews are working on three to five stations simultaneously. The good news is that it's fast-track work and the project should be done by mid-winter.

Keep up the good work Patrick, I really enjoy the site. Its nice to have another online option when following the CTA.

No. Toronto's "Corbusian" areas are far from subway stations. The areas with towers around subway stations are virtually all pedestrian-friendly except for Kipling Station, and arguably a couple of other stations. The areas around all the Yonge line stations for example are ped-friendly. You bring up the Danforth line east of the Don, and it's pedestrian-friendly every station as far east as Victoria Park.

Thankfully the Prairie Parkway dies a quiet death
 

Chciago Trib Link

It's the end of the road for proposed Prairie Parkway
With litigation, low funding priority, 'Hastert Highway' loses federal approval
By Jon Hilkevitch, Chicago Tribune reporter
9:34 p.m. CDT, August 23, 2012

The $1 billion Prairie Parkway, a proposed highway in the Chicago region's far outer-ring exurbs that lost momentum when former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert left office, was officially declared dead Thursday.

The Federal Highway Administration rescinded its approval of the parkway, which would have cut through miles of farmland, after it failed to receive a high funding priority in the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning's "Go to 2040'' land-use and transportation blueprint for the seven-county area.......

This would be great, but unfortunately racial politics in the city will prevent it from happening any time soon. In addition, there is too much vacant and underutilized land on the south and west sides to make the supply/demand calculation for substantial density work out. We'll be lucky to get Skokie-level density.

The demand isn't for housing, it's for access to downtown at a reasonable price. It doesn't matter if you have 100,000 square miles of open space, if only 10 square miles are walkable to transit, then those 10 square miles will always and forever hold a market premium over the rest. If race factors in at all, it's racism against locating in certain areas, not racial politics.

Interesting tidbit resulting from the weekend track work in the Loop:

I would be interested to see how well this configuration works since it has always been considered a possible method of consolidating the two lines

Based on the 2011 numbers the Brown/Orange would make for 25.7mm boardings with a ton of room to grow along the Orange alignment and possible extended hours... not too shabby

The Brown/Orange combo would be the obvious choice for a third 24-hour line.