New Cermak Renderings

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/5512/kwbc.jpg

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/6061/hbjr.jpg

http://img845.imageshack.us/img845/4672/39ld.jpg

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/1510/7sbu.jpg

Really looks nice. Though I wish the whole thing could be column free in entirety. The platform full of columns and equipment are core problems of the CTA's station obsolescence. This is a step in the right direction, but for the most part much of the CTA's stations will remain 20th century vintage with technology upgrades every decade or so.

Look again....the platforms ARE "column free"....It looks as if the berthing locations are offset. Northbound trains will berth at the southern end and southbound trains will berth at the northern end with about four car-lengths of overlap beneath the middle cocoon. (Like, but not exactly similar to Loyola on the Red line.) The platform at either end...far south and far north has the columns and a barrier located together only on one side. In the middle section of the platform, there are no columns. The roof is held up by the outside walls, making for the middle "cocoon." With entrances from the ground at the extreme ends, passengers coming up will have about four car lenths of boarding space open to one side only with the safety of the barrier wall and columns behind them.

DH

Interesting that the elevators are at the extreme ends, and not anywhere near the roadway. A bit user-unfriendly for people with mobility problems.

This can't really be avoided. There's only so much width between the tracks, and a mid-platform elevator would almost totally block the platform. This in turn would not meet ADA requirements because a wheelchair user could not safely pass the elevator on the sliver of platform that remains.

The only alternative would be to move the tracks apart, totally rebuilding the viaduct, and that adds so much extra cost it's not reasonable except at a major, major station like Fullerton/Belmont/Wilson. Or they could switch to a side platform design and get all the width they want, but that requires land takings to either side of CTA's ROW.

It's not as bad as it seems, though... the southern elevator is pretty close to the auxiliary entrance at 23rd, so elevator users won't need to trek back up to Cermak.

The platform is the whole thing, and as you described, it's full of columns on either end. This is where all the bad stuff happens in CTA stations. People hide and vandalize these areas because it's typically where no passengers go.

If you look at my post I mention that it is a big improvement. It's just a realization that we are stuck with alot of other stations that can't be rebuilt because it would be costly. If the platforms were totally devoid of any sort of fixtures with the exception of stairs and granite blocks for people to sit on, the stations would improve CTA operations. Easier to patrol and keep on eye on people and there's virtually nothing people could damage or deface...except maybe throw gum on the ground. Theoretically one station attendant should be able to see what everyone is doing all at once, but we know that's entirely impossible in current stations because the architecture doesn't allow it.

You're missing my point. The supports and the barrier are at the edge of the platform. So that where the columns and barriers are, trains only serve that part of the platform from one side only, NB or SB.

DH

Yes, there are supports and a barrier at the edge of the platform, my point exactly.

You're living in a dream world. The transit system is to transport people, not try to change criminal motivations. The barriers would improve safety on the narrow platforms. There are always going to be walls along the stairs, escalators, elevators, station house, on and on...... I'm through.

Maybe that's why I said "I wish." Whether you like my idea or not is no concern to me.

I didn't realize they're just plugging in a station structure onto existing tracks that will sit largely untouched; I would've figured either a track was going to be shifted or they would use opposing-side platforms if capacity needs warranted it. But I guess as you suggest the project does not justify something of such cost. This raises a very interesting point: How much, or what sections, of CTA's el were constructed where the twin tracks are so far apart as to allow the insertion of a workably-sized station platform? Was this sparse stretch of the Green Line specifically built to enable future island platforms in specific areas; was it built along almost its entire length with such capability; or is this (I doubt) just dumb luck at Cermak?

As can be seen in this 1913 route map, there used to be a third express track in between the local tracks.

The South Side L originally had two tracks with side platforms. Circa 1905 a third column was added to the structure (easy to spot even today) and a third (express) track created. In return the city required the relocation of the original ground-level station houses (only Garfield survives) and opening of a continuous alley under the Alley L.

A complete account of how the work was done was published in the Journal of the Western Society of Engineers in 1908.

http://archive.org/stream/journalofw...e/494/mode/2up

I like the historical info, but isn't all that irrelevant (to my question) given the Green Line rebuild of 1996? Or was the rebuild just a replacement of tracks but not the support structure?

Correct. They did almost no work on the structure other than replacing column footings. The Douglas (Pink) Line is the only one so far where the actual structure has been replaced. Even Brown Line was just stations.

Hang on, they closed the Green Line for like 2 years in the '90s for rebuilding and we're still stuck with a 100+ year old structure ??

And the Cermak viaduct area is presumably an exception to what you said (the renders above make this look clearly rebuilt - slender long spans, clean slender columns - and not something from an era when horses outnumbered cars) ? Driving under the Lake Street el in the West Loop to Western and beyond also does not feel like one is under a century-old structure.

At Morgan, the columns had to be replaced. The structure couldn't support anything more than the super-lightweight wooden platforms of yore, certainly not the concrete platforms that are standard today. People give the CTA crap for using wood on the Brown Line project but using concrete would have required a lot of expensive structural work.

I'm guessing the Cermak columns and footings will also be replaced with something stronger.

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6227/6...cbfa3f2c_o.jpg

Still blessed with a 121-year-old steel structure, perhaps you meant to say. One that was overengineered, experiences no spalling, needs only periodic paint, and in which damaged or compromised members can easily be welded or bolted into place.

If you can put up with the noise, steel rocks!

Speaking of historic steel structures, this has always been one of my favorite photos:
http://afflictor.com/wp-content/uplo...lroad-1896.png
Afflictor.com

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Let's also not forget how much more aesthetically pleasing the old Elevated structures are than most modern viaducts. I'd much rather have finely detailed, heavily riveted (what was that about there being 200% or so more rivets than necessary due to overengineering?) steel structures than elongated Western/Belmont viaducts running all over the place. The tracks that they completely refurbished and repainted on Wabash look like a piece of art in much the same way that the Eiffel tower does.