SkyscraperPage Forum

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)

Mr Downtown Nov 21, 2017 6:46 PM

Not from The Onion:

Foxconn requests autonomous vehicle lane on I-94 as part of factory deal

Kippis Nov 22, 2017 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 7993583)

So the expansion begins in Milwaukee and ends at the state line. What purpose would that really serve though, especially given the fact that the AV lane(s) would end the second it hits the Tri-State? I would assume that much of their talent will be commuting in from the Chicago area, rather than Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha.

Unless Wisconsin starts prodding the Tollway into integrating one of these types of lanes as well.

Wait.

I feel a disturbance in the Force. One my iPass has not felt since...

Tom In Chicago Nov 22, 2017 5:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kippis (Post 7994368)
Unless Wisconsin starts prodding the Tollway into integrating one of these types of lanes as well.

Wait.

I feel a disturbance in the Force. One my iPass has not felt since...

:tup::tup::tup:

ardecila Nov 22, 2017 5:32 PM

I-94 in Kenosha and Milwaukee Counties was already widened. I doubt WisDOT will go back and widen it again so soon. It's only the Racine County portion that still needs rebuilt. They could re-designate the fourth lane on the Kenosha and Milwaukee segments for autonomous, but then a bunch of motorists are gonna get upset, including the FIB Illinoisans who drive up to their vacation homes on summer weekends.

If Foxconn did get the lane, they could run autonomous trucks from the factory up to Mitchell Airport to ship products out (saving money on drivers) or to Wisconsin's park and ride lots to enable remote commuting. The technology doesn't quite exist for this yet, so it's a bit of a gamble. I suppose they could operate the trucks autonomously for the freeway portion and switch over to remote control while on local roads.

I don't know why they wouldn't just encourage employees to drive, though. Foxconn doesn't have a particularly strong environmental conscience, and they have ample land on which to build lots.

PKDickman Nov 22, 2017 6:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7994678)
I-94 in Kenosha and Milwaukee Counties was already widened. I doubt WisDOT will go back and widen it again so soon. It's only the Racine County portion that still needs rebuilt. They could re-designate the fourth lane on the Kenosha and Milwaukee segments for autonomous, but then a bunch of motorists are gonna get upset, including the FIB Illinoisans who drive up to their vacation homes on summer weekends.

If Foxconn did get the lane, they could run autonomous trucks from the factory up to Mitchell Airport to ship products out (saving money on drivers) or to Wisconsin's park and ride lots to enable remote commuting. The technology doesn't quite exist for this yet, so it's a bit of a gamble. I suppose they could operate the trucks autonomously for the freeway portion and switch over to remote control while on local roads.

I don't know why they wouldn't just encourage employees to drive, though. Foxconn doesn't have a particularly strong environmental conscience, and they have ample land on which to build lots.


I think that they have Wisc lawmakers on a string, and they're jerking it to watch 'em dance.
Worst case scenario, they don't get it. Best case, they get what would be tantamount to their own private lanes to the airport.

IrishIllini Nov 30, 2017 1:00 AM

Surprised no one is talking about the O'Hare express train...

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...details-emerge

denizen467 Nov 30, 2017 6:14 AM

^ On the one hand, the RFQ PDF is 125 pages, so there's a bit to flip through before making comments. Among other things it details 3 potential rail corridors and 4 potential downtown terminus sites (no huge surprises though). On the other hand there's little to really comment on, and it's all still just aspirational, until there's real number crunching and actual feedback from the market with the RFQ responses early next year. One big issue not discussed before seems to be what real estate opportunities at the termini might be offered to the developers in order to make the project's economics work. Imagine if no Rosemont existed yet, and a bunch of land or zoning or infrastructure were offered and a developer made the project viable by planning a shopping and entertainment district near the terminus. In this case, the City has available land around the CONRAC and in the surface lots between T1-T3 and near T5; serious plans emerged last year to site hotels in all 3 of those places, and they (or similar sites or amenities) could be deployed as commercial sweeteners for the rail developer, for example. Even something crazy like an outlet mall built on top of the CONRAC (and directly linked to downtown) could divert easy dollars from Rosemont and maybe be not so crazy. Lots of empty land will become available once the car rental companies vacate all their surface lots.

k1052 Nov 30, 2017 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 8002646)
Lots of empty land will become available once the car rental companies vacate all their surface lots.

But the utility of that land is limited due to the runway protection zones from 9R/27L and forthcoming 9C/27C. The latter of which will require the demolition of the parking lot E ATS station I believe because it's too high. There would still be some good sites to develop at T5, at (or even on) the CONRAC, and the main terminal complex however.

Vlajos Nov 30, 2017 4:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishIllini (Post 8002309)
Surprised no one is talking about the O'Hare express train...

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...details-emerge

And now this.....

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...train-interest

Mayor Rahm Emanuel's plan to add a high-speed train between the Loop and O'Hare International Airport has drawn interest from a big name: Elon Musk.

Yesterday, the tech entrepreneur tweeted:

The Boring Company will compete to fund, build & operate a high-speed Loop connecting Chicago O'Hare Airport to downtown https://t.co/bRqKpzSJjz
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 30, 2017

Jim in Chicago Nov 30, 2017 4:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlajos (Post 8002964)
And now this.....

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...train-interest

Mayor Rahm Emanuel's plan to add a high-speed train between the Loop and O'Hare International Airport has drawn interest from a big name: Elon Musk.

Yesterday, the tech entrepreneur tweeted:

The Boring Company will compete to fund, build & operate a high-speed Loop connecting Chicago O'Hare Airport to downtown https://t.co/bRqKpzSJjz
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 30, 2017

The media are mixing the terms "high speed" and "express". This actually sounds more like a conventional train, running express. I can drive from the Loop to ORD with no traffic in about 20 minutes, maybe a bit less. Google maps gives the "no traffic" time at 18 minutes.

IrishIllini Nov 30, 2017 5:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago (Post 8003019)
The media are mixing the terms "high speed" and "express". This actually sounds more like a conventional train, running express. I can drive from the Loop to ORD with no traffic in about 20 minutes, maybe a bit less. Google maps gives the "no traffic" time at 18 minutes.

There are very few instances in which a person can make it from the Loop to O’Hare in 18 minutes by car.

Vlajos Nov 30, 2017 5:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishIllini (Post 8003144)
There are very few instances in which a person can make it from the Loop to O’Hare in 18 minutes by car.

Yep, and no planes will be arriving or taking off a those times generally.

Busy Bee Nov 30, 2017 5:38 PM

I don't know those 3:15 am flights have a lot of perks...

the urban politician Nov 30, 2017 6:46 PM

Actually, the fact that Rahm continues to push the OHare-Loop link, plus with Elon Musk publically planning to bid, does get me a wee bit excited. It's still a ways off, but this actually could happen...

Jim in Chicago Nov 30, 2017 7:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishIllini (Post 8003144)
There are very few instances in which a person can make it from the Loop to O’Hare in 18 minutes by car.

I get that. My point was that if a car can do it with no traffic in that amount of time then a true high speed train should be able to do it in less, not the 20 minutes they're talking about - that sounds like express with no stops, not high speed.

Vlajos Nov 30, 2017 7:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in Chicago (Post 8003350)
I get that. My point was that if a car can do it with no traffic in that amount of time then a true high speed train should be able to do it in less, not the 20 minutes they're talking about - that sounds like express with no stops, not high speed.

Ok, so it's express.

Kngkyle Nov 30, 2017 9:59 PM

My understanding is that the RFQ only mentions 20 minutes to rule out any proposal that takes longer than that. I would expect Musk's proposal, at least, to be significantly faster than that considering we are only talking about 15 miles as the crow flies. That is only 45mph average...

the urban politician Nov 30, 2017 10:27 PM

Has anyone proposed just building a giant slide that runs from OHare to the Loop?

That would be cheap as hell. Start at around 2000 ft in the air, plop your ass down, and just ride it all the way till you get to the Loop. Let gravity do the work.

I bet I could get a team and build it for way cheaper than all these other proposals.

Come to think of it, have it enclosed and run a bit of water under it. Turn it into a ride like at a water park.

Busy Bee Nov 30, 2017 10:33 PM

Move O'hare to Meigs!!! Problem solved!!!

Really though, if this gathers momentum the concept of Crossrail could become an "official" goal which gives me hope.

bnk Nov 30, 2017 11:50 PM

https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/...nectivity.html

Chicago scores top mark in new study of flight connectivity





By Lewis Lazare  –  Reporter, Chicago Business Journal
4 hours ago

Chicago's O'Hare International Airport and Midway International Airport are a fearsome combo when it comes to the flight connectivity they offer travelers in the Chicago market.

That's the top finding in a new study of the quality of air ....

The Eno Center for Transportation, a transportation think tank, ranked the quality of Chicago's air service highest among all 47 cities because of the level of flight connectivity travelers are afforded at both O'Hare and Midway. 
In the Eno Center study, Chicago notched a score of 94
. The next highest-ranked market was Denver (79) followed by Los Angeles (78). Dallas, New York City and Atlanta each had scores of 76.

At a time when Chicago wants to stay in the competition to land Amazon's second headquarters, any study of airport connectivity that paints Chicago in a flattering light is going to get Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's attention. 
Noted Emanuel: "Being home to the most connected and competitive airports in the country is another strong asset for Chicago residents, businesses and visitors to this great city."

Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) has stated that an airport with great connectivity is one feature it is looking for in the city eventually selected for HQ2.
Chicago Department of Aviation commissioner Ginger Evans said of Chicago's top ranking in the Eno study: "Chicago's connectivity will only get stronger as we continue to modernize and improve O'Hare and Midway airports, making them best-in-class aviation facilities for travelers in Chicago and worldwide."
Chicago's high flight connectivity ranking was due in no small measure to the fact that both United Airlines (NYSE: UAL) and American Airlines (NASDAQ: AAL) have major hubs at O'Hare, a unique aspect of that airport. And Midway is Southwest Airlines' (NYSE: LUV) largest hub.


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:24 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.