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)

Chicago3rd Feb 6, 2008 8:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by k1052 (Post 3335734)
There is nowhere for an train line to run above ground north of Millennium Park so you'd be talking going subway most of the way north. Given the chance to spend billions on a new line I don't think this is near the top of their priorities since it would be redundant to the Red Line and bus routes in many areas.

There are rail lines......so their are already places the EL could feed into the park. And not recongnizing the actual density of areas along the lake and just making judgments by how far apart lines are on the map is a huge backwards way that many in Chicago look at things. If a new line popped up magically along the whole length of Lake Shore drive over night.....it would be a huge success and the Redline would retain its ridership....more people would ride because it is less congested......

k1052 Feb 6, 2008 8:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd (Post 3335746)
There are rail lines......so their are already places the EL could feed into the park. And not recongnizing the actual density of areas along the lake and just making judgments by how far apart lines are on the map is a huge backwards way that many in Chicago look at things. If a new line popped up magically along the whole length of Lake Shore drive over night.....it would be a huge success and the Redline would retain its ridership....more people would ride because it is less congested......

I'm talking about north of Millennium Park, there is no additional room to build a surface line paralleling the lake front between there and Loyola. They'd have to build subway, period.

I live in Lakeview half a block from where this line would potentially be. As nice as it would be its just not realistic.

Nowhereman1280 Feb 6, 2008 9:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd (Post 3335746)
There are rail lines......so their are already places the EL could feed into the park. And not recongnizing the actual density of areas along the lake and just making judgments by how far apart lines are on the map is a huge backwards way that many in Chicago look at things. If a new line popped up magically along the whole length of Lake Shore drive over night.....it would be a huge success and the Redline would retain its ridership....more people would ride because it is less congested......

How much time have you spent in the far north neighborhoods? You do realize that up in Edgewater and Roger's Park the Red Line runs between one and 4 blocks from the lake, I don't care how dense it is, you don't need an El every other block...

Even In the Gold Coast there would be no point, At Clark and Division and Chicago it is only about 4-5 blocks from the lake...

Also, don't forget that it would be a huge waste of capacity to run a line right along the lake, say under LSD. You would have all of the riders on one side of the line and 0 population on the East side. It is much more practical to run a line through the very center of the densest areas, I.E. Red Line, than along the edges like a line under LSD would do...

That said a Circle line that would run out along the N/S Pink line, down along Cermak to Mccormick, Up along the lake, under Streeterville, and then back across under Division or north, then back south to the pink line, would work since I would slice around the edges of the city center through some of the densest neighborhoods.

ardecila Feb 6, 2008 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego (Post 3335548)
In other highly speculative potential south loop rapid transit improvements, the other ideas that have been floated in recent years are:
1. an Archer entrance for the Cermak-Chinatown Red Line station, possibly as part of the Circle Line project, though I don't get the point of an expensive transfer connection here given Roosevelt already exists;
2. Reopening the Polk Street entrance of the Harrison stop. I think a major factor here is whether or not it would need to be made handicap-accessible; if so, then obviously it won't be happening.

These seem like good ideas. I had no idea there was a Polk Street exit to Harrison.

I would personally wait until the parking lot at the NW corner of Polk/State has a development proposal, and then work with the developer to incorporate a station entrance that includes an elevator. This way, the turnstiles and unpaid area can be kept at ground-level, and the tiny underground mezzanine turned into just a connecting hallway.

Mr Downtown Feb 7, 2008 3:01 AM

NWC State/Polk will be the Jones HS expansion. Or, on the last renderings I saw, that will be the Jones HS teacher parking lot.

But CDOT/CTA seems to have an aversion to doing building entrances like you find in Washington and even (occasionally) in New York. They put in a sidewalk elevator at Roosevelt/State instead of incorporating it into State Place. Only Merchandise Mart and Thompson Center come to mind.

ardecila Feb 7, 2008 3:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 3336879)
NWC State/Polk will be the Jones HS expansion. Or, on the last renderings I saw, that will be the Jones HS teacher parking lot.

But CDOT/CTA seems to have an aversion to doing building entrances like you find in Washington and even (occasionally) in New York. They put in a sidewalk elevator at Roosevelt/State instead of incorporating it into State Place. Only Merchandise Mart and Thompson Center come to mind.

I don't understand their hesitation. Being confined to the envelope of the street right-of-way means that things necessarily have to be shrunk and distorted, making station facilities more cramped and less enjoyable.

As a widespread policy, it could lead to some headaches (especially when dealing with private developers) but it shouldn't be too difficult when the neighboring lot is owned by CPS.

VivaLFuego Feb 7, 2008 3:59 PM

Just wanted to put this out there, the aldermen who voted against the real estate transfer tax to fund CTA:

Bob Fioretti (2nd)
Sandi Jackson (7th)
Sharon Dixon (24th)
Rey Colon (35th)
Brian Doherty (41st)
Bernard Stone (50th)

pip Feb 7, 2008 5:13 PM

Bob Fioretti (2nd). I'm getting really sick of this guy.

If the City Council did not pass this then all that hundreds of millions of State money a year for the CTA would be cancelled. That was the deal the State of Illinois came up with. Also the pensions of CTA employees would not have been reformed if this did not pass.

What does Bob Fioretti want? no CTA? Oh sure I'm sure he would say of course not but his actions speak loader than his words.

VivaLFuego, I do have one more question for you. You have often talked about those new articulated busses. My concern or question is about the center part that bends. When those busses go over even the smallest of potholes sometimes let alone large bumps it sounds like they are going to fall apart in the center. It is one hell of a banging noise. Its extremely load and I wonder how sturdy those center circle things are.

Chicago3rd Feb 7, 2008 5:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 (Post 3335884)
How much time have you spent in the far north neighborhoods? You do realize that up in Edgewater and Roger's Park the Red Line runs between one and 4 blocks from the lake, I don't care how dense it is, you don't need an El every other block...

Because my dream line turns west at Hollywood and joins the brown line.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 (Post 3335884)
Even In the Gold Coast there would be no point, At Clark and Division and Chicago it is only about 4-5 blocks from the lake...

Again I don't think in suburban terms like distance...rather density. Look at areas of Manhattan and Seoul and notice they don't go by the 4-5 block rule in areas that are dense. We need to either be a city or Dubuque. Spend our money and planning on already dense areas or areas that are zoned to become dense..encouraged....no more 1-2 story buildings next to any station on the line...if they want to be upgraded or added. If they want to stay the same then we just move past them....


Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 (Post 3335884)
Also, don't forget that it would be a huge waste of capacity to run a line right along the lake, say under LSD. You would have all of the riders on one side of the line and 0 population on the East side. It is much more practical to run a line through the very center of the densest areas, I.E. Red Line, than along the edges like a line under LSD would do...

Redline is run on the west side of the uber-density and not thru it. I would like a line on the west side of the park for the most part. Actually my preference for the lake front is light rail.

emathias Feb 7, 2008 6:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd (Post 3338117)
Because my dream line turns west at Hollywood and joins the brown line.

To join the Brown Line, you'd want to turn west under either Wilson or Lawrence. Ideally for the long term, replacing the northmost east-west segment of the Brown Line with a subway under Lawrence all the way from the lakefront to Jefferson Park might be the best solution. Of course to make that work, it would be best to rezone everything within 1/2 mile of the Jefferson Park station as high-density land, which would be extremely unpopular with most J.P. residents I'd think.

Really, though, the whole J.P. area is ripe to become a "downtown" for the NW side even as it is, with Metra and Blue line connections. If the MidCity Transitway got built, and the Brown Line extended to about J.P., then the city would be stupid not to turn Jefferson Park into "downtown NW" because of all the transportation that would be feeding into it. In 50 years, I'd hope to see it a reality. With this, you could even explore a commuter rail shuttle between Skokie and J.P. over or along the Edens, connecting with the MidCity Transitway.

The South Side equivalent would be to either turn Hyde Park into "downtown South" (the more scenic but less popular with locals solution) or do something with the underutilized land around where the Green Line flies over the Dan Ryan (better transportation access, especially if you created an east-west shuttle over the green line between Jackson Park and Ashland).

To do either or both, though, we'd have to really gear up attracting businesses to the city.

emathias Feb 7, 2008 7:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 (Post 3335884)
How much time have you spent in the far north neighborhoods? You do realize that up in Edgewater and Roger's Park the Red Line runs between one and 4 blocks from the lake, I don't care how dense it is, you don't need an El every other block...

I don't think anyone has ever proposed a lakeshore line going north of about Wilson - they almost all turn west at about Wilson to connect to the Brown Line or at least the Red Line.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 (Post 3335884)
Even In the Gold Coast there would be no point, At Clark and Division and Chicago it is only about 4-5 blocks from the lake...

3/8 of a mile (about 3 walking blocks) is the distance most transit planners estimate to be a functional draw area for a rail station. From Clark/Division, that does put you at the Inner Drive at Division, but by that standard, the Hancock Tower and everything east of there is out of range, as is nearly everyone in the Gold Coast north of about Schiller unless they're actually on Clark, as well as most of Old Town. A rail station at Clark and North Ave would redefine transportation for the Gold Coast and Old Town residents year-round and likely also be extremely well-used by beach and park-goers in the summer months.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280 (Post 3335884)
Also, don't forget that it would be a huge waste of capacity to run a line right along the lake, say under LSD. You would have all of the riders on one side of the line and 0 population on the East side. It is much more practical to run a line through the very center of the densest areas, I.E. Red Line, than along the edges like a line under LSD would do...

As I said, I don't think anyone would touch LSD with a line - as you say it wouldn't be worth it and even the most optimistic planners know that would be a bad location for a line. The only reason express buses work for there is that they pick people up in the neighborhoods before driving over to the Drive.

If it were my line, I'd run a Streeterville subway (under Columbus/Fairbanks) west from Chestnut, turning north under Clark (with the turn a broad one accomodating long cars under Washington Square) in a cut-and-cover trench under Clark north to North Ave. Cut and cover lines are closer to the surface so they're slightly noisier, but they're easier to access for pedestrians and therefore result in faster trips and higher utilization. Plus, in areas full of clay, they can be cheaper to build unless utility relocation is onerous. Certainly in the a section from LaSalle to Armitage, you could just temporarily put Clark along the edge of the Park as you dug in to place the line.

Then, depending on funding tolerance, either turn west to become the Circle Line route or continue north under Clark until Diversey, then under Broadway or Claredon to Wilson, then west to Jefferson Park under Lawrence. For that stretch, you could make it an express from Jefferson Park with stops at Kimball, Damon/Ravenswood, Wilson/RedLine - almost a shuttle to bring Uptown Residents fast, easy access to NW jobs. I'd also stagger the stops compared to the Red Line, so maybe put them at Burton, Menomonee, Webster, Wrightwood, Wellington, Roscoe, Waveland, Buena, Wilson, Clark, etc.

It'd be expensive, but it would be used as long as headways were relatively frequent. The Streeterville subway could follow the Carrol Street alignment to the West Loop train stations.

Alternately, it could be done with lightrail north of North Avenue, run on Lincoln Park West or on the very edge of the Park. This would be less efficient, but probably an order of magnitude cheaper.

emathias Feb 7, 2008 7:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd (Post 3335536)
As a person who is a pedestrian very little of what is shown on the map below is acceptable: ...map of Ford City Mall snipped for space...
If they make it denser...I am 100% behind the extension. That goes for every extension to be made and every improvement to be made. There must be more density. There is no reason there cannot be more housing, retail, industrial located in this area in a denser fashion.

Running the El down along Cicero from the blue line to the orange line would be more of a priority for me.

First, look at where existing rail is - the stops would likely be in that (hopefully on the south side of it).

Second, remember that for the most part outer stops on Chicago "L" lines are supported primarily either by feeder buses or park-and-ride or both. While I, too, am car-free and pedestrian oriented, it's not realistic for Ford City to become highly pedestrian-oriented anytime soon. The likely solution would be to extend the rail so that the line doesn't terminate next to a high-traffic destination like the region's second-busiest airport, and then link in circulator and feeder bus lines. Bringing in some pedestrian-friendly development will be nice, but for this location it would be secondary to making it a functional feeder system for access to downtown and reverse access from the inner city to jobs in that area.

schwerve Feb 7, 2008 8:05 PM

as to the current discussion on a lakefront line I'll throw in my two cents. I could never see the benefit of running a line directly north-south along the lakefront because it doesn't offer any connectivity to other lines in the system. What I would like to see is a combination of the grey line, monroe subway, and carroll avenue transitway. It would be a light rail because of the realities of the current system. It would take over the existing metra electric, turn west at monroe and run at grade (could be a subway but that's alot of dough) through the city to clinton, and follow the proposed carrol ave. transitway. From the michigan avenue spur it could follow the lsd frontage road up through lincoln park. it would accomplish linking the south side, lakefront, mccormick place, soldier field, field museum, and navy pier/lincoln park directly into the current system without the costs of heavy rail.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2021/...d38bb52625.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2257/...db1ae7b7d7.jpg

Nowhereman1280 Feb 7, 2008 8:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago3rd (Post 3338117)
Because my dream line turns west at Hollywood and joins the brown line.

Hollywood? Are you kidding me, the Red Line is like 2 or 3 blocks from the lake there, what a waste of transit dollars that would be.

Quote:

Again I don't think in suburban terms like distance...rather density. Look at areas of Manhattan and Seoul and notice they don't go by the 4-5 block rule in areas that are dense. We need to either be a city or Dubuque. Spend our money and planning on already dense areas or areas that are zoned to become dense..encouraged....no more 1-2 story buildings next to any station on the line...if they want to be upgraded or added. If they want to stay the same then we just move past them....
Since when is distance a suburban term? I'm pretty sure that I don't decide how long it is going to take me to go from downtown to Roger's Park in terms of Density. This is a matter of putting lines where they will serve the most people. Lets say people will walk up to three blocks to get on the train. If the densest area is along lincoln park and then it gets exponentially less dense as you move away, then you would put the train line 3 blocks from the park since all of those people in those highrises would still be willing to walk those three blocks as well as the people in the less dense areas three blocks to the west. If you built it right through the center of the densest area then you would build it a block from the park wasting two whole blocks of range to the East since no one lives in the middle of the park.

Also, knowing a lot of people who live along LSD, no one wastes time with the train anyhow, everyone uses the 145, 146, 147, and 151 to get places since they are just as frequent and much closer and efficient. Even with the train right next to the lake at the Loyola campus it is about 15 minutes faster to get on the 147 than the train since 147 goes express.

Quote:

Redline is run on the west side of the uber-density and not thru it. I would like a line on the west side of the park for the most part. Actually my preference for the lake front is light rail.
Like I just said, it may be your preference, but it makes no sense and the people who live there will still just use the express buses anyhow since they are faster and will always be faster than rail.

pip Feb 7, 2008 8:59 PM

express busses are often way slower than trains. When I have rode them during rush hour or the bottle neck at the entrance to Michigan ave coming from the north can take upwards of 20 minutes sometimes just to go those last few hundred feet.

Dr. Taco Feb 7, 2008 9:42 PM

^ what about traffic, nowhere? I've been up in rogers park and down in streeterville and everywhere in between, and it just kind of sort of sucks. Sure, express buses are nice.... at 8pm or later. other than that, they're about as express as any other car in bumper-to-bumper.

You know, its just the worst at night when youre by the lake on the northside, and you happen to live on the northwest side, and your only option at times is to walk 5 blocks to the redline so you can take it all the way to lake and take the blue line north.

I mean, I can live without any rail additions, but it sure would be nice. and streeterville? So far away from the rail!


____________________________
I really like your maps, schwerve! :tup:

emathias Feb 7, 2008 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstush04 (Post 3338739)
^ what about traffic, nowhere? I've been up in rogers park and down in streeterville and everywhere in between, and it just kind of sort of sucks. Sure, express buses are nice.... at 8pm or later. other than that, they're about as express as any other car in bumper-to-bumper.

You know, its just the worst at night when youre by the lake on the northside, and you happen to live on the northwest side, and your only option at times is to walk 5 blocks to the redline so you can take it all the way to lake and take the blue line north.

I mean, I can live without any rail additions, but it sure would be nice. and streeterville? So far away from the rail!

Ideally, Chicago would take a page from London, Madrid, Paris, etc., and, create a mesh of grade-separated or otherwise traffic-mitigated options instead of just neighborhoods-to-downtown feeders. A few shorter lines, like something close to and roughly parallel to (assuming a subway is out of the question for price reasons) Halsted from central Bridgeport to the North/Clybourn corridor would be useful and greatly enhance the near west side. A line from Pilsen/Douglas along 16th to the south lakefront around McCormick could become useful.

I've always thought it would be cool to put streetcars along the Boulevard system. It would be easy in some places, harder in others, but it would easily supplement the Circle Line concept and, if coupled with targeted zoning, could really enhance life and boost development in a diverse collection of neighborhoods.

Another thing the city does half of (the preserve portion), but should probably do more of from a rezoning standpoint, is preserving corridors for future transit while at the same time zoning the areas along those routes to encourage the need for that future transit. It should also make sure that when it zones areas to allow big-box stores that it doesn't do that in places what will make future transit less useful for pedestrians, since pedestrians in the U.S. aren't the biggest users of big-box stores.

It's not like we're the only city that is missing obvious links, though - what would it do for the New York region if there were some real east-west lines across Manhattan from New Jersey to Long Island? :-)

Mr Downtown Feb 8, 2008 5:20 AM

You will notice that London, Madrid, Paris, etc. don't have a single concentrated CBD. They have widely dispersed suburban train termini that give rise to a number of office districts.

It would be better for regional transit to reinforce Chicago's highly centralized office employment district than to enable it to spread out.

Chicago3rd Feb 8, 2008 3:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias (Post 3338325)
To join the Brown Line, you'd want to turn west under either Wilson or Lawrence. Ideally for the long term, replacing the northmost east-west segment of the Brown Line with a subway under Lawrence all the way from the lakefront to Jefferson Park might be the best solution. Of course to make that work, it would be best to rezone everything within 1/2 mile of the Jefferson Park station as high-density land, which would be extremely unpopular with most J.P. residents I'd think.

Sounds great to me. Hell its that or we could put the northsouth freeway through J.P. running parallel to Cicero. If we could massacre our cities in the 1950's for freeways...we can improve them with mass transportation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by emathias (Post 3338325)
Really, though, the whole J.P. area is ripe to become a "downtown" for the NW side even as it is, with Metra and Blue line connections. If the MidCity Transitway got built, and the Brown Line extended to about J.P., then the city would be stupid not to turn Jefferson Park into "downtown NW" because of all the transportation that would be feeding into it. In 50 years, I'd hope to see it a reality. With this, you could even explore a commuter rail shuttle between Skokie and J.P. over or along the Edens, connecting with the MidCity Transitway.

The South Side equivalent would be to either turn Hyde Park into "downtown South" (the more scenic but less popular with locals solution) or do something with the underutilized land around where the Green Line flies over the Dan Ryan (better transportation access, especially if you created an east-west shuttle over the green line between Jackson Park and Ashland).

To do either or both, though, we'd have to really gear up attracting businesses to the city.

Love all your ideas!

VivaLFuego Feb 8, 2008 3:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 3339788)
You will notice that London, Madrid, Paris, etc. don't have a single concentrated CBD. They have widely dispersed suburban train termini that give rise to a number of office districts.

It would be better for regional transit to reinforce Chicago's highly centralized office employment district than to enable it to spread out.

Generally concur. The city and region are really built for a hub-and-spoke rail system (supporting the one major mega high-employment-density district) supplemented by -roughly- a developed grid of scalable BRT. That would include the usual arterial suspects in Chicago (Western, Irving Park, Cicero, etc.), Pace's "J-Line" proposal as well as partial implementation of their large "PARTNER" BRT network from some time back.

Really, the north branch of the Red Line (connecting with Purple service to Davis St) is the only Chicago line that functions remotely like a "European"-style line, with high residential and employment density along much of its length and thus highly varied trip patterns. To some extent, the Blue Line O'hare branch serves varied trip patterns, with some employment concentrated at the Cumberland, Rosemont, and O'hare stations; but even this, when considered as riders-per-route-mile, are fairly low. There is -some- commuter traffic to the Medical District, but in terms of overall volume it is minor. All other lines serve non-CBD trips more or less incidentally, with non-CBD trip densities being massively outweighed by the peak direction volume.

A rail "grid" would only make sense if there were significantly dispersed major employment districts: something on the west side along the Ike, along Cicero near Midway and I-55, at the 95th junction, a majorly expanded Medical District and Ashland corridor.


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:51 PM.

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