SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Skyscraper & Highrise Construction (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=103)
-   -   CHICAGO | North Union (Moody Bible Campus) | 2,680 Residential Units (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=244410)

BVictor1 Oct 27, 2020 5:11 AM

CHICAGO | North Union (Moody Bible Campus) | 2,680 Residential Units
 
Seems like a project of this scale deserves its own thread...

https://chicago.urbanize.city/sites/...?itok=Gi31B9M0

https://chicago.urbanize.city/sites/...?itok=t99ckP1s

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...orth-side-site

October 26, 2020 05:19 PM UPDATED 5 HOURS AGO

Nearly 2,700 homes planned for Near North Side site
The project would be one of the biggest residential developments in Chicago in decades, and the largest for its builder, JDL Development.

https://s3-prod.chicagobusiness.com/...%20%282%29.png


ALBY GALLUN

Quote:

JDL Development plans nearly 2,700 homes on Near North Side property it would buy from the Moody Bible Institute, one of the biggest residential developments in Chicago in decades.

The Chicago-based developer will unveil its proposal for the 8.1-acre site at a Nov. 12 community meeting, according to emails from the Department of Planning and Development and Ald. Brian Hopkins (2nd). The emails were short on specifics, but did include a key, previously unreported detail: The project northwest of Moody’s campus would encompass about 2,680 residential units.

Quote:

Called North Union, the development on the Moody property would be bounded roughly by CTA Brown and Purple Line tracks, Oak, Chestnut and Wells streets. It would include a mix of low-, mid- and high-rise buildings, 30,000 square feet of commercial space and about 1.3 acres of public open space, according to the emails. Two towers, one 600 feet tall, would rise on the northwest corner of the site, said JDL President Jim Letchinger.

rgarri4 Oct 27, 2020 5:28 AM

Man this is awesome.

C. Oct 27, 2020 1:00 PM

Great news for Chicago!!

Will there be NIMBY opposition?

the urban politician Oct 27, 2020 1:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C. (Post 9086444)
Will there be NIMBY opposition?

^ The question is never whether there will be NIMBY opposition. It is rather how much there will be....

BuildThemTaller Oct 27, 2020 2:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 9086462)
^ The question is never whether there will be NIMBY opposition. It is rather how much there will be....

How much could there be? The immediate neighbors are Onni, the city (Walter Payton Prep), and Moody, the group that sold the land to be developed. I suppose there are people in Old Town that will gripe, but it's not like anyone that stands to lose views of downtown would object to placing towers there.

I suppose it's best to assume a "concerned citizen and taxpayer" will kick up a fuss.

Randomguy34 Oct 27, 2020 2:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 9086462)
^ The question is never whether there will be NIMBY opposition. It is rather how much there will be....

JDL shared with the Tribune last month that neighbors were surprisingly receptive of the plan, even with the 50-story towers.

It also helps that almost everything east of Wells is outside Burnett's ward, so he'll likely ignore any NIMBYs outside his ward

r18tdi Oct 27, 2020 2:39 PM

The Trib has a story with a gallery of renderings:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/resiz...PFALHN2TSU.jpg

sentinel Oct 27, 2020 2:51 PM

I really REALLY wish developers would hire design architects from outside of Chicago - I mean, keep the local talent as AOR, but get some better designers. I think this development has promise, but it could be much more interesting.

ardecila Oct 27, 2020 3:00 PM

This is kind of backwards, they should be concentrating the density closest to the Chicago Brown Line stop, no? That way they could step down in scale toward the school. Maybe even put their park/playground at that end so they get some synergy with Payton's athletic fields.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuildThemTaller (Post 9086508)
How much could there be? The immediate neighbors are Onni, the city (Walter Payton Prep), and Moody, the group that sold the land to be developed. I suppose there are people in Old Town that will gripe, but it's not like anyone that stands to lose views of downtown would object to placing towers there.

I suppose it's best to assume a "concerned citizen and taxpayer" will kick up a fuss.

I assume the Walter Payton community will raise a fuss, the dropoffs there do create a fair bit of traffic and JDL is proposing its tallest building directly next to the school.

Parc Chestnut has 286 units, that's a lot of neighbors. 45 units at Sedgwick/Locust, and various smaller condo buildings scattered throughout etc. There are other big buildings on Orleans but those are mostly rentals.

BVictor1 Oct 27, 2020 3:18 PM

https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVFT.ClSv...2&qlt=90&dpr=2

r18tdi Oct 27, 2020 3:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 9086586)
This is kind of backwards, they should be concentrating the density closest to the Chicago Brown Line stop, no? That way they could step down in scale toward the school. Maybe even put their park/playground at that end so they get some synergy with Payton's athletic fields.

I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps JDL believes that putting most of the density near Division will further force the city's hand to back a CTA station there?

Quote:

I assume the Walter Payton community will raise a fuss, the dropoffs there do create a fair bit of traffic and JDL is proposing its tallest building directly next to the school.
Yes, and directly in line with the tallest tower of OTP... which seems very odd from a view consideration, unless they think the southern views will make up for it?

ardecila Oct 27, 2020 3:24 PM

I don't think the Division Brown Line stop is a factor. Atrium Village/OTP was the excuse to build that, but the new entrance to the Red Line made it less important.

There's really a lot of redundancy between the coverage areas of Brown/Purple and Red, I can see why this isn't a huge priority for CTA. The real benefit is for the people who live further west in the Cabrini area.

sentinel Oct 27, 2020 4:12 PM

https://www.chicagotribune.com/resiz...YWEAYZTLF4.jpg
Bigger image from the Tribune article (source: Trib/JDL Development)

Barrelfish Oct 27, 2020 4:49 PM

Going against what someone said in another thread, I think this could be great for Wells Street. Wells has tons going on north of Division and south of Chicago. Good planning on this development could connect those two stretches.

sentinel Oct 27, 2020 5:22 PM

Four thousand years ago when I was in grad school, I remember reading a book about urban design/planning in Chicago (the book was from the mid or late 90s), and how even though the City population had declined from 3.6 million to 2.8 million, it could actually comfortably accommodate a population of 1 million or more on top of the original peak population, within its current borders. Obviously, this is based on best-case scenarios in terms of urban planning, and I'm sure a lot has changed since the 90s when the book was written. But I look at developments like this, as well as other mega-developments that have been proposed over the past 10 years (the 78, Lincoln Yards, The Michael Reece site, SouthWorks/U.S. Steel), and not to mention smaller, but more numerous TOD developments peppered throughout the rest of the City outside of the greater CBD, and it's definitely possible...although demand is a different story, especially when Chicago is still shedding lower and middle-income residents.

I wish I could remember the book, so much from that time in my life is lost in the aether of my brain :/

mark0 Oct 27, 2020 6:53 PM

"I'm sure a lot has changed since the 90s when the book was written"

It sure has. Chicago did a great job keeping itself relevant in the new economic order however the region and especially the state of Illinois have floundered and sadly it's bringing Chicago down with it. A lot of factors to discuss but business competitiveness, lack of natural features and lousy weather really hurt Illinois in an era where sunshine, natural beauty and low taxes are prime drivers. The options / futures industry is also changing, central banks now trade and control the volatility making meaning the "market makers" are gone and with them a huge blow to our financial center standing despite the exchanges being headquartered here. In addition we no longer have a single money center bank. We have no national media. No major tech platform. A lot has gone wrong in the last 20 years and our political class has no ideas while we hemorrhage people and talent. If you think its bad in the Chicago area go down state, it's stagnant and shrinking. I really think we need to shore up Illinois going forward and Chicago will naturally go along with it. The Downstaters are correct when they complain about Chicago soaking up the resources of the state.

Edit: Dont mean to be a downer but we shouldn't be subsidizing these private mega projects in Chicago. If they cant happen on their own then they cant happen. We are in emergency survival mode here trying to stay above stall speed. I personally think every dollar the city and state takes in should go towards stabilizing the debts (reform is another topic). Once the state and city officially go broke and can no longer borrow the decline can take decades to recover from if ever.

Bonsai Tree Oct 27, 2020 7:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark0 (Post 9086995)
"I'm sure a lot has changed since the 90s when the book was written"

It sure has. Chicago did a great job keeping itself relevant in the new economic order however the region and especially the state of Illinois have floundered and sadly it's bringing Chicago down with it. A lot of factors to discuss but business competitiveness, lack of natural features and lousy weather really hurt Illinois in an era where sunshine, natural beauty and low taxes are prime drivers. The options / futures industry is also changing, central banks now trade and control the volatility making meaning the "market makers" are gone and with them a huge blow to our financial center standing despite the exchanges being headquartered here. In addition we no longer have a single money center bank. We have no national media. No major tech platform. A lot has gone wrong in the last 20 years and our political class has no ideas while we hemorrhage people and talent. If you think its bad in the Chicago area go down state, it's stagnant and shrinking. I really think we need to shore up Illinois going forward and Chicago will naturally go along with it. The Downstaters are correct when they complain about Chicago soaking up the resources of the state.

Edit: Dont mean to be a downer but we shouldn't be subsidizing these private mega projects in Chicago. If they cant happen on their own then they cant happen. We are in emergency survival mode here trying to stay above stall speed. I personally think every dollar the city and state takes in should go towards stabilizing the debts (reform is another topic). Once the state and city officially go broke and can no longer borrow the decline can take decades to recover from if ever.

I hate to say this, but Chicago is fundamentally different than downstate. We operate in two completely different spheres and I'm perfectly ok with that. Chicagoland doesn't owe anything to downstate.

Also, we're not subsidizing these megaprojects in the traditional sense. You seem to be under the common misconception of how TIFs for megadevelopments operate. The city isn't giving sterling bay $1.3 billion dollars and saying "have fun". Sterling Bay and Related Midwest are going out of their own pockets to pay for infrastructure within the megadevelopments. In exchange, part of the added tax revenue from those developments will pay off the developer. It's a way to improve the city's infrastructure while keeping our deficit down. By your own metric, you should be in favor of this. And I'm not sure what that has to do with North Union since I don't think any sort of Tif has been discussed yet.

As to your "we have no strengths" thing. I think that we'll hopefully find that our abundant water, lack of natural disasters, and inexpensive cost of living may attract more people in the future. I know many on the West Coast who are considering a move somewhere else in the country because it is unlivable out there. Your entire argument about sunshine, taxes, etc. may ring true to some extent, but I'd also like to remind you that Chicago is the capital of the Midwest. Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, and Indiana have all had steadily increasing populations (even despite their bad weather). When the Midwest does better, we'll do better as well.

mark0 Oct 27, 2020 8:29 PM

I understand TIF perfectly, I think you may not. TIFs were supposed to be for blighted property, property that could not be redeveloped "but for" the proposed allocation. This property fails the "but for" test. Would it be as dense without the TIF? Probably not, but it would still be developed. Mega projects like this utilizing TIF distort the marketplace and starve development from marginal areas.

ardecila Oct 27, 2020 9:37 PM

It is unlikely that JDL will ask for TIF money at North Union, especially since the project does not seem to include any new public infrastructure and barely provides the required 10% of affordable units.

It's possible the city might use TIF money to advance the Brown Line stop at Division, but that's been talked about for years and is a separate project. If that happens, I think everyone involved will be very careful to keep that project separate from North Union so that activists do not conflate the two.

emathias Oct 27, 2020 9:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark0 (Post 9087141)
I understand TIF perfectly, I think you may not. TIFs were supposed to be for blighted property, property that could not be redeveloped "but for" the proposed allocation. This property fails the "but for" test. Would it be as dense without the TIF? Probably not, but it would still be developed. Mega projects like this utilizing TIF distort the marketplace and starve development from marginal areas.

I largely agree, although I think it benefits the city to do things to maximize density in the core where infrastructure supporting density already exists. Anything south of North Ave, and certainly south of Division, should be developed to international levels of density, which this is. Some of the CHA's proposals for the Cabrini area are laughable in their lack of density. The Core needs to be dense because density is where you get the best bang for your urban buck, and its what people who want urban lifestyles want. People who don't want high density have so many other parts of Chicago to consider, from Hyde Park to Rogers Park, so in the Central Area, I think the highest density needs to occur and I don't have a problem with at least some of the projects getting an extra push to make that happen.

I live two blocks south of Chicago Ave, by Wells and Huron, and look forward to this. The area around me has been under near-constant construction since I moved in in 2004, with the only pause being due to the Financial Crisis. Since I moved in there have been two new hotels, plus 2 renovations existing hotels, eleven buildings of 12 or more stories and three buildings under 10 stories built within 3 short blocks of me (not 3 standard 1/8-mile blocks, but 3 actual River North blocks). And if I go further than that, I could keep adding buildings. But I'm still looking forward to this project. Like someone else said, it will help tie Wells north of Division to Wells south of Chicago. I also think that putting the densest part near Oak helps drive any traffic it creates to be even split between Division and Chicago Ave. Oak is the only street between Division and Chicago that goes from Michigan Avenue to Larrabee. It's still only a 5 minute walk to the Brown Line at Chicago and not much more than 5 minutes to the Red Line at Division. I would like to see a Brown Line station at Division. But I'd also like to see a Red Line station at around Cleveland, especially if the City isn't going to be making a Clinton Street subway splitting from the existing subway at Larrabee anytime soon. A subway station at Cleveland would be far more useable for people in the northern parts of the ex-Cabrini area than even a Division Brown Line station would be. When the idea of a Circle Line was being bounced around, I liked the idea of turning North/Clyborn area into a superstation with the Red Line interfacing with the Circle Line and the Brown Line dipping into a subway for transfers and making the station a massive transfer station. But the Circle Line seems to not be on anyone's radar anymore.

Goose Island Guru Oct 27, 2020 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 9087246)
It is unlikely that JDL will ask for TIF money at North Union, especially since the project does not seem to include any new public infrastructure and barely provides the required 10% of affordable units.

It's possible the city might use TIF money to advance the Brown Line stop at Division, but that's been talked about for years and is a separate project. If that happens, I think everyone involved will be very careful to keep that project separate from North Union so that activists do not conflate the two.

There is no TIF proposed for this development. Everyone can take a deep breath.

rgarri4 Oct 28, 2020 4:50 PM

From my 3D model of Chicago.

https://images2.imgbox.com/bf/bd/b2hp2WdG_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/dd/59/pk14pRti_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/58/91/YriWHKLf_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/bf/bd/b2hp2WdG_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/a9/0d/mpxRD3Nl_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/b5/ab/fA6JREfI_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/c1/10/817mUhLQ_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/a8/05/DaUvL7GJ_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/99/d1/ixqROxpX_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/72/59/tdDEL8bt_o.jpg

https://images2.imgbox.com/c5/67/wPuPMF7p_o.jpg

lakeshoredrive Oct 28, 2020 8:17 PM

I am underwhelmed by this development. Is anyone feeling the same way?

ardecila Oct 28, 2020 8:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lakeshoredrive (Post 9088320)
I am underwhelmed by this development. Is anyone feeling the same way?

It's from the old school of mega developments, like Central Station. The developer does a mix of highrises and lowrise/townhouse phases so they can react to changes in the market (owner vs rental, etc).

Surprising that there is no office or hotel planned. I would expect to see that next to a downtown L stop. I guess JDL doesn't wanna compete with the Fulton Market scene, but River North has seen plenty of office absorption as well.

Kumdogmillionaire Oct 28, 2020 9:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lakeshoredrive (Post 9088320)
I am underwhelmed by this development. Is anyone feeling the same way?

I mean, it's away from the core, and doesn't have the greatest access to transportation, so it's not like it can be some absurd/over the top mega development. There are major site constraints, plus an issue in what they can even build there, considering the neighborhood. This is what I'd expected from the beginning, if anything, perhaps bigger.

r18tdi Oct 28, 2020 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kumdogmillionaire (Post 9088411)
This is what I'd expected from the beginning, if anything, perhaps bigger.

I too assumed it would be smaller, and it would look like Old Town Park v2.0.

gebs Oct 29, 2020 4:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonsai Tree (Post 9087040)
I think that we'll hopefully find that our abundant water, lack of natural disasters, and inexpensive cost of living may attract more people in the future. I know many on the West Coast who are considering a move somewhere else in the country because it is unlivable out there.

I can't agree with this enough. If our climate continues worsening, then you will see a LOT of people look at the Midwest (and Chicago in particular) as a very safe bet for long-term comfort and, let's face it, survival.

As for this development, um ... I like it. Let's build it.

ardecila Oct 29, 2020 10:41 PM

Getting way off topic for a project thread, but the demographers who have looked at this have generally concluded that climate migrations will mostly speed up existing trends and benefit inland Sunbelt and Mountain cities like Austin, Dallas, Nashville, Atlanta, Denver, etc. Miami being underwater doesn't solve Chicago's problems (or Detroit's, Buffalo's, etc).

Briguy Oct 29, 2020 10:54 PM

They put the tallest building so that it will be the terminus of Franklin St, and have amazing views down Franklin for residents, and we get a beautiful (hopefully) board of trade type situation

rgarri4 Oct 29, 2020 11:40 PM

A quick flythrough:

Video Link

NYC2ATX Nov 5, 2020 7:09 AM

It's funny that news of this proposal is breaking now. In the past few months as the final Old Town Park tower has topped out, and I've seen some photos of it in the skyline, I thought to myself how that project has served to extend the core of skyscrapers further north and west. Now, this has granted precedent to future tall proposals in the area ...aaand cue taller proposal for the area! :P

IrishIllini Nov 10, 2020 9:58 PM

I don't see where the NIMBYs would come from for this one. Next to no one around :shrug:. The two large towers on Orleans are rentals. The churches on Orleans see a pay day in their futures. Even if you're not sold on the architecture, it's a much needed facelift.

Randomguy34 Nov 10, 2020 10:21 PM

Here's the draft presentation for the Thursday: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...aft_111020.pdf

ORD2010 Nov 10, 2020 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34 (Post 9102898)
Here's the draft presentation for the Thursday: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...aft_111020.pdf

That's a lot of phases! It makes sense but I highly wish it was reversed and we began with the two tall towers. But build it all!

ChiPlanner Nov 10, 2020 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34 (Post 9102898)
Here's the draft presentation for the Thursday: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...aft_111020.pdf

Honestly... I could make some nit-picky complaints... but honestly it's well thought out, low parking, has affordable units, decent massing, lots of open space.

Get 'er done.

rlw777 Nov 11, 2020 1:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34 (Post 9102898)
Here's the draft presentation for the Thursday: https://www.chicago.gov/content/dam/...aft_111020.pdf

Love seeing lots of basement parking. I feel like JDL does way more underground parking than other developers in this town.

Barrelfish Nov 11, 2020 3:06 PM

I like it a lot. Some of the strong points:
  • Retail and active uses along Wells street, which will help link the areas to the north and south. The phasing means that these improvements will happen first (eliminating surface parking!)
  • Parking is largely tucked away (underground or next to the L tracks)
  • Adaptive re-use of some of the more attractive existing structures. 871 N Franklin, 919 N Franklin, and 221 W Walton are all brick with some nice detailing and are being preserved.
  • Healthy amounts of open space
  • Conceptual designs for the buildings are architecturally interesting, and I like the way the materials shift to match the surroundings

Overall, a very thoughtful proposal. I'm excited to see how this turns out.

west-town-brad Nov 11, 2020 4:42 PM

looks like a great connecting piece on the north side, reminds me of Seattle/Amazon's neighborhood

r18tdi Nov 11, 2020 8:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlw777 (Post 9103144)
I feel like JDL does way more underground parking than other developers in this town.

One Chicago obviously comes to mind. Any others?

BVictor1 Nov 11, 2020 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by r18tdi (Post 9103753)
One Chicago obviously comes to mind. Any others?

9 W. Walton

Randomguy34 Nov 13, 2020 12:08 AM

Here's the Youtube livestream for folks to watch and ask questions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3wBKFIM8j4

Ricochet48 Nov 13, 2020 1:25 AM

So who on here was asking about the height increases and landmark towers haha

BVictor1 Nov 13, 2020 1:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricochet48 (Post 9104964)
So who on here was asking about the height increases and landmark towers haha

Me...


Here are some notes:

North Union Community Meeting (11/12/20)


878 N. Wells - 21 story building (389 units) - 256’ - 200 parking

920 N. Wells - 15 story building (186 units) - 155’ - 90 parking

909 N. Franklin - 12 story building (100 units) - 161’ - 100 parking

205 W. Oak - 42 story building (340 units) - 509’ - 324 parking - rental/condo?

312 W. Walton - 30 story building (340 units) - 312’ - 212 parking

310 W. Oak - 47 story building (508 units) - 512’ - 583 parking

300 W. Oak - 55 story building (633 units) - 630’


- Repurposing older buildings

- DX-5 not changing the underlying zoning of expanded downtown area

- Goettsch Partners as a design partner

- Open space will be privately owned/maintained but open to the public

- Gonna used dead end Wendell Street for ingress/egress of taller towers

- $20,000,000 in annual taxes per year

- 400 permanent jobs

- LEED neighborhood development

- permeable paving for alleys

- $21,000,000 into affordable housing fund

- $21,000,000 neighborhood opportunity

- 236 affordable units on site and evenly distributed amongst unit types

- Approximately $1,300,000,000

rgarri4 Nov 13, 2020 2:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricochet48 (Post 9104964)
So who on here was asking about the height increases and landmark towers haha

Haha. When she read those I was like it's definitely someone from here.

Barrelfish Nov 13, 2020 8:24 PM

I loved pretty much everything about that presentation. Very thoughtful all around. It's a great sign when the toughest questions they didn't already have a plan for were "can you build a temporary dog park earlier" and "where will Walter Payton students play soccer".

Let's hope they get funded and it becomes real ASAP.

ChiTownWonder Nov 15, 2020 8:02 AM

Hope everyone has a great day :)

RedCorsair87 Nov 16, 2020 7:59 PM

Some improved photos:

https://chicagoyimby.com/2020/11/jdl...orth-side.html

IrishIllini Dec 10, 2020 6:09 PM

Surprised there's no mention of reestablishing the elusive Division brown and purple lines station. Definitely more justified than rebuilding the Halsted green and pink lines station.

Randomguy34 Dec 10, 2020 6:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrishIllini (Post 9130037)
Surprised there's no mention of reestablishing the elusive Division brown and purple lines station. Definitely more justified than rebuilding the Halsted green and pink lines station.

Reestablishing the Division stop was mentioned at the meeting. The CTA's reasoning for not doing so is that the Brown/Purple lines are already overloaded by the time they get to Sedgewick. So until they can run at increased frequencies, likely not until the Belmont flyover is finished, the Division stop will not be reopened.

ardecila Dec 10, 2020 7:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomguy34 (Post 9130083)
Reestablishing the Division stop was mentioned at the meeting. The CTA's reasoning for not doing so is that the Brown/Purple lines are already overloaded by the time they get to Sedgewick. So until they can run at increased frequencies, likely not until the Belmont flyover is finished, the Division stop will not be reopened.

The Belmont flyover will be open next year (although the mainline rebuild will stretch out another few years) so if that truly is the constraining factor then CTA should feel free to start planning for a Division stop. These new stops take years to plan, design, and fund.

However, I believe the benefits of Belmont flyover will accrue mainly to Red Line trains. Brown and Purple are limited by the number of slots in the Loop, not necessarily by conflicts at Clark Junction. CTA has obscured this fact, because they have tried to build the strongest possible case for Federal support and because the Lakeview residents impacted by the project are more partial to Brown Line service than Red Line service (Becky: "ew, the Red Line?!") The only way I see to increase service on Brown Line is to disentangle it with the Purple Line and take over those slots in the Loop, which means eliminating the Purple stops at Wellington, Diversey and Armitage and sending the Purple Line into the subway.

Long story short, if CTA is looking for additional capacity on Brown in order to build the Division stop then we might be waiting a very long time.


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:18 AM.

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