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)

N830MH Dec 16, 2011 7:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTA Gray Line (Post 5510424)
If the freight railroad operation were eliminated from the equation, the Red Line Extension could be placed in a trench, or cut-and-cover subway (best) - for MUCH less cost than an aerial structure.

What about Blue Line? Will they ever more rail service extension?

jpIllInoIs Dec 16, 2011 4:58 PM

Blue Line Tiger III Grant
 
Looks like the Blue Line scored a little money for 3 mile of track and a bike facility..

http://www.rtands.com/newsflash/chic...rant-4827.html.

ardecila Dec 17, 2011 1:12 AM

^^ I'm confused. That track is not a slow zone, according to CTA's own maps. From personal experience, I know there is a southbound slow zone around California. But how can it possibly cost $20 million to replace only 1600' of track?

CTA did rebuild all the track in the Dearborn Subway and between O'Hare and Addison.

the urban politician Dec 17, 2011 2:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 5519726)
^^ I'm confused. That track is not a slow zone, according to CTA's own maps. From personal experience, I know there is a southbound slow zone around California. But how can it possibly cost $20 million to replace only 1600' of track?

^ The report quoted says '3.6 miles' of track.

Also, not all 20 million will go to the blue line. Some is also going to the bike sharing program.

ardecila Dec 17, 2011 2:57 AM

Yeah, but the slow zone map I linked to (the most recent one at the top) only shows 1600' of slow zones.

the urban politician Dec 17, 2011 3:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 5519825)
Yeah, but the slow zone map I linked to (the most recent one at the top) only shows 1600' of slow zones.

^ Maybe they are trying to prevent future slow zones?

M II A II R II K Dec 17, 2011 4:01 PM

Emanuel, Quinn hope bicycles fill the missing link in mass transit


December 16, 2011

By Jon Hilkevitch

Read More: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,3771067.story

Quote:

Going from bicycle to train and even to airplane could be a breeze thanks to new funding designed to encourage creative solutions to urban congestion, officials said Thursday. A $20 million federal transportation grant for Chicago that was first announced Monday will allocate $16 million toward repairs on the CTA Blue Line O'Hare branch and $4 million for the city's planned bicycle-sharing project set to start next year, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Gov. Pat Quinn said during an event at the Logan Square Blue Line station, 2620 N. Milwaukee Ave.

The Logan Square neighborhood near the CTA stop is a candidate to get one of 300 bike-sharing stations in 2012, Emanuel said. The city plans to provide 3,000 bikes for short-term use, for free or a modest fee, starting in June, to encourage less driving and more use of mass transit, and to reduce traffic congestion and pollution. The mass transit-bicycling connection encourages bike use before or after using transit, officials said. Users will pick up a bike from a self-service docking station, ride to their destination and drop off the bike at the nearest station.

Officials expect to expand the bike-sharing program to 4,000 bicycles and 400 stations near bus stops and rail stations by 2013. The total cost of the Blue Line and bike projects is estimated at $64.6 million, according to a document provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation. While the CTA and Chicago Department of Transportation are getting a total of $20 million, Chicago's original grant application totaled $50 million — $40 million for the CTA and $10 million for bike-sharing, CDOT spokesman Bill McCaffrey said. Forty-six transportation projects nationwide will get a total of $511 million in this funding round, according to the U.S. Transportation Department. The top single amounts awarded were $20 million apiece to four projects, including Chicago's.

.....



Gov. Pat Quinn, from left, Mayor Rahm Emanuel and U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood gather Thursday at the Logan Square CTA station to announce a $20 million federal grant for Blue Line repairs and a bicycle-sharing program. (José M. Osorio, Chicago Tribune / December 15, 2011)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/...2/66804248.jpg

emathias Dec 17, 2011 4:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 5519832)
^ Maybe they are trying to prevent future slow zones?

Could also be they knew they were going to get it and so already did the work and will just replace the money they used.

But more likely it's that the current condition is such that they can keep it out of slow zone status, but it takes more and more work to do so, so replacing track or whatever it is they're doing provides a more permanent solution.

ardecila Dec 17, 2011 10:47 PM

Hopefully they can use the recycled-plastic ties and modern tie clips to give the track a longer lifespan than the previous generation of track.

I just have a fundamental issue with CTA using one-time grants to pay for periodic maintenance. What's gonna happen when we get conservatives in Washington (it's guaranteed to happen eventually) and the well dries up? We're still gonna need to find those maintenance funds somewhere.

M II A II R II K Dec 19, 2011 5:31 PM

Will Rahm Emanuel Show America What BRT Can Do?


December 19, 2011

By Ben Schulman

Read More: http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/12/19...at-brt-can-do/

Quote:

.....

With Chicago DOT Commissioner Gabe Klein at his side, Emanuel has already implemented the city’s first protected bike lanes as part of a plan to add 100 miles of bike lanes within four years, announced a $1 billion upgrade to the Chicago Transit Authority’s Red Line, and passed a $2 “congestion fee” on downtown parking garages that will go towards the creation of a CTA Green Line stop that serves McCormick Place – the nation’s largest convention center – and a downtown circulator bus route being billed as bus rapid transit.

- He has stated that BRT projects in Chicago will include “dedicated bus lanes, signal preemption, pre-paid boarding or on-board fare verification, multiple entry and exit points on the buses, limited stops, and at-grade boarding.” As it’s proposed now — with off-board fare payment and signal priority — the downtown circulator is a step in this direction. But it has yet to be seen whether Chicago will commit to high-performance BRT that sets a precedent for other American cities.

- From Boston to Kansas City, U.S. cities tend to implement “BRT-lite,” where the actual benefits fall well short of expectations. Most of this disconnect is due to poor marketing by transit agencies trying to drum up excitement for projects that don’t meet true BRT standards. When the projects deliver less than promised, the reputation of BRT as an effective transit solution suffers.

- A gold-standard BRT system in Chicago could serve as the bellwether for the next wave of American BRT. “Chicago looks very promising, and could be a model for other cities,” says ITDP Executive Director Walter Hook. “Rahm Emanuel understands BRT better than any other U.S. municipal leader, according to Enrique Penalosa,” he added, referring to the former mayor of Bogota, Columbia, who built perhaps the world’s most advanced BRT system. The early word from respected voices like Hook and Penalosa bodes well for Chicago’s BRT efforts. And if the city follows through, it will bode well for BRT nationwide.

.....



With Mayor Rahm Emanuel signaling a commitment to high-performance bus rapid transit, the Chicago-based nonprofit Metropolitan Planning Council envisions a 95-mile BRT network that would carry an additional 71,000 daily riders.

http://dc.streetsblog.org/wp-content...12/MPC_BRT.jpg

the urban politician Dec 19, 2011 6:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K (Post 5521839)
Will Rahm Emanuel Show America What BRT Can Do?


December 19, 2011

By Ben Schulman

Read More: http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/12/19...at-brt-can-do/






With Mayor Rahm Emanuel signaling a commitment to high-performance bus rapid transit, the Chicago-based nonprofit Metropolitan Planning Council envisions a 95-mile BRT network that would carry an additional 71,000 daily riders.

http://dc.streetsblog.org/wp-content...12/MPC_BRT.jpg

^ I gleamed through the study, and it is very interesting, but I have 2 reservations:

1. I'm not convinced that improving transit will go very far in promoting infill development in many areas of the south side, as mentioned in Chicago's BRT study. Just looking at the fields of grass surrounding south side Green Line L stops pretty much backs up my assumption. I think gangs, violence, and drugs kind of hold most of these areas from redevelopment. Having a fancy BRT route, even one that is well implemented, may certainly improve ridership and connectivity, but I don't see a lot of infill happening until the whole gang/drug thing is solved. That is why I am disappointed to see that so many of the BRT routes are in those areas of the city.

2. Will the city do anything to addess zoning along these BRT routes? If I can still build a strip mall next to a BRT station, then what's the point of all of this investment? I especially am targeting Western Ave, which already has been pockmarked with strip centers, auto dealerships, and large parking lots.

M II A II R II K Dec 19, 2011 7:45 PM

Laying track down has more of a sense of permanence to it and more likely to attract transit prompted development.

ardecila Dec 19, 2011 7:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 5521913)
^ I gleamed through the study, and it is very interesting, but I have 2 reservations:

1. I'm not convinced that improving transit will go very far in promoting infill development in many areas of the south side, as mentioned in Chicago's BRT study. Just looking at the fields of grass surrounding south side Green Line L stops pretty much backs up my assumption. I think gangs, violence, and drugs kind of hold most of these areas from redevelopment. Having a fancy BRT route, even one that is well implemented, may certainly improve ridership and connectivity, but I don't see a lot of infill happening until the whole gang/drug thing is solved. That is why I am disappointed to see that so many of the BRT routes are in those areas of the city.

2. Will the city do anything to addess zoning along these BRT routes? If I can still build a strip mall next to a BRT station, then what's the point of all of this investment? I especially am targeting Western Ave, which already has been pockmarked with strip centers, auto dealerships, and large parking lots.

Look at it from a political perspective. It's best if all demographics are behind Emanuel's transportation agenda. If you look at some of the BRT lines as the political price for support, then it's a pretty low price relative to expensive rail.

Plus, the BRT lines have a regional impact. Imagine the benefits that would accrue from a rapid bus connection between Hyde Park and Midway, for example. The South Side contains 2/3 of the city's land area and many strong neighborhoods. Connecting those isolated areas of strength can only benefit the South Side.

nomarandlee Dec 21, 2011 8:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 5518764)
Yea, the same stuff I garnered from the animated GIF they had a few weeks ago.

One new thing is that the city is considering adding new tracks under Canal instead of Clinton. Adding intercity or regional trains under Canal with CTA under Clinton may be cheaper than the crazy 4-level WLTC concept under Clinton. It could greatly simplify junctions and underground clearance issues. Plus, it would divorce the Clinton Street Subway from the expansion of Union Station, allowing them to be funded separately.

Just a few questions on the Union Station redevelopment. Redistributing the lines from the WLTC to go under Canal and Clinto does sound like a much better option to me.

However if the plans to go down the Canal/Clinton route were set forth then would that essentially put the 222 Riverside tear down out of play or would there still be a push to redevelop the 222 Riverside with through tracks? If it was still in play then I'm a bit confused why there would be the need to also put HSR/regional tracks under Canal Street.

johnnygosox Dec 21, 2011 9:14 PM

No well ever runs dry...just an Old Wives Tale!!!
 
Yep Ardecila...... a terrible prospect looms before us when the money actually used by our omniscient government is finally not borrowed and printed. By the way....the "well" is dried up and empty.....the hacks and incompetents in Washington just haven't got the memo yet. Don't worry.....they'll be just fine but I worry a bit about you and me. We need to be more self sufficient in terms of our needs.......city needs that is.

Mr Downtown Dec 22, 2011 5:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomarandlee (Post 5524742)
However if the plans to go down the Canal/Clinton route were set forth then would that essentially put the 222 Riverside tear down out of play or would there still be a push to redevelop the 222 Riverside with through tracks?

I don't know of any connection between the two. The city is interested in a WLTC that was first talked about for Clinton and now for Canal. Meanwhile, a group of railfans with no power to do anything had a rendering prepared of a rebuilt Union Station concourse with no 222.

ardecila Dec 22, 2011 7:31 AM

I'm envisioning Union Station remaining as the preferred location for intercity and "standard" commuter trains, with the under-Canal tracks reserved for a new class of regional trains running through downtown, like Paris' RER. Such trains would make all local stops out to the 355 ring, while Metra would continue to operate push-pull trains as express service to the outer suburbs.

This is veering into fantasy territory, but later phases of the Chicago RER could connect Millennium, Water Tower, and Clybourn, with the St Charles Air Line seeing some service as well. If you route the lines correctly you can connect every suburban line to every major downtown destination and employment node with at most one transfer.

jpIllInoIs Dec 22, 2011 2:54 PM

^
I would add a connection to Ohare to that fantasy list. The ROW exists and is plenty wide. Add Ohare express service on the new thru tracks at CUS and you can have 1/2 hourly service from Millenium; McMk place and CUS direct to Ohare. Along with a short extension of the ppl mover to either the existing transfer station or to a the existing Rosemont Metra Station on Balmoral St and you have some direct O'hare service from the Loop which I venture would be far cheaper and faster to implement than any Blue Line express that involve new track.

ardecila Dec 22, 2011 4:46 PM

I was only talking about downtown stuff. I'm assuming that there would also be a suburban branch running through O'Hare Central and O'Hare West, or at least to a spiffy new O'Hare Transfer at the current site with a People Mover connection.

Unfortunately the current plans for the long-term parking site are a huge garage with a not-even-half-assed transit connection. Basically the same as Midway, because the city doesn't seem to give a crap about making connections quick and pleasant.

sammyg Dec 22, 2011 5:57 PM

Instead of BRT, wouldn't it make sense to re-instate express service on Irving Park, Western and Ashland first? (I don't remember which other corridors were cut)


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:10 PM.

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