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)

the urban politician May 28, 2016 1:37 PM

^ This area of town is going to explode with development.

tjp May 28, 2016 6:16 PM

^It's too bad Hilliard Towers and National Teacher's Academy are there. It'd be great to see continuous development from McCormick to Chinatown on Cermack.

urbanlife May 28, 2016 6:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 7456098)
^ This area of town is going to explode with development.

I could see that area eventually looking a lot like the area around the Roosevelt Station just north of this area.

CTA Gray Line May 29, 2016 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by harryc (Post 7455954)






Beautiful, and only 3 blocks from McCormick Place!

harryc May 29, 2016 1:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CTA Gray Line (Post 7456644)
Beautiful, and only 3 blocks from McCormick Place!

saw a dozen or so people from the NRA (Restaurant) show making the walk. Even easier if you use DIVVY.

chicagopcclcar1 May 30, 2016 1:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjp (Post 7456258)
^It's too bad Hilliard Towers and National Teacher's Academy are there. It'd be great to see continuous development from McCormick to Chinatown on Cermack.

Sounds like wanting more complete "black removal."

DH

the urban politician May 30, 2016 2:35 AM

^ I wouldn't interpret it that way. Both Hilliard and the NTA are set way, way back from the street, hindering any chance for a possible pedestrian-inviting street wall.

ardecila May 30, 2016 3:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the urban politician (Post 7456990)
^ I wouldn't interpret it that way. Both Hilliard and the NTA are set way, way back from the street, hindering any chance for a possible pedestrian-inviting street wall.

BS. Hilliard is just fine the way it is, and an architectural landmark to boot. CHA is aware of the urban design issues and has explored the idea of developing the outlots. I wouldn't expect anything to happen here within the next decade, gotta wait until the surrounding parcels fill in.

National Teachers Academy doesn't offend me any more than Walter Payton HS does, and ideally it would serve as a neighborhood school for South Loop rather than a charter for poor children who are bussed in. It is brand new, well equipped and way under capacity. Ridiculous that Rahm and CPS are talking about building a whole new elementary school in South Loop rather than deal with the racial politics of mixing white and black kids.

Also, there is a pretty significant plan to redevelop CHA/Harold Ickes land and create a bustling mixed-use corner at Cermak/State. Of course, it's led by McCaffery who can't seem to get anything off the ground...

tjp May 30, 2016 1:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chicagopcclcar1 (Post 7456966)
Sounds like wanting more complete "black removal."

DH

No no no, absolutely not. I just don't like how they're set back from the street. It'd be great if the CHA could build something on the Cermak/State and Cermak/Clark corners.

Randomguy34 May 30, 2016 4:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7457009)
BS. Hilliard is just fine the way it is, and an architectural landmark to boot. CHA is aware of the urban design issues and has explored the idea of developing the outlots. I wouldn't expect anything to happen here within the next decade, gotta wait until the surrounding parcels fill in.

National Teachers Academy doesn't offend me any more than Walter Payton HS does, and ideally it would serve as a neighborhood school for South Loop rather than a charter for poor children who are bussed in. It is brand new, well equipped and way under capacity. Ridiculous that Rahm and CPS are talking about building a whole new elementary school in South Loop rather than deal with the racial politics of mixing white and black kids.

Also, there is a pretty significant plan to redevelop CHA/Harold Ickes land and create a bustling mixed-use corner at Cermak/State. Of course, it's led by McCaffery who can't seem to get anything off the ground...

Preach.

To add on to ardecila's point, whenever I'm in New York it isn't uncommon to see housing projects on streets that still had great pedestrian experiences, especially in Midtown. Heck, some of the projects even had retail on their ground floor in spite of the tower-in-the-park design. Here are some public housing areas I've passed by and really enjoyed walking around:

The Bronx: https://goo.gl/maps/EhwBRRBmwGL2 (Who said Starbucks is for gentrified areas?)

Midtown: https://goo.gl/maps/bEVKxKT45f62 and https://goo.gl/maps/EfpVqN8fEHu

Brooklyn: https://goo.gl/maps/CbrcBGNDTKz

Queens: https://goo.gl/maps/6Atx8Zk1dBt

ardecila May 31, 2016 3:32 PM

Not to get too OT... but Parkchester and Hilliard are two different ideas. Parkchester was built in the 1930s on the edge of the city on undeveloped land, and developers had to build a retail component as well just to ensure that residents' needs were met. It's also not public housing, it was developed privately as a master-planned community (although I believe it had government support of some kind).

Hilliard was part of 1960s slum clearance, which explicitly rejected retail and mixed use on the theory that the surrounding neighborhood would satisfy the needs of tenants, or worse, set aside land for auto-oriented shopping centers in the master plan.

Anyway, NYCHA is exploring the idea of selling off public housing outlots and I assume CHA will do the same. Right now CHA has a huge cash reserve and doesn't need the proceeds from selling the land, plus there's no shortage of developable sites in the area so land values are not as high as they could be.

OhioGuy Jun 8, 2016 10:38 PM

The Quincy Loop Station is Getting a Makeover, Including ADA Accessibility
STREETSBLOG CHICAGO | Wednesday, June 8, 2016 | by John Greenfield

Quote:

This morning the CTA took a step towards making the system more accessible for people with disabilities, as the board of directors approved the construction contract for the rehab of the Quincy Loop station, including the addition of two elevators. Currently, 100 of the CTA’s 145 rail stations (69 percent) are wheelchair accessible.

The board awarded the CTA Quincy Loop Station Upgrade Project contract was to Ragnar Benson Construction, LLC. Work is slated to begin later this year.
CTA Website for Quincy station upgrade
Image from above link
http://www.transitchicago.com/assets...incyrender.jpg

denizen467 Jun 10, 2016 10:24 AM

So, what with the 'splosion of offices and other things in the mid and far west loop, will we ever see a station added along either of the Metra routes running alongside Kinzie?

Assuming some point when passenger counts would justify it (shouldn't be hard to beat at least UP-North Clybourn), the main issue would probably be timetable planning of the lines' runs, more than construction or land costs.

ardecila Jun 10, 2016 8:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by denizen467 (Post 7469927)
So, what with the 'splosion of offices and other things in the mid and far west loop, will we ever see a station added along either of the Metra routes running alongside Kinzie?

Assuming some point when passenger counts would justify it (shouldn't be hard to beat at least UP-North Clybourn), the main issue would probably be timetable planning of the lines' runs, more than construction or land costs.

Milwaukee District is at-grade through much of the West Loop. A stopped train would block grade crossings and the exiting passengers pose a safety concern. If a station was added, it would have to be west of Racine, or possibly right between Green and Morgan (assuming you want about 900' for a Metra platform for the longest express trains).

I wouldn't expect much to happen here until Metra decides what to do with A-2 Interlocking. That's a huge capacity constraint... ideally they would build a flyover, but financially they may have to settle for just a computerized signaling system.

denizen467 Jun 10, 2016 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7470572)
Milwaukee District is at-grade through much of the West Loop. A stopped train would block grade crossings and the exiting passengers pose a safety concern. If a station was added, it would have to be west of Racine, or possibly right between Green and Morgan (assuming you want about 900' for a Metra platform for the longest express trains).

For the time being a number of those sleepy grade crossings can suffer more frequent gate closures, or even complete elimination, since they aren't really necessary every single block. Eventually if vehicular volumes build up, a viaduct would be necessary at some point anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7470572)
I wouldn't expect much to happen here until Metra decides what to do with A-2 Interlocking. That's a huge capacity constraint... ideally they would build a flyover, but financially they may have to settle for just a computerized signaling system.

When you refer to the A-2 Interlocking, is that effectively the point about 30yds inbound of Western Ave where 3 tracks of MD cross 4 tracks of UP? That seems conceptually so easy to separate -- there is an uninterrupted mile from Western to Ashland, or 1.5 miles because you have useable space all the way to Racine, where you have 8 straight, parallel tracks, lacking even crossovers, that are accompanied by ample "shoulder" r-o-w (and a hodgepodge of forgettable light industrial) on either side, with zero NIMBYs to complain about construction of a flyover. So it would seem conceptually easy to re-assign all the tracks at the current crossing into a non-crossing configuration and east of there build, in easy phases, a 4 by 4 track flyover over that fertile stretch.

So is it just that there is no present need that justifies the (admittedly nontrivial) outlay, or is there something more complicated behind it? If Rahm & Ginger come up with an airport express scheme along NCS, maybe that can start catalyzing something. The resulting improvements to the ancient, cavelike viaducts connecting Hubbard and Carroll would help spur more artisanal food and other light industrial and office in that area as well. And Amtrak would eventually derive benefit too, alongside planners allocating Union Station platforms, so it seems like it would kill a flock of birds with one mammoth stone.

denizen467 Jun 12, 2016 10:21 PM

Barring some notable increase in demand like an airport link or something, ^this passenger rail matter can be revisited again in a half decade or decade. But in the present, Union Pacific was supposed to be rebuilding all the viaducts on the North line between Addison and Bryn Mawr. They successfully built a new single-track viaduct along the west side of that length, creating a 3rd track through that stretch along with a beautifully done revetment and landscaping and parking etc. But then work seemed to stop at least a year ago. Have they given up on this? It does seem that this would be the trickiest phase of the project, where you have to pick either the middle or eastmost track and demolish it, and its viaducts, while leaving its aging immediate neighbor undisturbed and operating.

ardecila Jun 12, 2016 10:35 PM

^ Metra is launching a study for A-2 Interlocking that will consider signal upgrades as well as a flyover. Signals can do a lot, but in our cold climate they can't alleviate the switch malfunctions that often happen in subzero weather. It's really a mistake to send so much of the Metra network through a single flat junction IMO... not only four Metra lines and Amtrak, but also the deadhead moves that bring Metra trains to their respective coach yards for daytime storage.

Everything comes down to money, and you're right - Metra has some big ticket projects they need to get done first, including the UP-N bridge project (not only finishing Phase I, but also Phase II from Grace to Webster). I believe that is on hold due to the state budget crisis...

orulz Jun 14, 2016 9:28 PM

Are fantasy maps allowed on this forum? Because I just made one.
See it here.

The general concept is a reconfiguration and expansion of the existing L system into 5
metro-style "L" lines, and a rework of the Metra network into 4 RER-style Regional "R". All lines run through the CBD. There are no frequency-limiting reverse branch bottlenecks - every line gets a two-track route through the core, but there is some proper branching at the outer ends of some of the lines. To the greatest degree possible, things are laid out to enable a two-seat ride from anywhere to almost anywhere.

There is no rhyme or reason to where I stopped drawing the commuter lines. I basically stopped when I felt I had drawn far enough to show my point.

Some parts are pretty foamy. Others are big but would probably be worth the investment. I tried to rely on existing infrastructure and rights-of-way, and base it on plans that actually exist in the real world, as much as possible.

Probably the two biggest items are:
1. Two new regional rail tunnels heading north from Millennium Station. One connects to the MD-N and NCS via Carroll Street, and the other connects to the UP-N via Streeterville and Chicago Ave. The UP-N, MD-N, and NCS would all be electrified at 1500VDC so they can use the tunnels and for compatibility.
2. The Brown Line wound up turning into a 40 mile "super loop" (Yikes, foam alert.) The only part of the brown line that is recognizable is the part where it already has its own route starting at Roscoe/Sheffield. Yeah, I know, it's a bit out of control. Its route, heading east from Roscoe/Sheffield, is:
(1) A new Lincoln Park Subway. East on Roscoe, South on Broadway and then Larrabee
(2) Clinton/Larrabee Subway under the North Branch
(3) West Loop Transportation Center
(4) St Charles Air Line through the South Loop
(5) IC Freight tracks through McCormick Place and Hyde Park, to 63rd
(6) West along the Green Line branches along 63rd, extended to Midway
(7) North up the Mid-City Transitway to Montrose
(8) East in a subway under Lawrence to the existing terminus.

Other things of note:
-The loop is de-looped by mothballing and/or removing the southern (Van Buren) segment.
-Tower 18 is reduced to a diamond where the Pink and Green lines cross each other, with no switching operations, and could (possibly?) be grade-separated.
-The Pink Line (formerly known as Purple) becomes a through route by taking over the Rock Island right-of-way from Lasalle to 18th, where it enters the Dan Ryan line
-Ogilvie and LaSalle stations cease to exist and their train sheds are made available for redevelopment.
-Rock Island trains are diverted to Union Station and run through to the MD-W and UP-W lines via Union Station run-through tracks.
-The BNSF is connected to UP-NW via Union Station.
-Intercity trains use the WLTC concept, with new through tracks under Clinton or Canal.
-The current yellow line is operated as an extension of the Red Line (basically, this frees up its color to be used on a Regional line.)
-The Metra Electric South Chicago branch is taken over by a southward extension of the Green Line. This would probably require rolling stock with dual current collection by both 3rd rail and pantograph, similar to the former configuration of the Skokie Swift.
-I was not really sure what to do with the Forest Park branch (current Pink Line). I just kept it as a branch of the Green Line.

denizen467 Jun 15, 2016 5:52 AM

:stunned: I think you're gonna need a bigger thread.

denizen467 Jun 15, 2016 5:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 7472160)
Metra has some big ticket projects they need to get done first, including the UP-N bridge project (not only finishing Phase I, but also Phase II from Grace to Webster). I believe that is on hold due to the state budget crisis...

Interesting you mention viaducts down to Webster -- I daresay if anywhere it's Ashland (next to Cortland) that really is decrepit and poses an issue to road safety, but I suppose that won't be addressed until Phase MMXXXV.


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:49 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.