^ That is simply not true.

There are still highrises under construction. There are still highrises that are going to be built. There are still smaller projects on the pipeline, and at least some of them will be built.

But when we start talking about Lawrence Ave subways and Cicero Ave subways and trains and tunnels to here or there, I think we all know that it's just a mental exercise.

I agree. While it's not perfect, it's still a great system to use. When I lived in Chicago, I sold my car and relied solely on the CTA. For the most part, I was able to make it to various areas of the city without too many issues. Chicago would hold vastly less interest for me if it didn't have the L. Yes the lakefront, old urbanity, and skyscrapers are great, but without a relatively convenient means of getting to/from various parts of the city, I'd be forced to continue relying on a vehicle and that would ruin the overall experience for me. (Not to mention I suspect less young professionals would be interested in relocating to Chicago without rapid transit and hence various neighborhoods would be nowhere near as nice as they currently are.)

Riding the Red and Brown Lines have always been a pleasure for me.

Don't get me wrong, I still think Chicago has better mass transit than 98% of the US.

Those are NEWS. They would be built whether or not this site existed. No matter how vigorously they're debated and disussed here, nothing said here changes whether they get built and how they get built.

Cicero trains have been studied for nearly 50 years. The Orange Line alignment partially uses the alignment a Cicero train would use.

The Lawrence subway is a thought exercise that encorporates a Brown Line extension discussed as an alternative by the CTA's Circle Line studies. The Gray Line has been advocated by many agencies, and is probably also included in the city's just-started study.

If you don't want to discuss these sorts of things, fine. What I object to is your pissy "I don't want to discuss this, so no one else should want to either because I think I control the universe" attitude.

I don't know who pissed in your Wheaties this morning, but cut out the crappy attitude.

^ I'm not telling you not to discuss it, I'm just saying that this thread may not really be the best place to continue to speculatively discuss hypothetical transit projects that may or may not be half a century away from ever happening. After all, this is the "Transit Developments" thread and many of us visit this forum for updates, not to watch others draw speculative diagrams on a metaphoric chalkboard.

I'm sure if we spent 5 pages on the Highrise Compilation Thread displaying designs of highrises we've drawn for various sites downtown instead of discussing real projects, people would start to go grow weary. There needs to at least be some link to the real world here, some sort of expectation of what's to come. Otherwise, maybe a separate thread in which everybody comes up with their dream transit system and discusses it at length should be created, so that the rest of us can visit this thread and actually discuss real developments that are actually likely to happen in the near future.

Sorry, but I just had to speak my opinion, and perhaps I'm wrong. Again, I'm finished so carry on however you'd like.

Well, the CTA requested feedback this very week on proposed alternatives for potential Red and Purple line re-development. Something is going to happen to the Red line in the next few years. It's why there is activity in this thread. In the last two weeks, the likely next mayor has proposed transformative bike-lane and BRT investments, which should be easy to implement and relatively cheap, as these things go. It all seems damn topical to me.

The CTA has changed a lot in the last few years: Bus and Train trackers. Blue line improvements. Brown line improvements. Union Station Re-development is underway. Pink line.

Nothing happens without a vision. If we don't talk about and convince ourselves about what we want to see, we have no way of explaining to people--in Washington and our neighbors--why they should care to. Keep it up, folks.

Something IS going to happen coming from the South Lakefront Corridor Transit Study; I am a R a b i d Foaming-at-the-Mouth Steroided-Up UFC-Trained Pit-Bull just waiting for the appropriate time to A T T A C K.

I WON'T let this chance go by!!!

^ Now that is more like it! :tup:

What a f*cking downer.

The CTA is realistically considering all sorts of cool stuff, including a brand-new 4-track line or a brand-new subway. That's in addition to the Red Line extension and the other two extensions, and the ongoing drive to start running BRT service.

Rahm has pledged to get both Red Line projects built if elected. He wasn't vague about it - he literally promised it.

Now, that doesn't mean it will happen. Pols say all sorts of things. But he didn't weasel out of it or make some vague platitude statement. He was also personally behind the last $8bn round of high-speed rail spending, so he'll undoubtedly push for passenger-rail improvements and CREATE. And he's the clear frontrunner right now, supported by the Trib (despite John Kass) and a huge number of Chicagoans. If he wins, the situation for transit improves immensely over the vague hands-off attitude that Daley had.

I expect Rahm to appoint a new CTA president who shares his enthusiastic view of transit. Hopefully he'll bring Huberman back.

Honestly, what's the reason for your frustration? Things haven't looked this good for the CTA since the 60s.

CDOT South Lakefront Corridor Transit Study
 

The Chicago Department of Transportation has begun the South Lakefront Corridor Transit Study; attached is a Presentation outlining goals, resources, and time frame of the Study.

I have placed the Presentation, Fact Sheet, and Input Surveys that were distributed at the Feb. 4th Meeting in pdf form here:

http://www.grayline.20m.com/box_widget.html



Read the Presentation and Fact Sheets; and then return the completed Input Survey sheets by February 18th via email or mail to:

Brenda McGruder

Chicago Department of Transportation

30 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 500

Chicago, IL 60602

southlakefront@cityofchicago.org

^ I would be hopeful that the discussions in this study would include how to promote the kind of density along the south lakefront to support heavy rail. I think that is a key ingredient, perhaps just as (if not more) important than the mass transit improvements themselves.

If mass transit improvements are accompanied by strip malls with acres of parking, then the investment is simply not worth it. And on the south side, we seem to be seeing a lot of that (strip malls, that is)

Immediate "L" access is not exactly a formula for success. Along W. Division, the area around Damen is much livelier than around Ashland even though it's further from the "L." Michigan is busier than State downtown. Clark is generally more successful than Broadway on the far north side.

Another consideration is that building stations is very expensive, and there's only so much money out there.

Also, don't get your hopes too high for the (IMO, much needed) wholesale redevelopment of Broadway as a high-density corridor, since "the neighbors" have spoken up and demand four stories max:
http://www.masmith48.org/broadwaycom...eproposal.html
(Not that those who are irrationally holding on to the idea of subway entrances every single block are any more capable of imagining a greater future.)

Good luck explaining that to the nihilist Tea Party maniacs who currently hold the purse strings. They want to keep their fat Social Security & Medicare checks and the endless golden shower of money for "defense and security" (bombs, spare fighter engines, and airport nude-o-scopes), while eliminating anything that has a payoff more than a week from today -- food safety inspections, catching tax evaders, day care, cancer research, and yes, mass transit.

Yeah, I think the formula is more reliably "Good El Access + Poor automobile access = dense, quality development". The Broadway v Clark example is illustrative of how constructing massive 6-lane auto sewers depresses the urban environment. They really need to turn Broadway into a boulevard or something. Maybe make it two lanes with a large vegetated median and angle parking with bumpouts? Of course they can't fix Broadway until they push LSD all the way to Evanston to reroute the 8 lanes of freeway traffic that are abruptly dumped onto city streets at Hollywood.

Good luck explaining that to the nihilist Tea Party maniacs who currently hold the purse strings. They want to keep their fat Social Security & Medicare checks and the endless golden shower of money for "defense and security" (bombs, spare fighter engines, and airport nude-o-scopes), while eliminating anything that has a payoff more than a week from today -- food safety inspections, catching tax evaders, day care, cancer research, and yes, mass transit.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I think the formula is more reliably "Good El Access + Poor automobile access = dense, quality development". The Broadway v Clark example is illustrative of how constructing massive 6-lane auto sewers depresses the urban environment. They really need to turn Broadway into a boulevard or something. Maybe make it two lanes with a large vegetated median and angle parking with bumpouts? Of course they can't fix Broadway until they push LSD all the way to Evanston to reroute the 8 lanes of freeway traffic that are abruptly dumped onto city streets at Hollywood.

Not to get too off topic, but that's completely true. The Republicans right now seem to be united only by a disdain for any sort of planning. Scott Walker not only eliminated the HSR in Wisconsin, but is now trying to pass massive regulations on Wind Farms that would essentially prevent any new ones. How does massively increasing regulations fit into the Republican platform? Who knows, but it appears to only fit when their platform is "resist anything new"...

Quinn to sign bill ending seniors-ride-free plan

About time, even if the timing is gutless.

SSDD

wow that urban politician guy is really anti-southside

^^^As to Nowheremans observation re Broadway; I wonder in the recent visions released for possible redline maintnence / development....I did not notice if there was mention of whether the subway option would simply run under the current Elevated path or would it perhaps run up (under) broadway??

I didn't notice any mention of a route; sorry if I missed it.

Also I agree Broadway is a mess particularly north of Lawrence....those strip centers gotta go....way too much street fronting parking. A little height especially on east side.....may 10-20 stories....with recessed parking would do wonder....the west side I would be satisfied given neighborhood constraints if we could get 60-80 feet. It has potential...there is quite a bit of spending power especially west of Broadway along this path.

^^^ I believe it will run under Broadway with the alleys where the current structure stands being re-routed and the subsequent raw land being sold off to help pay for the project. With all of the uber-long mega blocks in Edgewater, it looks like we'll just see a dozen more Catalpa Gardens style buildings pop up on the reclaimed land.

As much as I would hate to see us drop tracks and stations, I would love to see a subway run under Broadway, I think it would really encourage all of those strip malls and auto repair centers to convert to some nice TOD. Problem is they've fucked with the zoning in Edgewater a lot to discourage additional density since the area is already so massively, NYC style, dense. Could be a really awesome neighborhood if Broadway were lined with shops and bars instead of CVS's and parking lots.

Ideal solution would be run a three or four track subway under Broadway, pay for additional expense by upzoning all land along the East side of Broadway to maximum density (allow highrises and all, the area can support the density) and to allow mid rises along the West side of Broadway between Sheridan and Wilson. Then make a massive TIF on all of that land that is dedicated to paying the bonds required for the subway and, since they would likely consider cut and cover, to pay for completely rebuilding Broadway to discourage car use. I think that would trigger rapid redevelopment throughout Chicago's far north side and easily pay for itself in a decade or two.

I mean there is no reason why Broadway, being such a wide thoroughfare, couldn't be lined by mid and highrises along its entire length.

You'd probably also need to extend LSD to remove the traffic from the area. Start with an extension to Devon and then to Howard, with northbound traffic allowed onto Sheridan.

^^^ I'm not certain that an extension to Devon would be possible. I have a feeling Loyola would attempt to stonewall any exit at Devon due to the massive disruption that would cause to its campus. The city will not do anything to piss Loyola off because they need their cooperation for both the LSD extension and Red Line reconstruction.

I have a feeling any extension would have to go up to Toughy with exits at Granville and Pratt. The plans already show a large lagoon being built in front of Loyola with the drive passing through a tunnel in order to preserve Loyola's lakeshore. The city and school are plotting together to ensure any extension does not cut LU's lake access or violate its campus. The plans I see essentially call for a city park that will act as an extension of Loyola's campus by several hundred feet into the lake with a sea wall and a lagoon / harbor that LSD would pass under.