SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: ORD & MDW discussion (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=87889)

VivaLFuego May 16, 2007 2:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alwaysonthefly (Post 2838391)
Guess somebody's asleep at the wheel; the Friendly Skies folks provide multiple daily RJ frequencies between Rockford and Denver (with connecting service at UA's DEN hub to their Left Coast destinations) - and have for over a year now.

Yeah, this would have been easy to look up....there are definitely regularly scheduled flights to Rockford, but obviously not that many; it basically gets comparable service to any of the other smaller cities in the midwest: a couple flights a day to regional hubs.

alwaysonthefly May 16, 2007 2:52 PM

Rockford, like an ever increasing number of other small-to-medium sized airports around the country, is working smarter (as well as harder) to 'future proof' itself against under-utilization of it's key facilities (i.e. - ticket counters, gates, etc.). RFD provides a common sense solution for airline passenger processing that leverages secure, airline-proprietary technology throughout the terminal; this flexible provisioning capability reduces costs/risks for their airline partners while, at the same time, optimizing RFD's limited 'bricks and mortar' passenger terminal.

RFD has the ability to accommodate several airlines - using shared facilities - at different times throughout the day. Perhaps, if/as/when other airports follow RFD's leadership in this key area, the capacity-driven need to expand landside operations will be partially mitigated by a more cost effective and service responsive optimization of terminal assets...certainly more so than the 'build it, long-term lease it and they will come' proprietary-use airport model that's long been the norm in North America.

VivaLFuego May 16, 2007 4:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alwaysonthefly (Post 2838647)
Rockford, like an ever increasing number of other small-to-medium sized airports around the country, is working smarter (as well as harder) to 'future proof' itself against under-utilization of it's key facilities (i.e. - ticket counters, gates, etc.). RFD provides a common sense solution for airline passenger processing that leverages secure, airline-proprietary technology throughout the terminal; this flexible provisioning capability reduces costs/risks for their airline partners while, at the same time, optimizing RFD's limited 'bricks and mortar' passenger terminal.

RFD has the ability to accommodate several airlines - using shared facilities - at different times throughout the day. Perhaps, if/as/when other airports follow RFD's leadership in this key area, the capacity-driven need to expand landside operations will be partially mitigated by a more cost effective and service responsive optimization of terminal assets...certainly more so than the 'build it, long-term lease it and they will come' proprietary-use airport model that's long been the norm in North America.

Even so, at the end of the day isn't RFD's only regularly scheduled passenger service from United (aside from assorted seasonally scheduled charter flights to vacation destinations)?

You're right that they're taking some good steps, but it also hardly makes sense for local, state, or federal governments to overinvest in an airport that will never be more than a regional feeder to hubs or at most, receive some spillover from the far reaches of the Chicago area (90 miles from downtown is much too far for the majority of Chicagoland residents; even Peotone would be embraced more than RFD or Mitchell for spillover traffic, that is if the obvious solution in Gary isn't embraced by the Indiana government).

nomarandlee May 16, 2007 5:37 PM

Viva is right. Rockford as far out as it is will only be attractive for the very outer reaches of the metro (which are not very dense). Even most western and northern burbs will still find O'Hare to be a good more deal attractive then a Rockford. The 45 miles Peotone is out is bad enough but 50-90 miles is utterly meaningless for 95% of the metro unless you connect it by Maglev or something.

As has been stated Gary makes the most sense since it is the closest to downtown and in the middle of the most densely built up area and underserved (NW Indiana) with the best base infrastructure to expand upon.

Peotone if connected with the ten mile Metra extension would perhaps be palateable (though still inefficant in my mind). The most that Mitchell, Peotone, or Rockford are ever to be considered would be releiver airports due to the distances from the outer edges of the metro serving niche communities.

alwaysonthefly May 16, 2007 8:09 PM

No argument on the geography guys, just wanted to make my point that there's more than one way to skin the proverbial cat. RFD's investment in convergence (between airlines and airports) technology...even as a reliever airport...provides a reasonable model for other airports to consider; whenever funding is an issue (and when isn't it), enhancing optimization of an existing facility...particularly at larger airports...offers a compelling, less costly alternative to new construction.

Chicago2020 May 17, 2007 10:54 PM

Thought this was cool. From the O'Hare website

http://www.ohare.com/FACE/FACE05rotate2.gif

VivaLFuego May 17, 2007 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alwaysonthefly (Post 2839338)
No argument on the geography guys, just wanted to make my point that there's more than one way to skin the proverbial cat. RFD's investment in convergence (between airlines and airports) technology...even as a reliever airport...provides a reasonable model for other airports to consider; whenever funding is an issue (and when isn't it), enhancing optimization of an existing facility...particularly at larger airports...offers a compelling, less costly alternative to new construction.

True. And by all means, airports on the periphery (Rockford and Milwaukee, particularly) should target traffic from the fringes of the Chicago metro. But the recent FAA report makes it even more clear that the Chicago area needs to be making decisions NOW about where it's 3rd airport will be, and it's basically between Gary and Peotone, each with certain geographical advantages and each with a whole mess of political considerations that could make or break them.

VivaLFuego May 18, 2007 2:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukecuj (Post 2842583)
The question is, how do you expand capacity without excessively increasing the development footprint of the metro region. The answer is recycling every bit of available developed land and redesignating it to more effecient use. Expand Midway south to the Clearing yard, West 4 city blocks, North to Archer Ave. This should be enough to allow parrallel take offs and landings, virtually increasing capacity by one half. It would keep the metro airspace tight but efficient, and as such, the metro area itself.

From a flight capacity standpoint this would be great, but where would you put the replacement for Clearing Yard? It's a vital part of the national freight rail system. There would have to be a replacement in place and operational before a Midway expansion could be begin. Tacks on a couple billion $....

nergie May 18, 2007 4:31 PM

:tup:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukecuj (Post 2842583)
The question is, how do you expand capacity without excessively increasing the development footprint of the metro region. The answer is recycling every bit of available developed land and redesignating it to more effecient use. Expand Midway south to the Clearing yard, West 4 city blocks, North to Archer Ave. This should be enough to allow parrallel take offs and landings, virtually increasing capacity by one half. It would keep the metro airspace tight but efficient, and as such, the metro area itself.

My idea is to bulldoze as much of Elk Grove and Bensonville as possible, those morons haven't got a clue. This would allow O'Hare to add terminals, the perimeter taxiway, etc. Heck, if we could convince W that Saddam hid is WMD's in Elk Grove this would have been taken care of years ago.

Chicago2020 May 24, 2007 3:47 AM

The North Tower is now listed on Emporis

spyguy Jun 22, 2007 9:34 PM

http://www.dailyherald.com/story.asp?id=325413

Chicago gets OK to raze buildings for O'Hare expansion

By Justin Kmitch
Posted Friday, June 22, 2007


Chicago’s bulldozers, long threatening at Bensenville’s border, today have been given judicial clearance to begin their work on Thursday.

DuPage County Circuit Judge Stephen Culliton, during a closed-chambers session this morning, declined to prohibit Chicago from beginning demolition on the 437 residential and commercial properties. The city bought the properties to make room for the expansion of O'Hare International Airport.

The city sent a letter to Bensenville officials Monday including a 10-day notice of intent to start demolition.

“There have been numerous break-ins, vandalism and theft of city-owned property, additional incidents of fly-dumping, and an assault on a property manager,” said O'Hare Modernization Program Executive Director Rosemarie Andolino. “Therefore, it is imperative that demolition activities start immediately in order to remove those structures that may harbor illegal activities and provide an unsafe environment.”

Bensenville attorney Joseph Karaganis argued against the demolition moving forward because Chicago hasn’t applied for permits from the village. Bensenville law calls for special health and safety requirements to be followed.

“Chicago has not shown any intent to cooperate with our ordinances,” Karaganis said following today’s hearing. “So we intend to enforce our ordinance to the extent of the law.”

Chicago2020 Jun 22, 2007 9:37 PM

Finally!!!! Lets get this thing done as soon as possible.

I think now is the time for the City to release renderings of O'Hare after whole modernization

Chicago2020 Jun 22, 2007 9:38 PM

dp

nomarandlee Jun 23, 2007 3:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago2020 (Post 2913571)
Finally!!!! Lets get this thing done as soon as possible.

I think now is the time for the City to release renderings of O'Hare after whole modernization

That would be nice for sure. I get a sense that we will not see those for a few years at least though. They will probably not release much detailed plans until the nearing of each phase I am guessing.

ardecila Jun 24, 2007 10:03 AM

There's a 25-page-thick set of HUGE drawings at the Des Plaines Library, showing the extent of the OMP. I was there to grab a book for a Latin research paper, and I noticed/thumbed through the plans. The thing was very impressive. and it included the circumferential highway, new runways, western access highway, new interchange, and even some terminal renovation stuff.

nomarandlee Jun 24, 2007 12:32 PM

That sounds very intreasting. I just may have to go check that out. I wonder if any other libraries around the area would have that as well. In what section did you find the drawings ardecila?

ardecila Jun 24, 2007 7:09 PM

To be honest, I can't remember exactly where it was. The library is right next to the train station, on the south side of the tracks. It's a 3-4 story building, with a large atrium. If I remember correctly, it was right next to the atrium stairs on an upper story. Just go up the stairs and look around a little bit near each landing. If you can't find it, ask a librarian - in my experience, they are quite friendly and helpful.

VivaLFuego Jun 24, 2007 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 2915695)
There's a 25-page-thick set of HUGE drawings at the Des Plaines Library, showing the extent of the OMP. I was there to grab a book for a Latin research paper, and I noticed/thumbed through the plans. The thing was very impressive. and it included the circumferential highway, new runways, western access highway, new interchange, and even some terminal renovation stuff.

Just to add a tidbit, the Western access includes both:
1) the Western bypass, e.g. the circumferential highway, along York Rd, and
2) the extension of the Elgin-O'hare eastward (finally) and into the airport.

The 'interesting' part of this is that #2 above will likely be designed with to allow for a light rail line either in the median or on the side of the ROW, that would connect to the 290 extension and run between Schaumburg and O'hare (such a light rail line is apparently highly favored by the mayors in that area). The light rail would link up with the STAR line in Schaumburg, and the entire expressway+light rail project would include revised local plans and zoning (i.e. think some TOD and even, gasp, office park infill!). This all just preliminary of course, and the money for the light rail is nowhere in sight, but the planning and feasability study are underway and the suburban pols are mostly keen on this being a major transportation+land use endeavor.

Marcu Jun 25, 2007 1:50 AM

:previous:

Sounds great, but is really feasible to have a light rail line with heavy rail everywhere else in Chicagoland? What about the increase in operation costs associated with using an entierly different system? I'd be perfectly heavy with an added heavy rail line. So long as it can get done.

ardecila Jun 25, 2007 6:54 AM

I thought the STAR Line was supposed to go from Schaumburg to O'Hare along I-90. Is this intended as an additional project, or will it replace that section of the STAR Line? I hope the latter is not true... Nobody will transfer from STAR to light rail in Schaumburg just to get to O'Hare.. it doesn't compete with driving on I-90.

I could see this creating some fairly cool development in that area, especially if they go for a really modern, appealing design for the trains. Light rail on par with STL Metrolink is what I'm envisioning right now. The line, I assume, is in a very conceptual stage at this point. Is it intended to go directly to the terminals like CTA does right now?

Sorry for all the questions... I almost never hear of transit developments in my immediate area.

I have connections with the Hamiltons of Hamilton Partners, which owns a lot of office parks in the area... I'll see if I can dig anything further up.


marcu, I believe the INTENTION is to create a separate system. This way, the communities that the line would serve can create an agency that's not part of RTA, and the funding wouldn't have RTA's problems.


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:47 PM.

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