CHICAGO: Transit Developments

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by honte

^ This is the biggest pipe dream on earth given the financial state of our transit, but has anyone ever thought about reconstructing the Frank Lloyd Wright station design as a part of something larger? Wouldn't that be amazing? It definitely would be a major attention grabber, especially if Chicago wanted to shine some light on its new transit emphasis.

Actually, Arthur Gerber designed the station building. Frank Lloyd Wright designed an earlier commercial structure on the same site, which looked quite modern.

[honte]

^ OK, but you get my drift...

I've never actually seen a photo of what was there, but I was told that somehow the FLW building related to the earlier station. Was this wrong?

[Mr Downtown]

The Stohr Arcade Building (right) from Chicago-L.org:

[the urban politician]

I found this interesting esp considering that some people here were whining about removing seats being "inhumane" and unbecoming of a world-class city such as "New York, London, and Tokyo":

Originally Posted by NYC4Life

NY1

Some New Subway Cars Will Lack Rush Hour Seats



August 02, 2008

New York City Transit officials are planning a pilot program featuring subway trains with flip-up seats in four of the 10 cars.

The flip-up seats will be locked in the upright position during rush hour and unlocked afterwards.

Officials are hoping to fit as many as 18 percent more people inside those cars.

As of Saturday, it was not known which subway lines will be a part of the test run.

The program is expected to roll out in five to seven months.

[honte]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

The Stohr Arcade Building (right) from Chicago-L.org:

Thanks. You can tell I'm not much of a transit junkie - I try to keep this thread uncluttered with my naivety.

[doggdetroit]

Ok, let’s assume Chicago is awarded the 2016 games, sometime in 2009. With Daley now in awe of the brand new Chinese transit system, how much can we honestly expect implemented in terms of new projects in the Chicagoland area by the start of the games? The Tribune states that the Chinese have built 4 new lines since 2002. Chicago will have roughly the same amount of time (7 years,) to really get cracking on additions / improvements before the start of the actual games.

Obviously 4 brand new lines / projects could not be built for around the 7.7 billion that it cost in China. The price here would be boatloads more. The various extensions, yellow, red, orange, possibly blue, would be relatively affordable and should be rather easy to construct. Additionally, Daley has always been in favor of the circle line and also the mid city transit line, however both projects would be quite costly. The airport express is something he favors as well, yet that appears to be another costly project. What about other proposals that have not been seriously considered, but would really improve rapid transit in the city such as connecting the brown and blue lines at Jefferson Park, the oft mentioned gray line, or even a north shore subway line that would have a HUGE ridership? All of which would be extremely expensive, but if Daley is looking at China as an example, maybe one or more projects become more than just pipe dreams. How about the west loop transportation center? Or the plan to bring rapid transit to the magnificent mile / Streeterville area? Would any of these fantasy projects suddenly become a reality? I guess what I’m asking is how serious is Daley about wanting to upgrade Chicago’s system? Is it even economically possible?

[Mr Downtown]

None of these projects would have much to do with Olympic needs. Daley might try to use the Olympics as an excuse to pry loose state and federal dollars, but that's rather uncertain. Who'll be governor? Who'll be on the conference committee that hammers out the next highway funding bill?

And seven years is pretty tight for any transit line in the US. You could probably build the passing sidings for Airport Express, and probably the Mid-City. But I don't think you could permit, contract, and build a subway line of any length in seven years.

[VivaLFuego]

Shooting for a "state of good repair" is much more likely given the timeframe and funding situation - e.g. maybe after this trip the Mayor will tell CTA to find a way to exercise every option on the railcar contract to get as many new railcars as possible as quickly as possible (CTA has already bonded out all its future capital money to buy new buses and fix slow zones, but... maybe there's more pennies to scrounge up somewhere, somewhere). Also, accelerating rail station rehabs, particularly in the downtown area, and completing the renewal, and ideally, expansion of the bus fleet.

In terms of "new" transit services, something resembling a BRT network is the most plausible option. King Drive, Roosevelt, and something along the north lakeshore would all serve Olympic sites and have the added bonus of also being quite beneficial to residents after the games are over. The first 3 are all straight-forward, but it's a tricky head-scratcher for how to best provide rapid transit along the north lakeshore, both from a design/engineering standpoint and an operational standpoint.

[CMack]

Originally Posted by doggdetroit

The various extensions, yellow, red, orange, possibly blue, would be relatively affordable and should be rather easy to construct. Additionally, Daley has always been in favor of the circle line and also the mid city transit line, however both projects would be quite costly. The airport express is something he favors as well, yet that appears to be another costly project. What about other proposals that have not been seriously considered, but would really improve rapid transit in the city such as connecting the brown and blue lines at Jefferson Park, the oft mentioned gray line, or even a north shore subway line that would have a HUGE ridership? All of which would be extremely expensive, but if Daley is looking at China as an example, maybe one or more projects become more than just pipe dreams. How about the west loop transportation center? Or the plan to bring rapid transit to the magnificent mile / Streeterville area? Would any of these fantasy projects suddenly become a reality? I guess what I’m asking is how serious is Daley about wanting to upgrade Chicago’s system? Is it even economically possible?

This is all interesting, however I don't have much background knowledge on these proposed/discussed additions to the transit system. Are there any publicized maps/drawings depicting these routes that I could familiarize myself with? I've downloaded PDFs from the CTA's site related to future outlook plans, etc. but can't seem to find much clear info on these topics. (Circle Line, Mid-City, Grey, etc)

[Taft]

Originally Posted by CMack

This is all interesting, however I don't have much background knowledge on these proposed/discussed additions to the transit system. Are there any publicized maps/drawings depicting these routes that I could familiarize myself with? I've downloaded PDFs from the CTA's site related to future outlook plans, etc. but can't seem to find much clear info on these topics. (Circle Line, Mid-City, Grey, etc)

http://chicago-l.org/

Great site about the history of the el and has many proposals for changes to the system that never happened or haven't happened yet.

Good place to start, anyway.

Taft

[schwerve]

orange/yellow line extension alternative analysis screenings

nice to see some movement on these fronts, red line screening 2 is also being scheduled for sometime in the fall.

----------------------

Orange Line Extension Alternatives Analysis Study Screen 1 Analysis

Screen 1 Open House Presentations

CTA is holding a public open house to receive input on preliminary findings from Screen 1 of the Alternatives Analysis Study for the proposed Orange Line Extension project. The Alternatives Analysis study is designed to examine all possible transit options and determine a Locally Preferred Alternative for the project. The proposed Orange Line Extension would relieve Orange Line Midway Station and bus terminal congestion and allow for growth in travel at Midway Airport. Additionally, the extension would relieve arterial traffic congestion in the study area bounded by 59th Street on the north, 79th Street on the south, Laramie Avenue on the west and Pulaski Road on the east, allowing improved access to employment and activity centers in the region.

The Screen 1 meeting date and location is:

Tuesday, August 19, 2008
6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.
Ford City Mall – Lower Level North Mall Entrance
7601 South Cicero Avenue
Chicago, IL 60652

---------------------------------------------------

Yellow Line Extension Alternatives Analysis Study Screen 1 Analysis

Screen 1 Open House Presentations

CTA is holding a public open house to receive input on preliminary findings from Screen 1 of the Alternatives Analysis Study for the proposed Yellow Line Extension project. The Alternatives Analysis study is designed to examine all possible transit options and determine a Locally Preferred Alternative for the project. The proposed Yellow Line Extension would provide more direct neighborhood access to transit services and enhance transit oriented land uses. Additionally, the extension would relieve traffic within and adjacent to the study area bounded by Old Orchard Road on the north, Dempster Street on the south, Central Avenue/Harms Road on the west and Skokie Boulevard on the east, allowing enhanced access to employment and activity centers in the region, improving multi-modal connectivity, and providing new opportunities for reverse commute travel.

The Screen 1 meeting date and location is:

Tuesday, August 26, 2008
6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.
National Louis University, North Shore Campus at Skokie
5202 Old Orchard Road
Skokie, IL 60077

[ardecila]

Yes, it is nice to see some progress on these fronts. I think CTA will probably push to bundle the Orange and Yellow Line extensions together, both for engineering/design and construction, to save money. On the federal-funding level, though, I believe they must still be separate.

The Red Line extension may also be included in this bundle, but it's a much bigger project and it offers different challenges.

The Mid-City is a long-term goal, but it seems to be more politically feasible than the Circle Line because it has the strong backing of City Hall, whereas support for the Circle Line was really only limited to the CTA and the public.

Plus, the Mid-City Line (whether is is BRT, LRT, or heavy-rail) is cheaper, since it runs above-ground over an existing railroad ROW and requires relatively few land takings.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Yes, it is nice to see some progress on these fronts. I think CTA will probably push to bundle the Orange and Yellow Line extensions together, both for engineering/design and construction, to save money. On the federal-funding level, though, I believe they must still be separate.

The Red Line extension may also be included in this bundle, but it's a much bigger project and it offers different challenges.

The Mid-City is a long-term goal, but it seems to be more politically feasible than the Circle Line because it has the strong backing of City Hall, whereas support for the Circle Line was really only limited to the CTA and the public.

Plus, the Mid-City Line (whether is is BRT, LRT, or heavy-rail) is cheaper, since it runs above-ground over an existing railroad ROW and requires relatively few land takings.

^ Either way, at this pace my ass will be wrinkled, gray, and sipping tea with cookies at the senior center long before any of these come to fruition.

[Abner]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The Mid-City is a long-term goal, but it seems to be more politically feasible than the Circle Line because it has the strong backing of City Hall, whereas support for the Circle Line was really only limited to the CTA and the public.

Really? Last time I remember the Mid-City corridor coming up, Madigan and Daley were both backing using it as a two-lane truck route (which sounds bananas to me). It would be great news if they were actually still interested in it as a transit line since as you mention it would be a relatively straightforward project.

(Funny, by the way, that the Circle Line's relative popularity was "only" with the CTA and the public, who ought to be far and away the most important constituencies. But this being Chicago, your phrasing was right.)

[Mr Downtown]

I think the Circle Line was the goofy dream of three or four CTA staffers (who persuaded Kruesi), all of whom are now gone. I don't expect to hear much more about it.

[Taft]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

I think the Circle Line was the goofy dream of three or four CTA staffers (who persuaded Kruesi), all of whom are now gone. I don't expect to hear much more about it.

Someone else, on another thread, made an equally bold yet vague claim about the Circle line being dead.

You say "I think." Anything to back that up?

Taft

[Marcu]

Has any in their official capacity at the CTA ever mentioned anything about connection the Brown like to Blue at Jefferson Park? Or is that just something people on this forum have came up with.

[Mr Downtown]

Jeff Sriver, who came up with the idea of the Circle Line, and Mike Schiffer, the director of planning who took it upstairs, have both left CTA. It never had much of a constituency beyond them.

[the urban politician]

^ Fine, but what makes it a "goofy dream" as you said? I'm just curious why you don't think the concept of a Circle Line has much merit?

[Mr Downtown]

It's an idea based on looking at a map rather than looking at unserved transit needs. Lots and lots of money with little prospect of attracting new riders (only four new stations). It's even dubious how much it would actually speed trips for existing riders. A single transfer downtown is almost always faster than two transfers at 1600W.

The Circle Line was the brainchild of Jeff Sriver, who'd lived in Tokyo for several years. Tying together radial rail lines often makes sense for the polycentric cities found in Europe and Asia, but those it's usually done with a circle much larger than 3000 meters in diameter, and usually done to connect frequent-headway regional rail service rather than infrequent suburban trains.