HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7681  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2011, 2:03 AM
schwerve schwerve is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
LaSalle is underused, but it doesn't have room for expansion unless they start tearing down adjacent buildings. It's also an absolutely crappy station. It has one tiny room for waiting, and the rest of the station is outdoors and unsheltered. The station really only exists at the whim of the Chicago Stock Exchange that it wraps around.

Hopefully Metra can bring in some architects and make LaSalle into a proper station. SOM did a tremendous job making Millennium Station into a dignified place.

At Union, Metra can re-arrange the layout to bring a fourth track into the north side and add a second through track along the river. The problem is that because of the station layout, the platforms will have a kink in them (or two, actually). That doesn't meet modern standards, and potential high-speed trains will be quite long.
I don't understand your hatred of LaSalle. It's nothing special but as a basic, clean, usable commuter station, perfectly fine. It's complete covered and only needs a small waiting room as most people walk directly onto scheduled trains. It can take Southwest and potential Southeast Metra service and do well, but shouldn't be used for much more than that. It can use some upgrades such as a direct connection to the LaSalle blue line station or more seating in the waiting room but other than that, serves its purpose effectively.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7682  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2011, 2:45 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beta_Magellan View Post
In their Go To 2040 project evaluation, CMAP only listed that double tracking as a “first phase” of the project, though—they estimated another $300 million would be necessary for “full service.” Although they’ve taken down their big list of proposed projects, ones affecting the northern suburbs can still be found here:

http://www.nwmc-cog.org/Transportati...sNWMCArea.aspx
AFAIK, the only capital spending required for the NCS is a reconfiguration of platforms at certain stations, a purchase of new locomotives/cars, and possibly change to the signaling system.

Those three things could easily add up to $300 million (the majority is the new rolling stock) but not a whole lot of actual construction.

EDIT: apparently Metra only double-tracked up to Mundelein. Further up to Antioch there is only one track, and the CN freight will not be moving away from this segment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwerve View Post
I don't understand your hatred of LaSalle. It's nothing special but as a basic, clean, usable commuter station, perfectly fine. It's complete covered and only needs a small waiting room as most people walk directly onto scheduled trains. It can take Southwest and potential Southeast Metra service and do well, but shouldn't be used for much more than that. It can use some upgrades such as a direct connection to the LaSalle blue line station or more seating in the waiting room but other than that, serves its purpose effectively.
It's embarrassing. The access is fairly awkward and has no major gateway feature - if you don't know where the two entrances are, you won't find them. They're hidden inside the Stock Exchange office building. Apart from the one small cramped room, there is no place to wait for trains, and the surrounding neighborhood is dead, so it's not like there are places nearby either. In a city with bitterly cold winters, the platform area is very open and windswept. Perhaps if I remembered the shithole that LaSalle was before the early 90s, I might feel differently, but that's not an excuse. (I do remember, but only very very vaguely - as a toddler taking the Rock in from Beverly)

The new bus terminal and south entrance are great, but it's sad that it took this long.

Too bad they demolished the train shed during the Depression.

__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...

Last edited by ardecila; Mar 21, 2011 at 3:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7683  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2011, 7:30 AM
Godwindaniel Godwindaniel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 43
Hey love this megabus. It is very useful for metro area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7684  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2011, 1:50 PM
k1052 k1052 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
LaSalle is underused, but it doesn't have room for expansion unless they start tearing down adjacent buildings. It's also an absolutely crappy station. It has one tiny room for waiting, and the rest of the station is outdoors and unsheltered. The station really only exists at the whim of the Chicago Stock Exchange that it wraps around.

Hopefully Metra can bring in some architects and make LaSalle into a proper station. SOM did a tremendous job making Millennium Station into a dignified place.

At Union, Metra can re-arrange the layout to bring a fourth track into the north side and add a second through track along the river. The problem is that because of the station layout, the platforms will have a kink in them (or two, actually). That doesn't meet modern standards, and potential high-speed trains will be quite long.

If you take a look at the the lines where they pass over Polk, specifically the bridge abutments it looks like they envisioned more track space and there is is some leftover space between the station and LaSalle St.

But yea, the station facilities are basically non-existent. Hopefully if Metra moves more service over there they will improve that situation.

To get HSR into Union Station itself 222 S Riverside would have to go so they could build the long platforms needed and reposition the concourse above platform level.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7685  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2011, 2:27 PM
schwerve schwerve is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
It's embarrassing. The access is fairly awkward and has no major gateway feature - if you don't know where the two entrances are, you won't find them. They're hidden inside the Stock Exchange office building. Apart from the one small cramped room, there is no place to wait for trains, and the surrounding neighborhood is dead, so it's not like there are places nearby either. In a city with bitterly cold winters, the platform area is very open and windswept. Perhaps if I remembered the shithole that LaSalle was before the early 90s, I might feel differently, but that's not an excuse. (I do remember, but only very very vaguely - as a toddler taking the Rock in from Beverly)

The new bus terminal and south entrance are great, but it's sad that it took this long.

Too bad they demolished the train shed during the Depression.
I simply don't get the emotional response. This is not to say the critiques are wrong, but these are design standards that aren't necessary. LaSalle is designed for its use, a pass through terminal commuter station to the loop that serves a single line. It's not Union or Ogilvie, both deal with much higher passenger loads and multiple lines with different frequencies. A full train shed and large waiting room are irrelevant to 95% of users as nobody waits for trains in the station, most walk directly onto the next scheduled train and wait there. The waiting room is sized for the people using it, riders purchasing tickets and off-peak users (I've never seen it full outside of after the occasional weekend festival in the city). Southern access will be nice, but until recently most people would never actually go south of van buren. The station is boring, innocuous, and completely competent to its task.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7686  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2011, 3:41 PM
nomarandlee's Avatar
nomarandlee nomarandlee is offline
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
LaSalle is underused, but it doesn't have room for expansion unless they start tearing down adjacent buildings. It's also an absolutely crappy station. It has one tiny room for waiting, and the rest of the station is outdoors and unsheltered. The station really only exists at the whim of the Chicago Stock Exchange that it wraps around.
Are we sure LaSalle station couldn't be expanded? It seems from looking at bing maps that there is room for another platform, perhaps two, if it expanded towards S.LaSalle St. Perhaps one more track could be built towards Finacial Place.

To bad that the old train shed was knocked down years ago, it looks like in its hayday it was pretty grand.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7687  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2011, 6:34 PM
nomarandlee's Avatar
nomarandlee nomarandlee is offline
My Mind Has Left My Body
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Too bad they demolished the train shed during the Depression.

A bit OT....Why did the railroads have no issue having train shed even with diesel train exhaust? If we did it back then would it theoretically be any less doable to reconstruct them today to house over diesel trains or would it be deemed a health hazzard.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7688  
Old Posted Mar 21, 2011, 6:57 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,412
The old train sheds were built in the steam era, so they got pretty smoky. From what I understand, they worked great for diesel trains. The problem was that they were difficult to maintain, so they often sprung leaks. This is why Chicago stations tore down numerous train sheds and replaced them with lower canopies.

It's perfectly possible to build a modern train shed... I'm guessing the air quality would be better than it currently is at Ogilvie or Union, since the warm exhaust would rise to the top and exit through vents. If designed properly the shed uses natural convection to refresh the air.

They've built plenty of train sheds in Europe. My favorite is in Dresden, where Norman Foster's shed ties seamlessly into the Beaux-Arts station.. There are also lots of modernist sheds that aren't barrel-vaulted, like Lisbon's Gare do Oriente.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7689  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2011, 3:41 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,388
I could be wrong, but I actually have the impression that smoke exhaust worked better (in relative terms) with steam locomotives than with diesels because the steam locomotives had taller smokestacks that were just a few inches below the smoke slots. That's one of the reasons Union Station's trainsheds were so low, requiring a novel cross-section. That could also be one reason for the demise of the high balloon trainshed at LaSalle Street. The smoke was highly corrosive and the structural members would have significant deterioration after a few years.

For the Daily News building, extensive tests were done with a mockup structure in the CB&Q yards, and Holabird & Roche eventually developed a technique of using an expansion chamber directly above the slots where the smokestacks exhausted. The air from that expansion chamber could then be drawn up and out at the roof by mechanical fans and the stack effect.

Last edited by Mr Downtown; Mar 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7690  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2011, 10:42 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
I could be wrong, but I actually have the impression that smoke exhaust worked better (in relative terms) with steam locomotives than with diesels because the steam locomotives had taller smokestacks that were just a few inches below the smoke slots. That's one of the reasons Union Station's trainsheds were so low, requiring a novel cross-section. That could also be one reason for the demise of the high balloon trainshed at LaSalle Street. The smoke was highly corrosive and the structural members would have significant deterioration after a few years.
Right, that's my point. The balloon trainshed was ill-suited to steam power and the low trainsheds were/still are ill-suited to diesel power. The Rock Island made a poor choice tearing down their balloon trainshed, because the implementation of diesel power only a few years later rendered the steam issue moot.

While we're on the subject of rail terminals, it's aggravating to me that Metra has not rebuilt the baggage platforms at Union Station for passenger use. They are wider than the passenger platforms, and more importantly, free of columns. Using both sets of platforms at the same time would greatly reduce congestion. Alternatively, the baggage platforms could be demolished and the tracks moved closer together, creating wider platforms spaced every two tracks.

Quote:
For the Daily News building, extensive tests were done with a mockup structure in the CB&Q yards, and Holabird & Roche eventually developed a technique of using an expansion chamber directly above the slots where the smokestacks exhausted. The air from that expansion chamber could then be drawn up and out at the roof by mechanical fans and the stack effect.

Popular Mechanics, August 1928
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7691  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2011, 6:32 AM
Beta_Magellan's Avatar
Beta_Magellan Beta_Magellan is offline
Technocrat in Your Tank!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 648
Pretty off-topic, but I was walking from Wabash and Congress to Wabash and Washington this afternoon and never had to stop walking—every light was green as I crossed each street. I’ve read about the possibility of calibrating signals so as to match pedestrian flows rather than traffic flows in downtown areas, although typically in a speculative, just-throwing-it-out-there kind of way. I doubt that the lights on Wabash were timed to accommodate walking (and my typical pace is somewhat brisker than your average Chicagoan, anyway), but is there a reason for the timing on Wabash to be so favorable to a speed that wouldn’t be so quick for car traffic, or is it just a side effect of timing of the lights on the east-west streets?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7692  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2011, 7:57 PM
MayorOfChicago's Avatar
MayorOfChicago MayorOfChicago is offline
You had me at herro...
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Lakeview, Chicago
Posts: 2,185
^ I can actually almost always walk from Wacker to State Street along Randolph and hit only green lights. I have to walk at my fast speed though, if I get behind a bunch of slow moving cows it screws everything up. I think it's just the timing of lights. I randomly know when and where I'm going to hit red lights when I do my usual routine during the day.
__________________
So I was out biking with Jesus last week...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7693  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2011, 8:28 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,412
Yeah, same. I need to be walking briskly but it is possible to go continuously down Randolph. It's weird, because running doesn't help; you'll just hit a red light and waste time waiting.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7694  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2011, 3:04 AM
Rizzo Rizzo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 7,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beta_Magellan View Post
Pretty off-topic, but I was walking from Wabash and Congress to Wabash and Washington this afternoon and never had to stop walking—every light was green as I crossed each street. I’ve read about the possibility of calibrating signals so as to match pedestrian flows rather than traffic flows in downtown areas, although typically in a speculative, just-throwing-it-out-there kind of way. I doubt that the lights on Wabash were timed to accommodate walking (and my typical pace is somewhat brisker than your average Chicagoan, anyway), but is there a reason for the timing on Wabash to be so favorable to a speed that wouldn’t be so quick for car traffic, or is it just a side effect of timing of the lights on the east-west streets?
Walking at a slightly brisk and constant speed, you can get lights on Michigan Avenue to be all green when crossing from Wacker to Chicago. Chicago Avenue always ruins everything. And if you miss the signal, you wait for eternity.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7695  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2011, 3:04 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,388
For decades, CDOT has ensured that signals in the Loop were set to accommodate pedestrians.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7696  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2011, 3:28 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,481
Yeah, while the lights are synchronized for all E-W and N-S streets, I do believe the cycles are timed to basically be a multiple of average walking speeds. I forget the precise number, but if you set the right pace (somewhere around 3.5mph, I think) you should hit nothing but green.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7697  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2011, 7:29 PM
J_M_Tungsten's Avatar
J_M_Tungsten J_M_Tungsten is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,379
Not sure of the date on this, but a pretty cool picture I found of the wacker drive project here http://wackerdrive.net/Photos/

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7698  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2011, 8:26 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,412
Holy crap! These are the first photos I've seen of the river tunnels since they closed in the 1950s! The tracks and cobbles are still intact! So cool...

I wonder if they'll get into the Van Buren tunnel when they get down to that section in 2012.


__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7699  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2011, 3:45 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,388
I'm not clear why the Wacker rebuild involves the streetcar tunnel at all. The roof of the tunnel should be at least 4-5 feet below the new Lower Wacker slab. I think the "Van Buren" tunnel is even deeper.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7700  
Old Posted Mar 25, 2011, 8:05 AM
Nexis4Jersey's Avatar
Nexis4Jersey Nexis4Jersey is online now
Greetings from New Jersey
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 3,292
what are they doing to the Tunnels?
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:55 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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