HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #13261  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2016, 10:18 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 7,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by Via Chicago View Post
Red Line extension to 130th moving forward

http://chicago.curbed.com/2016/9/29/...ago-south-side
I assume the writer simply used the wrong terminology here...

Quote:
According to the CTA, there are two different ways this extension can be one. One is building light rail on the west side of the existing Union Pacific Railroad line, and the other is to construct the rail on the east side of the tracks. And to help make the final decision, the CTA is asking for feedback from residents.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13262  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2016, 11:18 PM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
CTA Announces Next Phase For Red Line Extension

The Tribune in its afternoon edition.....The CTA is moving forward on plans for the long-discussed extension of the Red Line to 130th Street, which will include a two-month period of public comment.

The next steps are part of a series of requirements before funding can be sought for the project and construction could begin.


[IMG][/IMG]
CTA Artist Drawing Showing Planned 103rd St Station.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13263  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2016, 7:07 PM
jpIllInoIs's Avatar
jpIllInoIs jpIllInoIs is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,215
^ What a massive blowout waste: 2.3b (to start) when the ME runs right by the proposed station stops. i can think of 5 projects that would actually boost ridership, add TOD potential and most importantly add connectivity.
1) extend Green Line along 63rd west to Midway and connect Orange.
2) extend Pink Line to Hines VA Maywood
3) extend Brown Line to Blue Line Montrose
4) build Clinton/Larrabee line including southern leg on Halsted with stop on east side of UIC and at Archer Orange, 31st, 35th, 43rd.
5) Even Gray Line proposal is better use of funds.

Last edited by jpIllInoIs; Sep 30, 2016 at 7:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13264  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2016, 7:16 PM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs View Post
What a massive blowout waste: 2.3b (to start) when the ME runs right by the proposed station stops. i can think of 5 projects that would actually boost ridership, add TOD potential and most importantly add connectivity.
You don't live there!! Metra is not even in the ball park! ME is miles away. ME does not go where the people want to go.

DH
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13265  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2016, 7:28 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,276
It would seem Rahm intends to run for re-election....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13266  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2016, 1:43 AM
BVictor1's Avatar
BVictor1 BVictor1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,460
Daniel Burnham's Chinatown-To-Downtown Roadway Is Finally Being Built

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2016...daniel-burnham

Daniel Burnham's Chinatown-To-Downtown Roadway Is Finally Being Built
By Ed Komenda and David Matthews | September 30, 2016 4:45am | Updated on September 30, 2016 11:06am


CHINATOWN — Daniel Burnham proposed it. Engineers and laborers moved the Chicago River to make room for it.

But more than a century passed before construction got started on a road connecting Chinatown and Downtown.

Work began this week on the long-promised Wells-Wentworth Connector, according to city officials and Ald. Danny Solis (25th).

The new $62 million roadway will realign Wentworth Avenue and Cermak Road, in turn easing congestion for Chinatown and South Loop residents heading Downtown.



Though modest, the project's initial phase near Wentworth and 18th Street is an important first step toward realizing the city's longtime plan to better connect the area just south of Downtown to the city's core.
__________________
titanic1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13267  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2016, 4:45 AM
CTA Gray Line's Avatar
CTA Gray Line CTA Gray Line is offline
Obsessed Activist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Downers Grove
Posts: 586
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagopcclcar1 View Post
You don't live there!! Metra is not even in the ball park! ME is miles away. ME does not go where the people want to go.

DH
I did live there for 58 yrs., and spending $2+Billions on six route miles is criminally ridiculous, and it certainly does nothing for the South Lakefront.

You are entitled to your opinion, just like everybody else is entitled to thiers; and I of course agree with jpillinois.
__________________
bit.ly/GrayLineInfo > "Make no little plans....." - Daniel Burnham

Last edited by CTA Gray Line; Oct 1, 2016 at 5:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13268  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2016, 5:07 AM
CTA Gray Line's Avatar
CTA Gray Line CTA Gray Line is offline
Obsessed Activist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Downers Grove
Posts: 586
How will the RLE relieve overcrowding on the Red Line? During the many years I boarded at 87th St., most of the time one had to let 2 or more trains pass before there was one with room to board; now there will be no room to board before they even reach 95th!

The RLE still only leaves one South Side 'L' Line South of 63rd, including Metra Electric's lines would provide 3 parallel 'L' Lines all the way downtown. (like the North Side has)
__________________
bit.ly/GrayLineInfo > "Make no little plans....." - Daniel Burnham

Last edited by CTA Gray Line; Oct 1, 2016 at 5:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13269  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2016, 8:57 PM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
^ Isn't the yard at 95th St at capacity? So a new, larger yard at the southern terminus would finally allow more frequency during rush hour, presumably.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13270  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2016, 3:28 AM
CTA Gray Line's Avatar
CTA Gray Line CTA Gray Line is offline
Obsessed Activist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Downers Grove
Posts: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by denizen467 View Post
^ Isn't the yard at 95th St at capacity? So a new, larger yard at the southern terminus would finally allow more frequency during rush hour, presumably.
And serving the South Lakefront - Bronzeville, Hyde Park, South Shore, South Chicago, etc., etc.... The RLE obviously goes nowhere near them!
__________________
bit.ly/GrayLineInfo > "Make no little plans....." - Daniel Burnham
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13271  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2016, 2:49 PM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by denizen467 View Post
^ Isn't the yard at 95th St at capacity? So a new, larger yard at the southern terminus would finally allow more frequency during rush hour, presumably.




The southern Red line yard is called 98th St. yard. It is filled in non-rush periods, but that's due to the extra cars assigned the line.... leftovers from 5000 series. CTA would say more frequency would depend on getting the "flyover" built at Clark Jct. There is no overcrowding on the Dan Ryan trains anymore despite what another poster says. True, there is space for a yard facility should the extension go to 130th St.

David Harrison
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13272  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2016, 9:22 PM
Tom Servo's Avatar
Tom Servo Tom Servo is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,647
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs View Post
^ What a massive blowout waste: 2.3b (to start) when the ME runs right by the proposed station stops. i can think of 5 projects that would actually boost ridership, add TOD potential and most importantly add connectivity.
1) extend Green Line along 63rd west to Midway and connect Orange.
2) extend Pink Line to Hines VA Maywood
3) extend Brown Line to Blue Line Montrose
4) build Clinton/Larrabee line including southern leg on Halsted with stop on east side of UIC and at Archer Orange, 31st, 35th, 43rd.
5) Even Gray Line proposal is better use of funds.
Good points. But remember: the CTA is notoriously bad at wasting money on useless projects.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13273  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2016, 2:38 PM
Jim in Chicago Jim in Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVictor1 View Post
https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/2016...daniel-burnham

Daniel Burnham's Chinatown-To-Downtown Roadway Is Finally Being Built
By Ed Komenda and David Matthews | September 30, 2016 4:45am | Updated on September 30, 2016 11:06am


CHINATOWN — Daniel Burnham proposed it. Engineers and laborers moved the Chicago River to make room for it.

But more than a century passed before construction got started on a road connecting Chinatown and Downtown.

Work began this week on the long-promised Wells-Wentworth Connector, according to city officials and Ald. Danny Solis (25th).

The new $62 million roadway will realign Wentworth Avenue and Cermak Road, in turn easing congestion for Chinatown and South Loop residents heading Downtown.



Though modest, the project's initial phase near Wentworth and 18th Street is an important first step toward realizing the city's longtime plan to better connect the area just south of Downtown to the city's core.
I still fail to understand why the connection at Cermak creates that crazy intersection that lines up with nothing, and creating the need to make two turns within just a few feed.. Wouldn't it be better to blow through that surface parking lot next to the CTA tracks, and create clean connection onto and off of the feeder ramp?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13274  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2016, 6:44 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,393
The idea is to create a safer connector between neighborhoods, and serving an expanded Chinatown—not an expressway feeder. The surface parking lot is owned by IDOT, land purchased when the Chinatown feeder was going to go all the way to Wacker & Harrison. The new vision is for a normal street, not a junior expressway. We want Dan Ryan traffic to realize it's on city streets now, and to be split among Canal, Clark, State, and (someday) Wells-Wentworth.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13275  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2016, 10:27 PM
CTA Gray Line's Avatar
CTA Gray Line CTA Gray Line is offline
Obsessed Activist
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Downers Grove
Posts: 586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
Good points. But remember: the CTA is notoriously bad at wasting money on useless projects.
The Red Line Extension is like a $500 Hot Dog, so CTA gets to spend $500 "for us", and we should be just sooooooo grateful!

IF somebody is going to spend $500 (or $2.3B) "on me", I want a choice in what it buys; not a $500 Pro Chef Cooking Set when my refrigerator is empty! The RLE is CORPORATE WELFARE for Walsh, Pepper, or whomever made the biggest Campaign Contributions -- and the Public is supposed to be TOO STUPID to be able to recognize that for themselves.

Even a $50 Hot Dog would be a better use of Funds - but we have little or no choice (like Block 37 - and the continued spending even TODAY on the Idiotic "Airport Express" concept -- $2M to Parsons-Brinkerhoff)!

I know one person will say that I'm WRONG, but what do the rest of you think?
__________________
bit.ly/GrayLineInfo > "Make no little plans....." - Daniel Burnham

Last edited by CTA Gray Line; Oct 4, 2016 at 5:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13276  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2016, 6:55 AM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
The radio just reported that NICTD is considering double-tracking all the way from Gary to Michigan City.

In fact there seems to be a public meeting on it -- Tuesday night -- in Gary. www.mysouthshoreline.com/news/item/47-double-track-nwi-public-workshops

This could end up being a modest boost to the airport at South Bend too. (And to some extent to the outlet mall in Michigan City.)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13277  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2016, 5:49 PM
Ryanrule Ryanrule is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
Good points. But remember: the CTA is notoriously bad at wasting money on useless projects.
privatize it all, right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13278  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2016, 7:20 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
The idea is to create a safer connector between neighborhoods, and serving an expanded Chinatown—not an expressway feeder. The surface parking lot is owned by IDOT, land purchased when the Chinatown feeder was going to go all the way to Wacker & Harrison. The new vision is for a normal street, not a junior expressway. We want Dan Ryan traffic to realize it's on city streets now, and to be split among Canal, Clark, State, and (someday) Wells-Wentworth.
I've always disagreed with this approach. There's very little traffic on Wentworth south of Cermak - why does it need to connect to anything?

Also, the T intersection of the feeder ramp into Cermak creates very dangerous conditions for pedestrians, especially since there's an L station right there. Lots of turning movements, large trucks, people transferring from bus to train, tourists, students, etc.

I don't see why Wentworth can't be a surface extension of the feeder. Use lane widths and streetscaping treatments to calm traffic. Or, better yet, link the two severed halves of 23rd Street with a new stoplight, and start calming the feeder traffic before it gets to Cermak.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13279  
Old Posted Oct 5, 2016, 6:11 PM
Jim in Chicago Jim in Chicago is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
I've always disagreed with this approach. There's very little traffic on Wentworth south of Cermak - why does it need to connect to anything?

Also, the T intersection of the feeder ramp into Cermak creates very dangerous conditions for pedestrians, especially since there's an L station right there. Lots of turning movements, large trucks, people transferring from bus to train, tourists, students, etc.

I don't see why Wentworth can't be a surface extension of the feeder. Use lane widths and streetscaping treatments to calm traffic. Or, better yet, link the two severed halves of 23rd Street with a new stoplight, and start calming the feeder traffic before it gets to Cermak.
Thanks. I wasn't arguing that it should be a superhighway, but more that creating an very awkward intersection that requires multiple turns withing a very short distance for those going straight from the feeder onto Wells seems unnecessary, when the land exists to make a clean four-way intersection. I think that idea that the majority of the traffic will continue from Wells onto Wentworth (and the the reverse is a fallacy. Most traffic, IMHO, whether the intent of the project or not, will use the feeder and Wells as a route to Roosevelt and into the loop and the project should acknowledge that.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13280  
Old Posted Oct 6, 2016, 2:41 AM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,393
But this project is making a clean four-way intersection at Wentworth & Cermak. And shifting that intersection 100 feet west should eliminate a lot of the confusion under the L line. Lots more pedestrians are walking along Wentworth trying to cross Cermak than along the expressway feeder.
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 12:18 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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