CHICAGO: Transit Developments

[chicagopcclcar1]

Originally Posted by emathias

The Blue Line subway has a short starter spur headed west under Lake Street. People definitely though it would be at least partially subway eventually.

The "spur" you mentioned was planning done in 1938. In fact, the Federal plan was for a subway linking Lake ST. "L" just west of Halsted and the Logan Sq and Humbolt Park be connected to Lake St."L". The city turned that plan down. Then the Federals went on to plan two....a two track subway under Milwaukee Ave. The city agreed to that plan. In 1939, construction began on the two subways, Clybourn-Division-State and the Milwaukee-Lake-Dearborn but the second Initial Subway was halted during the War.

DH

[orulz]

Elevated lines in Chicago are basically open deck plate girder bridges which do absolutely nothing to dampen noise, and in a way amplify it, because vibrations are transmitted almost directly from the vehicle to the structure. Modern elevated lines are much, much quieter.

There probably is some way to dampen noise somewhat. Some composite crosstie material that dampens vibrations better than wood. Or some thinner material that leaves extra room for a buffer between the ties and the girders. They say that the L is significantly over engineered, so even a solution that added quite a bit of weight might still work. Maybe something that closes the deck. You'd then have to worry about drainage though. So not sure what can be done. It would probably be expensive no matter what.

[chicagopcclcar1]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

Also, the connector project kept referencing the London Docklands Light Railway as a model to follow instead of other heavy rail systems, so the connector system would end up looking more like this:

I must disagree...although the Docklands Light Railway is mentioned in a proposed plan last year, if any plan used CTA thinking, it will use CTA vehicles and CTA engineering. True, Chicago "L"s are all built before 1910. To get a true picture of what in the twenty-first century "L" might look like we can use the latest elevated lines built in the last years...1990s plus.


Orange Line built along railroad right-of-ways,



Rehab project rebuilding the Pink Line (former 1895 Metropolitan Douglas Park "L".

DH

[orulz]

The 18th street connection and much of the orange line are examples of more modern elevated structures with ballasted, closed decks and concrete noise walls. They are also much, much quieter than the Lake Street or Loop elevated tracks. They are more visually obtrusive too since light can't pass through the structure, but I'm pretty sure fixing the noise would be worth it. I wonder if the Lake Street or Loop elevated structures are strong enough to support a retrofit to those standards.

[ardecila]

I wonder what the effect would be if they put in dampening ties and added sound walls without going to the extreme weight of a ballasted deck. Would that provide maybe 60% of noise reduction at less than half the cost of a ballasted deck?

Part of the reason DLR structures seem lighter and less obtrusive is because they don't have a ballasted deck or sound walls. It's just a concrete box girder with tracks embedded in the top.

[chicagopcclcar1]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Part of the reason DLR structures seem lighter and less obtrusive is because they don't have a ballasted deck or sound walls. It's just a concrete box girder with tracks embedded in the top.

I doubt that DLR runs at 55 mph like the CTA.

DH

[Randomguy34]

Originally Posted by chicagopcclcar1

I doubt that DLR runs at 55 mph like the CTA.

DH

DLR runs at 80 km/hr, so about 50 mph, which is very comparable

[chicagopcclcar1]

Originally Posted by Randomguy34

DLR runs at 80 km/hr, so about 50 mph, which is very comparable

I'm standing corrected. It looks puny, LOL....like a mini LRV.

DH

[ardecila]

^ And CTA's rolling stock looks puny compared to NYCTA or WMATA's 75'-long cars. It's all relative. But importantly, the short car length means DLR can make sharp turns in congested areas without having to tear down buildings. Maintenance yards can be more compact, etc. That could come in handy in a built-up area like downtown Chicago where underground construction is to be avoided.

[chicagopcclcar1]

Originally Posted by ardecila

^ And CTA's rolling stock looks puny compared to NYCTA or WMATA's 75'-long cars. It's all relative. But importantly, the short car length means DLR can make sharp turns in congested areas without having to tear down buildings. Maintenance yards can be more compact, etc. That could come in handy in a built-up area like downtown Chicago where underground construction is to be avoided.

Yes, but going to the shorter length would mean cars that are nonconforming to the CTA fleet and that goes against CTA practices. It works for the O'Hare people mover. I want to see NYCTA or WMATA go around the Loop "L". Are cars can do 70 MPH too.

Its all a dream anyways....given the costs NYC's Second Subway is the last we'll ever see of such projects.

DH

[the urban politician]

Imagine how much property values in Uptown, Edgewater, or Loyola would shoot through the roof if the CTA actually had express trains on the north main red line.

[Mr Downtown]

DH, it's not clear that CTA would play any rôle in the Connector project. It's still at such a preliminary-study stage that they haven't had any serious discussions with any operating agency, though they've been told that an actual transit agency will be required to talk with FTA.

I raised the question of incompatible rolling stock with the main consultant, who replied "I do not want to use existing 'L' car design with 19th century dimensions; want 10' car width if possible, much more efficient loading."

[WrightCONCEPT]

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

DH, it's not clear that CTA would play any rôle in the Connector project. It's still at such a preliminary-study stage that they haven't had any serious discussions with any operating agency, though they've been told that an actual transit agency will be required to talk with FTA.

They will have to work with RTA so they can figure out
a) Fare that are possibly compatible with Metra, which will effect the ridership modeling and whatever farebox recovery that they maybe expecting.
b) How the fare of this will effect CTA ridership will it actually relieve loading in part of the L that are going over capacity?

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown

I raised the question of incompatible rolling stock with the main consultant, who replied "I do not want to use existing 'L' car design with 19th century dimensions; want 10' car width if possible, much more efficient loading."

The consultant actually said that? When the operating dimension of the L cars actually fits the tighter turning conditions that would work for the DLR and they want wider 10' trains which makes it virtually impossible to get a tight conditions. If they want better operating loading just add an extra door with seats along the walls which in fact will make it something that will HELP the CTA in future.

The CTA car dimensions are a base framework and in fact working off of that with a slight modification will make the cost of the work of the railcars cheaper and more likely that this can get off the ground. Or a set of articulated high loading floor light rail trains which are the same width of the CTA trains.

SMH

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by WrightCONCEPT

They will have to work with RTA so they can figure out
a) Fare that are possibly compatible with Metra, which will effect the ridership modeling and whatever farebox recovery that they maybe expecting.
b) How the fare of this will effect CTA ridership will it actually relieve loading in part of the L that are going over capacity?




The consultant actually said that? When the operating dimension of the L cars actually fits the tighter turning conditions that would work for the DLR and they want wider 10' trains which makes it virtually impossible to get a tight conditions. If they want better operating loading just add an extra door with seats along the walls which in fact will make it something that will HELP the CTA in future.

The CTA car dimensions are a base framework and in fact working off of that with a slight modification will make the cost of the work of the railcars cheaper and more likely that this can get off the ground. Or a set of articulated high loading floor light rail trains which are the same width of the CTA trains.

SMH

Was there a public meeting regarding the connector? Is there another planned for the near future? Would love to see it come to fruition. Any word regarding the status of the grant they were hoping to win?

[Mr Downtown]

No public meetings yet, and still some distance from one. At this point, it's just an idea being explored by the Chicago Central Area Committee

[denizen467]

Originally Posted by orulz

The 18th street connection and much of the orange line are examples of more modern elevated structures with ballasted, closed decks and concrete noise walls. They are also much, much quieter than the Lake Street or Loop elevated tracks. They are more visually obtrusive too since light can't pass through the structure, but I'm pretty sure fixing the noise would be worth it. I wonder if the Lake Street or Loop elevated structures are strong enough to support a retrofit to those standards.

Rare opportunity for anyone to directly compare noise levels exists for a little while -- stand on Broadway underneath the Wilson approach viaduct. Northbound Purple trains still run on the century-old steel structure(*) All other trains are running on the new viaduct structure. (I guess you could just make two audio recordings with your smartphone in two different locations and almost accomplish the same thing; there's nothing like being there though.)

*: Looking carefully while on Broadway, even the old viaduct has had some columns completely replaced (not yet available in Google streetview) with temporary new ones during the complicated construction project, so even the old viaduct is probably enjoying some sound dampening. The difference is nevertheless noticeable. In any case, because this is next to a station, I doubt it will be possible to make a comparison with trains running full speed.

[UPChicago]

^ I live in the vicinity and I can vouch for this statement, since they replaced the old western most viaducts the noise level is unnoticeable for passing trains whereas before it use to be unbearable at times.

[emathias]

New Green Line 'L' Station Planned At Damen and Lake, City Announces

NEAR WEST SIDE — Mayor Rahm Emanuel will announce plans for a new Green Line 'L' station at Damen and Lake on the Near West Side Thursday morning.

The new station will fill a 1½ mile gap between existing Green Line stations at California and Ashland. Emanuel is expected to announce the new 'L' station ahead of his 2017 infrastructure address.

The Damen and Lake stop aims to better serve the growing business corridor and residential neighborhood on the Near West Side, the Mayor's office said.
...

From DNAinfo

I'm glad they're adding this. I kinda wish they'd decided to do both this one and one at Madison/Pink. Damen is better because there is more existing residential nearby, but that sea of parking lots near Madison/Pink could easily become developments if there were a stop there. At some point the land value will be high enough that United Center can create multi-story parking garages adjacent to the Center and do some intensive development on the outer lots.

[maru2501]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Two demolition permits were issued yesterday to tear the body shop down at LaSalle and Erie. I believe it's supposed to be luxury condos (starting at $1.3M), called The Betham.


ALSO*** New CTA stop is planned to be completed at Damen & Lake by mid 2020, about 1.5 to 2 blocks north of the United Center. ***

that CTA stop is badly needed there for UC. I always thought maybe they would do a giant pink line stop right where it crosses near the UC to the east

I wish they would eminent domain a couple of those ridiculous parking lots

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by maru2501

that CTA stop is badly needed there for UC. I always thought maybe they would do a giant pink line stop right where it crosses near the UC to the east

I wish they would eminent domain a couple of those ridiculous parking lots

Yeah I'm surprised they didn't go on the Pink Line, but this is good nonetheless. I'm curious if it will spur some new development in that specific area with a new stop. 3 years is a ways away though so who knows.