[F1 Tommy]

http://chicagobreakingbusiness.com/2011/02/o%E2%80%99hare-deal-would-open-gates-for-virgin-america.html

O’Hare deal would open gates for Virgin America
By Julie Johnsson

The city of Chicago has struck a deal with Delta Air Lines that could pave the way for upstart Virgin America to begin service at O’Hare International Airport.

A proposed ordinance introduced by Mayor Daley in city council Wednesday would give the city control over the L concourse gates in Terminal 3. The gates have been largely vacant since Nov. 17, 2009, when Delta shifted its operations at O’Hare to merger partner Northwest Airline’s base in Terminal 2.

This is not as big a deal as they make it out to be. They will only get a couple of gates and add a few flights. By the way, AA/Eagle are adding flights and so is United/UA express. O'hare will have the most passenger traffic it has had in many years starting in April.

[Kngkyle]

Virgin starts with 3 SFO-ORD flights so United responds by adding 5 more to the 11 daily flights they already have. It's fun to watch this stuff. Fares are gonna plummet on that route.

[ametz]

:previous: Dammit.....I just spent a small fortune for a ticket from O'Hare to San Fran.

[OrdoSeclorum]

Sounds Promising?

Airlines and City agree to runway completion: Crains (http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20110314/NEWS10/110319950/city-airlines-in-deal-to-continue-ohare-runway-building-report).

[ardecila]

Looks like they'll build 10R-28L at the far south end. That necessarily includes the relocation of Irving Park Road and the UP rail line, which essentially means that the airfield will grow to its ultimate size, even if they don't add more runways inside.

They've already extended 10L-28R, and I believe they will build the remaining (middle) half of 10C-28C, since it's already started. The south airfield will be built-out as per the OMP plan; no losses there.

What we don't get is 9C-27C, or the extension of 9R-27L.

All in all, that's still two more runways than O'Hare currently has. Plus, the city doesn't lose either of the two diagonal runways that were slated for closure.

Pre-OMP
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/3066/11496042146760606mngapt.jpg

Daley Compromise
http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/9475/compromise.jpg


OMP Master Plan
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/9587/11496042149150606mngapt.jpg


OMP Master Plan

[bnk]

http://travel.usatoday.com/flights/post/2011/03/ohare-expansion-deal/147616/1

Compromise allows Chicago O'Hare expansion to proceed \
By Ben Mutzabaugh, USA TODAY



Ben Mutzabaugh, USA TODAY

A deal has been reached that gives Chicago the green light for additional expansion at O'Hare International Airport, The Associated Press reports.

That deal comes as city and federal officials reached a deal today with American and United, airlines that combine for more than 80% of O'Hare's traffic.

The Chicago Tribune calls the effort a "breakthrough agreement" that Mayor Richard Daley "desperately sought to keep alive the expansion of O'Hare International Airport."

Bloomberg News says "the agreement will allow work to begin on a new runway and other airfield improvements, preventing an escalation of flight delays at O'Hare, according to a statement today by Chicago Mayor Richard Daley, the airlines and the U.S. Transportation Department. It is the largest airfield modernization program in the U.S., federal officials said."

The deal ends an impasse that boiled over in January,...


...

The deal with the airlines allows the city to push ahead on $1.17 billion in related projects, while deferring the terms and timing of the remaining $2.23 billion in projects that had been part of this phase of expansion. The deal stipulates that the parties must negotiate details of the deferred portion no later than March 2013.

The Wall Street Journal provides specifics, writing:

...

The first phase of the O'Hare expansion, parts of which remain under construction, includes two new runways, a runway extension and a new air-traffic-control tower. The second phase, which will get started with funding agreed Monday, will allow the city to begin work on an additional south runway as well as other airfield improvements.

...
"eight modern runways" once the latest phase is complete, the Journal adds.


...

The Tribune writes that when "asked what altered the airlines' hardline position that more O'Hare runways would not be needed for many years," Jeff Smisek nodded toward DOT Secretary Ray LaHood.

He "helped change my mind," Smisek said, according to the Tribune.

Tipping his hat to O'Hare's role within the national aviation system, LaHood says in a statement that "making improvements to O'Hare will not only reduce flight delays and improve service for air passengers across America, it will ensure one of our busiest airports continues to thrive economically in the future."

[Beta_Magellan]

Is western access still possible?

[ametz]

It's about time clouted something out of D.C.

[ardecila]

Is western access still possible?

Sure. Nothing is preventing the future construction of western access, either as a transportation center or a full-fledged air terminal. The airlines just won't pay for it - nor will they agree to increased ticket taxes to fund it.

The Elgin-O'Hare-West Bypass (http://www.elginohare-westbypass.org/SitePages/Home.aspx) project is run by IDOT, and the state/federal gov't will fund it, probably in conjunction with tolls. It's not financially connected to the city's O'Hare project, and it won't connect into the airport unless the city can find its own money for the western terminal.

There is a transit component to this expressway (BRT lanes and median platforms) but it's pretty speculative at this point, and it won't be built in the first phase. (Pace will most likely provide interim bus service on the corridor to build ridership).

[Beta_Magellan]

Hmm…I’d thought ensuring western access was dependent on building a connection when the runways were being moved—now that it’s not happening will western access simply be much more expensive to get done?

[ardecila]

Oh, I see... Runway 14R-32L (the diagonal one) would still need to be relocated if you wanted to reconfigure the airport to resemble Atlanta or Orlando.

That doesn't rule out a western terminal, though. (I think) the only sticking point is for transfers from the east side to the west side, since baggage tractors and shuttle buses can't cross an active runway. You'd need some sort of underground system for baggage, one for passengers, and then at least one or two road underpasses for other vehicles.

[SamInTheLoop]

Virgin starts with 3 SFO-ORD flights so United responds by adding 5 more to the 11 daily flights they already have. It's fun to watch this stuff. Fares are gonna plummet on that route.


This tells you a lot of what people need to realize about the legacy carriers claims of how flight demand didn't warrant continued expansion of O'Hare. Actually, demand for seats is rebounding (I don't have at my fingers, but I'm sure up-to-date year-over-year passenger numbers would confirm). However, because of the legacies' struggling business models, the planes are still parked in the California and Arizona deserts. It's kind of a ridiculous circular argument by the legacies - flight traffice increases are being stymied by their business decision to keep the capacity parked in the desert - not by stagnant growth in demand for seats from the travelling public, so they argue there's no need for further expansion. Again, as evidenced by the epic, long struggle Virgin America had to even enter the airport and start off with a very modest presence with service to two cities, United and American have far too large an impact on overall capacity and competition-supression at O'Hare.

Also, on this week's agreement: This is just redefining what this next phase of O'Hare expansion is.........my understanding is that all parties go back to the table in 2013 to decide what comes next at that point. Hopefully by then, even the legacies' influence in keeping capacity and competition down will be weakened, and along with a healthy economy, it will be clear to all that all of OMP must be finished, including the Western Terminal...

[ChiPsy]

Thanks, Ardecilia, for posting those maps! I've been searching the newspapers (Tribune, Sun-Times, Crains, and even the STL Post-Dispatch) for a map in their stories, and they've posted none -- even though it would seem the most obvious way to illustrate the expansion/compromise. Maybe maps have been in the print editions, but otherwise this is the first time I've finally been able to visualize exactly what happened yesterday.

Looking at these pix, it seems like Mayor Daley was able to accomplish ~3/4's of what he aspired for 10 years ago when he announced the audacious modernization plan. Does that sound about right?

[Kngkyle]

I think the key to the Western Terminal is to convince United or American to move into it. More likely to be United but either way it would be a tough sell. T1 isn't exactly in bad shape and United doesn't really need more gates. American has been downsizing ORD quite a bit and isn't in as good of financial shape as United. And building a massive new terminal means there will be a ton of unused gates in the old terminals, which United and American won't want to see go into the hands of LCCs. Perhaps demolishing and rebuilding T2 at a later date (which needs to be done regardless) is one way to get them on board.

It would certainly be nice though if the western terminal was a state of the art terminal for the new worlds largest airline - United. Akin to the McNamara terminal in Detroit but larger. Maybe sometime in the next decade or two.

[SamInTheLoop]

I guess I asked a very timely question above:

Airports Council International this morning apparently released estimates of 2010 passenger traffic at airports around the globe. O'Hare increased 3.3% over 2009......not fantastic for sure, but at least moving in the right direction, and much better than Atlanta and Heathrow....

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ What's the situation like for Atlanta and Heathrow?

[Vlajos]

Atlanta grew 1.4% and Heathrow declined about the same.

[Jenner]

There is still no reason to build the western terminal, despite what we may want. I don't have the numbers handy, but as I recall, the frontage space that the western terminal provides would be less than what UA and Star Alliance are taking right now, but more space than AA. Even if UA or AA moved there, you open up a ton of gates for competition. Given that UA and AA are basically paying more fees for runway construction, I'm not sure why they would want more competition at ORD.

I am rather surprised that they didn't extend 9R-27L. That should not have impacted any of the maintenance areas, and would allow a longer runway for takeoff and landing of large aircraft. In this scenario, the only other part to be built would be the 9C-27C runway, as well as the new airline maintenance areas.

[Beta_Magellan]

A western terminal is definitely more of an ground-transport accessibility issue than anything else—Elgin-O’Hare and its transit component both assume some sort of connection there, and most of the (admittedly very conceptual) Illinois HSR airport links I’ve seen favored western over eastern access.

[denizen467]

Perhaps demolishing and rebuilding T2 at a later date (which needs to be done regardless) is one way to get them on board.
This (or the same thing regarding T3) is the cleverest argument, and strategy, for a western terminal that I've heard. There would be at least a couple-year span before aggregate gate count were increased, and many more years if there weren't immediate funding for it, so UA/AA might be placated by this. Would there be counter-arguments that T2 can be renovated (while in use) for another half-century? Or is it truly too narrow, too long, too devoid of amenities?

[ardecila]

Didn't T2 just receive a major renovation of its arrival/departure/security areas? Helmut Jahn's massive canopy, and the star-studded panels, are quite beautiful.

Why would American want to tear down a terminal that works fine functionally, and is not unattractive, for a brand-new one on the far side of the airport that would require a costly new underground train?

[aquablue]

All of O'hare's terminals are too long, narrow and lacking amenities by international standards. Chicago deserves a modern terminal design. It is hardly an attractive transfer hub for Europeans or Asians given the palaces they are used to.

[ardecila]

Yeah, but European and Asian countries can make money appear out of thin air to build vast, impressive pieces of infrastructure. The US doesn't have the money, which is why we need the airlines' permission - so we can milk the passengers for money.

The recent, costly renovations to T2 and T3 have made them beautiful, unified, and compatible with modern airport security procedures, extending their lifespan considerably.

The best-case scenario would be for the city to find a different funding source and begin construction on T3 without the use of ticket taxes, and then open it up to smaller airlines.

Short of that, I want the city to build a transport hub on the site of T3, without any gates. Passengers could arrive at the transport hub via train or bus, check in at a small set of counters, go through security, and then board an underground people-mover to T1, T2, T3, and T5. There would be two tunnels drilled under the airfield: one for a Blue Line extension and one for the people-move - baggage transfer could probably be tucked into one of the other two tunnels.

The airlines might be willing to fund this if the city pledged not to add gates.

[aquablue]

It's all priorities. The US could have the money for these things if the will was there. Unfortunately, most Americans care little for aesthetic concerns and are happy with a functional practical terminal as long as it works. At least LAX's new terminal renovation will be very nice.

The problem with the way most american terminals have been designed in the recent past is this:

The main terminal area is usually an afterthought for passengers. The building is usually too small for shopping, amenities, etc. It is just ticketing then gate. A cattle transport way of thinking. Passengers check in, then directly to a boring gate area which is usually too small to allow for much other than a few shops and gate space. The airside area needs to be larger in airports, to allow more space and prevent concourse crowding. If you look at even old Euro terminals, they are usually deep and wide to allow for departure lounges, while US terminals are usually pencil thin.

The concourses are too small and cramped overall, however there are some exceptions.

The US is lucky it isn't a small country like Thailand or Singapore vying to attract transfer passengers, because with this approach they'd never get any business at all!

[Godwindaniel]

Nice…chicago airport look crazy…The airport expansion is a good thing.

[nomarandlee]

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110328/news/703289987/

3/28/2011 07:23 AM

Suburbs still want western terminal at O'Hare

By Marni Pyke ..O'Hare flight information Metra service advisories Why Not the Best Web site Why Not the Best Web site Why Not the Best
A western terminal and its promise as a cash cow driving economic growth helped convince suburbs around O'Hare to drop resistance to airport expansion and join Chicago in its quest for more runways.

But now with uncertainty about the western terminal's future — when and if it will be built at all — local leaders are adjusting expectations.


“I think it will happen but we have some big obstacles,” DuPage County Chairman Dan Cronin said.

After months of feuding, the city with United and American Airlines announced a deal March 14 that ends a lawsuit by the carriers and allows for construction of a runway at O'Hare International Airport's southern end.

Absent from the pact is the western terminal, estimated to cost about $2 billion. The airlines and Chicago agreed to kick other outstanding issues down the road to 2013. United and American opposed the terminal, expected to be used by smaller rival airlines.

“The western terminal complex will only be developed as demand dictates,” Chicago Department of Aviation officials said in an e-mail Friday, adding that “only the users of this facility will be responsible for its costs.”

That puts the future of a western terminal in the hands of United and American's competitors. But with the shaky economy affecting air travel, it's questionable when or if willing investors will step up.

The vision for the airport's western side included extending the Elgin-O'Hare Expressway east from its terminus in Itasca into O'Hare along with a terminal. That was anticipated to trigger development with restaurants, shops and industry rivaling towns to the east like Rosemont.

The expressway project is inching forward as state planners search for funding. Chicago would build parking and provide transport — likely buses — to existing terminals once the expressway reaches O'Hare.

Bensenville Village President Frank Soto in 2009 negotiated a $16 million deal with Chicago ending years of lawsuits hampering airport expansion.

Two years later, Soto still thinks western access is an economic engine for the area. But “whether it's a four-cylinder or an eight-cylinder depends on whether it's a parking garage or a terminal. A terminal's the best option because it creates many more opportunities,” Soto said.

Cronin agreed, noting that the economic “promise will not be realized without the terminal,” he said. “If you're talking about a roadway and a hole in the fence with a parking lot, it's not my vision.”

Historically, DuPage suburbs along with Elk Grove Village fought O'Hare expansion, which involved taking a chunk out of northeast Bensenville. But in 2003, former DuPage Chairman Robert Schillerstrom convinced his board to change course despite opposition from longtime Bensenville Village President John Geils.

Schillerstrom and Geils are no longer in office and Chicago Mayor Richard Daley will be succeeded by Mayor-elect Rahm Emanuel in May.

“I'm anxious to sit down with Mayor-elect Emanuel and have a frank discussion,” Cronin said.

“There's a certain amount of uncertainty because of the transition. My vision of western access must include the terminal and western access — there's no doubt about it.”

As to the possibility of the terminal dropping off the radar screen, Soto doesn't blame the city.

“It's not an issue the city of Chicago had control over,” he said. But, he'd rather see the terminal built first, before the runway.

The soft economy and high fuel prices will continue to dog the western terminal for now, aviation expert and DePaul University professor Joseph Schwieterman said.

“Skeptics forget that the expressway will likely bring much development to the communities west of O'Hare regardless of whether a new terminal is built,” he said.

“A new terminal, however, would immeasurably change things.”
...

Is there any truely redeeming value of having a Western terminal other then appeasing the original West suburban cynics who primarily just wanted to shave 5-10 minutes off their travel time getting to the airport by having a Western access terminal? Even that is shortsighted given that it isn't as if the east terminals will not supply the vast majority of flights.

[Beta_Magellan]

There’s a lot of ambition for the Elgin-O’Hare corridor—I think they just want the full trifecta of road, rail and air more than anything else. It’s a big infrastructure project that, when completed, could be a big selling point for the communities and the western terminal also has a lot of peripheral transportation projects associated with it. There’s probably a lot of optimistic thinking about induced demand there, though, and Schwieterman’s right that the terminal isn’t a prerequisite for growth.

I’ve heard (by ear) that the O’Hare Ring Road’s moving along, which should eventually help connect Elgin-O’Hare with the east side and maybe allay some of DuPage’s concerns about the lack of western access.

[aquablue]

How many pax per year can the current gates take? I guess this means that United doesn't have huge ambitions to expand O'Hare into a larger operation once they max out their terminal.

If I were United, I'd think about how a beautiful new terminal would help attract new transfer pax from other hubs. I'd look into turning the terminal into a shopping mall like European airports do. I'd use the revenue from transiting pax from shops and restaurants to basically pay back the cost of the terminal. However, United now has IAH + EWR to focus on. I think this approach works better in a country where an airline has only 1 or 2 major hubs which is a shame for us pax.

[trvlr70]

How If I were United, I'd think about how a beautiful new terminal would help attract new transfer pax from other hubs. .

No offense, but nobody at any airline would care about this.

[aquablue]

Actually, that's not true. I'm sure terminal experience is very important to airline's. Look at Delta at JFK. They're awful terminal has not helped them there at all, and I'm sure many people avoid delta due to their aging pile of crap.

A terminal designed with retail in mind could practically help pay for itself. A nice quality terminal is important for the airline's ability to attract premium fliers and its overall image. You may even be able to lure passengers from other hubs if the experience was far superior. It may even help draw people that otherwise would fly for with other airlines. It also would be a massive PR boost for Chicago. An airport is the first impression that potential investors get when entering from abroad. Right now, O'hare has average looking terminals. Why do you think British Airways & BAA designed such a great terminal in Heathrow. They did to retain their competitiveness against other airlines and airports in Europe and Asia, as well as boost retail sales from more shopping space that go to help pay for the terminal design. They also got a PR boost for London in the process, as people won't come into the city saying 'what a dump', how could such a great city have such a ugly airport terminal!

[VivaLFuego]

How often are you expecting airlines to invest in massive new flagship terminals by named star architects? Every 15-20 years? United built the excellent Terminal 1 less than 25 years ago. Maybe in another 15-20 years United would consider a brand new terminal but certainly not before then... hence the point of United fighting so hard against having a new terminal built right now.

[aquablue]

How often are you expecting airlines to invest in massive new flagship terminals by named star architects? Every 15-20 years? United built the excellent Terminal 1 less than 25 years ago. Maybe in another 15-20 years United would consider a brand new terminal but certainly not before then... hence the point of United fighting so hard against having a new terminal built right now.

Yes, I see your point. The problem is terminal 1 is lacking amenities and was not built for the post 9/11 era. There isn't enough room in there for all those things.

I don't even know if United wants to grow at O'Hare. Seems to me like Terminal 1 will be enough capacity for them for many years. I guess I spoke too soon. United should really concentrate on Dulles anyway, an abomination of a concourse.

[Rail Claimore]

Yes, I see your point. The problem is terminal 1 is lacking amenities and was not built for the post 9/11 era. There isn't enough room in there for all those things.

I don't even know if United wants to grow at O'Hare. Seems to me like Terminal 1 will be enough capacity for them for many years. I guess I spoke too soon. United should really concentrate on Dulles anyway, an abomination of a concourse.

I would expect American to agree to a terminal rebuild or a completely new terminal at O'Hare before United. But American is going to have some pretty hefty financial obligations with the planned renovations at three of the original terminals at DFW.

My guess is that UA, AA, and foreign carriers will agree to the proposed eastern expansion of T5 though, and perhaps building FIS facilities into existing T1 and T3.

[ardecila]

^^ FIS?

Like all except the very newest terminals, O'Hare's T1 wasn't built with TSA screenings in mind. It was, however, built in an era when people had to check in in person, which generated long lines.

United can easily move the check-in counters forward, allowing for more room behind them for security. Jahn's design is an open floorplan, so the check-in counters are just glorified kiosks anyway.

SCB recently designed a small addition to T1 to accommodate security (the little wedge-shaped box in the center). It works pretty well.

http://www.scb.com/images/project/96/1.jpg
SCB (http://www.scb.com/?mainpage=2&pagetype=architecture&p=96&firstlevel=9&seclevel=0)

[Rail Claimore]

^^ FIS: Federal Inspection Services. In other words, immigration and customs.

[denizen467]

SCB recently designed a small addition to T1 to accommodate security (the little wedge-shaped box in the center). It works pretty well.
Never knew who did that, but it's been there for a couple years now. It is great to see that pockets of expansion are doable elegantly on T1, seeing as how it is simply too cramped for 21st century travel.

It looks as though there is plenty of space to do this along the roadway side of Concourse B, at its ends. They could seriously add some food, shopping, lounge, or other services, and thereby alleviate the holdroom crowding on its western side. I know it would cost money, but it would be a very simple structure and could bring in a lot of rent. Is UA's budget the only thing that would prevent this, or is there some aviation (or city) related reason regarding these quasi-blank spaces?

Concourse C is way more hemmed in, but what about a 2nd level near its ends?

[nomarandlee]

A new ORD express rail site now open......

http://www.ordexpressrail.com/

O'Hare Airport Express Rail Service Launch of Website and RFI & I

The Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA) and the O'Hare Express Blue Ribbon Committee announce the launch of the O'Hare Airport Express Rail Service website (www.ordexpressrail.com) and the release of a Request for Information and Interest (RFI&I) for the development of a rapid passenger rail system connecting Chicago's Central Business District and O'Hare International Airport.

The Chicago-O'Hare Airport Express Rail Service is envisioned to provide a world-class, expedient, convenient, efficient, and reliable link between downtown Chicago and the City's global gateway - O'Hare International Airport. Chicago's Central Business District is the City's and State of Illinois' major center for business, tourism, conventions, hospitality, entertainment, cultural attractions, restaurants and shopping. This service will alleviate traffic congestion on the region's roadways and is intended to be independent of, but supplemental to, other mass transit system connections.

The website will provide the public and interested parties with information and updated progress on the development of this vital infrastructure link between the two major economic centers..............

[ardecila]

It occurred to me today that the Altenheim Subdivision could be used for an express O'Hare line. It has little-used, it's 2 tracks or more at all points, and it would get you from California and Roosevelt all the way to Franklin Park without encountering any real freight traffic. Plus, it's almost entirely grade-separated except for a few crossings in River Forest and Melrose Park (10, by my count, and some could be closed off).

From California and Roosevelt, it could either go north to the Metra yard and then east into Union/Ogilvie via the UP-W or MD tracks, or it could go south and then enter Union via the BNSF. On the O'Hare end, the exact alignment would depend on whether you're running to the existing O'Hare Transfer site or to a new station by the terminals.

The advantage of this alignment is pretty strong. You could have an intermediate station at Forest Park with a transfer to the Blue Line... such a station would also be easily accessible from the Eisenhower.

[the urban politician]

A new ORD express rail site now open......

....

Some pretty heavy hitters on the committee:

Committee

Chair - Lester Crown
Chairman, Henry Crown and Company

Rosemarie S. Andolino
Commissioner, Chicago Department of Aviation

John Gates
Chairman and CEO, PortaeCo

R. Eden Martin
President, The Civic Committee

Jerry Roper
CEO, Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce

Sam Skinner
Of Counsel, Greenberg-Trauig

Glenn Tilton
Chairman, President and CEO, UAL Corporation

Tom Villanova
President, Chicago and Cook County Building Trades Council

John Rogers
Chairman and CEO, Ariel Investments LLC

Jorge Perez
Executive Director, HACIA

Beth Doria
Executive Director, Federation of Women Contractors

Terry Peterson
Chairman, CTA
VP Governmental Affairs, Rush University Medical Center

Jorge Ramirez
President, Chicago Federation of Labor

Ty Fahner
Partner, Mayer Brown

James Bell
President and CFO, Boeing

Byron Trott
CEO, BDT Capital Partners

Rita Athas
President, World Business Chicago

[ardecila]

Looks like the same people that were behind Chicago 2016. Does that tell you anything?

Man, I'll feel so much better when Daley stops tilting at windmills, and Rahmbo can get down to the real work of making the city better. Rahm may not succeed, but at least he's not off in la-la land.

[aquablue]

If this were to happen, it could set an example for other cities like cough NYC cough. Most respected cities of high standing around the world have decent rail to airports, and many have express rail. The USA is lacking in anything like this. Really, if you build something that is comfortable to ride, quick, easy to store luggage, and goes to a central location, you are going to take many cars off the airport road which will benefit everyone.

Daly is my kind of mayor, because Irish don't take no crap. I love his ideas. He's a real mayor, someone who actually wants to accomplish physical projects in the city, unlike most mayors cough managers cough. Really, NYC needs this kind of mayor. A transit master who can use his strong voice to get this done in this idiotic transit-hating country of ours. Bloomberg is far too nice and logical to get anything controversial through.

[ardecila]

Yeah, which is why the nice-guy Bloomberg failed to get construction started on East Side Access, the Second Avenue Subway, the 7 extension, the Fulton Street Transit Center, the WTC transit center, etc, etc...

Chicago is already ahead of New York - we have direct one-seat ride service from our downtown to both major airports... unlike New York where getting to any airport requires a transfer from the subway to a bus, AirTrain, or NJTransit. Getting people to the airport is important, but it's much less important than many other issues in Chicago, like rebuilding the northern stretch of the Red Line or reconfiguring the freight rail network, or building a decent downtown rail terminal for intercity and high-speed trains, or building a rapid transit line along the lakefront.

[Beta_Magellan]

Or he’s pursuing potentially unnecessary or comparatively low-impact vanity projects while dropping the ball on ordinary commuters (such as letting the express buses get cut during union negotiations last year) and routine, if unglamorous, maintenance.

[spyguy]

http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/kwo/spr11/alumni/kerwin.htm

Thomas Kerwin '07 -Taking a firm approach to 'sustainable, vibrant' architecture
By Barbara Rose

...The year-old firm, with about 45 design professionals, is already winning work. BKL is partnering with Magellan on a 50-story tower, scheduled to break ground in May on East Wacker Drive in Chicago. Among BKL's other projects are the interior renovation of O'Hare International Airport's Terminal 5, China Aviation's headquarters in Beijing and a 70-story hotel and residential tower in Shaoxing, China.

[202_Cyclist]

Gary airport authority agrees to move 3 rail projects to expand main runway

April 26, 2011
Chicago Tribune

"GARY, Ind. (AP) — Gary has a deal to expand its airport.

The Gary/Chicago International Airport Authority unanimously voted Monday to relocate three railroad projects that would make way for the airport to expand. The projects blocked the expansion of the airport's main runway.

The $128 million project will allow most passenger airliners and larger cargo planes to land at the airport by expanding the runway from 7,000 feet to nearly 9,000 feet..."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/sns-ap-in--garyairport-expansion,0,1156063.story

[ardecila]

I'll believe it when I see the EJ&E move... they've been talking about it for years.

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/classified/automotive/traffic/ct-met-getting-around-0502-20110501,0,4375617.column

City seeks proposals for system to rival those in Europe, Asia
Jon Hilkevitch

Getting Around

6:40 p.m. CDT, May 2, 2011

Still itching to build something big for Chicago even in his final days in office, Mayor Richard Daley has invited technology experts from around the world to submit concepts for an express rail service to O'Hare International Airport.

Whisking travelers from downtown Chicago to O'Hare in 10 to 20 minutes, it would be the first rapid passenger rail line connecting a downtown and an airport in the U.S., rivaling express trains in Beijing, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Paris and Shanghai, officials said.

"Rich has an idea a minute, and his recent trip to China brought this to the forefront for him again," said Lester Crown, chairman of a 17-member committee that Daley appointed to explore O'Hare express rail service after an earlier plan to use the CTA Blue Line fizzled.

Responses to the city's "request for information and interest," due by July 26, will land on Rahm Emanuel's desk at City Hall. Mayor-elect Emanuel has expressed interest in the project. As White House chief of staff to President Barack Obama, Emanuel helped craft the administration's plan to build high-speed rail corridors across the U.S.

The initial objective of the O'Hare solicitation is to get suggestions from potential investors to finance, construct, operate and maintain the express rail project. Interested parties are required to identify potential routes and options for stations downtown and at the airport, as well as suggesting schedules and amenities to make the premium service attractive to customers...........
.
...More in link

[spyguy]

Virgin Airlines -> Virgin Express Train -> Virgin Hotel @ Block 37

Richard Branson: Make it happen

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2580/5760084743_64fb54cdfa.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/brookswashere/5760084743/)
Untitled (http://www.flickr.com/photos/brookswashere/5760084743/) by Brooks was here (http://www.flickr.com/people/brookswashere/), on Flickr

[denizen467]

Virgin Airlines -> Virgin Express Train -> Virgin Hotel @ Block 37

Richard Branson: Make it happen

... you thought up those ideas ... or did he say something about this?

[ardecila]

No, but Virgin was looking for hotel sites in the Loop, and Block 37 needs a hotel tenant. After that, it's only natural that Virgin might look into rail service, especially since they already operate trains in the UK.

Unfortunately, any train going into Block 37 would have to use the slow Blue Line to get to O'Hare, either sitting behind local trains or forcing all of us local stiffs to wait on sidings as the global-city elite pass us by.

A Virgin train from O'Hare into Union Station would be better, and more in line with Virgin's UK expertise... Branson could still build his hotel above the platforms, on the Reschke-controlled site between Lake and Randolph, or on the proposed site for that Japanese hotel across from Union Station.

[Alliance]

Virgin should be the hotel and just complete the original plans for union station.

[ardecila]

That could work too, but I think Virgin is a bit tawdry for the reserved architecture of Union Station.

I suppose it could work if they somehow separate the hotel from the train station... but I will not stand for huge Virgin signage in the Great Hall.

[denizen467]

Just thinking about the above ... the time is so ripe for an airport train ... other than the recession, the mayor's office has been behind it, there are various routings available, we have a foreign moneybags guy (and China?) interested in it, there are multiple hotel tower sites available, the President and Secretary of Transportation are Illinois people ... if an initial phase doesn't materialize now, then it could be decades ...

[ardecila]

What "foreign moneybags guy"? I've yet to hear of a single REAL person willing to invest in this project.

Richard Branson hasn't indicated anything yet, although he did ride on the Blue Line today. Still, the more I think about it, the less it makes sense. Why waste so much time putting together a deal for an O'Hare express train when there are so many other, more pressing needs? The Red Line needs rebuilding. Rapid Bus needs to be implemented in both the city and suburbs. Our existing highways are crumbling and woefully over-capacity. Many of the Metra lines are maxed-out and need more investment in order to add more service. The O'Hare Modernization needs to be completed.

Besides, the two most realistic options for O'Hare Express - diesel from O'Hare Transfer Station to Union Station, or express Blue Line, both have severe drawbacks. The first one has huge "last-mile" problems. The Metra airport station would be at the far end of the people-mover system, not right in the terminals. Then it would let people off at Union Station, which is pretty far from the hotels where the global elite are heading. The express Blue Line would require huge expenditure to add capacity to the Blue Line while seriously inconveniencing the commutes of tens of thousands of Chicagoans every day.

[denizen467]

^ Are you in a depressed mood or something - you laid right into the various weaknesses and difficulties. Without acknowledging what I believe da (previous) mare and others have been talking about. If there is substantial private involvement, then I don't see a lot of "wast[ing] time" at the expense of other rail projects. Yeah political capital and infrastructure capital are more easily directed 100% at a single priority goal, but if private capital and expertise are knocking on the door (I understand they aren't right now - everything here is predicated on "if"), it might be wise to jump at the chance, and it will not necessarily preclude also lobbying to refurb or extend the Red Line or other projects.

I think a couple Blue Line bypasses to get the ride close to a half-hour would be a good start. Passengers aren't going to ignore the train option just because it takes more then 15 minutes or whatever. Cab rides can be $50, take a very long time in traffic, and the waits in the taxi queue, especially in bad weather, can be ridiculous. Yet at the same time a lot of people find the current, inexpensive, Blue Line ride from ORD completely unacceptable.

[Beta_Magellan]

The ultimate problem is that an airport express remains a marginal transportation market. The CTA’s most optimistic 2030 estimates (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2ilzLsqW86gJ:www.transitchicago.com/assets/1/miscellaneous_documents/aexpress200610.pdf+o%E2%80%99hare+airport+express+ridership&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com#34) only estimate around 6600 riders per day for a Block 37-O’Hare express service with bypasses. In comparison with the rest of the CTA’s network (and much of Metra’s), that’s pretty insignificant, so I think ardecila’s right on the nose—it’s a distraction that mainly gets attention because a lot of movers-and-shakers use this route.

As I’ve said before, if Da (former) Mare wanted to leverage private capital for infrastructure improvements, the best place to do that is with CREATE, an existing program relying on public-private partnerships which involves the already-profitable freight carries, the sometimes-covering-operating-costs Amtrak services, and Metra.

[denizen467]

The CTA’s most optimistic 2030 estimates only estimate around 6600 riders per day for a Block 37-O’Hare express service with bypasses. In comparison with the rest of the CTA’s network (and much of Metra’s), that’s pretty insignificant, so I think ardecila’s right on the nose—it’s a distraction that mainly gets attention because a lot of movers-and-shakers use this route.

But given that fares would be say almost 10 times normal commuter fares (and in-railcar advertising could command higher rates, and maybe vending or other concessions could produce a bit of revenue), it's not a simple apples-to-apples comparison. How does it compare to daily figures on a middling Metra line? FWIW, the number would skyrocket during heavy travel seasons or horrible weather that congests the Kennedy.

But setting aside the microeconomics of ridership estimates, there is some amount of induced attraction to the city that a "white collar" link to ORD would have. That could be a couple more national associations, a couple more conventions, a couple more office relocations (including from far suburbs), a couple more startups, some more tourists flying in for one night of theater, etc. Of course, none of those things would benefit the train operator; they'd be overall benefits to the city, so those aspects suggest public operation, not private operation. Anyway, if the ridership figure is low for this estimate, isn't it also low for Heathrow and certain other cities (excluding cities whose airports are so distant that trains have a natural advantage) who run these trains anyway?

As I’ve said before, if Da (former) Mare wanted to leverage private capital for infrastructure improvements, the best place to do that is with CREATE, an existing program relying on public-private partnerships which involves the already-profitable freight carries, the sometimes-covering-operating-costs Amtrak services, and Metra.

Well fine but these aren't mutually exclusive. Not only is there lots of capital out there, investors in freight infrastructure improvements would not necessarily be the same people who would run a shuttle train.

If there's extra federal $ sloshing around from Florida's HSR budget, I wish that would go to projects like this instead of bringing St Louis closer to us, etc. If the Administration is convinced HSR is a worthy marquee green project, surely one little airport shuttle is too.

[ardecila]

If/when private sector operators come forward with proposals, I will definitely pay attention. But the track record of public-private partnerships like this suggests that the private operator will build little-to-no additional infrastructure, and instead just look for ways to use existing infrastructure. In the O'Hare travel market, this means either a sub-optimal train trip via Metra or a trip via the Blue Line that places serious delays on normal L trains and those who ride them.

IF Metra were already electrified, then tunneling beneath the airport and building a new rail terminal there would probably be less than $300 million (the Hiawatha airport tunnel (http://enr.construction.com/features/transportation/archives/021125.asp) is a decent yardstick, with similar soil types and length). However, Metra isn't electrified, so you can't run its diesel trains into a tunnel. And even if you purchase dual-mode locomotives, you still need to run FRA-compliant equipment, and bore a tunnel big enough to squeeze them into.

Building passing sidings on the Blue Line isn't a great idea either. The Blue Line has to shut down fairly often for suicides, accidents, bomb threats, and occasionally derailments. Now into this, let's throw a system of passing sidings that shoots to hell the idea of frequent, regular service for the Blue Line. Just as a good experience with an O'Hare Express train could very well bring in new passengers, a bad experience - say, getting caught in the Milwaukee-Dearborn subway - could turn off these global-city visitors and make them vow to never visit Chicago again.

I'm not saying it's impossible to set up a good service, but it's not the kind of turnkey operation you want to hand over to a private company. It will require substantial and costly new construction. If and when there's surplus money lying around to build a tunnel that brings Metra into the O'Hare terminals area, with electrification and all, then we can set up a good service.

[Jenner]

The O'Hare shuttle could use Metra tracks until it reaches I-190. A new portion of track would be created to create a semi-circle, going from the Metra tracks circling into the blue line tracks at the 294-190 interchange, west of the blue line yard. From here, you can use the existing blue line tracks into O'Hare, without a need to create a new station. This limits the use of the blue line tracks to O'Hare only, and doesn't need to go through the blue line yard.

Drawbacks:
- This would mean that you'd need a different type of train provided, since the Metra diesel trains wouldn't be able to run on the Blue line and into the O'Hare station.

- O'Hare station will need some way to differentiate blue line passengers and business passengers -- meaning you don't want the business passengers to go through the CTA turnstiles.

- Need to make sure that the O'Hare express doesn't cause backups on the blue line or Metra lines.

[ardecila]

This would mean that you'd need a different type of train provided, since the Metra diesel trains wouldn't be able to run on the Blue line and into the O'Hare station.

This is the big one. A train heavy enough to meet FRA regulations and run on Metra track would be so heavy that it would tear up the CTA track, even if you could get a waiver to run the operation.

- O'Hare station will need some way to differentiate blue line passengers and business passengers -- meaning you don't want the business passengers to go through the CTA turnstiles.

- Need to make sure that the O'Hare express doesn't cause backups on the blue line or Metra lines.

These two are more minor... the O'Hare Terminal already has three tracks. One track could be segregated as a premium-service track pretty easily, with its own platform, set of escalators and turnstiles (maybe a lounge). This would mean the loss of terminal flexibility for CTA, but they could fix this through careful train scheduling or by short-turning some Blue Line trains at Rosemont.

[spyguy]

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20110721/NEWS02/110729950/council-committee-oks-westfield-for-ohare-concessions

Council committee OKs Westfield for O’Hare concessions
By: John Pletz July 21, 2011

The long-delayed contract to operate retail and food concessions at O’Hare Airport’s international terminal is headed for a City Council vote next week.

...The city is looking for the developers to overhaul Terminal 5, including moving the concessions to the other side of security gates, where travelers will have more time to shop before boarding their flights. The city hopes to more than double annual revenue from about $26 million now.

The revamp envisioned by the city will require an investment of at least $20 million from the developer.

[Kngkyle]

^ Good news. I often hear complaints about the lack of options gateside in T5.

[denizen467]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-city-new-runway-over-former-cemetery-expected-to-open-at-end-of-2013-20111027,0,6039464.story

City: New runway over former cemetery expected to open at end of 2013
By Jon Hilkevitch
7:10 PM CDT, October 27, 2011

About 75 percent of the graves blocking a new runway under construction at O’Hare International Airport will have been removed by the end of the week, and the runway is scheduled for completion by December 2013, O’Hare expansion officials said Thursday.

...

Exhumations will hit the 900 mark this week, said Jim Chilton, an official with DMJM Aviation Partners who is the program manager for the O’Hare Modernization Program.

Chilton spoke at a conference presented Thursday by the Eno Transportation Foundation and the city focusing on lessons learned during the first phase of O’Hare expansion.

The $8.6 billion project began in 2005, and so far only one new runway has opened and an existing runway was lengthened.

The “cemetery runway,’’ as runway 10 Center/28 Center is informally called, is set to open in two years, followed next by a far southern runway in 2016 10 Right/28 Left, which will be built on the site of more than 400 homes that the city demolished in Bensenville.

...

[nomarandlee]

e-letter via Chicago Department of Aviation

CDA Announces Solar Panels, Multi-Fuel Station at O'Hare

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel today joined Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA) Commissioner Rosemarie S. Andolino in announcing new sustainability initiatives that will make Chicago's airports greener than ever during the kickoff of the 2011 Airports Going Green conference in Chicago.

The CDA announced it will pursue the development of a massive solar panel installation, as well as an alternative fueling station for private and commercial vehicles at O'Hare International Airport. The CDA also revealed it will launch a composting program for some restaurants operating at Midway International Airport.

"The CDA is proud to host the fourth annual Airports Going Green conference and to continue to lead by example by implementing the most innovative and progressive sustainability initiatives at O'Hare and MidwayInternationalAirports," said Andolino. "The solar panels will provide a substantial renewable energy source to help power O'Hare and the alternative fueling station will promote the use of clean fuels and electricity to power vehicles."

Both the Mayor and the Commissioner joined Karen Weigert, Chief Sustainability Officer for the City of Chicago, in providing welcome remarks at the conference.

In the next few weeks, the CDA will issue Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for the following two initiatives.

- The CDA will issue a request to the renewable energy development community to install and operate up to 60 acres of ground-mounted solar panels around O'Hare on vacant properties that are suitable for such development. The O'Hare solar panel systems will supply clean, renewable energy to the airport while helping grow the region's renewable energy market.

- The CDA is also inviting developers to construct and operate a fueling station that will supply multiple alternative fuels such as compressed natural gas, biodiesel, ethanol, and electric vehicle charging to commercial and private vehicles at and around O'Hare. This proposed development will leverage the City's new electric vehicle charging infrastructure and provide alternatives to conventionally fueled vehicles to the millions of drivers that travel to the airport each year..............
............

[ardecila]

The solar panels are a great way for the city to earn a bit of money on unused patches of O'Hare land while offsetting the massive carbon emissions of the airport.

[untitledreality]

The solar panels are a great way for the city to earn a bit of money on unused patches of O'Hare land while offsetting the massive carbon emissions of the airport.
Agreed. And hopefully the term "massive installation" actually means a massive installation, not just a single acre of panels.

[ardecila]

^ The article specifically calls for 60 acres.

[untitledreality]

^ The article specifically calls for 60 acres.

Why indeed it does, can't believe I missed that... thanks.

[ardecila]

T-WALL® supports relocated UP rail line for O’Hare Airport expansion (http://www.rtands.com/newsflash/t-wall-supports-relocated-up-rail-line-for-o-hare-airport-expansion-4724.html)
Friday, November 11, 2011

The Neel Company is advancing the O'Hare Modernization Program in Chicago with almost 90,000 sq. ft. of its T-WALL Retaining Wall System. T-WALL is being constructed to elevate Union Pacific along Irving Park Road.

The UP rail line, Irving Park Road and the Bensenville Ditch are all being moved several thousand feet south of the current alignment to make way for a new runway. The contract is part of the $6.6-billion expansion at O'Hare Airport, one of the largest construction projects in the nation. Union Pacific predecessor Chicago and North Western Railway built the line through what would become O'Hare International Airport in 1910. This line had to be moved when the original O'Hare airport was built in the 1950s. To accommodate new runways, the railroad is being moved once again.

The Neel Company will provide three large T-WALL retaining walls totaling over 5,250 linear feet. The structures are designed for railroad freight loads and wall heights of up to 30 feet high. A heavy cut stone architectural finish is incorporated into the precast T-WALL units. The precast units are produced for The Neel Company by Dukane Precast in Aurora, Ill.

The realignment of the railroad is on an accelerated construction schedule. Dukane Precast committed to full production six days a week until completion to help meet the aggressive schedule.

Interesting article. This company has vastly streamlined the construction of retaining walls - they completely grade-separated the freight line through downtown Wichita in under 2 years for less than $100 million. That's about 2 miles of work with 5 streets passing beneath. It's like Legos.

It's a really cool system, and they design whatever finish you want. Usually this means fake stone, but I guess you could do whatever you want.

The O'Hare project will look similar to this Tollway wall in Elgin:
http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/9576/tw2855wallla2l.jpg

[denizen467]

^ I'm curious to know just what alignment the new line will follow. In fact, same goes for Irving Park Road - it has to duck underneath the far south runway but it's not clear where or how. Will the rail line instead follow the other freight line alignment already skirting the airfield's outside border? Most OMP layout diagrams aren't specific about this ground infrastructure, despite the importance of the road access to USPS and other air freight facilities to be landlocked between runways.

Incidentally, just how does one square following Railway Track & Structures Monthly, and all the rest, with studies and La Dolce Vita?

[ardecila]

Nothing will pass beneath the runways. UP will be pressed as close to the CP alignment as possible. Irving Park will go underneath them both just east of York, and then follow right on the north side of the tracks. There were several options for depressing the York/Irving Park intersection (mostly having to do with the degree of access to businesses) but I'm not sure which one IDOT chose.

To answer your second question: I spend a ton of time in studio (not much sleep) and I need something to read during breaks. RTandS is in my blog reader so I check it for Chicago stories occasionally. Don't worry, I'm still enjoying la dolce vita... when time and money permit.

[spyguy]

Westfield's T5 Renovation (adding about 10,000 sf of new concession space)

http://www.chicagot5.com/

http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/3487/60223118.jpg

[FlashingLights]

Is MDW (Big Timber) being changed at all?

[denizen467]

Westfield's T5 Renovation (adding about 10,000 sf of new concession space)

http://www.chicagot5.com/
That website refers to completion in 2013. Why the heck does seemingly simple stuff take so long at ORD...

[denizen467]

Nothing will pass beneath the runways. UP will be pressed as close to the CP alignment as possible. Irving Park will go underneath them both just east of York, and then follow right on the north side of the tracks. There were several options for depressing the York/Irving Park intersection (mostly having to do with the degree of access to businesses) but I'm not sure which one IDOT chose.
But the air cargo complex (FedEx, UA, UPS, Lufthansa, various others) will end up in between runways (unlike the USPS facility, which is south of the southernmost runway alignment), so there has to be either an underpass, or alternatively possibly access directly from the western boundary of the airfield somehow.

[ardecila]

I believe the plan is to have a depressed roadway branching off from Irving Park just east of the tracks. It will pass beneath a taxiway, but not a runway.

I didn't notice this when I looked over the plans the first time.

It's gonna get really interesting when they try to squeeze the O'Hare Bypass through here, too.

[Kngkyle]

So American Airlines has filed for bankruptcy and it is widely expected that they will be shrinking some of their weaker hubs. ORD is believed to be their weakest hub due to the fierce competition with UA and to a lesser extent WN.

I think it's safe to say we will unfortunately be seeing further flight reductions. Hopefully UA will pick of some of the slack.

[the urban politician]

So American Airlines has filed for bankruptcy and it is widely expected that they will be shrinking some of their weaker hubs. ORD is believed to be their weakest hub due to the fierce competition with UA and to a lesser extent WN.

I think it's safe to say we will unfortunately be seeing further flight reductions. Hopefully UA will pick of some of the slack.

^ Good.

Maybe other airlines that have been wanting to break into O'Hare can get in on the action.

[Steely Dan]

ORD is believed to be their weakest hub due to the fierce competition with UA and to a lesser extent WN.



uhh, southwest doesn't serve ORD, they're only at MDW.

[Kngkyle]

uhh, southwest doesn't serve ORD, they're only at MDW.

Still serve many of the same passengers. I know when I had family in Chicago we would use whatever airline was cheaper, regardless of if it was into ORD or MDW. But Southwest doesn't really compete for business contracts as much as UA and AA, hence the 'lesser extent'.

[denizen467]

I'm not sure there isn't more pressure on UA to keep its ORD fares in check if it has one big hub rival, AA, compared with having small presences of other carriers. Duopolies are bad, but often it's not difficult for an 800lb gorilla to squeeze competition by temporarily lowering fares or temporarily adding hourly flights, etc.

Also, there's benefit in Chicago business and travellers having easy access, via ORD as a hub, to both Star Alliance and Oneworld networks. Note that if Jet Blue and/or Virgin grow at ORD, they are (and/or are likely to be) Star Alliance carriers.

Besides, haven't the gate shortages already been alleviated to some extent, beginning to open the door to more entrants?

[denizen467]

I believe the plan is to have a depressed roadway branching off from Irving Park just east of the tracks. It will pass beneath a taxiway, but not a runway.

I didn't notice this when I looked over the plans the first time.
Very interesting.

It's gonna get really interesting when they try to squeeze the O'Hare Bypass through here, too.
Yeah, although isn't that all to the west of York - so it'll get to be its very own barrel of monkeys.

[Standpoor]

I'm not sure there isn't more pressure on UA to keep its ORD fares in check if it has one big hub rival, AA, compared with having small presences of other carriers. Duopolies are bad, but often it's not difficult for an 800lb gorilla to squeeze competition by temporarily lowering fares or temporarily adding hourly flights, etc.

Also, there's benefit in Chicago business and travellers having easy access, via ORD as a hub, to both Star Alliance and Oneworld networks. Note that if Jet Blue and/or Virgin grow at ORD, they are (and/or are likely to be) Star Alliance carriers.

Besides, haven't the gate shortages already been alleviated to some extent, beginning to open the door to more entrants?

Posner and the Chicago School do not believe in price predation. Dumb asses. I agree with you. It is much easier to segregate and annihilate airlines that only have one or two destinations from O'hare as opposed to a hub of a gigantic alliance. Unless Jet Blue or Virgin grow quickly at O'Hare, reductions in AA will be a boon for the bottom line at United.

[ardecila]

Very interesting.


Yeah, although isn't that all to the west of York - so it'll get to be its very own barrel of monkeys.

No, the bypass will run east of York and the railroad tracks. There's no room to the west without ripping out even more of Bensenville.

Since this stuff is within the Runway Protection Zone, everything has to be at-grade or lower, so there's a lot of earthmoving and overpasses. New UP alignment is blue. You can also see the new road into the cargo area.

http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/8464/oharesw.jpg

[F1 Tommy]

So American Airlines has filed for bankruptcy and it is widely expected that they will be shrinking some of their weaker hubs. ORD is believed to be their weakest hub due to the fierce competition with UA and to a lesser extent WN.

I think it's safe to say we will unfortunately be seeing further flight reductions. Hopefully UA will pick of some of the slack.

If you say so it must be true. You will see some reductions accross the system during the bankruptcy with Eagle picking up more flights after they come out of chapter 11.They went into chapter 11 with alot of money on hand. This is more about restructuring labor costs.

[Craigraether]

Keeps most of the main terminal intact and solves three problems -
Adds more gates the core without adding new western access,
two- creates two way alley ways for better gate movement and on time departure.
three, rebuilds all the piers except for the newer UA - ones. Solves the problem of the narrow piers and 60s style waiting areas.

Also keeps the cross wind runway in place.

http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t100/raether916/ohare.jpg

[Standpoor]

If you say so it must be true. You will see some reductions accross the system during the bankruptcy with Eagle picking up more flights after they come out of chapter 11.They went into chapter 11 with alot of money on hand. This is more about restructuring labor costs.

I honestly think it has more to do with restructuring debt. Sure pension will change but the rest of the labor costs are not way outside industry average. Meanwhile, they carry huge quantities of debt at unbelievably high interest rates.

[F1 Tommy]

I honestly think it has more to do with restructuring debt. Sure pension will change but the rest of the labor costs are not way outside industry average. Meanwhile, they carry huge quantities of debt at unbelievably high interest rates.

They claim they pay 3/4ths of a billion a year more in labor costs that the other big US mainline carriers partly due to the pensions. They can also restructure some debt there is no doubt. The huge aircraft order they just placed for Boeing and Airbus already helped due to the very low prices they paid for the new aircraft. It will also allow them to replace the gas guzzling old aircraft they are farther behind replacing than most other major carriers. This is all based on public information supplied at the time of filing.

[F1 Tommy]

British Cargo brought their second 747-8F into ORD today. This is the third carrier to use the 747-8F at ORD along with Cargolux and Cathay Pacific. They have to park it at an angle by the old UAL cargo building since it is so long. We could really use the upgraded south cargo area now.

Happy Holidays

[nomarandlee]

E-letter from Chicago Department of Aviation


Chicago Department of Aviation

Future of O'Hare Modernization Discussed at Elgin O'Hare West Bypass Meeting

WHEATON, Ill., January 18, 2012 -- Chicago Department of Aviation (CDA) Commissioner Rosemarie S. Andolino today provided a detailed update on the O'Hare Modernization Program (OMP) to the Elgin O'Hare West Bypass (EOWB) Finance Committee at the DuPage County Complex.

The Elgin O'Hare Committee is comprised of leaders from the suburbs of DuPage County as well as other local and state government officials and stakeholders including the llinois State Toll Highway Authority and the Illinois Department of Transportation. The purpose of the Elgin O'Hare West Bypass project is to improve local and regional transportation efficiency and connections and access to O'Hare International Airport in the area bounded by the existing Elgin O'Hare Expressway to the west, I-90 on the north, I-290 on the south, and I-294 to the east.

During her presentation, Andolino discussed the work currently taking place on the OMP, including the construction of new Runway 10C-28C and the relocation of Irving Park Road and the Union Pacific Railroad to accommodate future runway and taxiway construction on O'Hare's south airfield. She also highlighted key dates for future milestones including the opening of Runway 10C-28C in the fourth quarter of 2013 and the commissioning of O'Hare's furthermost south Runway 10R-28L in 2015.

The presentation was followed by a question and answer session with Andolino that was moderated by DuPage County Board Chairman and Elgin O'Hare Finance Committee Co-Chairman Dan Cronin. The discussion focused mostly on proposed western access to O'Hare and how all of the stakeholders involved in the Elgin O'Hare project and the airport will continue to work together to ensure the success of this major regional transportation improvement plan.

"The CDA has been fully committed to cooperating with all the stakeholders of the Elgin O'Hare Bypass project," said Andolino. "We pledge to continue to work closely with all of our partners to ensure these projects move forward to create enormous economic benefits and new opportunities for our region."

For more information about the Elgin O'Hare project, including its Advisory Council visit: www.elginohare-westbypass.org.

[Jenner]

United/Continental will upgrade Terminal 2 to provide new jet bridges to RJs, and expand the United club lounge.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-united-continental-planning-upgrades-to-terminal-2-20120203,0,7327623.story

[aquablue]

How many passengers will Chicago O'hare be able to process / year once fully built out? I'm talking about max capacity with O'Hare style operations?

Right now it is processing 60+ million? So, I assume we can say 100+ million?

If Heathrow can process 70+ million with 2 runways, if O'Hare used more wide bodies I'm sure the figures would be astronomical...correct?

[Standpoor]

If Heathrow can process 70+ million with 2 runways, if O'Hare used more wide bodies I'm sure the figures would be astronomical...correct?

LHR passengers 2010=65,884,143
Aircraft movements=450,000 (I rounded up from 449,000 something).
passengers per movement=146.4

ORD aircraft movements 2010=882,617
146.4*882,617=129,215,128

That includes cargo movements I think but the two airports have very similar cargo ton numbers.

[aquablue]

You can't do that. Since you can't fit as many wide body movements into an airport as narrow bodies due to separation. Therefore, those movements for O'Hare that you are using would be lower giving a lower # for passenger figures.

Ok, so how many movements will O'Hare be able to process under full expansion given that we know that it has currently a massive capacity if larger planes were used. Actually, no expansion would be needed anytime soon if a Euro or Asian hub style operation was used given that the max capacity is well over 100+million, correct?

Also, LHR was around 70mil for 2011. Those figures are out of date. When will we see US 2011 figures?

[F1 Tommy]

AA and AE will have a large flight increase up to last summers levels at ORD in April and another increase in June. UAL will also be increasing flights this summer at ORD. A 787 landed at ORD early this morning. It was doing route proving for JAL.


Also they are deep into building the north runways connecting taxiway that feeds into tango behind the hangars. This will allow landings from the west on the north runway without crossing several other runways on taxi to the terminals.

[denizen467]

^ AE? Is that right?

Also, is the consolidated car rental facility project in limbo or something?

[F1 Tommy]

^ AE? Is that right?

Also, is the consolidated car rental facility project in limbo or something?

American Airlines and American Eagle.

[denizen467]

^ Oh. I was thinking only along IATA lines. Nice to hear the bankruptcy isn't resulting in net reductions at ORD.

[ardecila]

Also, is the consolidated car rental facility project in limbo or something?

The city had to get the rental agencies (and City Council) to agree to a new $8 fee. Having accomplished that, last September they gave the go-ahead (http://www.autorentalnews.com/Channel/Rental-Operations/News/Story/2011/09/O-Hare-Airport-Begins-Work-on-New-Conrac.aspx) for design to begin, and that process should take 9 months maximum.

My guess is that TranSystems (the chosen designers) will price out the CONRAC with and without an extension to the ATS system. The ATS extension might make the project more costly than the funds available from the $8 fee, so the extension would either need to be postponed or the fee raised. On the other hand, the ATS extension would allow (finally) for a direct connection to Metra and possibly Amtrak at the nation's second-busiest airport, so it might be a good candidate for a Federal grant.

[ardecila]

Unfortunately Jesse Jackson Jr. just won the primary, which means we have to continue to deal with his bone-headed Peotone Airport boondoggle idea.

If Halvorson couldn't beat him now, when he's tarnished by the whole Blago thing and especially weak, then nobody can beat him until he dies or decides to resign.

On the other hand, this is adorable:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2012-03/313952040-21072915.jpg
source (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-rep-jesse-jackson-jr-out-to-early-lead-against-halvorson-20120320,0,6767261.story)