HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #9341  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2012, 6:35 PM
Mr Downtown's Avatar
Mr Downtown Mr Downtown is offline
Urbane observer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,387
I doubt there are really any reliable numbers. While outdoor lines do experience weathering, subsurface lines are constantly battling water infiltration, subsidence, and ground movement. Many railroad embankments are now 160-180 years old, and the only upkeep or repair has been routine replacement of running rails.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9342  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2012, 9:20 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,376
That's a good point but we aren't really building earthen embankments anymore. Instead we're getting steel or concrete viaducts that probably won't last very long without ongoing and expensive maintenance or periodic replacement. Plus, even earthen embankments have steel or concrete overpasses that require periodic replacement... witness Metra's current UP-North project or the 40-year replacements on the expressway system.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9343  
Old Posted Jun 23, 2012, 11:57 PM
J_M_Tungsten's Avatar
J_M_Tungsten J_M_Tungsten is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,379
Can someone explain why they never finished the railings and otheR detail work on 90/94 in the downtown area? It has been years and they still have concrete dividers and wood railings in many places.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9344  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 4:14 AM
untitledreality untitledreality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
Say it takes 10 years until the extension is complete. Say it takes 3 years before funds are finished being sourced and the 95th station is complete. That would mean that $140 million gets 7 years of extra use. $20 million per year. 4 million riders a year. So you're spending $5 per rider for a short-term benefit.
How exactly is it a short term benefit? The added capacity wont cease to exist after the Red Extension is, or is not, completed. You could easily have another 40+ years of functionality before new work is needed (since the existing bus terminal has gone 43 years with only minor renovations)

So by your math, $140mm over 40 years, and a stagnant 4mm riders per year comes to 87.5 cents per rider... even if ridership falls off because of the Extension it would still be fairly low cost per rider.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9345  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 2:23 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,376
Because the capacity won't be used if the extension is built. Almost all the bus lines that currently terminate at 95th will be shifted to stations further south and 95th will be stuck with a ton of super-expensive bus bays that sit with nobody using them. Or, worse yet, CTA turns them over to Greyhound - a private company that is supposed to build its own terminals.

By contrast, $140 million could fund three or four infill stations on other areas of the system - Division Brown Line, Madison Pink Line, Damen Green Line, Western Green Line, etc.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9346  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 5:41 PM
Mister Uptempo's Avatar
Mister Uptempo Mister Uptempo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 267
$240 million project to remake 95th Street CTA Red Line station

BY TINA SFONDELES Transportation Reporter tsfondeles@suntimes.com June 23, 2012 11:32PM

Terrible, cramped and decrepit.

That’s how CTA President Forrest Claypool describes the 95th Street Red Line station, one of the agency’s busiest terminals.

But under an ambitious $240 mil­lion plan to upgrade and expand the station, it will morph into a bright, airy and clean space, double in size with a sound barrier to block noise from the adjacent Dan Ryan Expy.


PHOTO CREDIT:Sun-Times

The glass-enclosed terminal will be spacious and filled with light, resembling O’Hare Airport, and its larger platforms will be able to hold more L passengers, according to conceptual designs from the CTA.

And it will have space for retail stores so riders can pick up a newspaper and a coffee for a ride into the city.


PHOTO CREDIT: Sun-Times

It’s not a pipe dream. This work is happening, the agency said, as soon as spring 2014.

More found on the Chicago Sun-Times website.

Personal Note - Funny how $140 million became $240 million all of a sudden. Leads me to believe, as others have noted, that the Red Line Extension may be a little longer in coming than originally planned.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9347  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 6:13 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,376
Woah, cool! Architecturally it doesn't seem on par with Morgan... Looks like the same galvanized-and-kalwall look of Howard.

Design concerns aside, it's really awesome to get a generous facility on CTA for a change after a century of tiny, cramped platforms with terrible sight lines. I hope Wilson is built equally spacious.

The mention of 10-car trains is also very intriguing. I know it was asked before, but are the State St subway platforms long enough to berth 10 cars? Lake, Monroe and Jackson have the continuous mega-platform but the remaining subway stations are isolated and tricky to extend.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9348  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 6:59 PM
VivaLFuego's Avatar
VivaLFuego VivaLFuego is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blue Island
Posts: 6,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
I doubt there are really any reliable numbers. While outdoor lines do experience weathering, subsurface lines are constantly battling water infiltration, subsidence, and ground movement.
Indeed, every right-of-way is different.

The expressway median lines, particularly those below ground level (Dan Ryan and Eisenhower), must fight a constant battle against standing water during heavy downpours when older drainage/pump systems are simply inadequate or unreliable. Aside from the obvious electrical system threats, poor drainage also causes premature degradation of ties and ballast. Trying to keep up by constantly replacing ties and ballast only treats the symptoms rather than the root cause.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
I know it was asked before, but are the State St subway platforms long enough to berth 10 cars? Lake, Monroe and Jackson have the continuous mega-platform but the remaining subway stations are isolated and tricky to extend.
Short answer is: Barely. There is an eternal debate (as yet unsettled, as far as I know) as to whether a computer-assisted berthing system would be required to reliably operate 10 car trains in the subway stations, but there is technically enough length with almost zero margin for variability.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9349  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 9:33 PM
Standpoor's Avatar
Standpoor Standpoor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 188
^^^
I am not entirely sure I understand this project given what we have talked about with regards to the extensions/bus routes but this is clearly more than just some bus bays. Regardless of whether or not this makes sense, that is a pretty bad ass station.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Downtown View Post
I doubt there are really any reliable numbers. While outdoor lines do experience weathering, subsurface lines are constantly battling water infiltration, subsidence, and ground movement. Many railroad embankments are now 160-180 years old, and the only upkeep or repair has been routine replacement of running rails.
Speaking of which:




my photos
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9350  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 10:33 PM
Beta_Magellan's Avatar
Beta_Magellan Beta_Magellan is offline
Technocrat in Your Tank!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 648
^^^ Saw those on the UP-N line last Wednesday—any word on how the new Ravenswood station’s doing?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9351  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 10:51 PM
denizen467 denizen467 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Standpoor View Post
There's an image of one of those caisson-tube-or-not-a-caisson-tube tubes that we were talking about a couple months ago. Does the verdict still stand that they are indeed caisson tubes for supporting the viaducts? Is this the lowest ratio ever of above-ground structure height to caisson depth in our city...?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9352  
Old Posted Jun 24, 2012, 11:50 PM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
Woah, cool! Architecturally it doesn't seem on par
The mention of 10-car trains is also very intriguing. I know it was asked before, but are the State St subway platforms long enough to berth 10 cars? Lake, Monroe and Jackson have the continuous mega-platform but the remaining subway stations are isolated and tricky to extend.
The Initial System of Subways included that all stations be designed to accomodate 6 car trains of three compartment cars, each (articulated) compartment car being 88 ft in length. That works out to 528 ft, enough for 11 cars of 48 ft. length that the CTA uses.

So yes, 10 car trains will fit.

David Harrison
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9353  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2012, 5:07 AM
daperpkazoo daperpkazoo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Minneapolis/Chicago
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagopcclcar1 View Post
The Initial System of Subways included that all stations be designed to accomodate 6 car trains of three compartment cars, each (articulated) compartment car being 88 ft in length. That works out to 528 ft, enough for 11 cars of 48 ft. length that the CTA uses.

So yes, 10 car trains will fit.

David Harrison
I would like to add that I was told by a CTA official at one of the RPM meetings on the northside earlier this year that once RPM was complete, all Red Line platforms would be able to accommodate 10 car trains.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9354  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2012, 6:03 AM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by daperpkazoo View Post
I would like to add that I was told by a CTA official at one of the RPM meetings on the northside earlier this year that once RPM was complete, all Red Line platforms would be able to accommodate 10 car trains.
Along those lines, what would it take to run longer *cars* on the Red Line?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9355  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2012, 7:26 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,376
I asked that awhile ago... Depends on what you mean by "longer". Supposedly the State and Division subways were designed to accommodate 75' cars like New York's BMT, but later subways (Kimball, Howard-Dan Ryan) were designed with tighter curves and smaller clearances. I suppose after the Sheridan curve is straightened, CTA could run longer cars on a Howard-Midway route or something.

Really, I think it would be better to stick with the existing 48' car length but do articulated connections between cars. You get most of the capacity benefits of longer cars but without the expensive retrofits to tracks and tunnels. The only downside is that CTA would not get the greater stability at high speed which comes from a longer/wider wheelbase.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9356  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2012, 2:45 PM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
Along those lines, what would it take to run longer *cars* on the Red Line?
This comes up every so often, especially on railfan sites. The CTA is not going to run longer cars. Longer cars would never get around the tight curves built all over the system. The CTA can run LONGER TRAINS. All of the subway stations can accomodate a ten car TRAIN. Many of the expressway stations can accomodate ten car TRAINS. Many of the newer stations have space left to lengthen platforms so that ten car TRAINS can operate.

The reasons why the CTA will keep the 48 ft. length it uses is for compatibility. They are able to adjust their car fleet and transfer cars from one line to another without limitation. That ability is VERY desirable.

Finally, the subways were designed in the 1930s and yes, the curves were laid out to accomodate a 60 ft car. The stations were also laid out to accomodate a wider floor. The temporary extensions along the platform edges have beendestroyed, especially when they put the tactile strip in along the platform edge. Therefore today's and all future cars will have the 8 ft 8 in floor.

If CTA trackwork is ever improved, our trains can operate up to 70 MPH.

Please don't ask about running left-handed.

David Harrison
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9357  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2012, 5:26 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagopcclcar1 View Post
...
Please don't ask about running left-handed.

David Harrison
Ok, I won't, but what about returning the Loop to running both the inner and outer track in the same direction as was once done? ;-)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9358  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2012, 11:35 PM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
Ok, I won't, but what about returning the Loop to running both the inner and outer track in the same direction as was once done? ;-)
That would adversely effect routes that are through-routed on the Loop like the Green line, the Brown-Orange so it ain't gonna happen.

Why would you want something like that?

David H.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9359  
Old Posted Jun 25, 2012, 11:40 PM
chicagopcclcar1 chicagopcclcar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias View Post
Ok, I won't, but what about returning the Loop to running both the inner and outer track in the same direction as was once done? ;-)
I didn't see the map at first. At a time both the Oak Park 'L' (Lake Street) and the Northwestern ran left handed after they left the Loop. That's the reasons for the crossovers after Tower 18 (Lake/Wells) Good find.

David H.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9360  
Old Posted Jun 26, 2012, 12:32 AM
Standpoor's Avatar
Standpoor Standpoor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beta_Magellan View Post
^^^ Saw those on the UP-N line last Wednesday—any word on how the new Ravenswood station’s doing?
As far as I now nothing has happened yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by denizen467 View Post
There's an image of one of those caisson-tube-or-not-a-caisson-tube tubes that we were talking about a couple months ago. Does the verdict still stand that they are indeed caisson tubes for supporting the viaducts? Is this the lowest ratio ever of above-ground structure height to caisson depth in our city...?
Yes and probably. I'll try and get a picture of one going into the ground if I can. My guess is the deep caissons will be needed when the current tracks and supports are removed. Digging out the current bridge supports would lessen the integrity of any shallow supported bridge, especially once the new western track becomes operational. Currently temporary cement supports are reinforcing the older spans.
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 8:19 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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