richhotrain Sawtooth500I'm going to start a new list of rebuttals:1. As far as the crowd control problems go at LaSalle St Station, it's the same at union station - except that you have more ticketing space and space to move around in Union Station, but LaSalle would probably be more convenient to more people because it's closer to the city center. 2. Regarding building a connector, it would take up relatively little space. I'm sure Daley would get less heat for that than for ripping up houses or a park near 75th street. 3. The biggest issue is platform space - even though there are only 8 platforms, how many more trains can they take? If they can't handle all the Metra BNSF trains... that would be a killer. But then you get another alternative - take the Metra Heritage Corridor Trains to Lasalle St - there are definitely fewer of those than BNSF Trains. 4. The bascule bridge's shape is fine. Amtrak uses it 6 times daily (and on rare occasion you will catch a freight there), and yes, it does go up (but very very rarely), so I don't think that would be an issue. The actual speed on the air line is restricted to 10 mph I think, so ok maybe it takes you 2 minutes more to get to the station but you more than save that 2 minutes in walking distance because LaSalle is closer to downtown than Union Station. And they could always fix the track on the airline and up the speed there too. 5. Why do you need a flyover? The Air Line already empties into the northernmost of the 3 track BNSF main. All the freights turn south anyways, so that wouldn't really be too much of a conflict with Metra coming off the air line, and with no more metra trains running into Union Station from the BNSF line you only have Amtrak traffic to contend with going into Union Station which is not that much compared to Metra... so why not just put some switches in? I love to be vindictive, but I am going to agree with you on all but #2. The south Loop is Daley's pet project, and it is also where he lives, his townhouse sitting on top of the old Santa Fe tracks leading into Daerborn Station. He would much rather tear down some houses at 75th Street than give up a bit of space at 16th Street. If you don't believe, call him and ask him !
Sawtooth500I'm going to start a new list of rebuttals:1. As far as the crowd control problems go at LaSalle St Station, it's the same at union station - except that you have more ticketing space and space to move around in Union Station, but LaSalle would probably be more convenient to more people because it's closer to the city center. 2. Regarding building a connector, it would take up relatively little space. I'm sure Daley would get less heat for that than for ripping up houses or a park near 75th street. 3. The biggest issue is platform space - even though there are only 8 platforms, how many more trains can they take? If they can't handle all the Metra BNSF trains... that would be a killer. But then you get another alternative - take the Metra Heritage Corridor Trains to Lasalle St - there are definitely fewer of those than BNSF Trains. 4. The bascule bridge's shape is fine. Amtrak uses it 6 times daily (and on rare occasion you will catch a freight there), and yes, it does go up (but very very rarely), so I don't think that would be an issue. The actual speed on the air line is restricted to 10 mph I think, so ok maybe it takes you 2 minutes more to get to the station but you more than save that 2 minutes in walking distance because LaSalle is closer to downtown than Union Station. And they could always fix the track on the airline and up the speed there too. 5. Why do you need a flyover? The Air Line already empties into the northernmost of the 3 track BNSF main. All the freights turn south anyways, so that wouldn't really be too much of a conflict with Metra coming off the air line, and with no more metra trains running into Union Station from the BNSF line you only have Amtrak traffic to contend with going into Union Station which is not that much compared to Metra... so why not just put some switches in?
I love to be vindictive, but I am going to agree with you on all but #2. The south Loop is Daley's pet project, and it is also where he lives, his townhouse sitting on top of the old Santa Fe tracks leading into Daerborn Station. He would much rather tear down some houses at 75th Street than give up a bit of space at 16th Street. If you don't believe, call him and ask him !
On second thought, I am going to challenge you on #5. I just looked at a current satellite view of SCAL. There is no access track from the old PRR tracks to the SCAL. So, a passenger train or commuter train approaching SCAL from the south has no way to access the line to turn east to the Rock Island tracks.
Alton Junction
richhotrain Sorry, I hit the Post button prematurely:
Sorry, I hit the Post button prematurely:
Of course none of us have ever done that hitting the wrong button. Station quite different from what i recall. Now remember people speaking of predestrian restrictions getting in and out of the station.
Sounds as if there are not enough tracks anyway and that would be a fatal flaw. Anyone know how many tracks LaSalle had at its height?
blue streak 1 Sawtooth500That's why I don't understand why they don't reroute BNSF to LaSalle St station instead... Since I have not been to LaSalle for decades I need some memory refreshment on its set ups. I do find the idea of some or all the BNSF Metra trains going to LaSalle with having some merit and diadvantages. 1. Isn't it adjaecent to the Loop lines where you just walk out of the station? 2. What is the condition of the station interior for much heavier use?. 3. How many RI train sets lay over daytime at the station now? 4. Are the layover tracks that once were just south of the station still there or can they be restored or replaced? 5.. How many usable station tracks does LaSalle have now and can any of the not in service tracks be restored? How does the ultimate # of tracks at LaSalle compare to those used at CHI US during rush hours? 6. What are platform lengths at LaSalle compared to US? Can they be lenghtened?. I seem to remember that longer is close to impossible at CHI US? without taking layover space? 7. Are LaSalle platforms wide enough for exiting commuters? 8. Are Union Station layover tracks full during the day? Now for the big problems. 9. What is the long term condition of the Air Line's bridge over the Chicago river? Is it near the end of its useful life? 10. Also is the bridge an active draw span? 11. There would be a need to have the air line connect with out any crossovers to all three ( or future 4) main west bound tracks. Is there room at the west end and north and south of the ROW of BNSF and of the airline to establish an inside flyover connection to the track main? . Number 11 at least is going to require a flyover change to access all the tracks of the Burlington without crossovers. An eastbound could have to move over 4 -5 tracks to access the air line tracks without a flyover. That flyover is a cost that may equal the cost of the 75th flyover. If either 9 or 10 is a factor then going to LaSalle from the Burlington route is a no go for 5 - 10 years unless more money than pills is found. However However the long term use of LaSalle for at least some of the Burlington trains has much merit. Certainly many business persons would be closer to work and could maybe take a later train to LaSalle and still be on time. Now how about some information and comments about the above????????
Sawtooth500That's why I don't understand why they don't reroute BNSF to LaSalle St station instead...
Since I have not been to LaSalle for decades I need some memory refreshment on its set ups. I do find the idea of some or all the BNSF Metra trains going to LaSalle with having some merit and diadvantages.
1. Isn't it adjaecent to the Loop lines where you just walk out of the station?
2. What is the condition of the station interior for much heavier use?.
3. How many RI train sets lay over daytime at the station now?
4. Are the layover tracks that once were just south of the station still there or can they be restored or replaced?
5.. How many usable station tracks does LaSalle have now and can any of the not in service tracks be restored? How does the ultimate # of tracks at LaSalle compare to those used at CHI US during rush hours?
6. What are platform lengths at LaSalle compared to US? Can they be lenghtened?. I seem to remember that longer is close to impossible at CHI US? without taking layover space?
7. Are LaSalle platforms wide enough for exiting commuters?
8. Are Union Station layover tracks full during the day?
Now for the big problems.
9. What is the long term condition of the Air Line's bridge over the Chicago river? Is it near the end of its useful life?
10. Also is the bridge an active draw span?
11. There would be a need to have the air line connect with out any crossovers to all three ( or future 4) main west bound tracks. Is there room at the west end and north and south of the ROW of BNSF and of the airline to establish an inside flyover connection to the track main? .
Number 11 at least is going to require a flyover change to access all the tracks of the Burlington without crossovers. An eastbound could have to move over 4 -5 tracks to access the air line tracks without a flyover. That flyover is a cost that may equal the cost of the 75th flyover. If either 9 or 10 is a factor then going to LaSalle from the Burlington route is a no go for 5 - 10 years unless more money than pills is found.
However
However the long term use of LaSalle for at least some of the Burlington trains has much merit. Certainly many business persons would be closer to work and could maybe take a later train to LaSalle and still be on time.
Now how about some information and comments about the above????????
6. No idea how long the platforms are but they funnel down to a throat at the south end and then you run out of room, but the current platforms are long enough to accomodate 8 to 10 passenger car trains.
7. Subject to the constraints previously mentioned, the platforms are wide enough, yes. But, with only center of the car access, boarding is slow if a train arrives late and passengers are waiting, a somewhat common occurrence. You have not really lived until you are caught in a crowd trying to enter a car all at once. It is like being in the ocean, so close to shore, but unable to quite reach land.
8. I do not know much about Union Station - - cannot help you there.
9. I am not a structural engineer, but I do not believe that those bascule bridges are in any danger of imminent collapse. I would give them another 100 years. One of the three is in a permanently raised position. That's OK because the track that it once served is long gone.
10. As far as I know, yes, but I have never seen it in a raised position, so maybe not.
11. That is a good question, and I am not sure that there is room for a flyover. Even if there is, you will have to "fight City Hall" so to speak to get permission to build it, what with all of the housing and commercial building plans going on around there.
Hope that helps. Others may want to add to what I have already said.
Rich
I'll take a stab at answering at least some of your questions.
Today, LaSalle Street Station is long gone. A modern financial center office building replaced it. The Metra station is literally located at the rear of the building with access to the station and tracks and platforms reached from the west and east side of the building. The new office building itself fronts onto Van Buren, just like the old LaSalle Street Station. Access to Metra is reasonable on the west side but severely limited on the east side. As you say, the elevated train is right there on Van Buren and the south Loop business district begins just another block north. Pedestrian traffic is limited by the presence of the Board of Trade and the BOT Annex. When I used to walk north toward LaSalle Street from the station, it was awful, nowhere for pedestrians to walk, the BOT often reduced or cut off access to Jackson Blvd through their property and, to make matters worse, eliminated the street running north-south between Jackson and Van Buren. All pedestrian traffic is subject to a street level crossing at Van Buren. For pedestrians, it is a nightmare under the best of circumstances and worse in inclement weather. Metra SWS traffic will only add to the mess.
2. Ha. The station now consists of a couple of ticket counters, rest rooms, a small concession stand and about 20 seats. A lot of suburban stations are actually bigger. It is not a passenger train station in the traditional sense.
3. Trains come and go with little or no layover. During non rush hours, trains are stored at 47th Street facility.
4. There are no layover tracks south of the station any longer. Once out the station, it is a double mainline, nothing else.
5. There are 8 access tracks to the current LaSalle Street Station which, incidentally, is elevated from ground level. There is no room for any additional tracks. Incidentally, all exiting passengers must walk north along the platforms to the exit point by the station behind the office building to reach Van Buren. Although passengers are crossing above Congress Street on the platforms, there is no staircase access to Congress. A very stupid, ill thought out arrangement. At the height of the rush hour, it can take 5 to 8 minutes to exit the train (all Metra Rock Island cars empty in the middle of every car rather than the ends - - go figure) and another 5 minutes to reach the staircases.
6.
Sawtooth500RRKen As for the St. Charles Air Line, Mayor Daley wants that land. I believe Daley wants the portion of the St. Charles Air Line east of the 16th street junction, a BNSF connector would only require the land west of the junction.
RRKen As for the St. Charles Air Line, Mayor Daley wants that land.
As for the St. Charles Air Line, Mayor Daley wants that land.
I believe that the long-term plan is to build housing and shopping on all of the land south of Roosevelt Road, west of the Rock Island tracks and east of the river, all the way south to 21st Street. Already, the land bordered by Polk on the north, Roosevelt on the south, Rock Island tracks on the east, and the Chicago River on the west is committed to housing and shopping. It's called Roosevelt Place, or something like that. In any event, that's why Daley wants SCAL removed. It cuts like a knife right through the center of planned development.
Interestingly, the land between Roosevelt Road and 16th Street is actually landfill used to straighten the old bend on the south branch of the Chicago River in 1930. For 40 years, the landfill supported rail yards, then all was abandoned for another 40 years.
RRKen richhotrain Here is a link to the Englewood Flyover diagram: www.createprogram.org/.../P1%20CREATE%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet%20FINAL.pdf Still trying to find one for the Metra SWS connection to the Rock Island tracks which I believe is going to be a flyover as well at 75th Street. I tried above link twice, did not compute. Easy enough to find the information. Go to createprogram.org on the right hand margin, there is a link for the entire CREATE project map. If you have the lastest Adobe reader, it will spawn a new window. Then back at the home page, there is a link to the P1 Englewood project, click and read that. Between the two, you should understand the routing for the Wabash commuter service into LaSalle. As for the St. Charles Air Line, Mayor Daley wants that land.
richhotrain Here is a link to the Englewood Flyover diagram: www.createprogram.org/.../P1%20CREATE%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet%20FINAL.pdf Still trying to find one for the Metra SWS connection to the Rock Island tracks which I believe is going to be a flyover as well at 75th Street.
Here is a link to the Englewood Flyover diagram:
www.createprogram.org/.../P1%20CREATE%20Project%20Fact%20Sheet%20FINAL.pdf
Still trying to find one for the Metra SWS connection to the Rock Island tracks which I believe is going to be a flyover as well at 75th Street.
I tried above link twice, did not compute. Easy enough to find the information. Go to createprogram.org on the right hand margin, there is a link for the entire CREATE project map. If you have the lastest Adobe reader, it will spawn a new window. Then back at the home page, there is a link to the P1 Englewood project, click and read that. Between the two, you should understand the routing for the Wabash commuter service into LaSalle.
Sorry about that. I would resubmit the link, but as you say, if you click on www.createprogram.org, that is the main link that provides its own links to the various projects.
Sawtooth500Yeah I can't find a diagram for the 75th street connection either.... but if you look at it on Google Earth you will see how there is absolutely no way that a connector could be built without either going through a park of bulldozing houses... so I still maintain that the St. Charles Air Line and routing BNSF to LaSalle station would be better. Sure, the SCAL is rarely used (except for Amtrak), but so what? That's a good thing, it won't create traffic conflicts. And it would definitely be much cheaper to build a connector at 16th st junction than it will be at 75 street. I've attached two links to satellite photos (click on them):16th Street Junction 75th Street Junction On the 16th street picture, in the bottom right you will see a white line where the connector between the RI district and SCAL would go. There is already a grade there as once upon a time it was connected, and still is connected in the southwest quadrant.On the 75th street picture, the RI District is the line on the right going up and down on a diagonal, and SWS uses the old wabash main which goes left out of the picture. Current SWS uses NS trackage and takes right turn at the junction to go to the old Wabash Main. The white line is where a connector would have to go - I drew it straight through the park. I guess it could also go south of the park if you bulldozed houses.That's why I don't understand why they don't reroute BNSF to LaSalle St station instead...
Yeah, a little while after reading your initial post, I realized why you voiced concern about the housing issue. Ironically, it was only a few years ago that a whole series of new homes were built on the east side of the tracks and just west of the Rock Island tracks right there around 75th Street.
I came across one article that indicated that I flyover would be built somewhere around 75th Street. i will see if I can locate that article and post a link.
I don't know why the decision was made to connect to the Rock Island tracks at 75th Street. Perhaps they are trying to alleviate congestion on the tracks between 63rd Street and 21 Street where there is a lot of freight train activity every day.
As far as 16th Street and SCAL goes, I think the long term plan is to abandon te SCAL altogether.
The spur you drew in on the map of 16th Street Junction is interesting in that such a spur used to exist there connecting the Rock Island tracks to the SCAL on the northwest corner of the 16th Street Junction. Even if they added back that trackage, they would also have to provide access from the old PRR tracks that the Metra SWS runs on to the SCAL. To my knowledge, there is no track access at the present time.
All in all, an interesting topic though.
Sawtooth500Interesting... here's my big question - so CREATE project P2 - that's the one they will need to do to physically make the connection to route SWS to LaSalle Station - they are going to have to either lay the tracks right through the middle of a park of bulldoze houses to make it happen - they are planning on doing that? In fact, would it make much more sense to move the BNSF Metra Trains to LaSalle Station? It just seems to me that building a connector to the St. Charles air line at 16th street junction would be waaaay cheaper than CREATE project P2 (especially considering that a grade for that connector is already in place, just no tracks)? Also, after the connection at Grand Crossing is completed, does the St. Charles Air line and CN tracks north of Grand crossing have any future? Or is it abandonment for them?
I would have to study the plan a little closer to locate the link up but I believe that it will be around 75th Street so that the SWS will be on the Rock Island tracks as they go through the Englewood Flyover and then make their way into LaSalle Street Station.
As far as the SCAL goes, that is so little used already that for all practical purposes it already is useless.
Actually, it is all very sad in that at one time years ago, the Englewood crossing was a super busy interlock for the PRR, NYC, and a whole bunch of other roads. And, the SCAL, and the 16th Street interlock, combined with the C&WI tracks crossing under the Rock Island tracks on the way to Dearborn Station made for some pretty exciting train watching.
If you want to view a map to see how these projects link up, click on the following link, then look for the link on the web site that reads "CREATE Projects With Passenger Benefits" and click on that:
http://www.createprogram.org/projects.html
Sawtooth500So in the May 2010 issue of the magazine, on page 12 article "High Speed Funds granted. Great. Now What?" it says that when the Englewood Flyover is completed Metra SWS trains will use LaSalle St. Station. How? Is this incorrect? The tracks that SWS uses are the old Wabash main - and this branches off the NS main that intersects the Metra Rock Island District waaay before englewood junction - so it doesn't make sense. So is this an error or is there another piece of the puzzle here?
As a long-time rider on the Metra Rock Island line, your question caught my attention. It is true that the Metra SWS trains will switch from Union Station to LaSalle Street Station.
But, to accomplish this, a 3-step process must be completed and the Englewood Flyover is only one of the steps. The so-called "75th Street Corridor Improvement Project" is another step, and that one is crucial to the re-routing of the Metra SWS trains.
You may find the following article interesting:
http://www.rtands.com/newsflash/metra-approves-final-design-for-creates-englewood-flyover.html
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.