Does this particular cities feature--Chicago's el train downtown. Ad to the cities appeal or take from it away somthing? (2013, photos)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I would say this- if you were to build Chicago's system today, you would build a "normal" system, mostly underground, and not the outdated, decrepit system of today. Especially with the winter weather, a mostly underground system would be a gigantic improvement.
Also, the biggest problem isn't the L structures- it's the freeway median running that does nothing for the urban sphere. That's the major shortcoming, not the elevated parts.
But the cool thing about the L is that it's distinctive. I'm not aware of any other major transit system built in such a manner, so it is fairly unique.
I think it's much better/realistic to simply improve and expand the existing system instead of building another subway line. Subway construction has gotten so insanely expensive and dragged-out in recent years, that most NA cities simply resort to light rail or bus rapid transit because it's cheaper, faster, and more politically expedient... Subway obviously is the most efficient method, if it can actually be built within reasonable time frame and cost.
I think it's much better/realistic to simply improve and expand the existing system instead of building another subway line. Subway construction has gotten so insanely expensive and dragged-out in recent years, that most NA cities simply resort to light rail or bus rapid transit because it's cheaper, faster, and more politically expedient... Subway obviously is the most efficient method, if it can actually be built within reasonable time frame and cost.
In America, only NYC has the population density to justify construction of new subway lines given our outrageously inflated construction costs.
There are many problems with having elevated subway lines that everyone mentioned already. That's why in Manhattan they went through the expense of constructing new tunnels and dismantling the El. In most cases its just too expensive to do that, since you're not really improving transit by much, but just duplicating existing capacity and routes. With that said, it is much better to have the El than nothing at all thats for sure.
Location: East Central Pennsylvania/ Chicago for 6yrs.
2,535 posts, read 3,280,624 times
Reputation: 1483
[quote=oakparkdude;36721228]In America, only NYC has the population density to justify construction of new subway lines given our outrageously inflated construction costs.[/
I believe LA has something under construction like a subway ongoing?
I read Boston has the BIG DIG. It is a underground highways project ongoing. But you would think it would have a transit line with it too???
In America, only NYC has the population density to justify construction of new subway lines given our outrageously inflated construction costs.[/
I believe LA has something under construction like a subway ongoing?
I read Boston has the BIG DIG. It is a underground highways project ongoing. But you would think it would have a transit line with it too???
Big Dig... man that was what, 10 years ago? It started in early 1980s and was only completed in mid 2000s. I really hope we could avoid another "big dig" type project... I think it still remains to be the most expensive freeway project in U.S. history, a total of almost $15 billion spent just on a few miles of freeway tunnels.
It does have a transit tunnel, now called the "Silver Line". No it's not a new subway line. No it's not light rail transit. It's actually just tunnel for articulated buses. I've been praying and hoping that they eventually convert this to an actual light rail line so the ride could be less bumpy with more predictable schedules, but not happening anytime soon.
I grew up in a part of New York City where the subways are elevated. I was about 10 years old before I realized that a lot of films that were shot in Chicago were not set in the Bronx.
even more interesting is that there are stations that serve both: the Clark-Lake station in the Loop serves 4 elevated lines and one subway line. the station is in the Thompson Center (State of IL). at the south end of the downtown area, the Roosevelt Road station has both el and subway platforms.
I think one of the reasons why Chicago kept its elevated structures and NYC got rid of a good percentage of theirs (mainly in Manhattan) is because the Chicago system was always lower scale than NY and comfortably fit into to the urban fabric. The el, in most places it goes through, doesn't overpower, even in the canyons of the 4 streets in the Loop.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
