Metra Star Line

Well..... Metra Is Planning On Building A NEW Line That Travels From O,Hare Airport All The Way Down To Joliet This Would Connect 4 Of The Lines...... So For Instances You Get Off At West Chicago You Get On Another Train To Get To Joliet. . The Goal For All Of This Is To Get More People Off The Highway. They Would Get New Engines Which Do Not Even Look Like a Diesel. I I Think This Would Be Interesting For A Railfans Perspective But All The Construction On The Lines And Not To Mention The Highways


If You Want More Information On This Line I Will Post The Link On The Bottom.

http://metraconnects.metrarail.com/star.php

Metracab123 wrote:Well..... Metra Is Planning On Building A NEW Line That Travels From O,Hare Airport All The Way Down To Joliet This Would Connect 4 Of The Lines...... So For Instances You Get Off At West Chicago You Get On Another Train To Get To Joliet. . The Goal For All Of This Is To Get More People Off The Highway. They Would Get New Engines Which Do Not Even Look Like a Diesel. I I Think This Would Be Interesting For A Railfans Perspective But All The Construction On The Lines And Not To Mention The Highways


If You Want More Information On This Line I Will Post The Link On The Bottom.

http://metraconnects.metrarail.com/star.php

I know everyone will hate me for responding to this post since it perpetuates the topic and ultimately leads to a flame war over either Barrington or some other suburb, but I feel it's only right:

1. Metracab123: The STAR line has been getting talked about for years. Star Line = not news.
2. Running the trains in the highway median doesn't work well, as we've seen with the Blue Line; access both to the station from residential areas and from the station to jobs is poor. Also, parking is inherently limited and people tend to find the stations loud and exposed with all the cars right there.
3. I think that a connector service won't work as a commuter rail project. Look to the Gold Line (or whatever it's called) for that. Sure it would be a smaller circle, but the goal is to connect the spokes to each other, which it would do better since connector routes rely on flexible connections (nobody wants to have to do a 1 minute transfer only to wait half an hour for transfer #2).
4. The ridership numbers are WAY overstated. People tend to ignore the fact that places like Rosemont are sprawling office areas where few jobs would be within range of each stop, especially given the STAR Line is commuter rail and would have more space between stops (especially with the highway median constraint, which limits where stops can be placed). Since passengers would have to transfer to buses anyways, and those buses would sit and wait near stations, usually on overpasses over the highway, traffic could end up being worse.

That said, the STAR Line could work if A. It did its job and connected the UP/North and MD/N lines by going all the way to Lake Forest like in the original plan (Gentleman, start your all caps for the great Barrington flame war of 2009!), B. Metra abandoned the highway median concept and opted for finding a better routing that allows better stations, and C. Stations were spaced much closer to each other with the service being more of a light rail/subway operation than a commuter rail one.

I'm not certian on whether I like the STAR line concept or not... one down side is that the current plan stops at/before Joliet, so connections with RI, SWS, or MED are out of the question. I also can't see very high ridership for the suburb to suburb travel... reminds me of Pace, and I don't think I have ever seen a Pace bus full in Orland.

As for highway stations, Metra could follow in the footsteps of the New Mexico Railrunner... which built stations in the 'median':

metraRI wrote:I'm not certian on whether I like the STAR line concept or not... one down side is that the current plan stops at/before Joliet, so connections with RI, SWS, or MED are out of the question. I also can't see very high ridership for the suburb to suburb travel... reminds me of Pace, and I don't think I have ever seen a Pace bus full in Orland.

As for highway stations, Metra could follow in the footsteps of the New Mexico Railrunner... which built stations in the 'median':

The running plan is to put stations in the medians. That's what I don't like. People don't like having to walk over a highway just to get to the station. Parking for said stations would be unworkable due to space constraints (most of the highways in question have pseudo (or actual) frontage roads which make things even more challenging. Not to mention the medians are narrow or non-existent. The STAR Line in its current form is concerning in that I'm concerned as to whether anyone at Metra bothered to actually check whether there's physically enough space for the tracks.

superego wrote:People don't like having to walk over a highway just to get to the station. Parking for said stations would be unworkable due to space constraints (most of the highways in question have pseudo (or actual) frontage roads which make things even more challenging. Not to mention the medians are narrow or non-existent. The STAR Line in its current form is concerning in that I'm concerned as to whether anyone at Metra bothered to actually check whether there's physically enough space for the tracks.

I don't see much difference between walking over a section of highway vs. walking from the furthest point in the parking lot at Route 59... if someone wants to take the train, they would park where parking is given/available. As for medians, I'm sure if the STAR Line where to happen the entire section of highway would be rebuilt in order to accommodate tracks and stations regardless the current layout of I-90... by no means a small project. Metra would probably be better off spending money elsewhere to improve current services and expanding current lines.

1. I don't see highway-median rapid transit or commuter trains as a problem. I have never seen evidence that commuters don't like the O'Hare, Congress, or 95th street trains operated by CTA. I've never had a problem with walking over a bridge that crosses both railroad and highway.

2. Most of the STAR line is to be on EJ&E property, which is not in a median strip. It's class-I railroad ROW that's been in place for a century.

Tadman wrote:1. I don't see highway-median rapid transit or commuter trains as a problem. I have never seen evidence that commuters don't like the O'Hare, Congress, or 95th street trains operated by CTA. I've never had a problem with walking over a bridge that crosses both railroad and highway.

2. Most of the STAR line is to be on EJ&E property, which is not in a median strip. It's class-I railroad ROW that's been in place for a century.

I don't have a problem with the EJ&E section, but I know CN is likely to increase freight traffic on it to avoid downtown Chicago (at least until significant work is done with regards to CREATE) which could become a problem.

The issue is that a lot of people do have issues with crossing those bridges. More importantly highway median operations limit train speeds unless the median in question is really wide; part of why Railrunner worked was that the medians were practically wide enough to put in a 4 track main with room to spare (maybe not quite 4, but the point still stands). 294 has not only a narrower median but a ton of interchanges that would increase costs by forcing tunnelling.

I do like the idea of running commuter trains on the EJ&E trackage, don't get me wrong, but the highway median section just seems misguided.

Batman2 wrote:More importantly highway median operations limit train speeds unless the median in question is really wide; part of why Railrunner worked was that the medians were practically wide enough to put in a 4 track main with room to spare (maybe not quite 4, but the point still stands). 294 has not only a narrower median but a ton of interchanges that would increase costs by forcing tunnelling.

In Chicago, I believe median width has little to do with train speed limitations. Instead, the real culprit is the conservative design of the transit equipment coupled with inherent speed limitations of transit lines that use third rail. Even if CTA could have 4-track ROW on the Eisenhower or Dan Ryan medians, the transit equipment is designed for a max speed of 70, but for all intents and purposes, it's actually 55 with cab signal restrictions...

I don't think putting a heavy rail, 79 mph commuter line down an expressway median would be the best idea in the Chicago area. Incidents happen every winter on the CTA where a car or semi plows right over the barrier and bisects the line at that point, causing service disruptions and a general mess for everyone involved. A cab car or DMU could probably emerge from a train-car collision unscathed but if it's a semi truck you're asking for problems.

Also, those expressway median stations are generally miserable to stand out in because of the traffic noise and wind. They're even less fun if it's a cold fall or winter day, or raining/snowing. And the salt used to melt snow on the roadway has negative effects on the rail infrastructure, including the rail itself, signal cabling and the station buildings. The rail on the Dan Ryan branch of the CTA red line lasted 10-15 years less than other installations on the system before it was replaced a few years ago.

Hopefully CN and Metra work things out so the line can go as planned. CN seemed less than thrilled to the though of letting Metra use the EJ&E line. Hopefully CN doesn't kill the STAR line. One of the proposed stations would be right by me near Joliet near Division Street.

EJ&ESDM809 wrote:Hopefully CN and Metra work things out so the line can go as planned. CN seemed less than thrilled to the though of letting Metra use the EJ&E line. Hopefully CN doesn't kill the STAR line. One of the proposed stations would be right by me near Joliet near Division Street.

Don't worry, CN won't kill the STAR Line, this:

http://www.fightrailcongestion.com/Default.aspx

will. This is probably the most blatant FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) campaign I've ever seen. Notice the link "Canadian National Railway: What they Don't want you to know". It's like a political attack ad, but against a railroad, and it's a website.

Also, as I alluded to in an earlier post (very rudely, for which I apologize) a big controversy emerged when the original plan had trains running to Lake Forest (connecting with the UP-North line. Barrington had issues over grade crossings, etc. and since then the line ends in Barrington, which hampers the capabilities of the STAR Line to do its job. What's the point of connecting the spokes if you only connect half of them? Sure, you connected something, but that doesn't help nearly as much and ridership will be MUCH lower as a result leading to a less compelling project overall.

Actually Its The Northwest Line AND It Ends In Harvard