Amtrak has agreed to move its north-suburban Chicago stop from downtown Glenview and instead stop north of town, the Chicago Sun-Times has reported. Local leaders are pushing for the change to cut back on delays at local crossings, as Amtrak trains block them while they take on and discharge passengers.http://www.trains.com/trn/default.aspx?c=a&id=5833
Amtrak's seven daily Chicago-Milwaukee Hiawatha round trips, plus its once-daily Chicago-Seattle Empire Builder round trip, currently make the stop. Under the plan, Metra commuter trains would continue to stop downtown, while the Amtrak trains would instead stop at the Glen of North Glenview stop.
State Sen. Jeff Schoenberg has lined up an earmark to pay for the changes, while local governments will have to pitch in as well. If an agreement can be reached, work could begin next spring.
Railroad Forums
Politicians make Amtrak move Glenview stop out of downtown
- Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
I saw this story, too. I checked out the satellite imagery on Bing, and I'm not sure, based on the location of the Glenview station, just what roads get blocked. I wouldn't think the Hiawathas are significantly longer that Metra commuter trains (which would still stop at Glenview). The Builder, of course, is longer, but there's only one in each direction per day. Maybe some of the Illinois contingent on this board can shed some light on whether there really is a problem with Amtrak trains blocking crossings, or if something else is afoot.
North Glenview
As one can readily see, there is a perfectly attractive station structure with plenty of parking. It is located along a relatively undeveloped stretch of Lehigh Ave. near what was the Glenview NAS and has now become of complex of "higher end' residences (just a guess: $500K and up).
Glenview Road is the "main drag' through town; while any train making a station stop at Glenview using the former MILW station would interfere with traffic, I'm not certain if such continues to be the case with the present structure that was built early in this decade, which is somewhat N of the former.
But having Amtrak stop at North Glenview simply means sixteen less trains (7Hi's+EB X 2) to disrupt traffic through Downtown Glenview.
Finally, a point that I have not investigated but should be considered as "on the table' - and that is the location of Glenview Emergency Services. If such is located east of the MILW, they might be at a loss to promptly respond to a call to the West. I'm not certain to what extent an agency to the West, such as Niles FD, has an agreement in place to respond.
I know that in my town where the Emergency Services are all located to the South of the BNSF, if there is an emergency to the North and the FD cannot respond account the BNSF being blocked, the Westmont FD, which has a station to the North (as well as to the South) will respond.
Although I no longer have occasion to regularly visit Glenview (I once had three clients there), I think this could prove to be a change for the better - including improved access for Amtrak passengers.
As one can readily see, there is a perfectly attractive station structure with plenty of parking. It is located along a relatively undeveloped stretch of Lehigh Ave. near what was the Glenview NAS and has now become of complex of "higher end' residences (just a guess: $500K and up).
Glenview Road is the "main drag' through town; while any train making a station stop at Glenview using the former MILW station would interfere with traffic, I'm not certain if such continues to be the case with the present structure that was built early in this decade, which is somewhat N of the former.
But having Amtrak stop at North Glenview simply means sixteen less trains (7Hi's+EB X 2) to disrupt traffic through Downtown Glenview.
Finally, a point that I have not investigated but should be considered as "on the table' - and that is the location of Glenview Emergency Services. If such is located east of the MILW, they might be at a loss to promptly respond to a call to the West. I'm not certain to what extent an agency to the West, such as Niles FD, has an agreement in place to respond.
I know that in my town where the Emergency Services are all located to the South of the BNSF, if there is an emergency to the North and the FD cannot respond account the BNSF being blocked, the Westmont FD, which has a station to the North (as well as to the South) will respond.
Although I no longer have occasion to regularly visit Glenview (I once had three clients there), I think this could prove to be a change for the better - including improved access for Amtrak passengers.
Good point about the impact of stopped trains on public safety, Mr. Norman.
My first job out of college was in Greenwood, SC. Up until the early 1970s, Greenwood's Main Street was bisected by the tracks of Seaboard Coast Line's (ex-Atlantic Coast Line, exx-Charleston & Western Carolina) Augusta - Spartanburg line and Southern's Columbia - Greenville line. SCL ran lengthy freight trains several times a day over this route to and from its connection with the Clinchfield in Spartanburg. They were limited to 10 mph in downtown Greenwood and could take as long as a half hour to get through town. Because of this, before a train could come through town, the SCL dispatcher would have to notify the local fire department, which would send a truck to the other side of the tracks.
Thankfully, SCL rerouted its trains through Greenwood over the former Seaboard Monroe - Atlanta line (Silver Comet route) in 1973. Good thing since in later years the Augusta - Spartanburg line experienced a huge increase in coal traffic. Southern rerouted onto a remnant of the old Georgia & Florida in the early 1980s, and its successor, Norfolk Southern, subsequently abandoned its line through Greenwood altogether.
My first job out of college was in Greenwood, SC. Up until the early 1970s, Greenwood's Main Street was bisected by the tracks of Seaboard Coast Line's (ex-Atlantic Coast Line, exx-Charleston & Western Carolina) Augusta - Spartanburg line and Southern's Columbia - Greenville line. SCL ran lengthy freight trains several times a day over this route to and from its connection with the Clinchfield in Spartanburg. They were limited to 10 mph in downtown Greenwood and could take as long as a half hour to get through town. Because of this, before a train could come through town, the SCL dispatcher would have to notify the local fire department, which would send a truck to the other side of the tracks.
Thankfully, SCL rerouted its trains through Greenwood over the former Seaboard Monroe - Atlanta line (Silver Comet route) in 1973. Good thing since in later years the Augusta - Spartanburg line experienced a huge increase in coal traffic. Southern rerouted onto a remnant of the old Georgia & Florida in the early 1980s, and its successor, Norfolk Southern, subsequently abandoned its line through Greenwood altogether.
I'm from one of the very nearby suburbs (at least when I'm home from school in DC), and I think that the new stop (Glenview North) is definitely the better location. "The Glen" (the development at Glenview NAS) is a pretty good location for a train station, but one concern of mine is that the station is actually about a mile from the main business area in the Glen, and while there are a few shops right near the station, I think that's an issue.
If I was in charge of the decision, I would relocate the station to the Northbrook station. That one is right near a nice business area, it has a lot of parking, and most importantly, it is north of the Techny interlocking. I think Amtrak should be aiming to reroute the Hiawatha trains to stop at O'Hare (increased O'Hare service means we can better justify a true O'Hare-downtown shuttle and extending the People Mover), so the North Suburban station would have to be north of Techny. Although if the grade crossing issue is important, Lake Cook Road or Deerfield would also be good candidates for relocating. Lake Cook has better parking, but the location is poor (next to an old strip mall, and the station is in the parking lot for a Home Depot), while Deerfield is near a newly developed business/shopping area.
Regardless of my nitpicking, I think this was a wise decision by Amtrak, even ignoring the grade crossing issue, since the new station is, in my opinion, a better location.
If I was in charge of the decision, I would relocate the station to the Northbrook station. That one is right near a nice business area, it has a lot of parking, and most importantly, it is north of the Techny interlocking. I think Amtrak should be aiming to reroute the Hiawatha trains to stop at O'Hare (increased O'Hare service means we can better justify a true O'Hare-downtown shuttle and extending the People Mover), so the North Suburban station would have to be north of Techny. Although if the grade crossing issue is important, Lake Cook Road or Deerfield would also be good candidates for relocating. Lake Cook has better parking, but the location is poor (next to an old strip mall, and the station is in the parking lot for a Home Depot), while Deerfield is near a newly developed business/shopping area.
Regardless of my nitpicking, I think this was a wise decision by Amtrak, even ignoring the grade crossing issue, since the new station is, in my opinion, a better location.
I'm Batman!
thanks Batman, that's what I was looking for. I suppose not a lot of riders are going to glenview from MIL anyway and Metra serves the downtown...though as someone whose town was served by a walkup station in its "town center" it was convenient.
This has been in the works since the decision was made to build the North Glenview Stop. Northbrook is not an option for the same reason that they "CLAIM" they are moving it from Glenview. There had been talk prior to building North Glenview of moving to Lake Cook, the only thing with either Lake Cook or North Glenview is the platform length, though when workign as a conductor, my personal preference was that rear sleeper work on #7 dictated a double spot at glenview anyway, so that would negate the platform legnth issue.
As for rerouting to Ohare transfer... NOT a good idea. One there is no connections between the CP and the CN ( north of O'hare) that would make it work, 2 that would legnthen the trip MKE-CHI to well over 2 hours, which is unacceptable, especially considering the return on investment in terms of additional ridership. And to route the train A5-B17-joint Track-Shermer-Techny Jct / A-20 would, A add even MORE time to the run, b) require the approval of the Union Pacific ( and make the UP a host road on this route as they control and dispatch the joint track) and require an entirely new depot on the WEST side of O'Hare
As for rerouting to Ohare transfer... NOT a good idea. One there is no connections between the CP and the CN ( north of O'hare) that would make it work, 2 that would legnthen the trip MKE-CHI to well over 2 hours, which is unacceptable, especially considering the return on investment in terms of additional ridership. And to route the train A5-B17-joint Track-Shermer-Techny Jct / A-20 would, A add even MORE time to the run, b) require the approval of the Union Pacific ( and make the UP a host road on this route as they control and dispatch the joint track) and require an entirely new depot on the WEST side of O'Hare
Conductors Portable calling the Head End of Amtrak 7, we have a green on the starting system, America's train can Depart Chicago on signal indication, lets go to channel 44
While I think the attitude behind the change is "el-sucko", the result is no-harm, no-foul. We're talking about the suburbs here, where everybody drives their (insert mid-large foreign model here) to the train rather than walking or taking CTA. Moving a station a few miles isn't going to change much.
The new Acela: It's not Aveliable.
AMTK1007 wrote:Everyone seems to get hung up on the idea I have (partially because I always forget to add crucial details) for O'Hare. I'm not talking about using solely existing track, which would necessarily go around the west side of the airport. The routing would simply follow the Metra NCS to Deval, where a new connection would be built (there's room for it) to the UP tracks. So you would only be adding about 15-20 minutes to the existing trip time, maybe half an hour. However, that could be offset by upgrading large chunks of the line for 110 MPH passenger trains. One option is to add a 3rd track in the UP section in order to offset the added traffic.
As for rerouting to Ohare transfer... NOT a good idea. One there is no connections between the CP and the CN ( north of O'hare) that would make it work, 2 that would legnthen the trip MKE-CHI to well over 2 hours, which is unacceptable, especially considering the return on investment in terms of additional ridership. And to route the train A5-B17-joint Track-Shermer-Techny Jct / A-20 would, A add even MORE time to the run, b) require the approval of the Union Pacific ( and make the UP a host road on this route as they control and dispatch the joint track) and require an entirely new depot on the WEST side of O'Hare
Ridership gains from Deerfield (assuming the stop were relocated there)-O'Hare section of the route justify the shift. Metra has been talking about trying to connect the North suburbs with the Rosemont/O'Hare area for years, and this would be a cheap way of doing so. Another option, however, would be to add several new frequencies. One idea would be to have 16 daily round-trips (which is doable if they keep the existing cars in service after the new Talgo cars enter into service), with 6-8 using the existing routing, and the rest using the NCS-UP-CP routing (after the connection at Deval that I mentioned is completed).
I'm Batman!
Batman2 wrote:Everyone seems to get hung up on the idea I have (partially because I always forget to add crucial details) for O'Hare. One idea would be to have 16 daily round-trips (which is doable if they keep the existing cars in service after the new Talgo cars enter into service), with 6-8 using the existing routing, and the rest using the NCS-UP-CP routing (after the connection at Deval that I mentioned is completed).Let's get serious, are most passengers riding Amtrak trains in from Wisconsin wishing to get to Ohare? I don't think so.
I think your idea is terrible. If Metra wants to do this, that is okay with me. But I think it's a major mistake for Amtrak to fund this...
electricron wrote:Thank you for your claim, I look forward to an explanation of why it's true at some point in the near future.
Let's get serious, are most passengers riding Amtrak trains in from Wisconsin wishing to get to Ohare? I don't think so.
I think your idea is terrible. If Metra wants to do this, that is okay with me. But I think it's a major mistake for Amtrak to fund this...
In defense of the idea, Amtrak should seek a code-share with one of the major airlines with hubs at O'Hare (United or American) to operate trains to Milwaukee; this would save those airlines the expense of having to fly regional jets from O'Hare to Milwaukee (which is actually the status quo!). Since both of those airlines have regional jets using a different terminal from mainline flights, the time lost to take the People Mover to the O'Hare transfer station is only marginally extra (maybe we add 5-10 minutes for the layover). Currently the Hiawatha trains take just about one hour to get from Glenview (the current stop) to Milwaukee (downtown station, not airport). In comparison, the O'Hare-MKE flights take about 40 minutes, since most of the time is spent either speeding up or slowing down, and they cost something like $150-250 for a round-trip.
Compare that to saving at least $100 (and that's with a $25 one-way fare - $4 more than the current Glenview-Milwaukee downtown fare, so it's reasonable in the current pricing system) in exchange for losing something like 20-30 minutes.
I'm Batman!
Batman2 wrote: In defense of the idea, Amtrak should seek a code-share with one of the major airlines with hubs at O'Hare (United or American) to operate trains to Milwaukee; this would save those airlines the expense of having to fly regional jets from O'Hare to Milwaukee (which is actually the status quo!). Since both of those airlines have regional jets using a different terminal from mainline flights, the time lost to take the People Mover to the O'Hare transfer station is only marginally extra (maybe we add 5-10 minutes for the layover).All of American flights operate out of terminal 3 at O'Hare. United's main terminal, terminal one, has several regional jets arrivals and departures. Also you would need far more than a 5-10 minutes extra. When flying, even if you had to change terminals, you do not exit the secure area. Your plan would have passengers not only taking a 3 mile or so long people mover ride, but they would have to go through security. They would need at least an hour planned for that.
Having worked thses trains in the past, i can tell you with some degree of certainty that the additional time going out to O'hare would add, even if it is , as you claim only 20 minutes, will be UNACCEPTABLE to the majority of the travelers on this route.. if it is going to take 2 hours, why not go take mega-bus for 10 dollars? and your dream of 100 mile an hour trains is that, just a dream.
Conductors Portable calling the Head End of Amtrak 7, we have a green on the starting system, America's train can Depart Chicago on signal indication, lets go to channel 44
To my best recollection, the funding grant from the FTA (Federal Transit Administration - successor to UMTA Urban Mass Transit Administration) to build MKA (Milwaukee Airport) noted that ready access to KMKE (Mitchell Field) is that KORD (UNOTHATWON) congestion would be alleviated, and that the rail access along with less formality time would make Hiawatha/Mitchell time competitive with O Hare for Northern suburb travelers. Should a station at, say, Gurnee be established, this position would have even more credence.
In all likelihood, this also was a factor in Wisconsin's legislature to enact funding for the Hi's. States are not too interested in funding trains to take people OUT of their state. Further, whatever traffic is generated to MKA is likely a 'reverse move' as there is more MKE TO CHI traffic than v.v. as experienced air travelers like to "get on with it' earlier in the day than later. As the day wears on, air traffic performance has its way of deterioriating.
While I respect the thought that Mr. Batman gave to his proposal, I have to concur with Condr. 1007's thoughts.
Finally, the bad news is that I understand Midwest Express, a small airline that hubs at KMKE and once noted for superior in-flight service, is on "shaky' financial ground. While I understand that Northwest was going to take them over, now that NW is being taken over by Delta, who knows?
In all likelihood, this also was a factor in Wisconsin's legislature to enact funding for the Hi's. States are not too interested in funding trains to take people OUT of their state. Further, whatever traffic is generated to MKA is likely a 'reverse move' as there is more MKE TO CHI traffic than v.v. as experienced air travelers like to "get on with it' earlier in the day than later. As the day wears on, air traffic performance has its way of deterioriating.
While I respect the thought that Mr. Batman gave to his proposal, I have to concur with Condr. 1007's thoughts.
Finally, the bad news is that I understand Midwest Express, a small airline that hubs at KMKE and once noted for superior in-flight service, is on "shaky' financial ground. While I understand that Northwest was going to take them over, now that NW is being taken over by Delta, who knows?
To further Mr. Norman's post.. Midwest ( formerly Midwest Express) is dead, having been acquired by indiananpolis based Republic Airliers ( the same outfit that acquired Frontier Airlines) and has returned the remaining Boeing 717's in the fleet to Boeing Capital. With no planes on the Operating certificate the certificate would have to be surrendered ( unless they have put some of frontier or republic's planes on the certificate, but I doubt it). As for the patronage at MKE, MKA has been a boon for those residents living on the South Side of Milwaukee, and the Southwest Suburbs, in that they no longer drive to Sturtevant. MKA does inded have patronage going to the airport but I would say that at most that is 20 % of the business done at MKA, more like 10%.
and i also must say that i respect the thought put into the proposal to go to o'hare, but it is just unworkable.
and i also must say that i respect the thought put into the proposal to go to o'hare, but it is just unworkable.
Conductors Portable calling the Head End of Amtrak 7, we have a green on the starting system, America's train can Depart Chicago on signal indication, lets go to channel 44