The city is studying the possibility of building a transit line that would connect the commuter rail stations on the Near West Side with the commercial and residential areas of North Michigan Avenue and Streeterville on the Near North Side.
The so-called riverbank line, aimed at heading off the gridlock that could accompany the massive real estate development planned along its proposed route, would be able to take a rider from Union Station to the vicinity of North Michigan and Chicago Avenues in 10 minutes, officials said.
Moreover, preliminary financial projections indicate the line could be operated at a profit, with the alluring prospect that no public funds would be needed to build it.
”Since federal money is not as available as it used to be, we would prefer to use some innovative financing method to get this project off the ground,” said Christopher Kreuger, director of project development in the city Department of Public Works.
Kreuger emphasized that the new transit line is only in the study stage and that no official decision has been made to build it.
”I do not want to give the impression that the city has jumped on the bandwagon on this thing yet,” he said.
The idea of a riverbank rail line is nothing new. For years, in fact, city planners have sought a convenient way to get commuters from the train stations to North Michigan Avenue.
One of the more auspicious proposals was made during Mayor Jane Byrne`s administration. That $80 million plan, the brainchild of Chicago architect Harry Weese, proposed a transit line from the Pilsen neighborhood to Navy Pier, stopping at the train stations and running along the river. Like others, however, it never got beyond the planning stages because of its cost.
The new plan might resolve that problem. And sources said the public works department is expected to forward data to a committee of senior city officials within the next two weeks that will make a strong case for constructing the line. It will be up to the committee to decide whether to pursue development as official city policy.
The line would roughly parallel the Chicago River for much of its 2-mile run. Starting at Union Station and heading north past the Chicago & North Western Station, it would turn east until it neared the vicinity of Hubbard Street and Fairbanks Court, where it would swing north, ending at Chicago Avenue.
As envisioned, much of the route would be on an old and little-known thoroughfare called Carroll Avenue, a street on the river`s north bank that runs under such structures as the Merchandise Mart and Marina City.
Carroll is used largely for deliveries to buildings that border it, Kreuger said. Most of the street is owned by the city, though several segments are in private hands and would have to be acquired.
The northernmost leg would run in a special reserved lane on an existing street, such as Fairbanks Court, near Michigan Avenue.
Public works officials say the line could be operated either with buses or trolley-like trains of one or two cars each.
Developing the riverbank line as a bus way would cost about $29 million, Kreuger said. As a rail line, the price would be about $70 million. Both figures include the purchase of necessary rolling stock.
Despite the higher construction cost for rail, there are certain advantages, Kreuger said. One train operator could carry as many passengers as several bus drivers, resulting in manpower savings. Electric trains also produce no air pollution, have much longer useful lives than buses and enjoy a better image with commuters than buses, he said.
City projections indicate that a riverbank line would attract 10,000 daily riders at first, about 25,000 within 10 years and roughly 45,000 within 30 years. CTA buses now transport commuters to and from the stations and various downtown locations.
City researchers say a number of approaches could be considered to finance construction. Pressure to trim the federal budget means that the U.S. government–historically the main benefactor of such transit projects–is an unlikely source of money.
But a special taxing district is seen as a viable option, with property owners whose buildings would benefit from the improved transportation footing the bill.
Under another possible approach that interests those who have worked on the city study, a private developer would pay for and operate the line. Bombardier Inc., a Canadian firm, has expressed interest as a possible participant in a rail version of the riverbank venture, Kreuger said.
Financial projections indicate the line could make money after the first few years of operation, a key factor in a private company`s undertaking the project.
Taken together, the Chicago Transit Authority, the commuter rail system and the suburban bus system cover only about half their operating costs from fare revenues. The deficits must be made up by public subsidies.
But economics are on the side of the riverbank line, researchers say, because of its short length and high ridership and the fact that it would operate only during the daytime hours, when demand is heaviest.
The city`s financial projections assume a fare of 65 cents; transfers from other transit lines would not be honored.
Streets in the area north of the Chicago river, in particular North Michigan Avenue, have become clogged with traffic because of development.
Darwin Stewart, a CTA planner, said developers are planning even more construction in the area, on the assumption that transportation will be adequate.
”What the developers tend to overlook is the fact that in the morning and evening peaks, Michigan Avenue is at capacity for buses,” Stewart said. About 100 CTA vehicles an hour ply North Michigan during morning and evening rush hours, he said.
A bus trip between Union Station and North Michigan and Chicago Avenues is scheduled for 20 minutes in the evening rush, but the trip sometimes takes longer when traffic conditions are poor, CTA officials say.
The Greater North Michigan Avenue Association estimates that $11 billion worth of commercial, residential and institutional construction has taken place on and near the ”Magnificent Mile” since 1961. An additional $6 billion is projected by 1990.
”The main single issue that will determine continued growth is mass transportation or lack of it,” said G. Bishop Gallagher, the association`s president. The riverbank line ”is a much-needed system,” he said.
”So much development downtown was based on anticipation of transit linkages,” said Tom Cokins, executive director of the Chicago Central Area Committee and another supporter of a new riverbank line. ”Circulation and development should go hand in hand.”
