Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila
Elston and Clybourn bus routes would still have to crawl through the mighty traffic jams that plague the corridor. Plus, neither one would provide good service to Goose Island. Maybe the Elston bus, but even there, multiple pedestrian bridges would need to be built. Both streets are lined with auto-oriented development, which is unlikely to change anytime soon, and is not conducive to transit. To the extent that the North Branch develops walkable places, it will be in the areas directly along the river, and along the proposed route of the transitway.
|
Goose Island doesn't really figure in. It is still a PMD It has had its uses expanded, but it's pretty much expected to continue as it has. It also has limited need for transit access. There is no place on Goose Island you can't walk in 15 min. If required you could make the two routes cross over at Division and bring the walk to 7 1/2. But it's moot. All the action will be north of North or east of Halsted.
The transit needs are north from Ogilvie, and N/S from each of the two Clybourns. All of which would be adequately served by a couple of 2 1/2 mile bus routes ride over existing infrastructure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila
This is really not even close to "pie in the sky". It's eminently reasonable, and any other world-class city would probably be planning something even more ambitious. It's literally less than a mile of new roadway, built across vacant or low-intensity land, and two short river bridges, only one of which needs to be operable. The rest of the corridor uses existing streets that are fairly wide, from one property line to the other, that are lightly used
|
Other "world class" cities limit their property taxes by limiting the rate and have been able to take advantage increases in property value.
We limit our base levy's dollar value. We cannot take advantage of rising property values unless it rises by tearing down the old and building new in its place (or by playing the TIF game). We said that we will pay for no more services than we had in 1994, and cannot expect any more.
In addition, the CTA's mission is not to move as many people as possible. The CTA's mission is to stay afloat. Riders only pay half the cost of operations. The taxes that pay the other half are not matching funds, they are essentially fixed amount not related to ridership. To pay his own way, each new commuter will have to spend 200 retail dollars a day or sell $750,000 in real estate each year. Adding service expenses to serve passengers who only pay half those costs is a losing proposition. Their path to sustainability is to to shoehorn more riders into the current level of service or the same number of riders into a lower level of service.
Any money to create new bridges and roads to serve transit will have to come from federal sources. Unlikely in the current administration.
That is the definition of pie in the sky