|
Emanuel names Claypool new CTA president
Chicago Tribune
April 19, 2011 http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/...president.html Quote:
|
Quote:
Klein represents a major shift from Daley's typical transportation chiefs, who were part of a revolving door between a small handful of big road-engineering firms around town. As you might expect, none of them ever showed much sensitivity to proper urban design, other than the bike lanes and the token streetscaping that Daley himself pushed for. Outside of that, there was always an odd disconnect between the big-ticket projects downtown that showed some level of sensitivity to pedestrian concerns, and the boneheaded decisions in the rest of the city (like in Uptown, where Broadway was widened and sidewalks narrowed right in front of a massive redevelopment with a Target and hundreds of units of new housing, one block from an L station). We couldn't get Janette Sadik-Khan, but we got the next best thing. Hopefully Klein will push for some of the major projects currently in the study phase (like the Bloomingdale Trail, the Polish Triangle at Ashland/Division/Milwaukee, and the West Lakeview intersection of Belmont/Ashland/Lincoln) to incorporate proper pedestrian and bike planning like the advanced thinking that's been shown in DC and NYC. I also expect a proper bike-sharing system to be implemented within 18 months. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
^^^^This is an example of roosters coming home to roost.
The land use patterns and consequently the density patterns in all but a very few Chicago suburbs make PT all but impossible to implement successfully....most development is far too sparse. Better to focus PT in areas where the underlying land use make its adoption amenable..ie certain inner ring burbs and the city itself. |
Finally, a realistic plan. I'd be happy to see some dedicated bus lanes and stations (not shoulders) pitched for the inevitable Addams Tollway rebuild that's coming up in a few years. Houston's bus lanes on US-290 are pretty cool. The buses have their own exit ramps to get to park-and-rides.
|
Finally a realistic plan for transit in the Northwest Tollway. Hopefully in the inevitable reconstruction/widening of the expressway we can get some dedicated bus lanes.
Mr. Downtown's plan (and illustration): http://www.chicagocarto.com/NWC.gif |
Quote:
|
Not to rain on anybody's parade, but I'm not sure the APTA "best transit agency" thing should be taken very seriously. In 2008 they gave the award to Richmond, VA. I don't know what their criteria are (maybe administrative/management as opposed to service?), but I promise that Richmond does not have the best transit agency in the state of Virginia, much less the continent.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4042/...6cb9dd7c_z.jpg |
I believe the award was given purely based on the CTA's innovative development, testing, and implementation of Bus Tracker and Train Tracker - not any other, more substantial measure of CTA's quality. If CTA was really America's best transit agency, then I shouldn't need a train tracker.
|
LaHood offers only wait-and-see for Chicago-area mass transit funding
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2...-cta-estimates
LaHood offers only wait-and-see for Chicago-area mass transit funding April 21, 2011|By Jon Hilkevitch, Rick Pearson and Patricia Callahan, TRIBUNE REPORTERS Chuck Berman, Chicago Tribune During a visit to Chicago on Thursday, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood offered no federal commitments to help rebuild or expand the region's deteriorating transit system. That was a marked contrast to his last visit to the area about a month ago, when he brought $155 million for the expansion of O'Hare International Airport, "We'll work with the folks at the CTA or Metra or whatever in terms of what their needs are. And if we can be helpful to them, we will be helpful to them," LaHood, a former Republican congressman from Peoria, told the Tribune's editorial board. But LaHood focused much of his message on the Obama administration's efforts to build a national network of high-speed passenger trains. He vowed that opposition from the Republican governors of Wisconsin, Ohio and Florida and Republicans in Congress will not derail the plan to spend $53 billion over six years to create routes that would eventually be within reach of 80 percent of the U.S. population. So far, $10.5 billion has been appropriated to more than 30 states, including about $1.4 billion to Illinois for the 110 mph Amtrak route between Chicago and St. Louis. Asked what he would do to help reduce travel times for train and bus commuters in the Chicago area, which suffers from the worst congestion in the nation, LaHood said increased federal investment in local transit systems will hinge on the outcome of the debt-reduction debate in Washington and whether Republicans and Democrats come together this year to pass new transportation spending legislation. LaHood made no commitment to fulfill Mayor-elect Rahm Emanuel's stated plan to line up federal funding in his first year in office to extend the south branch of the CTA Red Line from its current terminus at 95th Street another 5.5 miles to 130th Street. The project is estimated to cost more than $1.2 billion. Emanuel also set a high priority on modernizing antiquated CTA stations and old tracks on the North Side, which the CTA estimates would cost up to $4 billion. "We're always going to have money at DOT for airport expansion, for transit. We'll see what the mayor's vision is, and then we're going to see how it fits into our budget," LaHood said. |
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,2629398.story
chicagotribune.com Illinois to start tracking bicycle 'dooring' collisions By Jon Hilkevitch, Tribune reporter 5:09 PM CDT, April 24, 2011 Dangerous collisions caused by the doors of parked vehicles opening into the path of bicyclists will for the first time be counted as crashes in Illinois, under a change ordered by Gov. Pat Quinn. The new rules, which officials said will be announced Monday and take effect immediately, require police departments across the state to record "dooring'' accidents on Illinois traffic crash forms. The dooring data will be incorporated into annual traffic accident summaries compiled by the Illinois Department of Transportation. Officials described the policy shift as a starting point to help reduce dooring crashes, which can result in injuries and deaths. Quinn sought the change after reading a March 21 Chicago Tribune story. The article reported on a long-standing IDOT policy to exclude dooring crashes from annual state traffic accident statistics because the motor vehicles involved in such collisions are not moving. "Anyone who rides a bike can tell you that dooring is a serious issue," Quinn said. "One of the best ways we can increase public safety is by making sure we've got the best and most comprehensive data possible. That's why we've made this change." The Active Transportation Alliance, a safety advocacy group that represents bicyclists, had appealed to IDOT officials, without success, since last year to collect dooring data as a means to understand the extent of the problem. IDOT officials expressed concerns that such a requirement would burden police with additional paperwork and that there were few complaints from the public about doorings. "We were never against collecting the data. There was never really any large effort to make us aware that doorings could be an issue," IDOT spokesman Guy Tridgell said. Alliance officials said dooring accidents are common, basing the conclusion on reports from bicyclists. But without a standardized statewide reporting system, there has been no way to accurately quantify the problem or pinpoint locations where such accidents frequently occur and where modifications to street layouts would help, alliance officials said. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gotta say the knuckle dragging visigoths are out in force in the Trib's comment section over this article last I checked |
Hey! Don’t knock the Visigoths!
Some of those comments were pretty funny, though—an obvious case of reading comprehension classes not being so good back in the “good old days.” The knuckle-draggers have generated a fair amount of pushback, fortunately. My favorite comment said that all these doorings were happening because schools don’t teach traffic law anymore because they’re too busy teaching kids how to put on a condom. Crazy old conservative cootiness personified. Although these responses do make me wonder about how Emanuel’s (likely ambitious) bike plans will shake out, I think we can take some comfort in that a lot of these commenters probably live out in the ’burbs, and I don’t think we have quite the same power dynamics or physical issues that New York does, either. |
I don't recall this being put on this forum:
http://www.cnt.org/repository/NSNJ.pdf Almost half (49 percent) of Chicago’s population, 72 percent of its jobs and 66 percent of its businesses are located within a half-mile radius of a transit station, based on Local Employment Dynamics (LED) data from the 2000 U.S. Census and 2004 Bureau of Labor Statistics. --------------------------------------- If this is the case then why oh why is Chicago's boarding / route mile so low....I mean it is something like 1/3 of boston's and half Philly's....I think it is even less than LA's. NYC us something like 5 times ridership per route mile. How can Chicago and CTA get the ridership / route mile increased to say Philly or Boston's level.....and perhaps equally importantly does they want to? |
3 reasons.
1)some of those stations are Metra stations, which don't have frequent service. 2)a half-mile is pushing it for walking distance, especially given Chicago's brutal winters. Stations are spaced every half-mile so that the maximum walking distance is a quarter-mile (spare me the geometry lecture, i know about taxicab geometry, etc) 3)distance is not the only factor. the environment around train stations needs to be designed to encourage pedestrianism. people working in unsafe neighborhoods may feel uncomfortable walking 5 or 6 blocks to an L station, especially when they get off work at 6pm in, say, late october and it's already night. |
I wonder if it also has something to do with the amount of trackage and stations that are not in job or population dense areas. the high percentage of population/jobs/etc near transit seems like it must be disproportionately located in and around the loop and the north side L lines. i'd guess those lines probably have much more comparable ridership/route mile numbers to other cities. on the other hand, there are definitely station areas in other parts of the city that proportionally contribute a lot more to track mileage than to population and jobs (and by extension, ridership). wish i had the energy to actually do a more formal analysis of this, perhaps another time.
|
Quote:
|
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,3868843.story
chicagotribune.com Midwest bullet train network to cost $83.6 billion, study says But the potential benefits from a 220-mph system are far greater than those from a cheaper one, report adds By Jon Hilkevitch, Tribune reporter 8:34 PM CDT, April 27, 2011 A Midwest network of bullet trains that could travel at 220 mph and higher would cost $83.6 billion, but the benefits would be far greater than those from a less expensive system of trains topping out at 150 mph, according to a study to be released on Thursday. The study, commissioned by the Midwest High Speed Rail Association and Siemens Corp., argues that going slower than 220 mph makes little sense, both in terms of construction costs and the ability to deliver passengers to their destinations quickly. Building a passenger rail network topping out at 150 mph, which is still faster than the 110-mph maximum speed in the current high-speed rail plans for Illinois and nearby states, would cost $74.7 billion, according to the study, prepared by the Economic Development Research Group Inc. and AECOM, which designs transportation systems. The price tag for a 220-mph network might be out of reach, with some members of Congress trying to gut the Obama administration's plan to invest billions of taxpayer dollars in high-speed rail as a way to expand employment and the nation's transportation options. All of the plans for high-speed rail envision Chicago as the hub of a Midwestern network. The rail association's study recommends corridors to Minneapolis/St. Paul, St. Louis, Cincinnati and Detroit/Cleveland. Trains would operate at 220 mph on dedicated track with no grade crossings. Travel times would be three hours or less between Chicago and the farthest points of the network — up to 450 miles away — the study said. The cost of a 220-mph network versus a 150-mph one is 12 percent higher, but that would be offset by higher ridership and increased annual revenues, the study concluded. "The Midwest has been working on an upgrade plan for Amtrak services. But there should also be a plan beyond that — true high speed — in which rail becomes a game-changer," said Armin Kick, director of high-speed rail development at Siemens. "When you get trip times down to two or three hours, that allows for much more exchange between cities, and it becomes an economic driver. You really cannot achieve that with the plans being pursued now," Kick said. The Illinois Department of Transportation, prodded by the rail association, agreed to conduct a preliminary study on the feasibility of building a bullet train network. But IDOT has failed to get a grant from the Federal Railroad Administration for the study. IDOT officials did not address the findings of the rail association's study. But agency spokesman Josh Kauffman said ongoing construction on the 110-mph Chicago-to-St. Louis corridor "represents the beginnings of a system to connect the Midwest region," and that Gov. Pat Quinn supports "the longer-term vision of higher-speed trains where feasible." The association's study estimated 43 million riders a year from 13 cities and metro areas on the system, based on offering 25 daily departures on each of the corridors. User-generated revenue was estimated at more than $2.2 billion a year. The proposed 220-mph system would produce $13.8 billion in new business sales a year and 104,000 permanent new jobs when it is in full operation, the study estimated. |
Quote:
Not sure what you are asking? The article just got me thinking about why Chicago's L system has such a low ridership per route mile in comparison to other cities....despite it being the second most extensive network in the nation. Even the red line only gets about 10,500 riders per route mile and that is the most heavilys used line. What is it about Chicago or Chicagoans that make them use their rail system comparatively so sparingly? My guess is that it has to do with two primary drivers 1. The Loop centric nature of the hub-spoke model vs the more efficient dense network say of NYC and 2. Chicago's rather extensive bus network. Interestingly I have read article that indicate that the elasticity of demand for rail ridership is quite a bit larger than for bus ridership ie in response to a change in price of a substitute good say auto use via increased gas prices....rail demand increases at a quite a bit faster pace than demand for bus.....if I recall the differences in elasticity were approximately an order of magnitude. I think this was the article that referenced the elasticities: http://www.apta.com/resources/report...rease_2011.pdf |
Interesting Maps showing scaled distances to Chicago rail transit stations; could the distance to the rail station have an effect on ridership:
http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Ma...he-Chicago-El/ |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 9:23 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Prev