Spain has much more powerful unions than the US, where are the savings coming from if not from labor?

For one, I don't think the governments there instituted "Buy Spain" requirements akin to the requirements here mandating that the vast preponderence of all labor and materials involved in the project be domestic. They could actually allow multinational consortia of engineers and construction managers to come in, i.e. leveraging comparative advantage, economies of scale, and so forth.

Also, as previously bemoaned in the thread, I doubt any country anywhere has as tedious and immense a mountain of bureaucratic red tape for government construction projects as happens here.

"powerful" and "greedy" aren't necessarily synonymous.

Also, all their health care costs are probably coming from a different line item, making direct cost [comparisons] difficult.

Finally, they've been in expansion mode for quite a while, and having continuous construction for a decade or more yields big cost savings in terms of reuse and training and learning to schedule and manage work. The head of their transit agency credits extremely good project managers for a lot of it, and seeing how some of the work on the Brown Line proceeded, I'd believe that the CTA's project management has a lot of room for improvement, or at least the rules around construction could be improved to enable enhanced scheduling.

For the Transit Oriented Development meetings I mentioned in a previous post, the north one on June 22nd was moved to a new location:

Skokie Village Hall
5127 Oakton Street
Skokie, IL 60077
6pm-8pm, June 22nd

^^ Too bad the Oakton Street station still isn't even close to beginning construction. People could ride the el and walk the short distance to downtown Skokie for this meeting.

^ So they choose to locate a meeting to discuss Transit-Oriented-Development in a location that has NO nearby connection to the rail system and is surrounded by parking?

HELLO? Did somebody have a brain hemorrhage or are they just attempting to be fashionably ironic?

The Clark/Lake elevated platform has flat screen monitors installed. Maybe one day you'll be able to see them from the street.

They may be more powerful, but they are less wasteful. Also, labor rates in Spain in general are far lower than in the United States. When the average income of a Spaniard is approximately half that of an American, then you can imagine how that would save money on labor.

Capitol Hill is buzzing with the news: just moments ago, a new transportation bill was released, and the Obama administration is pushing Congress to pass a funding plan quickly. Why the rush?

Transportation funding is running out.

But we can't afford to keep throwing money at transportation agencies unable to show progress on the issues that matter to us all: Affordable ways to get around; alternatives to congestion; reducing our oil dependency; protecting the climate; safe and vibrant communities and access to jobs.

Tell Congress: No new money without a real, sustainable plan.

The National Highway Trust Fund - which pays for road work, bike and pedestrian facilities and transit projects - will run out of money in August.

With funds drying up, the pressure to throw more money at our problems is growing. Some in Congress are poised to take money from other needs to prop up the trust fund, which comes from gas taxes. They would prefer to go on spending our tax dollars without a real plan. But more money with no strings attached is not the answer.

The U.S. hasn't had a vision for transportation policy in decades. We've been trying to build our way out of a congested and inefficient system with no accountability and no actual plan to link our roads, trains, buses, bikeways and pedestrian-friendly streets.

The result? Longer, more frustrating, less safe and increasingly expensive commutes for all of us.

But now we have an opportunity for change. We must ensure that our country's transportation investments strengthen our economy, our environment and our health.

Tell your representative we need real reform before we throw more money at our problems.

Don't let Congress make the same mistakes it's made in the past. We must fund transportation, and we must do it right this time.

Thank you for your support at this crucial moment.

Sincerely,

Ilana Preuss
Outreach and Field Director
Transportation for America

^ Did anyone by chance happen to go (or plan to go)?

^I am planning on going tonight, and will provide details later.

To continue the discussion from the O'Hare thread regarding the Kennedy corridor...

The point is really moot, isn't it, because ANY sort of highway improvement would be ridiculously expensive, and IDOT is not considering any such project in their long-term plans.

This could change, but I haven't even heard any plans or political will mentioned that would change the status quo. Nor have I heard any practical solutions pitched. A double-decker highway sounds great as a congestion relief tool, but try building one through a residential neighborhood. Area residents will scream bloody murder, and I don't think it could get through environmental review.

H+T index has a few new features

http://htaindex.cnt.org/mapping_tool.php?theme_menu=0

our system needs a massive overhaul in managing, planning, and infrastructure.

it seems as though they keep repairing these slow zones over and over again.

why does it seem like the cta is run by boobs?

.....Unrelated in same article about prospects for real estate upticks....

As for the commercial market, it won't be much good until 2017, the head analyst for commercial mortgages at Deutsche Bank Securities told Reuters news service. "We are currently in something which is comparable to what we saw in the 1990s and potentially worse," Richard Parkus said. He said commercial property values would fall by more than 50 percent from a 2007 peak.

The west loop doesn't need a 3rd separate train station in the form of the old post office (one that is even further out of position for a Monroe St. or Carroll Ave. circulator at that).

For the Blue Line subway anyway, they repaired the slow zones using "normal" repairs with the money they had, then they were able to get stimulus money to make more permanent reconstruction, which is why they're "re-repairing" those slow zones. Once they complete this round, for the subway at least, there shouldn't be more than minor repair work needed for slow zones for decades.

I generally agree, although if the Post Office were the Amtrak+new high speed service station, and they also rework tracks at Union Station to run more Metra routes through the station instead of terminating there (they wouldn't have to run both directions for the whole route at rush hour, just move to be held in yards outside of downtown), you could free up some space to do other things with, and greatly increase Metra capactiy and service to a wider part of downtown (imagine trains that stopped at Roosevelt and on the south side of Union Station and at Kinzie Station, instead of only at Union Station.)

For a circulator, the Post Office would just be one more stop on the line, and if it were primarily for Amtrak and/or high speed rail, being only a few blocks further from the core really wouldn't be any worse than Union Station for that sort of trip. It'd be worse for a commuter station, sure, but not for inter-city travel.


As with a lot of things, though, that woudl require some good, strongly coordinated planning, which Chicago isn't especially good at.

From the Trib:
CTA Service Cuts Loom

We're far from the only agency with this issue - seems like Obama ought to step in and provide 1 or 2 year operating subsidies to transit agencies until the economy picks up again.

I'd much prefer they just build the WLTC/Clinton St Subway and finally integrate CTA rail access with Metra/Amtrak/intercity bus services and the potential circulator(s).