SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Transportation (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   CHICAGO: Transit Developments (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=101657)

Mr Downtown Jul 2, 2008 6:23 PM

Cycling is my primary mode of transport and recreation. I always laugh at the people who express concern about cycling in downtown Chicago. That's easy. It's the suburbs where none of the side streets go through and where drivers seem to feel you're taking something away from them personally by being on their multilane arterials.

emathias Jul 2, 2008 8:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alex1 (Post 3647260)
does the CTA no longer post ridership numbers for each individual bus route, rail line and stations?

performance metrics don't really mean s***. At least not compared to being able to view the old statistical breakdowns.

I recommend emailing ctahelp (at) transitchicago.com and also the FOIA officer, Terry Levin tlevin (at) transitchicago.com to request that they resume posting the detailed reports on their website. If enough of us contact them, they'll at least consider it.

nomarandlee Jul 3, 2008 6:06 AM

Chicago-Milwaukee commuter line
 
Quote:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel...,7697714.story

Time for Chicago-Milwaukee commuter line has come, employees, companies say

Wisconsin debates how to pay for $200 million proposal
By John Dobberstein | Special to the Chicago Tribune
10:46 PM CDT, July 2, 2008


The answer for marathon commuters such as Ver Steeg could be a proposed $200 million, 33-mile commuter rail system that would serve Kenosha, Racine and Milwaukee Counties and carry commuters from Chicago to Milwaukee and dozens of towns in between.


.......Proponents say connecting Milwaukee and Chicago by commuter rail would provide access to jobs, airports and entertainment venues in both cities, and boost housing and retail development along the route.

....But the train is stuck at the station because Wisconsin lawmakers can't agree on how to pay for it. It would cost about $11 million a year to operate and maintain the system, with fares covering less than half of that amount. The rail service would use existing track. Some federal money would be available to help build new stations, but not without local matching funds.......
..

ardecila Jul 3, 2008 6:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Downtown (Post 3647642)
I think it's interesting that a century ago Chicago could simply require the railroads to elevate their tracks through the city, at the railroads' expense. Partly that was because the railroads came after the city was established, and in many cases actually occupy city streets. Illinois law apparently has changed since then, generally making grade separations a joint expense of both railroad and road agency. And expectations have changed a lot.

Don't forget that most of the tracks in Chicago were grade-separated in an era before unionized labor and ridiculous costs for building materials. They were elevated on solid-fill embankments (only building material you need is dirt!) and the street overpasses used small amounts of stone/concrete and some short bridge girders that were probably made over in Gary.

Also, railroads were much smaller and more profitable back then. Since then, hundreds of small railroads either were abandoned or swallowed into a small handful of transcontinental mega-railroads, which today do not have the resources, the local commitment, or the organizational efficiency to oversee anything but the most essential building projects.

Besides, even around 1900, Chicago was one of the very few cities in the country that could afford to mandate grade-separation, because the city had already become the country's biggest rail hub, and placing a hardship on the railroads would merely make them grumble as they complied.

ardecila Jul 3, 2008 6:18 AM

By the way - Viva asked a few days ago about how much money is being awarded to Chicago under the recently-passed Saving Energy through Public Transportation Act. A little blurb in "Inside Chicago" says that Rahm Emanuel has promised Chicago $88 million over the next two years to expand transit service and frequency.

Taft Jul 3, 2008 4:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 3650493)
By the way - Viva asked a few days ago about how much money is being awarded to Chicago under the recently-passed Saving Energy through Public Transportation Act. A little blurb in "Inside Chicago" says that Rahm Emanuel has promised Chicago $88 million over the next two years to expand transit service and frequency.

That sound you hear faintly--in the distance--is this drop falling the in the massive and empty bucket for transit financing in Illinois.

Every little bit helps, I guess. But this is a big goal for such a little amount of money.

Taft

ardecila Jul 4, 2008 12:32 AM

You do realize that the transit systems' financial problems are caused at the state level and not the national? This is the first time ever that the federal government has provided money for day-to-day transit operations. Usually, they just fund expansion or renovation projects.

Unfortunately much of what ails the L system is not a problem with service levels, but a problem with reliability and speed, as well as frequent downtime. However, Metra, Pace, and CTA buses would indeed get greater ridership with more buses and trains.

VivaLFuego Jul 4, 2008 6:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ardecila (Post 3652190)
This is the first time ever that the federal government has provided money for day-to-day transit operations.

This line has been repeated ad nauseum in all the press materials regarding this latest transit bill, but it's just not true. Not only is it not true, but it's not even particularly ancient history. Federal operating subsidies were provided in varying degrees to varying agencies from the 70s-90s. In fact, I'm fairly certain CTA received federal operating subsidies all the way until the early 90s when they were gradually phased out nationwide during the Clinton administration (major service cuts to balance the budget in 1997 were related to this subsidy phase-out).

in re: this $88 million, it's still very worthwhile. Ideally, it will result in:

1. Allow CTA to push back a fare increase for another year, and if lucky with a few bucks leftover to run some extra peak period service on the most crushed routes.
2. Allow (force?) Metra to actually provide the extra off-peak service they were supposed to after the recent state funding bill, but backed out on because of 'fuel costs'.

Chicago Shawn Jul 9, 2008 3:12 PM

Came across this video. Remember when Ald. Fioretti voted no on the real estate transfer tax increase for CTA pensions? Well, someone captured Daley's response on video, its hilarious....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ashM23pslk

jpIllInoIs Jul 10, 2008 12:45 AM

Gary Transit station
 
PUBLIC HEARING ON GATEWAY STATION PROPOSAL

http://www.nictd.com/info/delays.htm#Gateway

The Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) will hold a public hearing to gather comments on a proposed plan developed by Gateway Partners, LLC in cooperation with the City of Gary to consolidate Miller and Gary Metro Center stations into a new Gateway Station to be located at 4th and Broadway in downtown Gary.

The plan calls for the construction of a temporary station approximately 5-6 blocks west of the current Gary Metro Center while the new Gateway Station is constructed. Once the new facility is open, the plan calls for Miller Station to be closed. To learn more about the project click here. http://indianagateway.com/

The public hearing will be held on July 8, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. at Christ Baptist Church, 4700 East 7th Avenue, Gary. The general public may comment in person at the public hearing or mail their comments to the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District, 33 East U.S. Highway 12, Chesterton, Indiana 46304. Comments must be received by NICTD on or before July 18, 2008.

Busy Bee Jul 10, 2008 1:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicago Shawn (Post 3662212)
Came across this video. Remember when Ald. Fioretti voted no on the real estate transfer tax increase for CTA pensions? Well, someone captured Daley's response on video, its hilarious....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ashM23pslk

Wow, the people who commented on this clip sure do hate Daley.

aaron38 Jul 10, 2008 2:27 AM

That video rocks, and Daley is spot on.

ardecila Jul 10, 2008 6:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpIllInoIs (Post 3663503)
PUBLIC HEARING ON GATEWAY STATION PROPOSAL

http://www.nictd.com/info/delays.htm#Gateway

The Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) will hold a public hearing to gather comments on a proposed plan developed by Gateway Partners, LLC in cooperation with the City of Gary to consolidate Miller and Gary Metro Center stations into a new Gateway Station to be located at 4th and Broadway in downtown Gary.

The plan calls for the construction of a temporary station approximately 5-6 blocks west of the current Gary Metro Center while the new Gateway Station is constructed. Once the new facility is open, the plan calls for Miller Station to be closed. To learn more about the project click here. http://indianagateway.com/

The public hearing will be held on July 8, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. at Christ Baptist Church, 4700 East 7th Avenue, Gary. The general public may comment in person at the public hearing or mail their comments to the Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District, 33 East U.S. Highway 12, Chesterton, Indiana 46304. Comments must be received by NICTD on or before July 18, 2008.

I like the concept a lot. The architecture of the station leaves a lot to be desired, but obviously the budget is small, and the design is at least visually-interesting. The amenities in the station, though, are very nice - it puts almost all of Metra's stations to shame, and it has more parking to boot.

However, I'm not sure this station is the panacea for Gary's problems that everybody wants. The station sits right next to the Skyway, so travelers can come off the onramp and drive 1 block into the parking garage, without patronizing any Gary businesses besides the ones in the station. Adding more and safer parking may entice more riders to board at Gary, but I don't think it will do much for the rest of the city.

Mr Downtown Jul 10, 2008 5:01 PM

This seems like an attempt to force Miller residents to visit downtown Gary twice a day, whether they want to or not. Miller handles almost as many weekday riders (504) as Gary (614).

aaron38 Jul 11, 2008 1:41 PM

Blagojevich pulls funds meant for mandate on seniors
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=217048&src=109
Quote:

Another sucker punch from Springfield has transit agencies scratching their heads.
Gov. Rod Blagojevich threw a curve ball at lawmakers by adding a proviso that senior citizens must ride free. Although considered an unfunded mandate, the new policy was swallowed by the three agencies as a necessary evil that allowed the funding reprieve to happen.
But Wednesday, Blagojevich pulled the plug on $37 million that had been allocated to the Regional Transportation Authority to partially reimburse the agencies for offering reduced-fare rides to seniors, students and people with disabilities.
Yea, our transit gets screwed over once again.

the urban politician Jul 11, 2008 2:27 PM

^ ???????

Impeach that bastard

k1052 Jul 11, 2008 3:27 PM

It's no wonder why the legislature trusts Blagojevich less than the shadiest used car dealer you've ever met.

OhioGuy Jul 11, 2008 3:36 PM

I don't necessarily want to stand up for the governor, but didn't the legislature force him into making cuts? I thought they were giving him a budget that the state couldn't afford, basically to force him into making cuts himself so that he ends up being the bad guy in all of this? I know Michael Madigan actually implied that lawmakers don't need to worry about producing a budget in which expenses equal revenues. He seems to believe it's their job to approve all of these expenses and then force the governor to come up with the money to pay for them or make cuts. And didn't Blago & Senate Democrats want to do something about expanding riverboat casinos & leasing the state lottery to raise revenues, but Madigan has worked against that in the House? Madigan is basically just setting up the governor to make him look even worse. That's not to say I'm a Blago fan because I'm not. I'm still pissed that he forced the RTA into allowing seniors to ride transit for free. I'd prefer he not make cuts that affect transit, but it seems he's being forced into making cuts in many different areas. Though I think he still found room to keep the cost of living pay increase for the legislature which I don't like. But I still think Madigan is as big of a problem as Blago is in all of this.

Taft Jul 11, 2008 3:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aaron38 (Post 3666861)
Blagojevich pulls funds meant for mandate on seniors
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=217048&src=109


Yea, our transit gets screwed over once again.

:hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell:

I don't usually use those smiley things, but I think this deserves it.

What a jerk! I understand we are in the midst of a political pissing contest over the budget. But to use this particular issue as a bargaining chip is political arrogance at its worst. Did he really think we wouldn't notice that he is cutting funding for a mandate he forced into legislation?

Taft

Taft Jul 11, 2008 3:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OhioGuy (Post 3667075)
I don't necessarily want to stand up for the governor, but didn't the legislature force him into making cuts? I thought they were giving him a budget that the state couldn't afford, basically to force him into making cuts himself so that he ends up being the bad guy in all of this? I know Michael Madigan actually implied that lawmakers don't need to worry about producing a budget in which expenses equal revenues. He seems to believe it's their job to approve all of these expenses and then force the governor to come up with the money to pay for them or make cuts. And didn't Blago & Senate Democrats want to do something about expanding riverboat casinos & leasing the state lottery to raise revenues, but Madigan has worked against that in the House? Madigan is basically just setting up the governor to make him look even worse. That's not to say I'm a Blago fan because I'm not. I'm still pissed that he forced the RTA into allowing seniors to ride transit for free. But I also think Madigan is as big of a problem as Blago is in all of this.

Oh, Madigan is a *huge* problem, don't get me wrong. So is Emil Jones, IMO. Both prime examples of Illinois Democratic politics at its worst.

But the specifics of Blago's cuts make me think he has no respect for the intelligence of the voters. Sure, he needs to "fight back" against Madigan's slimy positioning, but to rip funding away from his own mandates (which are still in effect, BTW) is just stupid.

Taft


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:41 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.