Maybe he will kill Peotone Airport as well. The state already owns a ton of land down there, they should sell it off and capitalize on the high land values for farmland right now. They will probably make a profit if they sell it off in the next year or two.

I hope both are killed.

I'm from Moline so I've been following the Amtrak progress. Back in August contracts were signed for the final design of signaling upgrades on the last portion of the route. That design work should all be done now, all that's left is to actually make the upgrades. Moline's Amtrak station is done I believe. Work at an Aurora rail yard should be done. It'd make little sense to kill that project at the 95% point, so I hope not.

Unlike a new interstate to be bulldozed through farmland, this Amtrak route runs entirely on existing track.

Quad Cities Amtrak has $200 Million in Federal money set aside. And some of the work is underway at Eola Yards in Aurora.

...or they could try to expand the Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie.

I thought that at 1st too, did not think it was that close together though.

Why is it vital to kill Peotone Airport? Do we honestly think we are the last generation, that the region's population (and air travel needs) will never expand beyond what they are today?

Let the state continue to bank land, and then lease it out for farming. Fifty or 70 years from now, we might be grateful someone had some foresight. If by then we're no longer using airliners and airports, we haven't lost much and the land can be sold off or made into a prairie preserve.

I'm sure there are some valid public uses for that land eventually. If we are ever forced to gear up for a major war again, we would need large scale facilities for producing ammunition (a la the original Joliet Arsenal). It could also be a good site for agricultural and scientific research like Fermilab, or for new power generation away from populated areas.

It's pretty clear to me that most regional travel is better done on a robust rail network with high speed, etc rather than in the air... Uses less energy, much smaller carbon footprint, direct access to city centers, etc. Building such a network would take significant strain off our airports, which are already colossal compared to their European counterparts.

I would prefer reinvigorating the old industrial footprint around Gary airport before burning up useful agricultural land for expanded air capacity.

Heck, even though it's politically unfeasible and cost prohibitive, moderate expansion of Midway's footprint South, East, North and partially West to the rail right of ways would unlock enough land to allow parallel runways for simultaneous take offs and landings.

I just think it's better to maximize existing transportation assets first, before building far flung new assets.

^ Honestly, so much of the metro Chicago's economy is oriented towards the north & west that I highly doubt a south suburban airport will get much use.

What is the point of Peotone? Is it really there to increase air capacity in the Chicago area, or is it just a political bone thrown to south suburban mayors and leaders? Because the way I see it, most of the power brokers in the Chicago area will not travel that far south to use an airport.

I had to pick up my brother in law from Midway airport yesterday and it was such a long and painful journey, imagine how time consuming and difficult a trip to Peotone would be.

I agree TUP, And that includes the future of Gary. If anyone reads the consultants report on Gary it points out that the prospect are very dim for it to ever become a pax port. Both Gary and Peotone are positioning themselves as cargo ports to relieve Ohare.

But Rockford may be in a better position to capture more cargo from Ohare. It is in the pathway of growth and has unencumbered boundaries. And is close to the massive inter-modal yards at Rochelle and not too far from the 2 in Joliet. Infrastructure includes a 10,000 ft runway and it cradles I-35 and I-90.

Gary is 28 miles from the Loop, Peotone is 43 miles. Neither airport is in a location that generates much air travel, between the lack of wealthy residential areas and the lack of large office clustering.

Even if we are discounting the possibility of a third passenger airport, though, Gary is still better sited than Peotone or Rockford for cargo operations, with direct access to I-80, I-90, and I-65. Cline Avenue is basically an airport access expressway.

Is either spot really a good place for air cargo, though? A lot of air shipments are high-value, time-sensitive goods that are headed to specialty manufacturers and resellers - these tend to cluster around O'Hare to some extent.

Garcia floats sales tax for CTA improvements
 

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...a-improvements

January 16, 2015 Greg Hinz on Politics

Mayoral hopeful Jesus "Chuy" Garcia today floated the idea of imposing some sort of regional tax, perhaps a sales tax, to pay for capital improvements in the Chicago area's often creaky public transit system.

In an interview with Crain's editorial board, the Cook County commissioner was vague on key details but suggested that "a dedicated revenue stream" is needed if outlying neighborhoods are to have access to rapidly growing employment in downtown Chicago, which has added 63,000 jobs since 2010.....

A Smart way to meet Transit Needs: The CTA Gray Line
 

The first new service listed on Transit Future's "Vision Page" is the "South Lakefront Service": http://vision.transitfuture.org

Please come and be part of a discussion on the basis of that idea -- this coming Wednesday January 21st, at the Henry George School in Downtown Chicago: http://hgchicago.org/event/a-smart-w...ay-line/?insta Your Questions, Comments, and Input are needed and invited.

It is also a major part of Mayor Emanuel's Museum Campus Transportation Study: http://www.civicartworks.com/project...opular&phase=1

Please attend Wednesday's meeting if you can,

Thank You

Metra testing out new seat configurations for passengers
 

http://chicago.suntimes.com/news-chi...configurations

Posted: 01/16/2015, 03:50pm | Rosalind Rossi

Metra officials want to test out a new train seat configuration that would place about half of riders in a backward-facing position, feature higher seat backs and possibly include armrests and cup holders.

Sample train seats were on display in November at five Metra stations, and 1,014 customers filled out surveys about them. Responses were mixed.....

Cermak–McCormick Place Green Line station opening now delayed until March, I hear.

RTA supports Union Station Master Plan
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...panel=comments

January 19, 2015 11:11am

The recent coverage in your newspaper of problems such as water leaks at Union Station compel me to remind readers of the Regional Transportation Authority’s support of the work now underway to improve the station and the area around it.

However, we are also keenly aware of the need for quick action to assure the landmark station, envisioned by Daniel Burnham, meets the standards of today’s passengers......

— Kirk Dillard, Chairman of Regional Transportation Authority's Board of Directors

RTA report: Metra, Pace, CTA falling behind in funding for equipment
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...122-story.html

By Richard Wronski January 22,2015


Chicago's three transit agencies have fallen $3 billion further behind previous years in investing in new equipment and maintaining existing trains, buses and infrastructure, a new report by the Regional Transportation Authority said Thursday......

Chicago Sun-Times RTA: Chicago Mass Transit Needs $36B In Infrastructure Upgrades T
 

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/01/...-through-2025/

January 23, 2015 7:54 AM Bob Roberts

CHICAGO (CBS) – A Regional Transportation Authority analysis released Thursday has determined that the CTA, Metra and Pace face $36.4 billion in capital needs over the next 10 years.

The numbers astonished two suburban RTA board members. Director Blake Hobson said the number seems “staggeringly high” and director William Coulson called it “arbitrary.” RTA Chairman Kirk Dillard said it’s not, but said it matters little if the figures are “off a bit......”

Metra onboard ticket-purchase penalty hike delayed
 

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/story/27...y-hike-delayed

Posted: Jan 24, 2015 9:11 AM CST Updated: Jan 24, 2015 9:18 AM CST

CHICAGO (Associated Press) -
Metra will delay its plan to increase the onboard ticket-purchase penalty until mobile ticketing is available this year.

Officials announced Friday the fee was scheduled to increase to $5 from $3 Feb. 1. That's when other fare increases and fare-policy changes take effect. They will continue as planned.....

Its painful how little these officials "get it".

It's more painful how decades of deferred maintenance, some on the part of Metra's predecessor railroads, has put us in this position.

On the other hand, I think the suburbanites are right to be somewhat skeptical of the huge cost figure. That number no doubt includes a lot of projects that aren't absolutely necessary to keep running service. Just like with our bloated road network, full replacement and/or expansion is not always the best choice for a given piece of infrastructure.

We really need to look at Chicago's transit system in terms of international best practices and start making investment choices based on that analysis.

http://my.chicagotribune.com/#sectio.../p2p-82628652/

Online maps will outline Chicago-area's transportation woes, need for money

Jon Hilkevitch
GETTING AROUND

12:01 am, January 26, 2015

The site http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/mobility/explore,

Online maps will outline Chicago-area's transportation woes, need for money
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/h...25-column.html

Jon Hilkevitch January 26, 2015 12:01am

A website launching Monday will turn wonkish government data into interactive maps on the quality of bridges, roads and rail transportation across Cook and six other counties with the intention of rousing the public to push for costly upgrades and expansions.

The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning created the site because it contends that northeastern Illinois' deteriorating transportation network costs the area billions of dollars a year and that renewing and expanding it will require an unprecedented financial commitment.....

Sigh - the site is terrible. Pretty. But barely functional, and completely uninformative.

The really sad thing is that there is a ton of data on there, but it is used almost exclusively as window-dressing. For example, a "lite-brite" style map of walkability for the entire Chicago region? Kind of pretty. Completely useless.

The layout of the site also makes it prohibitively difficult to navigate and compare data from different areas. Just like the unfortunate transit future vision page.

Please, give me a PDF which I can scroll through and search! Maybe even print out, if it is good.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...128-story.html

They are rehabing Union Station. $12 million worth. Any repairs are nice but $12 Million won't do much imo

They do have a PDF if you read through the site.

One surprising thing on that PDF is that in the unscheduled future projects, they include "Brown Line Extension" with an estimated cost of just over $4 billion.

Ouch! Burn! You must mean I didn't read through the site! (why so snarky?)

Anyhow, what you provide is only a portion of the update that came out last October. True, it's the meat that we usually look for, but the actual site is culled from a variety of sources:

http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/mobility/explore/sources/

Which they do not summarize in a PDF, and is much more expansive than the capital project update.

For the Brown Line Extension: $4bn for 3 miles of subway from Kedzie to Jefferson Park, or $833M per kilometer. This falls between NY's Second Ave Subway and LA's Westside Extension, which is probably a fair estimate of the cost. Somewhat depends on the number of stations.

Wow, and to think I complained about the $300 million/km cost of underground subway in Toronto since it is so much more than the $150-$200 million in Montreal.

Yeah American costs are out of control. Nobody can really explain why fully,
but there's no single reason.

It wasn't meant to be snarky, Mr. Defensive, it was merely a statement of fact. :-)

If it really does estimate out to be that much, a large part of it is probably because it would be quite complex to create a subway portal in a fairly dense, active neighborhood and then join an active rail line in the center of the areas busiest expressway.

Unfortunately we're not out of the woods on this yet. Rauner lifted the freeze on IDOT projects after blowback from the roadbuilders, but it remains in effect for rail.

You've got to be kidding me.

Nope, see here:
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...pending-freeze

The good news is, as I understand it, IDOT was only unfrozen for existing contracts, so the Illiana is still frozen.

Is there any explanation for going full subway? Since looking at the route (assuming its going straight west to the blue line) elevated over Lawrence Ave would be fine except for the very last half mile due to two elevated rail tracks. Unless the cost of raising el track high enough over the lines pushes subway into being competitive.

And iirc the plans called for two stations, over Elston and Pulaski.

I don't understand how tunneling in Chicago can possibly be that expensive. It blows the mind, where does the money go exactly?

Existing contracts were always going to be left untouched (they are contracts, after all). The recent unfreezing was for the shovel-ready projects that were supposed to be let on January 30. In other words, business as usual. The argument was that road builders had already spent time preparing bids and committing resources for those projects before Rauner took office, so it would be unfair to pull the rug out from under them.

I'm not sure of the contractual status of IDOT's rail projects; they are usually a contract with the freight railroad in question rather than with a contractor directly. The railroad can perform work itself or subcontract to a construction company.

Into a giant hole in the ground...

Tunneling itself is only a portion of the cost. Laying track, installing signal equipment and drainage systems, etc is also very costly regardless of whether you are above or below ground. The cost of stations is also tremendous. Cut and cover is the more economical way to do stations, but it's very disruptive to businesses and residents, and may not be politically feasible if less-disruptive options exist (also might fail an EIS).

I lived at Lawrence & Kimball for 5 yrs (easy commute to the Loop), there is NO WAY the Businesses along Lawrence Ave. would go for any type of "L" structure; which would turn it into Lower Wacker Drive. And there is no other available ROW in the area; even a subway under Lawrence would probably have to be stacked (cut & cover - boring is too expensive) because of the narrow street width.

I don't see any reason to build new elevated lines in a gentrified city. Chicago hasn't taken its down like most cities, but they won't build new ones.

They certainly won't build anymore over streets (maybe), but both the Red and Orange Line extensions are proposed to be elevated for much of their lengths (the Orange maybe over Cicero Ave. approaching Ford City); parts of any Yellow Line extension also.

If constructed it would make a very interesting ride, on elevated tracks from the Loop to Western Ave., down to the surface with frequent grade crossings to Kedzie, down into a subway to reach the Kennedy Expy., and then up into the Expy. median (probably running all the way to O'Hare, providing it 2 CTA city access routes)

Any Brown Line extension should absolutely eliminate the grade crossings between Rockwell and Spaulding. Elevated structure makes the most sense. Build it in concrete with sound walls, it won't be any noisier than the ground-level tracks.

For Metra riders, fare increase depends on type of ticket, destination
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...130-story.html

By Richard Wronski and Meredith Rodriguez January 30, 2015 2:34pm


When Marlene Tillis bought her February Metra pass recently, she was surprised to find out how much the cost had jumped: an increase of $14.50 to $92.75 for a month's worth of rides.

That amounts to an 18.5 percent increase — more than the average of nearly 11 percent that Metra said the fares would rise when it approved the increase in November......

The combined cost of that and the subway would price it right out of existance; also I'm sure there was Federal funding involved, isn't there some rule about using a funded facility for some certain length of time? Also I don't think the locals would want a big wall (like the Red Line at Berwyn) in their back yard (NIMBY).

I'm doubtful that the Brown Line Extension will come to fruition in the near future, perhaps even in the long-term. It is certainly a worthy project, as it would provide a crosstown connection between the Red and Blue, and is the third highest ridership line in it's own right.

There are a few projects that are more important that will take up the CTAs efforts for the next 10-15 years; Red Line reconstruction, Red Line to 130th, Blue/Forest Park reconstruction, and Ashland BRT. The Yellow and Orange extensions should go through, as they are relatively cheap.

I wonder if CTA is still pursuing the Circle Line. Despite being in CMAP's list, it's duplicative of the Ashland BRT. I guess both projects are moving quite slowly, so who knows if either will happen.

It would be really nice if CTA could cut about half the bus stops from the system. Currently CTA uses 1/8 mile spacing, but cities like Seattle and LA are using 1/3-1/4 mile stop spacing. Reducing spacing would increase speeds, and more ridership at the remaining stops would justify more bus shelters.

I'd also like to see CTA introduce TSP on some of the wider streets, like Western, where it would be beneficial. Moving more stops to the far-side of the intersection would really speed things up.

I'd also like to see a move to all-door boarding with Ventra passes (a la San Fran), but I don't think that CTA would be fond of that idea.

Where are the Chicago-area construction projects in 2015?
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/h...mn.html#page=1

Jon Hilkevitch February 1, 2015 6:44pm

A boatload of transportation projects, including completion of the first phase of the Chicago Riverwalk extension, will be launched or resume in early 2015, regardless of whether an early spring is in the offing.

That's because in northeastern Illinois, construction season runs most of the year, put on hold only by "Chiberia"-like conditions or strikes involving lightning or labor unions.....

That would never work in Chicago, half the riders would sneak in through the back door behind someone else (I lived in Chicago for 58 yrs, lots of it spent on CTA -- I KNOW)

Re: Museum Campus Transportation Study
 

Anyone have any idea why the Analysis and Illustration Phases of Mayor Emanuel's MPC/CDOT "Museum Campus Transportation Study" were halted; the entire Study was supposed to have been completed by the end of December, it's months later now: http://www.civicartworks.com/project...opular&phase=1

There weren't THAT many submissions (less than 50) that the big group of quite knowledgeable people at MPC and CDOT couldn't get a handle on it in over 2 months (unless maybe they are stalling until after the Elections -- and that is certainly NOT right, the Public is entitled to that knowledge)