From that article:

Oh my god yes.

I read some interesting stuff about the old Central Area Circulator... the trains only offered a speed advantage over buses if the stoplights were all synchronized, and back in 1990 there were only minimal computer tools available to figure out the right timings that would allow the trains to skip red lights... Lots of old school engineers with calculators and slide rules trying to crack the code.

I think on this go-around the engineering challenges may be simpler. I am eagerly awaiting the details of how this thing would operate... bus or streetcar? Mixed traffic or dedicated lanes? Yada yada...

How would the central area circulator do anything to alleviate congestion on the red, blue, and brown lines?

Exactly, these trains are crowded way before reaching the loop.

It wouldn't, not to any great extent anyway. But a) the Blue Line still has the capability to add trains, b) the Red Line will have the capacity to add trains if/when the Clark Junction flyover is built - that would be something like 20-30% increase in train frequency, and c) if the Red Line stations are expanded to support 10-cars you get a 25% boost from that.

Zotti, in the past, has alternately proposed routing Purple Lines into the subway, which would open up Loop slots for the Brown Line to run more trains in the mornings.

So the Circulator wouldn't solve those problems, but other parts of what they're looking to do would.

Funding, funding, funding!

From the Crain's article: "Mr. Emanuel's team clearly is interested. “We want to think big,” one insider says, “but we can't break the bank.”"

Both the Circulator and the Carroll Street Transitway died because of a lack of funding. In case our Mayor hasn't noticed yet, the bank has already been broken. The first pension supplemental payment ($250M?) to fund unfunded pension liability is due at the end of 2015. People will scream bloody murder about their property tax bills rising.

$900M in bonds were issued this year. http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...llion-in-bonds The bonds sold to underwriters - but prior-issued City bonds were seliing at 15 points below the price the recent bonds sold at. (Never give a sucker an even break.) The City got a sweetheart federal loan, not a grant, for building the Riverwalk improvements.

The Chicago bond rating was reduced to 4 tiny ticks above junk this year. The LaSalle/Central TIF project is so broke it could not give Hines the money last year to build the River Point plaza/park/Metra tunnel.

This plan will not come to fruition unless a funding source outside the City comes to the rescue. The Transportation Department bailed out the Riverwalk project. IMO, the Transportation Department would have to bail out the City again on this one.

Do you think that the city should stop giving TIF funds to developers that clearly don't need it in areas that clearly aren't blighted? I personally think the city needs to rethink a lot of its spending priorities. I do not have a great depth of knowledge or understanding on the city's budget but I wonder what types of things the city could do to right the ship at this point.

From a transportation standpoint, I think we absolutely need some kind of local dedicated source for capital dollars. I don't know if that's a sales tax, a special property tax levy, or something else... But the state is unreliable and the Feds have demonstrated time and again that funding transit expansion is not a high priority compared to Middle East wars and corporate subsidies. Funding transit in Chicago is an even lower priority still for the Feds in spite of the great potential for ridership here (just look at Dallas' ever-expanding, poorly used light rail system for proof).

Transit Future is hinting in this direction but I think the project list is not regional enough and preserves a city - suburb divide at the Cook County line that will ultimately hurt the support for transit.

I am a fan of the TIF money being spent on a project in the specific TIF district and any surplus funds beyond the project also being spent within the confines of the specific TIF district. I have no preference on what purpose the excess funds should be spent on.

Those taxpayers who pay money in the TIF district should benefit from the expenditure of the TIF money they paid in taxes. They should benefit more than the taxpayers who live outside the TIF district and did not contribute the tax funds which are being spent.

IMO, the fact that the TIF increment is siphoned off to the City of Chicago rather than distributed to the County, Forest Preserve, Chicago Park, CBOE, City Colleges and MWRD is a different issue than where the funds should be spent. As long as the expenditure is in the TIF district, it's a matter of politics what purpose the funds generated by the TIF should be spent on.

I admit there are differing opinions on this. But, you asked me for my opinion and you now you have it.

The way to right the ship is to spend no more money on current operations than will be coming in from current collections. As capital improvements become necessary, they should be funded by bonds sold after referendum approval (with a few exceptions for true emergencies) with a level repayment rate. In other words, bonds should not be backloaded. Backloading bonds is a convenient way to kick the can down the road for a later administration to deal with. And, the big payment in the last year or two causes the later administration to play the same game selling new bonds, backloading the bond repayments and, thus, causing headaches for an even later administration. Even if the taxpayers realized who caused by the problems, with backloaded bonds those politicians will not be around to hear the complaints.

Here's what the 1989 proposal looked like:

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/196/4...124_z.jpg?zz=1
First phase of circulator map by Metropolitan Planning Council

It was heavily tilted towards getting suburbanites from the commuter train stations to the then-booming Near North Side. Remember that in 1989-1990, the towers at 676, 700, and 900 North Michigan all opened one right after another; Navy Pier's renovation under MPEA's authority had just begun; and NBC Tower was the first tower in what was then an empty post-industrial expanse between Trib Tower and Navy Pier.

Not quite: this 1997 article by Joravsky offers a fairly quick accounting of how the Circulator died. The city came up with the local share of funding by launching a new downtown property tax district, which apparently is still on the books and can be restarted at will. What stopped it was concerted opposition at the state and federal levels, which stopped the chance to match the funds.

The state doesn't have money, sure, but the feds now have a dedicated Urban Circulator pot of money. The route, as described by Hinz, would bring rail transit to the Canal/Roosevelt area that many people on this forum complain about -- and thus could also tap into five TIF districts.

All that said, the Riverbank route still seems like a solution looking for a problem. There's nothing it does that express buses, using the CLBRT route or Lower Wacker, could not do just as well (or better).

Correct me if I am wrong but TIFs aren't a special tax added to anyone's bill. It is just money from your tax bill after certain areas of the bill are capped. So nobody is paying more in 1 are or another. If your area is capped and the tax base goes up then yes your area is contributing more to the TIF but is not paying more because of the TIF. TIFs are a joke in my opinion and are just a slush fund for the politicians, had those taxes not been capped and the funds gone to where they were supposed to, schools, police and other things would not have the shortages they do now.

Ok, put that way I agree with you about using TIF as a way to prevent a siphoning of tax dollars to other taxing bodies outside the city. Personally, I think it would be best for the city as a whole, if there were a way to prevent tax dollars from being siphoned but still be able to use the tax dollars in areas of the city that actually need it. I seriously doubt Hines needed a tax payer funded subsidy. Maybe there needs to be more flexibility in using the funds.

You are right TIF is basically as, I understand it, a loan against future tax revenue, its suppose to be meant for blighted areas.

TIFs, as used in Chicago, are not loans but cash accounts. Developers can obtain TIF-funded grants from the city, and the city can expend TIF money to build train stations and pay the federally-required local match for Divvy bike-share stations.

All TIF districts in Chicago had a combined balance of $1.7 billion as of January 1, 2014. You can read all about it in Civic Lab's 2013 TIF analysis.

I guess that goes to show the danger of designing a transit system for the needs of people "now". It's a little bit like playing neighborhood Darwinism.

I've been torn between a simple system that would move people between the 2 train stations, museum campus, grant park, and navy pier; and something even less specific... just a system of longitudinal and latitudinal lines that would make it faster to move across town in one direction. That was kind of the dream of BRT but we can't stop dialing back our implementation of that.

You can fix a lot of our budget "shortfalls" with 1.7 billion.

Let me take this back to transit since this is the transit thread. I do like how many public tran projects , especially new stations have been built because of TIF funding. Not so big on developers dipping into it though.

I posted this version a few weeks ago.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3356/...a5665b93_b.jpg

This one is ok. For contemporary needs, it'd be nice to have it take Canal all the way to Cermak and then go east to McCormick. Maybe eventually south to Pershing. That would accomplish a lot:

1) Two routes to McCormick from the West Loop.
2) Connect the West Loop to the Chinatown area, enabling more tech incubator/startup type space in the old industrial buildings between 18th and Cermak along Canal and the river - those buildings at Cermak and Lumber would really benefit and it could totally turn into something like Kendall Square in Cambridge, especially if you put an Orange Line station at Cermak.
3) Additional transit for far East Pilsen.
4) Big boost for those parking lot areas along Canal south of Roosevelt.

Sounds like a lack of funding killed the Circulator to me - whatever the reason for the funding drying up.

Interestingly, that was also true at the time. The rather curious combined alternatives analysis and draft EIS calculated that the average travel time for all trips within the central area, weighted according to the formula (1 x in-vehicle time + 2 x (walk access + wait time) was

Peak period Bus/TSM 27.6 min Full light rail system 27.7 min
Midday Bus/TSM 31.2 min Full light rail system 31.7 min

Didn't the money for that end up going to the Orange Line?

Isn't the main advantage of light rail higher capacity? What was the projected capacity of both?

No, Orange Line was already operating by 1993. Some of that money had come from the cancelled Crosstown Expressway.

Capacity was assumed to be the same in the calculations. You need more buses at certain times of day, but they can operate closer together. The downside of the oft-mentioned "bigger vehicle carrying more passengers" advantage for light rail is that the passengers end up waiting longer for the vehicle to arrive. Better to have 10 buses every hour than 3 LRVs. Even with fewer vehicles to staff, the total cost per rider was put at $0.58 for a bus/TSM system; $2.05 for a full light-rail system.

I guess CDOT has stealthily started a "Streeterville-River North Transit Study". This may be related to the Central Area Committee's push to restart the Central Area Connector. There's an open house tomorrow from 4-7pm at Loyola Water Tower.

If anyone is going to this Meeting, they should suggest some equipment types to the CDOT -- maybe something like these: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ981kav6TU They seem to be very flexible type vehicles, as they have doors on both sides,
and they can p/u power from overhead, or surface contact! This is what they should be using on Ashland Ave, instead of BRT.

Trains Downtown, and on Ashland could be the start of a new city-wide system.

Red Line Extension Would Have Served Jackie Robinson Park
 

Chicago's The Little Leauge Entry Williasport, PA World Series This Thursday, Aug. 14, 2014, Would Come From Jackie Robinson Park Which Would Be 10 Blocks Away From Planned Red Line Extension Stations At 103 St. or 111 St.

Even if we could ignore the enormous capital cost, and the higher operating costs of light rail, it would be even more problematic to install along Ashland. Anyone familiar with the experience in Houston would be reluctant to allow any left turns across the tracks. And any collisions with turning or crossing vehicles don't just cause hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage, they also shut down the line for an hour or more. Buses can just go around a disabled bus.

Relevance to anything? They're playing the games in Pennsylvania.

The real ideal situation would be to just man up and build a cut and cover subway under Ashland from at least Irving Park (could jog East to tie into a new Sheridan Red Line stop) down to at least the Orange Line. LRT is not going to work in Chicago because things simply get too gridlocked here. Regardless of crashes, idiots will just stop on the track and block it just like they currently do in every major intersection in the city. BRT can at least maneuver around such blockages and a subway obviously doesn't have to deal with that problem in any capacity.

Not BRT, but a step forward. I always thought CTA made a mistake cutting the X9 and X49 express buses... hopefully this will restore some of the speed.

Granted, transit signal priority has been a goal for CTA and Pace for years but nothing has ever happened... I'll believe it when I see it.

Well, apparently there's a dispute between RTA and CTA about the signal priority money. CTA wants to use some of the money to update old Chicago traffic signals so they can be prioritized; RTA says that's beyond the scope of the federal grant.

CTA efforts to reverse declining bus ridership are not being helped by the Regional Transportation Authority, which is holding back money related to the installation of special traffic signals that give buses green-light priority over other vehicles, CTA president Forrest Claypool said Wednesday.

In 2012, the RTA received a $36 million federal grant and $4 million in local money to implement traffic signal prioritization in Chicago and the suburbs to increase CTA and Pace bus speeds and help bus routes operate more efficiently.

So far, the CTA has received only about $2 million from the RTA, even though the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning released all the federal money to the RTA for distribution two years ago, Claypool said.

This year, the CTA received $1.6 million for final engineering on South Ashland, from 95th Street to Cermak Road; and on Western, from Howard to 79th streets, the CTA said. Those areas already have modern traffic signals that are able to communicate with the controller boxes for traffic signal prioritization as well as with modems on buses.

But the majority of traffic signals on Chicago’s street grid operate using older technology that is not compatible with traffic signal prioritization.

CTA officials have asked the RTA to allow some of the $40 million to be used to update traffic signals in order to speed up the rollout of traffic signal prioritization and free buses from the congestion knot that frequently occurs at busy intersections, CTA spokeswoman Tammy Chase said.

RTA officials said the federal grant can be used only for equipment directly involving traffic signal prioritization, not the replacement of old traffic signals.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...813-story.html

I hope the new lights include protected left turn phases... Hundreds of intersections across the city lacking this basic feature even when left turn lanes are present.

This is exactly why there should be just O N E Transit Agency, all this silly internecine squabbling like immature mentally challenged children.

^Under whose control? City—where most of the current riders are—or suburbs—where 72% of the tax revenue comes from? There's a reason we have a divided system with a balance of power, just as there's a reason we have two houses of Congress instead of one national assembly.

One agency, represented by people throughout the region.

^In what proportion? How many suburban reps, how many city reps?

Two houses of congress that have their thumbs and heads up their asses.

The Governor I guess, actually ANYBODY! There is no "balance of power", it's our Illinois Government F**King the Illinios Taxpayers.

Because what's happening now is Criminal (remember Brad O'Halloran, and ALL the other Metra, CTA, and RTA crooks who resigned) and should be Prosecuted.

Speaking of, I wonder if Alex Clifford has been able to wash all of the "Illinois Government Shit Smell" off of him (do people still hold their nose when he walks by -- through NO FAULT of his own) from swimming in our Illinois Government Cesspool?

It's easy to throw rocks at the transit board structure we have, but what would be a better one? Put it all under the governor's control? Just imagine what kind of harm a conservative Downstate Republican could do to the CTA.

I don't know % ridership?

How come other Urban Regions in the U.S. are able to function without our Silly @$$ed BullCrap -- and WHY do we have to suffer it??

And also -- they are wasting MY F *King MONEY (I pay Taxes) that I work VERY F *King HARD for every day -- So I should just let them THROW IT AWAY Downtown (like the Popular and Profitable Block 37 SuperStation)???

Many large metropolitan regions have a division of responsibility very similar to what we have: Bay Area MTA oversees San Francisco Muni, AC Transit, etc. New York MTA oversees NYCTA, Metro-North, LIRR, etc.

Allocating seats based on ridership wouldn't get very far. Chicago would end up with probably 8 out of 11 seats, even though it only pays 28% of the tax revenue. The suburbs would demand that Chicago pay for its own damn buses and trains and the whole coalition would splinter. The first incarnation of RTA ran a bunch of "Country Buses" once a week through the cornfields of McHenry and Kane so there would be something on the regional map to make those counties feel they were getting their money's worth.

There's a century of distrust between city and suburbs—and public transit is utterly irrelevant to 80 percent of the region's inhabitants. Chicagoans think Metra is a service for stockbrokers coming from Lake Forest, while suburbanites think CTA is a rolling homeless shelter.

Those other Urban Area's Transit Agencies work together to serve their riding Public; here is how Chicago's Transit Agencies Ridiculous Rolling BullCrap affects us all: http://bit.ly/VtAXqG

If Metra was not in WASTEFUL DIRECT COMPETITION (Thousands of Dollars per Day) with CTA in some areas, would Metra have to raise it's fares on YOU??

Your logic escapes me here. If Metra trains quit stopping at Oak Park or Ravenswood, how would their expenses go down more than their revenues?

I said in "some areas", in Oak Park and Ravenswood (and many other areas) they are somewhat complementary, and both profit (besides well benefiting the surrounding communities, TOD's, TIF's and such).

BUT they COMPETE with each others Transit services all over the South Side (costing both thousands daily, and of absolutely NO benefit to the surrounding communities (and I completely understand the "F *k the South Side" principle -- and why it is like that -- City vs Suburban stinkity P O L I T I C S just like you said Downtown)

I lived there for 40 yrs, so I watched (and rode) the Greatest in the World Illinois Central Electric rail services deteriorate into the present worthless wasteful in-city MED abyss: http://bit.ly/1pAhdxM

I am going to try to explain something, I did live on the South Side for over 40yrs; now I am lucky enough to both live and work in Lisle, which is like living INSIDE the Morton Arboretum (quiet and almost creepily peaceful). BUT my Family and Friends are still trapped on the South Side with Noise, Sirens, Guns, Drugs, and Stupid Killings Each and Every Single Day. Why? NO JOBS!

The "Powers that be" W O N ' T change that -- So I guess it's all up to silly me Thank You.

Yes, it's hard to defend something like the Blue Island branch, which has only 850 daily boardings on the entire line (most stations don't even reach triple digits). That doesn't even cover the cost of the train crews. But given the racial politics of Chicago, there'd be a holy shitstorm and parade of "community leaders" bleating about how the suburb-controlled Metra board was shutting down a South Side line vital to the community.

You are exactly right, in it's present running format it is useless, and costs a lot more than it makes; and some Mainline stations have less than 100 daily boardings of trains (all with minimum 3-man crews). You're also right about the shitstorm in trying to close any of the in-city MED down. A way could be found to utilize it better (just like the rest of the MED)

I will be doing my next Don Quixote impression this Wednesday the 20th before the RTA Board, and it's new Chairman Kirk Dillard (who says he's going to try to get more cooperation and coordination between our Regional Agencies -- we'll see)

While I don't always agree with every detail of your proposals, I am impressed by your persistence and general good attitude in the face of the seemingly impossible task of hammering citizen input into the minds of our local transit executives. Keep up the good fight!

Ultimately it has to be more than a one-man quest... I was impressed when SOUL and Kwame Raoul started agitating for their Gold Line proposal.

Are they still committed to this plan? I know there were minor differences between your concept and theirs, but it was pretty similar all the same.

The Blue Island branch might get more use if Blue Island is selected as an Amtrak station for the Chicago-St. Louis trains. Build a real intermodal station at Vermont St!

There is no such thing as the "Gold Line", they had the ear of the Governor and the whole big group of them still couldn't get it accomplished.

If it wasn't for SOUL and Kwame the Gray Line would be running right now, they didn't come up with any plan -- they Hi-jacked ("stole") my plan, and then screwed it up: http://archive.today/A912 And there were/are MAJOR differences; which is why their "plan" failed.

The Gray Line was created in 1996, 11 years before they tried (somewhat successfully) to get credit for it: https://app.box.com/shared/jqvpx489un I don't think SOUL even existed in 1996.

They screwed it up mostly by leaving it in the hands of the Transit Agencies to implement the plan (like leaving Black Voter Registration in the tender mercies of the KKK).

And by having absolutely NO type of technical knowledge of either rail transit operations, or the MED infrastructure itself -- just "we want this", instead of supporting a Major Capital Project that was already included in the State RTP at the time; with specific plans, designs, and operating formats specific to the existing MED infrastructures.

For example, they had/have no idea or concept of what to do with the Kensington/Blue Island trains, both where and when to berth them in the very limited Downtown Terminal track layout, and which tracks they would use between downtown and 67th St; and what their stopping pattern would be. Among lots of other things they have NO idea of (like train crew size costs).

And the Agencies gave them the same answer I would have -- "Sorry, that just won't work".


Thank you sincerely for the concern Ardecila, but I'm a big boy -- and I'm OK all by myself......