1. The renovated Green Line is not enough in itself to spur TOD on the south side. I think the same can be said about the blue line out west. Agreed?

2. "I can't fathom how Chicago will redevelop underutilized land if it cuts transit service to it." Think about this. Can Chicago afford to have transit service to "underutilized land"? Any good business goes after its best customers. These are the people on the brown, purple, and red line on the north side. I am NOT saying that the CTA should make money, I am saying that taking care of your best customers is a sound practice in the real world beyond government organizations. And especially when the CTA budget situation is so dire, you have to make tough choices. Of course, politics will prevent Chicago from doing what is best for itself, as so often in the past...

Yikes. I'm glad I scheduled my upcoming trip to Houston next weekend for a Friday departure & a Tuesday arrival. I won't be stuck dealing with the blue line headaches. I had been wondering this week what all of the big equipment was for along the blue line between Jefferson Park & Harlem. Now I know.

I believe the CTA is supposed to be finished with their Red line track improvements by the end of the year, but how much longer will the Blue line improvements take?

I was quite :stunned: when I took the Green line down to the Garfield stop 2 weeks ago (on my way to Hyde Park). The rundown vacant lots along the track are just terrible. I sat there on the train imagining thousands & thousands of international visitors riding through the area on their way to the Olympic Stadium and thinking that this isn't a particularly good impression the city will be making on them, let alone the impression IOC voters will have if they opt to check out the public transit to the prospective Olympic Stadium site. Something needs to be done to spur TODs along the southside Green line.

Yep, CTA wanted to shut the green line down of course for this reason. But after you've saved the green line, you can't even talk about shutting down the cermak line. So you have to keep both. Oops.

How about immediately removing -any- density restrictions on any lot within 1/4 mile of a green line station? That would spur some development. Wishful thinking...

The tie work on the O'hare branch will last until November 2008, but the construction will be most painful in the places in the worst condition, like between Jeff Park and Harlem. I'd expect the first 6 months of construction to be worst and it to gradually get better and less intrusive, but there will be periodic line cuts for the next year.

How about tearing down the steel L structure or rezone Lake Street into an alleyway rather than a boulevard? The only lots that seem to work for development are large parcels that will have to set back from the 'L' strucutre at least 50' and make Lake Avenue the side street rather than the main boulevard.

State street subway (Redline) will be closed the next 3 weekends, then they'll be a pause in the around Thanksgiving, followed by another long string of weekends breaking only around the holidays. At some point as next spring approaches all the half ties in the State st subway should be replaced.

Ohare branch line cuts between Jeff Park and Harlem will be every weekend between now and Xmas with a break only for Thanksgiving weekend. Then they'll be about 3 months off, followed by about 8-9 months of weekend line cuts every weekend until late 2008. At that point the Ohare branch will be entirely replaced.

Other blue line issues - single tracks will still be taking place in addition to the line cuts on most weekend nights in other locations. In another month or two half tie renewal should start up again in earnest in the Dearborn subway, with exact details TBD. Expect many line cuts again here as well.

Flip side of all this - in 18 months the track conditions system wide will be dramatically better then they are now, and even moreso then they were 6 months ago.

Bet you never have been here. Don't go making me post all my photos of condos and apartments built right next to the EL on the north side...new ones. Some are even between the EL and the METRA line. So you idea seems sort of expensive and sensless.

Ok, so the downstaters are having a fit in this article at the suggestion that the state of Illinois should help out the mass transit issues here in the Chicago area. I f&cking can't stand people from down there (as I imagine they can't stand people from up here).

Why doesn't someone have enough balls in the political world to say look downstaters...you get this much more money per tax money you put in than the chicagoland area so shut up or loose it!

Why should they care? They have absolutely nothing to gain (at least directly) and a lot to lose (having to tell their constituents that they have to pay into Chicago's mass transit). It's not that irrational. And every half-wttied politician knows there's no such thing as a tax for a particular program. It all goes to the general state budget so they're always running the risk of having to pay for the cta.

Then it is time for Chicago to take the extra money they are getting away...and let them live of the federal government...oops they do...the red part of the state has more federal and state money coming back to them than they give....the true welfare citizens of this state. Chicago area needs to correct once and for all and let the rest of Illinois sink or swim.

No more state funds (only the part they pay for) for their "FREEWAYS".
No more subsidizing AMTRACK and that way people in Chicago can go to St. Louis and other places without stopping at those nasty little welfare run counties/cities.
Hope they are paying for their little scrawny ass airports.....

I've said it before...Chicagoland should secede from the rubes in the red parts of the state and create North Illinois...let the rest of them sink or swim on their own. The economic engine that is Northeastern Illinois funds all those ignorant hayseeds.

How ironic. The people on this board calling downstaters ignorant impoverished hicks are able to so effectively stereotype so many people over such a large area of land. Of course, most of these people have never actually been 'downstate' except for the gas station off I-57/55.

Not accounting for Chicago, downstate Illinois is actually right in line with the national average as far as income goes. It also has some of the world's biggest companies (State Farm, ADM, John Deere, Caterpillar). Amtrak is more beneficial for Chicago than any other part of the state. It mostly serves college students and faculty going to Champaign, Normal, Carbondale, etc from Chicago, business people going to Peoria, Decatur, Champaign, Bloomington, and Quad Cities, and downstaters going to Chicago to spend their money. The "freeways" were built under the interstate highway program. I-57 and I-55 happen to be free in Chicago too.

Oh yeah and the secede from the "red part of the state" line of thinking is how civil wars start (eg secede from those politically different than you because you can'tr get your way). Very thought out.

Well I'll be sure to see you all on the city discussion threads making fun of New Yorkers for not being able to see outside their own city.

Yawn.

Hey dude, I lived here for 6 years and rode the Green Line often to visit my family in Oak Park and graduated from IIT in Architecture where I had a design studio with a project sited on this Lake Street Green Line. Sorry if I wasn't clear as to where I refering to.

Sure there are apartments/condos next to the L but how are they positioned? Are they directly fronting the L, like buildings would be on Lake Street or will their backs/porces/fire stairs face the 'L'? Are they on the side next to the 'L' with a slightly thicker CMU/brick wall?

There's also a design factor involved as to where the steel structure on the 'L' is placed and how it affects the surroundings. In the Northside it's near a main street but not directly ON the main street so there are buildings that act as a buffer to the steel structure and their backsides are facing the 'L' to serve as a noise buffer rather than the direct front. On the Brown/Red Line is near Sheffield but not on it. The Ravenswood its near Ashland or Lawrence but not on it. The steel structure in those areas create virtual alleyways in the areas it serve, that is not a bad thing in a dense environment, these can function depending on the design and span of the structure as additional neighborhood parking in the Wrigleyville area or right-of-way for a partial alley. In addition on the Northside, the stations are closer together so that slows down and reduces the noise impacts that may occur so that buildings can be placed closer to the 'L'.

In the Loop, the sidewalks that operate under the streets are wider and have more stations within close proximity limiting the overall speed of the Loop which makes a steel elevated structure livable.

The Green Line on the Lake STREET segment is literally under Lake STREET (street being the operative word) so based upon those conditions and how the current projects that are being built are designed near the 'L' between Ashland and Western on the old public housing sites, how are they designing this? With wide setbacks away from the 'L' to counter direct noise in segments where the trains speed up to the 55 mph zone that can hinder building any kind of ground floor retail elements or any positive TOD's next to this 'L' which is the whole point of this discussion. On the Southside Ashland Green Line Branch there are a few developments and buildings that are planned and under construction right now (at least on my recent visit last week), why? Maybe placement of this steel structure may give you a clue.

Now this can be counteracted by adding more stops along the Lake Street line to slow the speed and allows for more opportunities for this. That is all I was saying. Right now with the L in it's current arrangement, the designs will treat Lake STREET like an alley rather than a boulevard which effects the TOD potential for this section of the Green Line.

dp

THE DAN RYAN IS OFFICIALLY COMPLETE!!!!

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/1...3382d2bld2.jpg

here's a pic from flickr courtesy of Jiachun GUO's

Success. And only 400 million over budget.

How long until we have to do the damn thing again?

I am grateful that the CTA decided to coordinate Red Line renovations with the Dan Ryan project. That way, there won't be much inconvenience on either for several years.

Ideally, CTA's rehab would have been complete before the roadwork started (strike 1) and have included a Park n Ride facility (strike 2) to lure drivers onto transit.

Also, minor semantical point, the Dan Ryan isn't complete yet, they've just finally re-opened all the lanes. They've still got a few months of some assorted landscaping and concrete, then punchlist items. I don't think completion is until sometime around March or April.

Sounds like you guys need a downtown circulator system to distribute passengers around the loop instead of an expensive taxi?

We've been using a short-hop streetcar system for that in Portland, although Chicago would probably have such a high demand for it that you'd need extremely short headways.

Also, they tend not to decrease ridership on the main trunk heavy rail or bus routes - but just the opposite (induce demand cause its more convenient on to get around downtown w/out a car) - demand kinda just appears out of nowhere, from what our little town has experienced. :cheers:

^ I don't mind carpooling. It is at least in some way a form of group transportation.

It's those people driving alone that we need to lure towards transit (IMO)

Re: Circulator
 

Does anyone know the status of the Carroll Avenue Transitway project? There was a informational seminar a few weeks ago. Did anyone attend, and how far away are they from constructing it (and will it be BRT or is there even a slight possibility of light rail)? Likewise, how will this coordinate with Lipinksi's Ogden Avenue Streetcar plan?

Re: Circulator
 

Sorry, I meant to include this quote in that last post.

I don't think anybody from here went. There was a $25 entrance fee for non-AIA members, IIRC.

I'll email the presenter and see if I can get any information. BRT is pretty much a given at this point, since it presents the lowest costs. Also, buses from BRT can be run on normal streets, which is a huge advantage since the route can be modified on-the-fly to respond to traffic jams and accidents. This will be very useful on the Streeterville portion of the route. Don't give up hope, though - once the city buys all the right-of-way and sets up BRT platforms, a light rail conversion is quite cheap if the passenger volumes demand it.

The Ogden part of the route is a huge stretch running from the Carroll Avenue Bridge over the river, down Wayman/Carroll out to Ogden, where it turns southwest and runs all the way to Cermak in Lawndale, then heads west on Cermak out to the North Riverside Mall in North Riverside.

The Ogden part of the route is extremely redundant, because it follows a path very similar to the Pink Line, which was just rebuilt at a steep price. A better use of money would be to re-extend the Pink Line out to its original terminal at Harlem Avenue. The old right-of-way is filled with little parking lots now that could easily be converted back to transit use with zero building demolition, and maybe a few street closures.

That's interesting to hear about the Carroll Avenue bit. If our friend from Portland (who I quoted in my previous post) is to be believed, then there will presumably be a large demand for the BRT service from suburban commuters to Union and NW stations. I worry, however, that BRT will be subject to the same traffic flow vagaries that plague regular CTA buses on Michigan Ave. during rush hour and that the BRT platforms will only be about two blocks apart (which, given, is better than the current 1 block separation for CTA buses) creating bus-bunching potential.

Re: Ogden, I was under the impression that Senator Lipinski was bound and determined to get the streetcar concept funding in Congress. At first I was instinctively glad that Chicago planned to use a diagonal street for transit (as I wish they would for Clybourne and Lincoln), but upon a second look at the map, you're right: the route doesn't seem to accomplish much.

Yeah and amazingly we have NO MONEY for CTA despite its massively higher throughput

Amtrak ridership up again
 

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/Conten...57347&ssid=180

Central Highlights

Huge gains are tied to increased frequencies in Illinois, with the three routes between Chicago and downstate communities showing large increases. The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) has more than doubled the size of its contract with Amtrak, providing three of the five round-trips on the Chicago-St. Louis corridor and two round-trips each on the Carbondale and Quincy routes, starting late last October.

On the Chicago-St. Louis Lincoln Service corridor, ridership is up by 55.8 percent for the state trains and 42 percent for the corridor, with total of 477,888. Ridership between Chicago and Carbondale, the route the Illini and Saluki trains share with the City of New Orleans, is up by 67.4 percent for the state-supported trains and 46 percent for the corridor, totaling 263,809. For the Chicago-Galesburg-Quincy route of the Illinois Zephyr, Carl Sandburg and other trains, ridership has gained 41.4 percent for the state-sponsored trains and 33 percent for the route, with 194,535 passengers.

Also from the Amtrak hub in Chicago is the Hiawatha Service, with up to seven daily round-trips sponsored by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation with IDOT. Nearly 600,000 passengers rode the trains between Milwaukee and Chicago last year, an increase of 2.6 percent.

The state-supported routes in Michigan — Grand Rapids-St. Joseph-Chicago Pere Marquette and the Port Huron-East Lansing-Chicago Blue Water — also posted increases. Ridership on the Pere Marquette was up 2.8 percent and on the Blue Water, 3.1 percent.

I wish Amtrak's Lake Shore Limited line had better scheduling instead of just one train departing each day. It doesn't leave Chicago until 10pm which means I if I want to take it home to Ohio, I wouldn't arrive until after 2am. Guess I'll just stick with a car instead of Amtrak.

Well it sounds like if Indiana and Ohio had any interest whatsoever, IDOT would be open to joint-sponsorship of more frequent services (note the frequent service on the Illinois, Wisconsin, and Michigan lines). I wouldn't blame this on Amtrak....maybe write some congresscritters in Indiana and Ohio to voice your support of more service on that corridor.

^ You got that right Viva. The fact that Indiana does not have service between Louisville and Indy and that Fort Wayne has no service and that Indy and Chicago do not have expanded service puts this one squarely on the Indiana State governemnts table. The higher ridership levels in Ill are all acheived thru State level contributions!

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/1...3382d2bld2.jpg

OMG look at OMP!

(Article) CTA called hurdle to Olympics
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...i_tab01_layout


EDIT: I'm aware that yesterday this article had been linkified and partially pasted over in the 2016 bid thread in City Discussions. The following is the draft from today's edition in full copy-and-paste.

If you can, I recommend following the link and checking out the Topix comment section of this article. It's a trip, as it often is for articles on this type of subject...


-----------------
CTA called hurdle to Olympics
Chicago must fix crumbling system, U.S. lawmaker says

By Jon Hilkevitch | Tribune transportation reporter
October 30, 2007


-----Chicago has the ingredients for developing a world-class transportation system, but unless reinvestment begins promptly, the city may have few mass-transit services left when the 2016 Olympics are held, federal lawmakers warned Monday.

Pointing to the transit crisis just days away, U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) bashed Illinois as "the poster child for neglect" during a congressional field hearing downtown that examined the city's transportation needs if it hosts the Summer Games in nine years.

He said the political gridlock in Springfield that has pushed the Chicago Transit Authority toward next week's "doomsday" service cuts and fare increases complicates the Daley administration's efforts to prove it is prepared to be the Olympic host city.

DeFazio is chairman of the House Highways and Transit Subcommittee, which wields influence in the fierce competition among cities vying to win billions of dollars in federal grants and funding earmarks for coveted transportation projects.

"It seems that the state and the governor are walking away from a minimal responsibility to maintain an existing system, let alone dramatically enhance it," DeFazio said in response to testimony at the hearing about rusting CTA trains and buses, crumbling viaducts, and miles of streets and dozens of bridges in disrepair across the Chicago area.

"You're in a full crisis mode, and the whole country is going to be watching this week," DeFazio said about the dozens of bus routes that the CTA and Pace are set to eliminate Sunday if the legislature fails to approve new operating subsidies.

Since the Illinois FIRST program ended four years ago, the state has gone without a source to fund capital improvements. That could lead to a significant loss in future federal aid if Illinois doesn't come up with the necessary matching funds.

Mayor Richard Daley, often criticized for not using his clout to force a solution to the long-running transit funding standoff, went on the offensive with drastic cuts only days away.

"To me, it's pretty clear," Daley said Monday at a separate event. "Either [the governor and the General Assembly] support public transit or they don't. This is do-or-die time."

"Springfield needs to remember that another round of short-term, stopgap, Band-Aid solutions is not the answer we need," the mayor said.

The House subcommittee's field hearing, held in a courtroom at the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse, was the first outside Washington in advance of Congress reauthorizing federal transportation legislation that will expire in 2009.

Officials from the CTA, Metra, Pace, the state and city transportation departments and the Chicago 2016 Committee were among those invited to testify.

CTA President Ron Huberman said the transit system could serve the Olympics well—but only if it is brought up to a state of good repair. Huberman summarized $6.3 billion in unfunded capital projects at the CTA ranging from rail slow-zones in need of new track and railroad ties to replacement of aging trains and buses.

Among proposed CTA projects that would make the city's Olympic bid more attractive to the International Olympic Committee, Huberman said, would be the Circle Line rail service connecting with many existing CTA and Metra rail stations in the downtown area and the extension of the Red Line to 130th Street. It currently ends at 95th Street.

U.S. Rep. John Duncan Jr. of Tennessee, the ranking Republican on the subcommittee, said it was his impression that modernization of the CTA system is necessary regardless of whether Chicago is chosen for the 2016 Olympics.

But Duncan called on local officials to prioritize projects "because we can't do everything at once," he said.

Surprisingly, none of the transportation officials used the hearing to pitch new projects as being vital to hosting an Olympics that would serve an estimated 2 million visitors.

Setting up the right transportation system presents one of the biggest challenges to a successful Olympic bid, said Doug Arnot, a senior vice president for Chicago 2016.

Yet Chicago's bid plans do not call for adding any significant transportation infrastructure, said Arnot, who was involved in planning for four Olympic Games, including in Atlanta, Sydney and Salt Lake City.

"Although we recognize that in the past cities have often looked at the prospect of the Games as a chance to bring forward long-planned projects, Chicago 2016 has not proposed, nor has budgeted, for any long-term city infrastructure projects," Arnot told the subcommittee.

Before the 1996 Summer Games held in Atlanta, the existing rail system was expanded by three new stations, 7 miles of new track and other improvements to system capacity. During those Games, rail service was provided 24 hours and rail cars were reconfigured to boost passenger capacity. The bus system also was beefed up.

But much of the CTA's bus and rail service, which provides 1.6 million rides a day, already operates at capacity during rush periods. The Chicago 2016 Committee plans to supplement CTA service mainly with shuttle buses to transport spectators and athletes to Olympic venues.

Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.), a subcommittee member who requested Monday's hearing, said he remains optimistic that a funding deal will be worked out in Springfield before Sunday when the CTA will eliminate 39 bus routes and Pace will stop running shuttle buses to suburban Metra stations due to huge budget deficits.

"I am confident the state and local governments will address the immediate needs," Lipinski said.

Differing from others who testified, Lipinski maintained that "fortunately, Chicago already has a world-class transportation system."

His views were not well received by disabled transit activists who disrupted the hearing for about 10 minutes, chanting, "We need transit now" and "What about the money for the CTA?"

The protest prompted U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) to note that "there is a lot of passion about not necessarily tomorrow's transportation issues (linked to the Olympics) but today's transportation issues."

DeFazio seemed to agree.

"There are some very immediate problems that need to be resolved or there won't be a transit system upon which to build for 2016," said DeFazio. State government has "dropped the ball and booted it," he said.


jhilkevitch@tribune.com

Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

Email from CTA, Tue 10/30/2007
 

The latest message from Lake and Clinton...


---------------------------------

From: chicagocard@transitchicago.com

Subject: Please Prepare for Next Week


Letter from CTA President Ron Huberman

Dear CTA Customer:

On November 4th -- less than one week from today -- the CTA will be forced to cut service and raise fares as a result of insufficient state funding. All of us at the CTA understand the hardship that these service cuts and fare increases will cause you. We do not want to make these cuts, and we have been fighting for funding to avoid making them.

I ask that you take the time to prepare for next week's commute. If you currently use service that will be eliminated, go online to transitchicago.com, or call 1-888-YOUR-CTA, to identify alternative service options. Try to use this alternative service at least once this week so you are familiar with it.

We are asking all of our customers to avoid the rush hour whenever possible by leaving early or late. With the reduction in bus service, we anticipate greater crowds on remaining buses and trains as customers seek different ways to get to work. Customers should expect longer travel times.

This is a crucial time to contact the Governor and your state legislators to tell them how important mass transit is to you. The Illinois General Assembly still has not acted to pass legislation that would guarantee the CTA's fiscal health and ensure that there are no more "doomsdays." Without action from the General Assembly, the CTA is required by law to balance its budget, forcing these service cuts and fare increases. Visit transitchicago.com, or call 1-888-YOUR-CTA, for information on how you can easily send a message to your state legislators. With your support, we are hopeful that we will finally get a long-term solution to the CTA's funding shortfalls and put future "doomsdays" to rest. If the State enacts pending legislation before November 4th, the service cuts and fare increases will not go into effect.

Sincerely,

Ron Huberman

Excuse me while I rant.
I'm sick of this shit. Chicago should secede from the state and charge every suburbanite $100 to use O'Hare and another $25 to enter the city. Then we'll see how quickly the state wants Chicago back, and how quickly they miraculously find the cash for the CTA.

And if I could throw in an anti-Bush thing here... The fucking war is costing $255 million per day. For fuck's sake, just stop one day of war and fix the CTA. Fuck this state, fuck this country, my goodness!

This is exactly how the Soviet Union fell. They neglected everything at home and got their asses into all sorts of wars.

God damn it.. Pakistan could pull $300 million out of its ass right now, but America and Illinois can't.

O'Hare: It's called landing fees. The feds pay for most of the construction. The city gets the windfall. Why do you think Daley lobbied for it so hard?

Fee to enter city: Do you have any idea what percentage of parking fee proceeds, sports venue proceeds, restaurant checks, etc. the city gets? it's significantly higher than what most of us (city people) would pay in the suburbs.

Umm. I'm not sure that warrants a response. But I can say the Soviet Union was not in involved in any wars when it fell.

Only the cold "war." I would largely agree with chiphile's point overall, though: the Soviet Union invested most of their assets in an unsustainable military buildup and put practically nothing into their domestic infrastructure or economy. This, combined with Soviet Republic uprisings led to their ultimate downfall.

Moving past history, I think this argument has some merit as related to our current transit woes. While I put the majority of the blame on lack of local and state funding (with another healthy dose going to past CTA mis-management and the labor unions), we can't ignore the lack of federal funds the transit infrastructure in the region gets. When people look at the estimated 100 billion we will spend on the Iraq war by its end, I can understand the frustration that must arise. I know I would personally rather have seen that war money invested in our national infrastructure.

To the issue at hand, Daley, Madigan, Jones and Blago should be ashamed. Do they have any idea how much money their little "stall tactic" of a 24mil cash infusion is costing the CTA in the long run? And the fact that we came so close to doomsday before they acted means the CTA will have spent millions unnecessarily preparing for doomsday, even if we eventually avoid it. They are just screwing all of us right now and wasting literally millions of dollars playing their little political games.

It is a crying shame.

Taft

^ The feds have very little to do with the situation. Most cities in the US, even very auto-centric ones with little support for government participation, have been able to either sustain service levels (eg NYC, Boston) or partake in major expansion (Houston, LA, Salt Lake, Nashville, etc.) with the same level of support from the feds and in many cases lower local taxes. The blame falls squarely on state and city governments.

The Feds don't provide subsidy for transit operations in big cities, but rather only provide funds for expansion and asset maintenance. The maintenance funds are largely distributed on a formula that is based on regional/metropolitan population.

All of this combines to put Chicago transit operations in a particularly precarious financial position because of their size relative to the subsidoes they're entitled to. Put a simple way, compare our transit capital assets to Atlanta's. We're maybe what, 50% larger than them, but our transit network is many times larger. The formula funds from the Feds are quite simply inadequate to maintain CTA's assets; the system is to big relative to those funds. So the deficiency in capital dollars is very clear.

From an operating standpoint, Chicago's network is too big and has too high a statutory recovery ratio relative to the total sales tax collected for operations. Places like Atlanta have a 1% sales tax to fund operations. So does Chicago. Who runs a higher quantity service? Chicago operates a much higher quantity of transit per capita than Atlanta, and yet the tax revenue per person to pay for those operations are fairly similar.

All of it combines to mean that the Chicago region must decide whether it will live within its current means of funding sources (federal and state) and therefore shrink the system, or increase local revenues to maintain the expansive and frequent network we have. And since its so complicated, its very hard for transit advocates to convince politicians to raise that revenue, especially when an idiot press and belligerently ignorant suburbanites give thise politicians the cover to avoid action with unsubstantied claims of "graft" "corruption" and "incompetence" as the sole causes of CTA's perenially precarious finances. As if a handful of hacks making $75K/year (while still unjustified) are the cause of a structural annual deficit best measured in the tens of millions of dollars.

The problem is indeed the fault of state and local politicians. They've chosen to force service quantity to be maintained when the funding is clearly inadequate to support it. When the decisions were made to rebuild the Lake, South Main, and Douglas branches, there should have been a commensurate structural increase in revenues collected to support these money-losing parts of the system. But of course instead the pols simply enacted a structure that makes CTA capital assets continuously deteriorate faster than they can be maintained and replaced, and have to run operations in such way that practically guarentees relatively high fares and relatively low quality service. Until the structure changes, none of this will change. SB572 and the casino bill combined might give us 5-10 golden years until the next crisis. The problem then is that SB572 is so generous to Metra that they may never again i our lifetimes have a funding issue, so good luck getting suburban support for any transit reform at that point. Once again, we'll have our worthless elected officials to thank.

Well it's 75k/yr + pension contributions + healthcare + very high levels of workers comp collection adding up to about 125k/yr. So around 400 "hacks" adds up to 50 million dollars. Would you be willing to argue there's less than 400 hacks at the county, city, and state level? Stroger alone gets 1000 patronage positions to fill. And this doesn't even include contracts, outside consultants, lawsuits stemming form illegal hiring practices, etc. It's more than just a drop in the bucket. I'd be very surprised if the total cost is less than $400 million/yr.

Very well-said, Viva. Cut some of the more obvious routes, especially on the south-southwest side, and the rest can almost pay for itself. But given that given that minority interests (race and handicap) couldn't care less for the city's larger interest, this is probably impossible. For example, it's shocking that "disabled activists" are still clamoring for more money, even as the huge extra costs associated with catering to them (the numbers for paratransit have been covered here before, we're talking hundreds of millions a year) are destroying the system even now. When is a serious politician going to take this problem head-on?

I'm talking about CTA, not the County. CTA has less than 1000 office-type jobs, so I suspect the number of "patronage hacks" is much less than 400. Even if someone were hired because they knew the right people, that says nothing about their qualifications for the job (poor Robert Degnan is always trotted out as an example of clout at the CTA, but no one ever seems to ask if he's 1) qualified or 2) does a good job. Frankly I don't know, but it seems like the most important question, not who his brother is allegedly friends with). Nepotism/cronyism is only a bad thing if the people being hired are 1) completely incompetent or unqualified for the job and/or 2) the job shouldn't exist in the first place.

So let's say, for the sake of argument (totally baseless suggestions), that there are 20 unqualified hacks contributing nothing on the CTA payroll. That's still only $2.5 million/year. The deficits being discussed are in the hundreds of millions.

In terms of contracts/consultants, at least for CTA and City that's all public record, the procurement/bidding documents and the actual executed contract. Bidders have to declare the names and percent ownership of every owner in the company. City workers and more importantly, council members voting to approve contracts recuse themselves if there are any connections between them and an owner in the company getting awarded the contract. So if there's improprietary in contract awards, people tend to find out about it.

^ But it's not about the CTA. It's about the overall peception of city, county, and state government. No one wants to give any of these organizations any more money because of the perception of corruption. The CTA, whether rightfully or not, is one of the "victims" of this perception.

I'm glad other peope are aware of this boondoggle. The old systems like the CTA (and the T in Boston, SEPTA and NYCTA as well) should have been grandfathered in under the 1990 ADA guidelines, with local transit for people with disabilities provided by an accessible bus network (CTA has been at 100% accessibility on bus for several years), and demand-response vanpooling. This is how it is done in many cities in Europe and Canada, where the metro systems are scarcely handicap-accessible but handicapped people can still get around by other means of public transport.

In addition to the absurd capital cost (e.g. doubling or tripling the cost of station renovations) relative to the number of handicapped riders using the rail system, handicapped passengers also cause significant delays when operators have to leave the train, go the platform storage box to retrieve and place the gap-filler for boarding and alighting. This process can add 1-3 minutes for both boarding and alighting, which quickly adds up to destroy a semblence of adherence to a scheduled headway.

And what's all the more crazy is that Chicago's gridded streets, with all major arterials (all mile streets and almost every half mile streets) served by frequent bus service, has a handicapped-accessible transit network that connects any 2 locations with between 1-2 transfers. So why double the capital cost for rail stations?

Of course talking about these things is politically incorrect, so no politician does it. I'm all for funding local paratransit service and for mandating buses that have handicap lifts/ramps (since bus "facilities" are just streets and curbs, not grade-seperated multi-level stations, and thus the capital cost is not applicable to the transit agency), but I find the justification for retrofitting handicap accessibility of old rail facilties to be quite weak. Yet another incredibly expensive but unfunded federal mandate.

This is completely unrelated, but strictly for the record: The Soviet Union fought a war in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989.

Well two districts in Chicago need to have public transportation shut off completely next monday.

Emile Jone's District
Rob Bagofdogpoop's neighborhood

Anyone else think they would like to peacefully meet next week at the Gov's neighborhood if there are cuts? It would be so cool to have several thousand working class people protesting outside his home.

Exactly. I also agree with all the later posts about the ADA and the impact it has had on public transit in Chicago.

My biggest fear is that what we'll see coming out of the state legislature at the end of this week will be another stop-gap measure. RTA funding needs to be rethought on a basic level, and if Huberman actually enacts one of the many "doomsday" plans we've been presented with in the last few years more power to him. One of Kruesi's biggest problems was that he created the doomsday approach to getting funding, but never enacted any of his plans no matter what the funding situation was.

I do place far more blame with the state than with Daley (and I'm not a Daley apologist, just mention TIFs and I'm calling for impeaching Daley). In this case it is a regional problem that needs to be solved at the state level, and our state government is completely messed up. Everyone in the state government agrees that the CTA needs more money, but they are fighting like children over how it should be done - Blago wants casinos, Madigan wants an increase int the RTA retail tax, hell, the Republican minority leader wants to increase gas taxes and split them between the CTA and road construction. Daley has doen the right thing by replacing Kreusi and there is statewide support (politically) for giving aditional funding to the CTA. At this point it has been reduced to moronic fights about where the new money will come from. Not a small point, but as long as Illinois state legislators keep acting the way the do it will seem like a small point.

So, a little propaganda. I think most on this forum from the Chicago area do not want to see a CTA doomsday situation happen. In addition, Metra will be taking similar drastic action in the beginning of 2008.

I think we need significant investment in both of these services, but it won't happen unless enough people raise hell. :hell: :whip: I encourage anyone from the area, particularly suburbanites who like mass transit to visit this site:
http://www.savechicagolandtransit.com/actnow.asp

I just called the governors office and both my state house and state senate reps. It took less than five minutes to fuss at their support staff. I was not put on hold; I talked to someone right away. It was easy. Please do something.

I'm curious what effect you expect from fussing at support staff of utterly powerless legislators.

Maybe we could get the governor's daily Midway-Springfield roundtrip given a CTA route number and put it on the threatened list.

Albany Park? Haha - cut off service there, that's a good one... We're rebuilding the Brown Line for $400 million, not shutting it down.

In all honesty, the CTA REALLY needs to consider combining the Brown and Pink Lines. The Pink Line is a horribly inefficient use of valuable trains, providing service to neighborhoods that don't really use it very much. In terms of operating cost vs. revenues generated, the Brown Line ranks second only to the Red Line. Combining the two would create a line that is more cost-effective than the Yellow, Green, Purple, or Orange Lines.