I've been thinking about subtle ways for donor states to claw back some of their losses. Of course it's unreasonable to think that every state gets an equivalent share, but perhaps some remedy for states that are donor to the point they get back less than 90% of what they send to Washington could use the difference as matching funds for infrastructure projects. In other words, say Illinois was shorted by $2 billion beyond what would amount to a 90% return. If they could qualify for a 2/1 local/fed match transit project that has a $3 billion price tag, they'd not have to ante up any actual funds, the Feds would grant their 1/3 worth $1 billion and then cover the $2 billion local match to compensate for the $2 billion excess donor status.

This seems only fair and makes a ton of sense, so of course it will never happen.

God fucking dammit.

https://patch.com/illinois/glenview/...expansion-idot

If Glenview hates Amtrak service so much maybe their stop should be cut.

No surprises there. If they hadn’t screwed up with the Glen station, it’d be possible to move the Amtrak station there assuming there’s space.

You really have to ask what was up with Glenview’s planning department when they decided to put their outdoor mall almost a mile from the Glen Metra station.

Yeah cut their Metra stops too (they probably don't care too much about Amtrak).

Glenview Amtrak station no longer make sense. At one time there was GV Naval air station nearby. Updating for today's population and travel patterns it would make sense to move Amtrak to Lake Cook road where travelers could make use of multiple bus routes and employer sponsored shuttles.

Also a stop north in Lake County at Rte 120 in the old Lakehurst site is needed. This to provide Milw/Chi access to Great America park (3 Mil attendance) and an easy 10 min shuttle to the park.

7-10 trains day, each way is enough for park visitors to plan a day trip and enough for employers/employees to plan shuttle services and commuter trips. Also Amtrak has a balanced inbound and out bound schedule meaning it would be useful for reverse commuters.

Frankly the nimbys of Glenview dont deserve this service. And Amtrak could increase ridership by responding to current needs, not some outdated model that serves an older recalcitrant suburb.

banning out-of-state motorists who have flooded Chicago streets

How is this supposed to be enforced? Monitors at the borders? How is she defining "flooded" has there been a census? The police don't have time or energy to stop cars that blatantly run a red light right in front of them almost killing pedestrians who scatter to get out of the way, there will be zero enforcement of this.

City: Non-IL residents/vehicles aren't permitted to operate. Give us data to verify compliance, non-compliance results in shutting your service locally.

Uber/Lyft: ok

I mentioned this before, but the mall was centered around the old control tower. They weren't about to relocate the tower a mile away. The North Glenview station was added as an amenity for local residents and as overflow parking for Glenview station. There was never a TOD concept around The Glen, except that some people might enjoy the property value boost of being "walk to train" and an even smaller group might actually do it. It is actually a very pleasant walk... but the overriding goal all along was to avoid the aesthetic of suburbia without actually changing the suburban lifestyle.

Such a system would be unfair to Indiana or Wisconsin rideshare drivers, who probably do a lot of trips into Illinois and especially to the airports.

They should just charge drivers a cruising fee or something while they're downtown waiting for rides.

Such a proposal wouldn't keep them out of the state, just the city. I'm sure a carve out for trips to the airports could be done and would be desirable.

Do a utilization rate like NYC.

In capital bill proposal news some info is starting to come out:

https://capitolfax.com/2019/05/17/pr...-capital-plan/

And how will the cops know they're cruising - follow them around? Chalk their tires - oh wait, that was ruled unconstitutional.

Same problem - you need to go through the city to get to the airport - anyone stopped could just say "I'm on my way to Midway..."

This, or a variation of it, is the answer. Whatever part of the city that makes sense becomes a "permit only" zone. This is in place all over the world. There are cameras at all entry points into the zone that scans license plate. Any car with a plate not in the database gets a ticket in the mail. There are typically ways to exempt non-permitted vehicles from the fines. The example I'm familiar with is in Italy, where if you're a hotel guest the hotel has a way to enter your car to get the exemption. I'm not sure how with would apply to things like food delivery services or Uber/Lyft - I'd think there would be a way for them to pay a large annual fee to be able to enter the zone as permitted. That would, of course, be added to your delivery fees.

London has something similar and NYC is talking about it.

In Chicago, I guess it could work sort of like the zoned parking:

You live in the zone you get a free pass to drive there.
You live in the zone and have a guest? - there could be away to enter an exemption for their car - with a cost per use and an annual limit.
You need to enter the zone repeatedly but don't live there? You can by an expensive annual permit.

This could even be time of day, where the permit is only needed M-F 7-7 or whatever.

The apps would not accept destinations inside city limits that aren't the airport. Rideshare companies would most certainly not risk losing city/airport access altogether for non-compliance. They already have to give data to the city.



I support a utilization standard for rideshare and dynamic congestion pricing. Both of these could indeed be done with fully automatic enforcement. Tons of people already have transponders for tolls and plate cameras could handle the rest.

Uber/Lyft know these numbers (essentially the times a driver is available for a ride) and will cooperate if they are made to. Maybe they can pay for some Uber or Lyft stands to have a place for drivers to wait without muddying traffic.

IDOT insists it is still looking at ways to make the Hiawatha expansion happen. I’m not happy about them kowtowing to Glenview and Lake Forest NIMBYs, but maybe this will push them to re-evaluate the New Line freight bypass idea.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/subur...523-story.html

This drove me nuts 4 seconds after I looked at the proposal, and I've actually used that Metra station twice now. All they had to do was keep running that train another 5% of its distance and come around the north side of the building and they could have had one station serving both the ATS and Metra all tied in together under one roof. They could have made the north side the main entrance to the rental care facility fairly easily, there is no main pedestrian entrance, just shift the setup within the large main hall/rental desks/parking spots.

As it is now you get off Metra and you're just standing all alone on the side of a street with no real pedestrian access or anywhere to go. You can walk around the side of the rental car facility and in through the front, but it is akin to getting dropped off behind a Target store and then having to kinda awkwardly walk and make your way around to the official entrance. It just seems like it's not built for this at all and not designed to have you walking there - yet here sits the Metra stop.....

This is what greets you:

https://goo.gl/maps/fUiF1s9kckHZHYnf8

There is one solitary door along that 400 feet of the northern side of the building, and I believe it's locked but I was able to go inside and you're literally just standing on the first floor of about the worlds largest parking garage. I wandered around and it made no sense, finally ran into workers who were just like - what the hell are you doing here??? I said I had gotten off the metra and were looking for the main desks and they thought I was crazy. They said I was in the totally wrong area, and there were no signs.

This being Chicago - is it just possible that the city sees the Metra as competition for the CTA and doesn't want to loose all those $5 trips from ORD? So, has thrown up a huge disincentive? Just asking.

Very possibly could be a primary reason.

Because it certainly seems negligent planing at best to have not to have integrated the ATS into NCS Metra Stop or least stage it for intermodal integration.