|
Quote:
As far as your argument about alternate routes, I thought a rebuttal would be obvious and not even worth mentioning but I guess I was wrong: All major thoroughfares should have tolls, whether you're talking north-south axes like Route 41 or east-west ones like Lake Cook Road. Again, purely wishful thinking on my part, but, in this climate, probably less so than hoping for a higher gas tax. |
Quote:
Quote:
Anyway, I don't think there is much to be gained by this argument, for the same reasons you state, so I will stay out of it from here on. |
Quote:
I'll extrapolate this logic further, just to be a bit provocative (not argumentative). The fellow going from Dalton to O'Hare really would have benefited from the Crosstown I-494, why not resurrect that plan to improve job accessibility for the working poor? Congestion impacts all drivers, but even moreso the one with long trips like our exemplar, here. If the working poor are impacted the most by congestion due to long trip lengths, aren't we then obligated to widen roads and build parallel routes to alleviate that impact? Why stop there, why not use all the subsidy money spent for transit reconstruction and literally buy cars for the working poor? The ~$30 million spent to reconstruct each of the Pink Line stations serving only ~1,000 commuters a day could have purchased 5,000+ used cars to give or sell at subsidized price. Or, $30 million buys a heck of a lot of gasoline, or subsidized insurance, and so forth. Where do we draw the line? I still maintain trying to have everyone pay their fair share is the most sound underlying philosophy for this. Land use policy has an important role, as there is a feedback loop between regional mode choice and land use patterns. The Canadian model, wherein Toronto rapid transit (steeply priced at $2.75) still draws significantly higher utilization than CTA while still obtaining greater than 80% cost recovery from fare revenue should be highly instructive. Both driving and transit are underpriced in the USA. Quote:
|
........I hate to interrupt this lively debate but...I rode the Red line north (from Addison to Argyle...there were many slow zones, but there was a large station rebuilding effort at the Lawrence Station......in general, can anyone tell me what is going on with the re-building efforts on the Red Line north ? many thanks.........
|
There have been a lot of slow zones this weekend because of those rebuilding and some other track maintinece efforts.
They are basically just replacing the wall sections around the stairwells from the old wood and glass to the new galvanized steel and glass like you see on the new brown line and Fullerton and Belmont stations. It looks really nice. They have also been re-roofing some of the stations (Berwin I know for sure) as well as doing some interior repairs in some stations (Berwin they are rebuilding some rusted out tin sheets on the ceiling). |
Quote:
But even with that said, the time it gets me to get downtown from Bryn Mawr is usually no more than 25-30 minutes thanks to the subway improvements. I just hope after they finish the Blue Line slow zone work they take on the slow zones on the northern branch of the Red Line. I can't wait to see how fast things go once that stretch you mentioned is operating at higher speed. |
Re-Roofing Lake/Ridgeland sta. Jul 21
http://lh5.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmich...0/IMG_3687.JPG State/Grand Aug 05 http://lh5.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmich...0/IMG_5861.JPG New track and ties and electric at Clark/Lake Sept 26 Anyone know what is with the blue stuff ? http://lh4.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmich...0/P1070405.JPG The new ties (sleepers) are made out of plastic (recycled material ?) http://lh6.ggpht.com/harry.r.carmich...0/P1070409.JPG |
Chicago has the 2nd lowest highway lanes per capita in the country (http://www.tlcminnesota.org/Resource...Miles2004.pdf). I'm not really sure why this is because cities with much better public transit have more lanes. One of the very first things I noticed when I moved here 5 years ago was that there were plenty of highways but HORRIBLE bottlenecks and a real paucity of the number of lanes. 3 lanes in each direction for the amount of traffic the Kennedy carries has little equal in this country.
There are true highway related bottlenecks in this metro that need to be solved and I'm not really sure why they are not being brought to the table. Or are they? The Kennedy is an absolute mess and the express lanes reversed create huge problems for inbound traffic on just about every weekday. 90 minutes from O'Hare to downtown is unacceptable. Not everyone is flying in from O'Hare and taking the Blue line to downtown so more transit for this particular bottleneck is not the answer--there is already great transit running right through the thick of it. I am curious as to why there are two express lanes that literally waste 4 shoulders total (one on each side of each lane, and then the barrier, and then another shoulder on the local). Seems to me if you eliminate express you could make the Kennedy six lanes in each direction without buying any land. This metropolitan region seems to be forgetting that it is a transportation hub and has a significant portion of its traffic related to business and people from other regions of the state and country passing through. I know people that have been passing through and wanted to spend some money downtown but didn't because when they see 86 minutes from O'Hare to downtown on the signs they just say "forget it." Is there any solution on the table to the Kennedy? It is drastically undersized and the express lanes idea may have been a good one in the 80's when downtown Chicago was billed as just a place for suburbanites to work, but now it is a place for people to live. I live with 3 roommates. All of us live downtown and work in the suburbs (which is where most of the jobs are!), and looking at horrible inbound traffic in the afternoons, which ironically is MUCH worse than outbound at the same time (!), I can tell we are not alone. When you have horrible congestion at 8PM at night inbound to the city on a Wednesday you know you have a problem. It seems we are expanding all the freeways in the suburbs but when it comes to making it easy for all those people living out there to go downtown, and all the people coming in from out of state to go downtown, and all the people living downtown to go downtown, we have just given up. That's the sense I get from living here 5 years now. |
Quote:
All of those office parks in the suburbs are part of the problem, IMO. You can't just blame the expressways. Why did Brenda Barnes move Sara Lee from downtown to a site close to her home? It's NIMBYism, but the opposite--(Nothing in my backyard except my job, regardless how much it affects everybody else's commute). This office park phenomenon is the greatest problem and, in my observation, a major cause of this whole congestion mess. I don't see any inadequacies in the highway system, it's just fine as far as I've seen. More companies need to do what BP and United Airlines just did. BP in particular is moving 1000 employees downtown because many of those employees are traders who live in the city and pressured the company to do so. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
On a transit note, has anyone else noticed how much the El noise has dampened on Wabash Avenue with the new rails, plastic ties and rubberized clamps? The trains ride noticeably smoother now too.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Anyways I'm not sure how were are going to "stop" suburban business expansion, nor why we would even want to. One thing that is not helping against it is the congestion getting into downtown. It isn't exactly a major selling point to an employer to keep transportation bottlenecks due to either poor planning or underfunding so that it takes an hour and half to get into the city during rush hour. But I guess we could "force" companies to locate downtown in this metro and force the people too, or just get the hell out of our state I suppose? And what do we do about all the business that are out there already? Close 'em up and tear down everything? Rosemont where my room mate has a job for instance isn't exactly a ripe new exurb. Neither is Berwyn where my other room mate works. |
It doesn't take an hour and a half to get into the city using Metra, unless you live way the hell out in suburbia... Metra is $12 round-trip from any point 1 hour away from downtown, and even less if you live closer to downtown, plus about $3-5 for station parking, so roughly $16 total. Buying a monthly ticket will reduce your costs even further. Driving downtown, even with no congestion, will still probably cost about $8-10 in gas and $20 for parking, and that's the absolute best deal... most people pay more. Roughly $28 total. Taking transit to get downtown is always gonna be the better deal, unless you carpool and split gas/parking costs.
I'm actually in favor of the Eisenhower widening to some degree. First of all, it is an actual bottleneck - 290 is 4 lanes coming out of downtown until Central Ave, and then narrows down to 3 lanes for 7.5 miles, then widens to 4 again just before 88 splits off in Hillside. It seems justified. Plus, the additional lane would be HOV (ie carpool lane). Plus, the most recent talks about the project have included decking over the Eisenhower through Oak Park and a Blue Line extension to Lombard, coupled with a rebuild of Austin, Oak Park, and Harlem on the Blue Line (the CTA tracks would need to be moved, requiring new stations to be built). I am NOT in favor of widening the Kennedy from O'Hare to the junction, although it would definitely benefit from a reconstruction project to replace overpasses and rebuild interchanges. Hopefully, this could be done in conjunction with the addition of express tracks on the Blue Line for the airport service. |
Quote:
In regards to your other post, obviously you've thought this through. The fact of the matter is, how much can we build ourselves out of congestion? New or widened highways cost a LOT of money. So no, I don't agree with you that building more expensive highways is the answer. At a larger, national level, emphasis must be put on making better use of the infrastructure we already have in place if, for no other reason, we simply can't afford to build more. Where is the money going to come from to maintain it all? Look at the state of the economy as it is today--how are we even going to maintain what we already have? If anything, I'm glad that congestion is such a problem in America today. It takes this exact stretching of our infrastructure to force a change in policy. Yes, I do believe that more incentives should be put in place to get companies of all sizes to move downtown, which is clearly served by some of the best transportation infrastructure in the nation. |
Quote:
It's not really that I want to "build my way out of congestion" it's just that I would like to see local people and politicians at least discussing solutions to some of our very real bottlenecks that we have inherited, partly due to poor planning, partly due to underfunding. Whatever the reason is, we have them, and relieving choke points doesn't NECESSARILY mean you want to eliminate the CTA, lol, it's kind of a knee jerk reaction I see with some people on this forum (not saying that's what you did). But to answer your question I believe any new funding can come from toll sources. If you use it you should pay for it. I remember last year, even with all the tollway construction, the Illinois tollway system ran a $600 million dollar surplus! Anyways it is amazing to watch almost all of the exurban tollway system go through a massive expansion at the moment yet we aren't even discussing getting something as important as the Edens/Kennedy junction flowing correctly so that people can actually choose to live downtown if their job is in the suburbs. It is not a good thing for anyone in the city if it takes someone an hour and half to get to downtown from outside of it on a Friday afternoon for instance. That's not helping anyone nor our city. I shudder to think what a Friday afternoon inbound will look like during the Olympics if the express lanes are in their current configuration. I don't even want to imagine it. |
^ But there are other options to get downtown. Metra, for example. And yes, with the CTA fixing its slow zones, that will certainly once again be a better option soon. And didn't the Kennedy just add a lane during its recent reconstruction, or am a mistaken?
|
Quote:
|
I'll use this opportunity to again pitch tollroads. Properly priced highway tolling could ensure a congestion-free commute for whyhuhwhy. What if the reversible lanes were instead High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes with variable pricing? What if the Tollway system switched to a revenue-maximizing variable pricing system which ensured a smooth flow of traffic? Not everyone on the roads at congested times has to be right there right then, not by a long shot, and the pricing would ensure a broader distribution of trips by time of day, with less congestion and more efficient utilization of existing infrastructure. Commuters stuck in the PM rush gridlock would be shocked and appalled by how many other people on the road could have timed their trip differently, and most of those commuters would gladly pay a toll to reduce their travel time. The difference between a crowded but fast-flowing LOS D and gridlocked LOS F is not very many additional marginal cars on the road.
|
:cheers:
Congress' boost to Amtrak fueled by high gas prices, too much traffic Chicago would be hub of nine-state, high-speed network Jon Hilkevitch | Getting Around October 6, 2008 Highway congestion, high fuel prices, dependence on foreign oil, pollution and global warming are creating perfect conditions for reforming stagnant transportation policies. Is it any wonder that Americans are cutting back on driving and turning to trains in record numbers? Congress got the message last week that the status quo, including an overreliance on the airline industry, is no longer acceptable for moving people around the state or across the country. The awakening crystallized when lawmakers passed the Federal Railroad Safety Improvement Act by a veto-proof margin. The landmark legislation, which the White House said President George W. Bush will sign, calls for almost doubling the federal funding provided to Amtrak—about $13.1 billion over five years. Among other precedents, it authorizes $3.4 billion to create high-speed passenger rail corridors and provide rail capital-improvement grants to states. The ambitious project proposed for the Midwest would cover 3,000 miles in nine states. All lines would radiate from a hub in downtown Chicago. The cost of a fully completed Midwest network is estimated at almost $8 billion. "Finally people are waking up to the fact that we need to move people without their cars," said Richard Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association, an advocacy group. Modern, comfortable, double-deck trains with wide seats and large windows would churn along at top speeds of 110 m.p.h. The faster trains would shave hours off trips, delivering passengers from one downtown to another hundreds of miles away. Amtrak trains in most of the Midwest now operate at up to 79 m.p.h., although average speeds are much slower, especially around Chicago due to freight traffic. Driving, which results in more than 40,000 fatalities a year, would take a back seat as a transportation choice, proponents say. So, too, would air travel as consumers factor in the time it takes to go through airport security, the hassle of flying and the time spent traveling from outlying airports. Travel times of almost 51/2 hours on Amtrak's route between Chicago and St. Louis would be cut to 3 hours and 49 minutes on a high-speed train, according to preliminary estimates. In the past year, more than 501,000 rides were taken on Amtrak's Lincoln Service route between Chicago and St. Louis, a 284-mile trip, a 15 percent increase over the previous year. Some 1.2 million rides a year would be taken when the route is served by high-speed trains, according projections by the Illinois Department of Transportation. In addition to the congressional action, the Federal Railroad Administration last week approved grants to Illinois to install train-control and cab-signaling systems on part of the route to facilitate high-speed trains. A high-speed rail line between Chicago and the Twin Cities could be running within five years, according to U.S. Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation Committee. The roughly eight-hour trip on Amtrak from Chicago to St. Paul would be cut to about 51/2 hours under the working proposal. Planners envision the line running from Chicago up through Milwaukee, Madison, the Twin Cities and eventually Duluth, while separate routes from Chicago would extend east to Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati. It's apparent there would be a strong market. Even today, with slow service and a poor on-time performance record, Amtrak finished fiscal 2008 last week with its sixth straight year of ridership growth. The Midwest Regional Rail Initiative involves Amtrak and the nine states: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio and Wisconsin. "A network of states produces much better results than each individual state going its own way," said Randy Wade, passenger rail manager at the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, which is coordinating the Midwest initiative. "We now have a political network, too, comprised of at least 18 U.S. senators," Wade said, adding that high-speed rail projects would stimulate the economy by creating thousands of permanent jobs. To keep up the momentum, the funding Congress authorized last week must be appropriated annually, and millions more added to the pot to pay for the 80 percent federal share of the high-speed rail projects. Supporters such as Ross Capon, who heads the National Association of Railroad Passengers, likened the congressional authorization to issuing a "hunting license" to go after big game. While representing a start, it's not the same as bagging a moose. What is needed to guarantee that the rail program continues to grow is for Congress to establish a rail title in the multiyear federal transportation legislation, Wade said. That would ensure that the passenger rail program benefits from the same steady funding that the highway and mass-transit programs receive, Wade said. People who have been promoting high-speed rail in the U.S. for decades point to a convergence that cannot be ignored. "Clearly the world has changed in the last year," Harnish said. "At the start of 2008, we didn't think there was a chance of this legislation moving. Having the runup in gas prices right before the Olympics has really opened up people's eyes. And the problem won't go away." A 20 percent match by the states would be needed to help pay for the network, which is estimated to cost $7.7 billion, based on 2002 dollar estimates. About $6.6 billion of the total would pay for infrastructure, and $1.1 billion for new trains, officials said. About 13.6 million passengers would ride the trains each year by 2025, according to ridership projections, and 90 percent of Midwesterners would live within an hour ride of a high-speed rail station. |
^Yeah, this is great news!!!
|
Quote:
See now that's a good plan and at least a proposed solution. I'm not really sure what solutions are being proposed right now by our local leaders other than more of the same. The nice thing about your plan is that it can theoretically pay for itself. |
Politicians have been reluctant to consider HOV/HOT on the Kennedy reversible lanes, although the idea has been pitched several times.
By the way, that Amtrak thing is great news! It definitely paves the way for high-speed rail around the country, but of course it's not exactly a green-light for the Midwest High-Speed Rail Network, merely an appropriation of funds for further studies, and certain improvements along the Chicago-St Louis corridor. Plus, our inept Midwestern state governments can still screw it all up! |
Quote:
I don't recall a serious proposal for HOT though; the technology for continuously variable pricing employed by "open road tolling" has really only been out there in practicable form for the last 5-10 years anyway. HOT lanes, where you're actually charging people rather than simply limiting lane access to buses and carpools as with mere HOV, would change the game, though, in my opinion at least. I agree with whyhuhwhy that the reversible lane concept is probably outmoded, as at this point congestion in the reverse commute direction is generally as bad if not significantly worse than in the standard commute direction. The revenue-maximization potential of HOT lanes would further, in theory, provide additional revenue to support other portions of the transportation system, such as aforementioned arterial/intersection improvements to mitigate some congestion on local streets (Chicago proper could sure use a few more left turn arrows, couldn't it?). There is pretty obvious linkage in expressway drivers benefitting from other travelers taking parallel transit service, so a portion of toll revenue above maintenance/depreciation costs could be diverted to support transit, as in the NYC region. But now, back to our brutal reality... of course the main reason NYC has it so good was a game of political gamesmanship to reduce the power and influence of Robert Moses rather than some sort of love for economically-sound transportation planning principles on the part of Rockefeller who made it happen. And given the political orientation of Illinois and the Chicago area, I just don't see any sort of regional effort to raise tolls to support mass transit. Depending on federal policy, however, it does seem conceivable that in our lifetimes I-90/94 could be tolled within city limits to support transit (e.g. the federal policy allowing for privatization of assets), but that would never happen due to any state-level action. |
Quote:
Continuing on with ardecila's explanation - the blue 'shim' not only reduces noise/vibration but also wear between the rail and the tie. It operates in much the same way as the NVH (Noise-Vibration-Harshness) isolation mounts on automobile engines. Smoother and quieter is better - not just for our ears but for the components of the track itself. As to high-speed rail - I'm all for it, having admired the trains in Europe personally (and those in Japan from afar.) However, wouldn't it be very, very expensive to implement given the size of the routes travelled and the need to isolate (for obvious safety reasons) tracks on which trains traveling upwards of 100 mph from cars, people and large animals (livestock)? In Europe and Japan sacrifices (high taxes, attitudes about the 'right' to drive *anywhere*) have been made to accomodate bullet trains and other high-speed rail - will Americans be willing to do the same? Maybe so - if gas prices continue to spiral upwards - at least I hope so. I hope this all comes about. Traveling by train can be a quite pleasant experience as compared to the hell economy-class jet travel already is and the financial burden long-distance driving is now becoming. NSP |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Frankly, a reliable system that reached 110mph for much of it's length would be such a vast improvement over the status quo that I'll still jump for joy to see real progress on this front. As part of the deal, let's get Amtrak to integrate ticketing with travel booking services and arrange for car rental and secure long term parking at various termini. These aren't major issues in downtown Chicago, but it doesn't do me much good to be dropped off at Michigan Central or New Center in Detroit without a car. Some of the suburban Amtrak stations (e.g. Glenview, Naperville), once Amtrak is a credible form of intercity transport, would be well-served by long-term parking facilities. |
Yes, New Center in Detroit and the St. Louis Amtrak station are really uncomfortable places...
Milwaukee recently rebuilt their downtown station. While it's still small, it's now modern, bright, and comfortable. |
Great news on Amtrak. 110 mph isn't exactly all the high speed though.
|
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Central_Station |
I have no idea if this belongs in the transportation thread, but can anyone tell me what effects long term vibration exposures from trains have done to existing structures around the tracks? I work in a building that backs up to Lake and Wells in Chicago, and the building constantly vibrates. You actually feel it more when you're in the core of the building than near the windows. I work on the 21st floor, and the vibration is quite remarkable.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
In most buildings, vibration is more of a nuisance than a structural issue. |
Quote:
|
This is pretty good news!
Quote:
|
If anyone could, I would love to see some pictures of updated stations and work including new buses, and everything else related to improvements with Chi-town mass transit.
|
Quote:
For everything else, browse the CTA pool at Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/groups/chitransit/pool/ |
Chicago area transit averaged over 2 million trips per weekday in the 2nd quarter.
1,073,800 (CTA bus) 650,700 (CTA L) - 1,724,500 Total for CTA 329,700 (Metra) 121,300 (Pace) - 451,000 Total for Metra/Pace 2,185,500 combined. |
^ And 3rd quarter is usually peak season... let's hope these trends continue. CTA is already getting 700,000+ ridership days on the rail system this autumn, and bus has continued its strong growth (which is remarkable after decades of nonstop decline leaving Chicago bus ridership merely half what it was only a few decades ago).
|
if you people could just fix the fckn' slow zones than ridership would go up even more. Yeah I know you are working on it. But why is work listed as done when with the done work the trains crawl every single day!? Every single day year after year! Christ the Pyamids were built faster, Rome was completed 6 times.
from transitchicago.com Work on the Red Line subway between Clark/Division and Grand, between Wilson and Sheridan, and on the southbound track between Morse and Loyola was completed in 2007. Progress was made on all four tracks (Red and Brown lines) between Armitage and Diversey during 2007. Slow zone elimination on the remaining portion of the Red Line subway is underway. All construction between Clark/Division and Roosevelt is complete. Track upgrades between Clark/Division and the north end of the Red Line subway continues and will be complete by the end of 2008. http://www.transitchicago.com/news/motion/szep.html#red well thats just sad. I ride fromn Addison to Wilson and back weekdays and it is slow as anything. The Red Line tunnels going south, I only know from the beginning to Grand, is slow too. Come one. Whats going on? Work completed? |
There is construction in the tunnels still, although it's not track-related. Construction at Grand/State and Block 37 creates construction slow zones, even though the tracks are in good shape.
|
The the Howard branch is scheduled for work in 09 I believe.
The State St. subway track work is done. The Red Line flies nicely though it when I take it at rush. Priority is on finishing the Blue Line track restoration and fixing the Ravenswood branch so we aren't crawling through slow zones between shiny new stations. |
...I would have to say as a somewhat frequent user....I'm in a certain amount of agreement with Pip.......I thought the O'hare Blue was finished with track restoration..yet it is constantly closed...and it seems that the Brown just crawls between Western and Southport (not just at the station reconstructions).....specifically what work is going to be done on the north Red (Addison to Howard) in 2009 ?? ....the lower half is absolutely terrible......
|
Quote:
|
My wife's commuting downtown this week, and yesterday waited 20 minutes for a #125 and said she was almost late, so she was going to take a cab today, cause she wouldn't know how long till the next bus.
So I bookmarked the CTA's bus tracker page on her iPhone, and this morning she'll be able to see exactly where the busses are as the train pulls in. I was playing with it last night and it works great. |
Amtrak Tops One-Million-Passenger Milestone in Downstate Illinois
The ridership increases keep on coming
October 13, 2008 http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/Conten...35288&ssid=180 Routes with Illinois-Sponsored Trains Continue Strong Growth; National Amtrak Totals Also Reach New High, Nearing 29 Million Riders CHICAGO – Amtrak trains operated under a contract with the Illinois Department of Transportation are drawing more passengers in the last 12 months, more than a year after additional frequencies were added. Total ridership on Downstate Illinois routes with state-supported trains has topped one million passengers for the first time in at least 30 years. In all, 1,079,778 tickets were sold on Chicago-Bloomington/Normal-Springfield-St. Louis, Chicago-Champaign-Mattoon-Carbondale and Chicago-Galesburg-Macomb-Quincy routes for the Amtrak fiscal year ending Sept. 30. That is an increase of 143,546 passengers from the previous year, a 15 percent improvement. "We are very excited to see the increase in ridership." said Illinois Department of Transportation Secretary Milton R. Sees. "This boost in ridership shows how important rail service is to thousands of people and Illinois DOT is proud to share in this partnership with Amtrak." "We take great pride in operating a safe and reliable service that is giving travelers the best way to travel between busy downtowns and small cities; an option that avoids highway congestion and links communities," said Amtrak General Superintendent Daryl Pesce, who is based in Chicago. On the Chicago-St. Louis Lincoln Service corridor, total ridership rose by 14 percent to exceed a half-million passengers at 543,642. Last month, the Federal Railroad Administration announced the award of $3.4 million in grants to improve reliability and decrease travel times on the route. It will fund the installation of a new trackside signal system between Joliet and Dwight and new on-train signal system from Joliet to Springfield that will allow top speeds of 110 mph. Ridership between Chicago and Carbondale, the route the Illini and Saluki trains share with the City of New Orleans, is up by 15 percent for the corridor, totaling 304,435. For the Chicago-Galesburg-Quincy route of the Illinois Zephyr, Carl Sandburg and other trains, ridership has increased by 19 percent for the route, with 231,701 passengers. The Illinois DOT also supports Amtrak Hiawatha Service trains between Chicago and Milwaukee which have gained more than 150,000 additional passengers in the last 12 months. That is an increase of nearly 26 percent, reaching a total approaching three-quarter-million passengers (749,659). Amtrak Hiawatha Service trains offer seven daily departures in each direction Mondays through Saturdays, with six trains each way on Sundays. They are primarily funded by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. In all, including downstate Illinois and the Hiawathas, Illinois DOT supported routes have added nearly 300,000 passengers in the last year (297,869). All Amtrak trains across the system saw increases in ridership. The 28.7 million total for the period October 1, 2007 - September 30, 2008, topped the 25,847,531 for the previous 12 months by 11.1 percent. Total ticket revenue for the fiscal year reached $1.7 billion, a 14.2 percent increase over the $1.5 billion in FY07. "After another record-breaking year, in which the railroad achieved double-digit growth, Amtrak has solidified its role as a leader in the nation's transportation network and proven intercity passenger rail's relevance in today's world," said Alex Kummant, President and CEO of Amtrak. "Highway and airway congestion, volatile fuel prices and increasing environmental awareness all contributed to Amtrak's successful year, as did our continually improving service and on-time performance." Kummant added, "With the recent passage of a reauthorization bill, which includes a significant state and federal capital matching grant program, we also look forward to expanding state partnerships to provide more rail service in growing corridors nationwide." FY08 Ridership and Revenue Chart |
Hiawatha Service Ridership Sets Record
Amtrak Hiawatha Service Ridership Sets Record
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/Conten...35258&ssid=180 National Amtrak Totals Also Reach New High, Nearing 29 Million Riders; Sixth Straight Year of National Ridership Growth CHICAGO - Amtrak Hiawatha Service trains have gained more than 150,000 additional passengers in the last 12 months, an increase of nearly 26 percent, and reached a total approaching three-quarter-million (749,659) passengers between Milwaukee and Chicago for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30. Amtrak Hiawatha Service trains offer seven daily departures in each direction Mondays through Saturdays, with six trains each way on Sundays. They are operated by Amtrak under contracts with the Wisconsin and Illinois state transportation departments. "We couldn't be more pleased with the ridership increases on the Hiawatha Service," said Wisconsin Department of Transportation Secretary Frank Busalacchi. "It shows that there is strong support for passenger rail service in this corridor." "We are very excited to see the increase in ridership for the Hiawatha Service " said Illinois Department of Transportation Secretary Milton R. Sees. "This boost in ridership shows how important rail service is to thousands of people and Illinois DOT is proud to share in this partership with Amtrak." All Amtrak trains across the system saw increases in ridership. The 28.7 million total for the period October 1, 2007-September 30, 2008, topped the 25,847,531 for the previous 12 months by 11.1 percent. Total ticket revenue for the fiscal year reached $1.7 billion, a 14.2 percent increase over the $1.5 billion in FY07. "After another record-breaking year, in which the railroad achieved double-digit growth, Amtrak has solidified its role as a leader in the nation's transportation network and proven intercity passenger rail's relevance in today's world," said Alex Kummant, President and CEO of Amtrak. "Highway and airway congestion, volatile fuel prices and increasing environmental awareness all contributed to Amtrak's successful year, as did our continually improving service and on-time performance." Kummant added, "With the recent passage of a reauthorization bill, which includes a significant state and federal capital matching grant program, we also look forward to expanding state partnerships to provide more rail service in growing corridors nationwide." Last month, the Federal Railroad Administration announced the award of a $5 million grant to further improve reliability on the Hiawatha Service route. It will fund the installation of nearly 18 miles of new track in Wisconsin and reprogram grade crossing warning devices. The project will eliminate delays associated with ongoing maintenance of jointed rail and reduce travel time. "We take great pride in operating a safe and reliable service that is giving travelers the best way to travel between busy downtowns and vital suburbs; an option that avoids highway congestion on Interstate 94 and links two great cities," said Amtrak General Superintendent Daryl Pesce, who is based in Chicago. |
^ Those numbers imply roughly 2,000 passengers riding the Hiawatha per day, or, perhaps 300 per roundtrip.
I'd be curious what the fare recovery ratio is. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:40 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Prev