Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila
^^ You bring up a HUGE point that I missed - there ABSOLUTELY needs to be a United Center station. There's really no excuse for its absence -
|
Between a United Center stop versus a Blue Line transfer station at Van Buren, I would guess offhand that the latter provides much more bang-for-the-buck in terms of annual user benefits and improved regional accessibility. I suppose in theory one could build both, but it seems like overkill considering how sparsely built the area is at the moment. As someone who goes to a lot of Blackhawks games, I don't feel like United Center is particularly poorly served by public transit - it's not as great as Wrigley or the Cell obviously, but the #19 and #20 are fine for trips from downtown, and the Green and Blue lines aren't exactly the longest walk - or at least not long enough to warrant dropping ~$30+ million on a new station at Madison.
Now, if Wirtz and Reinsdorf announced plans to redevelop their fields of parking into a mixed-use neighborhood in conjunction with a new L stop, that would change things, but since they have zero intention of doing so...
Quote:
Originally Posted by emathias
Seven years of "planning" and their only official proposal is to build a little chunk of elevated track and further postpone the largest part of what would actually make this a "Circle" Line? If they could make decisions, they could take advantage of the slack real estate market and buy some land, or preserve corridors.
I also thought it was just plain weird to expand the boundaries, regardless of feedback. It was interesting to see an actual map from the CTA with a Kimball-Jefferson Park proposal, though.
|
"Environmental Review" (which, for intents and purposes, means "neighborhood veto power") tends to doom new elevated lines, while cost dooms new subway lines. In the current environment, an outcome like this was probably inevitable - there's simply no way to build the northwestern portion of the "Circle" unless an elected official rams through an elevated line (to meet cost effectiveness) or spends political capital with a massive earmark for a subway. Remember, even the 2nd Ave Subway was so expensive as to be of marginal 'cost-effectiveness', and the WMATA extension to Dulles would have died until enough politicians got involved to clarify that the rules in place wouldn't be strictly adhered to and the line would be built regardless. Considering that all of the CTA New Starts are more heavily dependent upon federal funds and less dependent on local funds than most other major transit construction projects nationwide (such as LA, Denver, Houston, NYC) since there is no local funding source in place for expansion let alone enough for maintenance, the sad truth is that the projects are thus even more at the mercy of federal cost-effectiveness requirements.