Official Chicago Public Transportation Question Thread (quality of life, cost, buses)

[oakparkdude]

This is why:

You take a 100 year old system. You expose the system to the elements (cold, ice, snow, salt, etc) instead of putting it in tunnels. You continuously underfund it to the point where large parts of the system are on the verge of collapse. Then you increase ridership levels to near historical peaks.

[eevee]

IDK, I think the CTA is fairly comparable to the MBTA in Massachusetts, an equally old system, though the T has gotten newer buses and trains and are in the process of revamping several stations, just like the CTA. and of course, and elevated system is probably just harder to maintain then one that's mostly underground. it all comes down to funding though

[advocatusdiavoli]

Originally Posted by LindseyHunter

Why is our CTA train enviroment so ugly? .

Because the city of Chicago does not realize that providing insfrastrucure such as tranpsortation is aboslutley critical to city's success. It's an investement in the future. Public transportations should not be an afterthought but a pivotal part of any serious city plannning. Good transportation system brings business to the city but also helps keeping the city coherent as opposed to lose conglomeration of neighborhood or suburbs.

[oakparkdude]

Originally Posted by eevee

IDK, I think the CTA is fairly comparable to the MBTA in Massachusetts, an equally old system, though the T has gotten newer buses and trains and are in the process of revamping several stations, just like the CTA. and of course, and elevated system is probably just harder to maintain then one that's mostly underground. it all comes down to funding though

Until very recently, the MBTA didn't actually have a real budget. At the end of every year, the state of Massachusetts simply wrote a check to cover whatever operating deficit the MBTA had. Incredible. I think that ended several years ago. The CTA has never been so fortunate. In fact, the fare recovery ratio (the amount of its budget funded by passenger fares) is the highest of any public transit agency in the country (50%.) Most other agencies have a recovery ratio of 10-30%.

[Mamama Mia]

Old system with no money.

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by advocatusdiavoli

Because the city of Chicago does not realize that providing insfrastrucure such as tranpsortation is aboslutley critical to city's success. It's an investement in the future. Public transportations should not be an afterthought but a pivotal part of any serious city plannning. Good transportation system brings business to the city but also helps keeping the city coherent as opposed to lose conglomeration of neighborhood or suburbs.

To be fair, in just the past few years we have spend over $500 million on rehabbing the Brown Line, almost $500 million on the Blue Line, over $300 million on the Red Line, and the 100+ year old tracks in the Loop are being replaced. The Green Line was renovated around 15 years ago. The Orange Line was opened in '93.

[aragx6]

Comparing St. Louis' metro to Chicago's el system is crazy. The el is like 10x older than the metro and way more extensive (i.e. costs far more money to keep up)

[Attrill]

I would agree that the condition of stations is generally comparable to the T, and also comparable to many of the MTA stations in New York. Newer systems like San Fran and DC are more modern, so they only have 30 years of grime instead of 100+ years. They also have a lot of their own issues.

Comparing it to European systems can't be done until we get European levels of funding for the CTA (or any US system for that matter)

[chet everett]

The CTA has quite a bit of money, as sukwoo states it has a very high "fare recovery ratio".

The simple fact is da' Mare does not particularly like the CTA system. He likes flowers and iron fences. And bus shelters with ads. And selling / leasing city facilities that have positive cash flow (parking garages, Skyway, Midway)...

Chicago region, because of the Deep Tunnel and other such projects, has the best experience with subterean construction in the world. If there was any kind of political will to create an extensive reworking of the CTA rail system it could be done.

Instead the bias is toward lower cost options that rely on barely adequate existing bus routes and such...

[via chicago]

Originally Posted by chet everett

Chicago region, because of the Deep Tunnel and other such projects, has the best experience with subterean construction in the world.

Instead the bias is toward lower cost options that rely on barely adequate existing bus routes and such...

The Deep Tunnel has also taken 30+ years of construction (wont be finished for another 10), and has already cost $3 billion+.

A comprehensive subway in place of the L is a nice thought and all, but it aint gonna happen. Buses are far more versatile and are not subject to high upfront capital expenditures, or tearing up the entire city for a few decades...