Chciago Streetcar (Lincoln: transit, best, park)

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Street cars do not aim to get rid of one form of transit. They work alongside it - every single system I've seen in real life makes it possible for cars to drive alongside it.

As I clearly said, the guy running the site above clearly is proposing closing Clark St to be closed to normal vehicular traffic--

In these neighborhoods, drivers are the minority. They'll still be able to drive to work, but not down Clark Street: Clark is going to be optimized for commuting and shopping.

Again, the fact is Chicago does have buses and trains and bicycles and personal vehicles and delivery trucks all generally working together to help people where they want to go. Folks that have professional experience understand this and would never suggest making radical changes that will harm the hard to balance needs of all the constituencies -- Former CDOT Engineer Slams Ashland Bus Rapid Transit Proposal | theexpiredmeter.com

BRT is something else the radical from the above site has no love for: Chicago Streetcar Renaissance: BRT or streetcar? The choice is about more than just the transit system


This sort of effort will go nowhere given the history of similar hare-brained schemes on State St or in Oak Park. If the OP wants to ally himself with that sort of lunatic that is his right but I warn the OP that such an alliance is unlikely to improve their own credibility with future employers. Simply put employers want to hire savvy pragmatists not wacky idealists.

[jdiddy]

There's a lot of transit projects on the shelf that would make a real positive impact on easing transportation in this city.

This isn't one of them.

[pete6032]

We can't even afford to keep our existing public transit rail lines in good working condition (see: slow zones). What makes you think its a good idea to build more of them?

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by pete6032

We can't even afford to keep our existing public transit rail lines in good working condition (see: slow zones). What makes you think its a good idea to build more of them?

Your example of slow zones is currently not a very good one. Not only was all of the track for the red line replaced south of Chinatown semi recently, but they are doing this or will be doing this for the Blue line, and upcoming for the red line on the north branch (including all those planned built flyovers in the Lakeview area). The CTA has also purchased a few billion dollars worth of a new series of cars that will start shipments in 2016 (I believe).

This notion that the CTA is just standing by and not doing any improvements to anything is pretty false. They could be mismanaged monetarily, but it's not like they're just sitting back and letting things deteriorate.

[chet everett]

pete6032 brings up a great point, the financial mismanagent of the CTA is forcing service cuts on existing lines. The limited revenues they have are pushed to the limit trying to keep critical segment of the well traveled Blue line and other high ridership rapid transit from collapsing. The hard work of people like Forrest Claypool can't compare to the lala-land pretty pictures of the "streetcar blogger guy"...

The OP is studying for an advanced degree in Economics. I've seen many many presentations that try to extrapolate data from urban areas far different than our own to make a case for some shiny new development / transit project. The problem with comparing Prague or Portland to Chicago is that the traditions we have are very different in everything from how / where people work / live to how poltical decisions made decades ago impact the present.

The massive "sell off of assets" that happend while Mayor Daley was in office means that things like the huge upfront investments in rail and rolling stock cannot be presented to potential bond-buying investors as one part of total finance plan that could also have revenue from things like tollhighways, parking meters / garages, or similar revenue streams "back" the costly initial building phase. If the analysis of ridership revenue from these trolleys would not cover the massive upfront infrastructure the project would be yet another source of red-ink forcing service cuts to other CTA areas of operations. Surely the pie-in-the sky dream that envisions some kind of quaint European style streetscape is massively out of touch with the reality of south side shopping unable to support a "Moo & Oink" grocery chain...

The OP might do well either in educating the streetcar dreamer as to how real financial feasibility studies truly should show this plan to be unworkable or perhaps even seeking an internship with a group like the Better Government Association where proper investigation of the financial mismanagement of CTA would help more people understand how the legacy of prior reckless management / corruption leaves the agency unable to move forward on "futuristic" dreams. What Chicago needs is some one like an angry parent that can wag their finger and say "... and THAT is why we can't have 'nice things' around here!".

[pete6032]

Originally Posted by marothisu

it's not like they're just sitting back and letting things deteriorate.

Have you ridden the Congress branch of the blue line?

[chirack]

Bad idea. Reminds me of turning state street into an pedestrian mall( commerce dropped because not everyone wants to take the bus downtown.). There are cities in the US that have built light rail systems but for the most part they are cities that don't have rapid transit like the EL. Philadelphia is the only city I know of that runs street cars, buses and rapid transit. In addition this route would compete with the Red line. In addition unless you ban cars along the route, this thing is going to get stuck in traffic too.

Anyway the reason why they install light rail is because there is enough demand for light rail and no other options. However for this route if you were going far you would use the Red line and as for too far to walk to please it is public transit not an taxi service for yuppies.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by pete6032

Have you ridden the Congress branch of the blue line?

I have - and I never said every single branch of every single line is having work done, but they are fixing some things (slowly but surely) on various ones and also replacing whatever. Do you understand how much money it costs to maintain and fix infrastructure like this? It's not cheap at all.

[pete6032]

Originally Posted by marothisu

Do you understand how much money it costs to maintain and fix infrastructure like this? It's not cheap at all.

That was my original point. We don't even seem to have the funds to keep our current rail transit system in modern shape, so why should the city even think for one second about building new lines, when existing lines are underfunded...

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by pete6032

That was my original point. We don't even seem to have the funds to keep our current rail transit system in modern shape, so why should the city even think for one second about building new lines, when existing lines are underfunded...

I think there's more to it than this. The CTA spent $425 million last year modernizing the south branch of the red line. The CTA also semi recently spent over $2 billion on ordering new cars to start delivery in 2016. They got federal funding for both the Blue Line and Red-Purple (north branch) modernization. I don't think they don't have the money - I think their priorities in spending are different than what some people may want (i.e. red line south branch extension).