Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They say it because its true. Ridership is alway inflated, the costs hidden and minimized. Its true of every transit project built in the entire US over last 4 decades. Projections are always wrong, because if the numbers look even worse, there will be even more opposition.
Many of those people won't move because the taxes are likely NOT to be lower anymore. Taxes will go up because we have a new train to subsidize. There is no free lunch. It will cost more then what they say it will. Mark my word, this train will cost over a billion, just to build it. And there will be additional costs as long as it runs, as fares will never come close to covering the costs.
If you do it by a pure numbers thing, we can't do this project.
Most people in Northwest Indiana will NOT benefit from this project. Most people in Northwest Indiana do not work in downtown Chicago. But they will have to pay for this train no matter. I am surprised there isn't even more opposition.
Agree with your post, if this would do all sorts of wonders then why hasn't the Hammond, East Chicago, Gary Metro stops been redeveloped to such dreams as what they're proposing in Munster? And it wouldn't cost the billion plus to do it either!
They say it because its true. Ridership is alway inflated, the costs hidden and minimized. Its true of every transit project built in the entire US over last 4 decades. Projections are always wrong, because if the numbers look even worse, there will be even more opposition.
Many of those people won't move because the taxes are likely NOT to be lower anymore. Taxes will go up because we have a new train to subsidize. There is no free lunch. It will cost more then what they say it will. Mark my word, this train will cost over a billion, just to build it. And there will be additional costs as long as it runs, as fares will never come close to covering the costs.
If you do it by a pure numbers thing, we can't do this project.
Most people in Northwest Indiana will NOT benefit from this project. Most people in Northwest Indiana do not work in downtown Chicago. But they will have to pay for this train no matter. I am surprised there isn't even more opposition.
Don't most of us want NWI to get better? Better access and jobs should be a positive thing although I do understand the concern for the negatives. Eventually even more jobs should be moving INTO NWI something that is very difficult to be currently done. I don't see any big companies with those good white collar jobs coming in if things stay the same. THis is the chance to get out of the doldrums.
IMO there is no better and reasonable way to make the Region better than the rail.
They say it because its true. Ridership is alway inflated, the costs hidden and minimized. Its true of every transit project built in the entire US over last 4 decades. Projections are always wrong, because if the numbers look even worse, there will be even more opposition.
Many of those people won't move because the taxes are likely NOT to be lower anymore. Taxes will go up because we have a new train to subsidize. There is no free lunch. It will cost more then what they say it will. Mark my word, this train will cost over a billion, just to build it. And there will be additional costs as long as it runs, as fares will never come close to covering the costs.
If you do it by a pure numbers thing, we can't do this project.
Most people in Northwest Indiana will NOT benefit from this project. Most people in Northwest Indiana do not work in downtown Chicago. But they will have to pay for this train no matter. I am surprised there isn't even more opposition.
Currently, a majority of people may not work in Chicago that live in Munster or Dyer. But if this is built, the property values, I believe, would skyrocket in value due to a rush of frustrated fiscal conservatives that work in Chicago and are tired of the high taxes and cost of living in the land of Lincoln. That would mean current homeowners in NWI would be able to retire a few years early with the money they could make on selling their house. I would invision Dyer and Munster turning into Downers Grove and Naperville with their fast train access into the city.
Currently, my parents home is worth 400k in the southwest suburbs of Chicago and has a property tax bill of 12k annually. If they owned a home in Munster or Dyer wouldn't it be around 4-5k for the taxes on a 400k home? If so, do you think this train line will cause takes to triple? I highly doubt that. Maybe a hundred bucks or so.
Currently, my parents home is worth 400k in the southwest suburbs of Chicago and has a property tax bill of 12k annually. If they owned a home in Munster or Dyer wouldn't it be around 4-5k for the taxes on a 400k home?
Yes, approximately.
Also, the points that MikeMak and WildWestDude have made are more of the positive ripple effects of this project/investment, a side point of what I was referencing in my last post. Things that aren't quantifiable now, and may never actually be. If you look at dollars and cents of the project with blinders on, and only do the A + B algebra of how much will the project cost vs what is the revenue received by riders' monthly fees... then yes it's a losing proposition. But, that doesn't include so many of the other benefits that would likely be realized... such as the aforementioned increase in home prices, becoming more appealing to business in Chicagoland to relocate, and everything else that works within the upward cycle of a strengthening economy that builds upon itself.
Also worth pointing out that while Munster and Dyer would be the likely main beneficiaries of this, it would help surrounding towns as well that don't have a station in their town. You can include Schererville and St. John in that as well, and maybe Highland and Crown Point to a lesser degree (for different reasons). Currently it takes someone from Schererville or St John about 25 mins to get to the EC station, give or take and depending on what part of those towns the person lives in. A station in Dyer would cut that down to roughly 10 mins max commute to the station, which with a 45 min train ride to downtown keeps it at or below the crucial 1 hour one-way commute time.
I could see people from Highland using the Munster station instead of the EC or Hammond station, especially those on the west side of town. It'd be a little bit shorter of a drive and definitely safer. Crown Point COULD see some benefit, but probably not as much. You'd think CP to a Dyer station would be about the same drive as a commute of CP to EC station, given the latter being majority expressway driving although distance-wise is further.
Agree with your post, if this would do all sorts of wonders then why hasn't the Hammond, East Chicago, Gary Metro stops been redeveloped to such dreams as what they're proposing in Munster? And it wouldn't cost the billion plus to do it either!
There are issues in Hammond, and even more in East Chicago and Gary that are far greater than anything a specific train stop would rectify. Those areas need more than a train station to help revitalize them. What about Naperville, Orland Park, Downers Grove, Hinsdale, Winnetka, Highland Park, or any of those areas? Train stations are not the ONLY reason they are thriving areas but it is a significant factor as to why they continue to thrive.
Last edited by Northwest Indiana; 03-09-2017 at 03:21 AM..
There are issues in Hammond, and even more in East Chicago and Gary that are far greater than anything a specific train stop would rectify. Those areas need more than a train station to help revitalize them. What about Naperville, Orland Park, Downers Grove, Hinsdale, Winnetka, Highland Park, or any of those areas? Train stations are not the ONLY reason they are thriving areas but it is a significant factor as to why they continue to thrive.
You're right there are issues in those cities, but if there was such demand for TOD wouldn't some developer try to make it happen instead of taking government dollars to subsidize it?
In regards to those towns you could also choose to include Harvey, Hazel Crest, Riverdale which are closer to NWI. Seems to be a lot of optimism for a hunch that people will migrate to NWI. 15% of NWI residents work in Chicago compared to 35% of residents in Illinois not in Cook County The affordable shore: Why Indiana living appeals to Chicago commuters - Chicago Tribune Going back to the previously posted article about a drop in ridership, how is this really going to change Munster/Dyer even being a secondary factor? Will there actually be an influx of people from over the border and not including the 'my new neighbor' replies? At the end of the day, this is just Visclosky's signature project that he is trying to force through.
This clip from The Simpsons feels very true in regards to trying to sell this idea.
It's not just people who already live in suburbs. Right now there are hoards of young people living in the Chicago, and many of them choose to move to the suburbs where they can afford a single family home with a yard and convenient parking when they decide to have children. However, those people who have become accustomed to using the train to get to work and will keep their city jobs will search out cities that emulate urban environments (like La Grange, like Downers Grove). with centrally located train stations and walkable downtowns.
When it's time to find a place to live, they look right over NWI, because none of the communities provide either of those. Gary, Hammond, and East Chicago have train stations and have vestiges of being walkable, but there is nothing there otherwise (schools, low crime, shopping, etc) to attract them. Furthermore, where there are good schools and the start of interesting retail, such as Crown Point and Muster, there isn't a train. And in Munster's case, there isn't much of a walkable downtown; Ridge could be that place, but it's not. So they suck it up and move some place that costs them more, because they feel that the extra cost is worth the better quality of life.
This is from experience, as it is my own feelings, all of my Chicago friends feel the same way, and even 90% of my coworkers who live in the suburbs have purchased homes that are in walking distance of the train. I had a hard time moving to SE Hammond, because I wasn't sure what there was going to be there for me, but I have found a certain bit of civic pride in the area, and I have hope that it can become a better place. But if the citizens of the region are ultimately the cause of stopping the train project, that will be my sign that it's time to move to Illinois, and I think west Lake County will have missed out on an enormous opportunity.
They also look over NWI because it's Indiana. My wife worked in Chicago and her coworkers were surpised to hear she was moving here from the city because they think its 2+ hours one way and when she told them her commute from CP was shorter than theirs from Schaumburg, Buffalo Grove, or even the south side of Chicago to NMH they were in disbelief.
If the possibility of a train is the only thing keeping you in Indiana then I'm sorry. Seeing that you state you're in SE Hammond I'm going to assume a point at 169th and Parrish Ave which is a meer 8 minute drive to the EC train station that'll get you into the city in about 35 minutes on a express train.
So maybe overcoming the perception is the bigger problem than a transportation 'solution'.
Cobra, that is definitely a problem. And I think that speaks to some sort of marketing campaign that the Region needs to push in Chicago, but that's another matter. I think you brushed over the point where I said that so many former city dwellers locating in places where they can walk to the train. The idea of driving 20 minutes in order for it then to take another 45 minutes to an hour to get downtown isn't what they are looking for. Even if they knew what Indiana had, they wouldn't be interested. Some people might turn it down just because of what they've heard about Hammond and Gary and not wanting to wait on a platform there. Hell, I bet some people in Munster and Dyer feel safer driving than going to Hammond station.
And it's not just about the train, because we already drive to the Hammond Station (though it would be great not having to coordinate who's driving when, or get stuck by BNSF trains at Hudson St.), it's about the populations state of mind. That one can live in an at best stagnating, at worst dying area, and not be willing to take a chance on something that has a chance to really make some of the area competitive with Chicago commuter suburbs that are doing significantly better than we are. Also, that was a typo. I'm in SW Hammond. Our house is almost right on top of the proposed South Hammond station.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
