CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by glowrock

My main question is quite simple: It's not going to reduce traffic in the least bit, so it's really just a money grab.

Aaron (Glowrock)

Why do you say that? Higher prices reduce the usage of every other product I can think of, unless it's something humans can not do without. 94 has more traffic than the toll road. Cigarette sales drop as prices increase, despite the presence of nicotine.

More importantly, other cities have instituted congestion pricing--or banned cars from portions of the cities--and now have fewer or no cars.

Generally, it makes sense to tax the things you don't want.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

Why do you say that? Higher prices reduce the usage of every other product I can think of, unless it's something humans can not do without. 94 has more traffic than the toll road. Cigarette sales drop as prices increase, despite the presence of nicotine.

More importantly, other cities have instituted congestion pricing--or banned cars from portions of the cities--and now have fewer or no cars.

Generally, it makes sense to tax the things you don't want.

I say that because, despite all of the myriad transit options that DO exist to get to and from the Loop area (use the same general downtown Chicago guidelines as earlier in this thread), lots of people who work in the area don't have easy transit access at all because of the general hub and spoke system and poor street networks for buses. In other words, people STILL have to get to work, and I don't see congestion pricing really changing that dynamic to really reduce the numbers of cars on the road. If anything, it's just going to encourage even more shared ride service vehicles driving around as opposed to people going into a garage, working, then leaving.

Additionally, I really feel that congestion pricing hurts the service/restaurant/retail workers even more than anyone else, because they can't take another tax hit upon their already low income levels. Yet they still have to get to work, so perhaps that means they'll be forced to work elsewhere. I can see this making it difficult for many types of positions in the Loop area to be filled if people can no longer get to their workplace in a reasonable time frame and at a reasonable cost. (no matter what kind of transportation they use)

Especially for the southern extent of this zone (ie: Roosevelt), many of those big box center garages are used by employees because the garages are reasonably priced for daily use. Tack on a big congestion fee, all of the sudden workers essentially can no longer afford to work at these locations.

Just saying I don't really think a congestion pricing scheme in the Loop area is all that great of an idea. It's not like people aren't already using transit, but with the number of jobs continuing to flow into the Loop area, transit can't keep up, therefore people still need to drive/use rideshares to get there. Not sure it makes sense to punish people for getting to and from work, that's all.

And yes, I would want to make sure the money is used for improved transportation infrastructure only in the Loop/downtown area. Otherwise it's just a flat-out money grab.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Vlajos]

I think the priority is additional tax money. The city has a large deficit to fill. All new taxes should be going to pay for the pension debt not new spending.

[aaron38]

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg...-unsustainable
Lightfoot urges pension changes, calls 3 percent COLA 'unsustainable'

About time someone said it. Constitutionally protected growth for some far above inflation is one of the biggest scams ever forced on the people of this state.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

If it costs $12 to take an Uber downtown to your job, and that increases to $22, more people will figure out a new way to get downtown through rail and buses. Then add in a $12 Uber home for a total price of $34.

If it costs $20 to drive downtown and park all day, and that increases to $30, more people will figure out a new way like rail or buses.

Higher price = less demand

Fine. How about this? Higher price = fewer workers available for service/retail/restaurant jobs in the Loop area? It's already expensive and/or time consuming to get to the Loop, either by transit, car or rideshare. Add even more time or cost to that mix, potential employees will simply nix the area from their job search areas, and employers won't be able to fill positions.

I'm not so sure that a congestion fee of any sort should be implemented at all to begin with, yet alone the tax dollars going directly to fund pensions. The casino money, sure. It's a sin tax, and I have no issue with that. I don't think getting to and from your workplace downtown should be considered something akin to a sin tax.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

^ It may take more time for the workers to commute, and the workers may demand higher compensation for this inconvenience which would translate into higher prices for all.

But I don’t think it’s a right to drive your personal car for free into the third largest city in the U.S. because you want to avoid the CTA.

Did I specifically state this? And rideshares are not your personal car, neither are taxis. What I stated was that the increased time and/or cost would make it prohibitive for many employees to stay at their current service/industry positions in the Loop area as well as for employers to fill open positions. Of course if employers would actually increase wages in the downtown area to compensate for these commute time and/or commute cost increases, that would likely resolve the issue. Even then, you're now basically taxing employers in the Loop area specifically, which I'm not sure is such a smart thing to do when you're trying to increase overall job density, not decrease it.

Aaron (Glowrock)

[the urban politician]

All I can say is, a congestion charge and higher Uber taxes will only fill my coffers more

I spent most of the last decade investing in several properties that are near (or fairly near) L stops. I also have a property right off the Chicago Ave bus line.

When the cost of driving and Ubering goes up further, proximity to transit will continue to become more and more valuable.

[OrdoSeclorum]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Just saying I don't really think a congestion pricing scheme in the Loop area is all that great of an idea. It's not like people aren't already using transit, but with the number of jobs continuing to flow into the Loop area, transit can't keep up, therefore people still need to drive/use rideshares to get there. Not sure it makes sense to punish people for getting to and from work, that's all.

Maybe. But we would be a better, more productive city if the people who *had* to drive had less congested roads and there were incentives for people to walk, bike and live in the city center. I feel strongly that we need fewer auto lanes and more protected bike lanes and dedicated bus lanes. This city could add rapid bus capacity ALL DAY if we put bus-only lanes on LSD, Chicago, Ashland, Western and a couple others. If people need to get to their service jobs affordably, that's the answer. Or, heck, to their CFO jobs.

As for what people do, my personal anecdote is this. I can walk, bike, bus, train, taxi or drive into the Loop, which I need to do only once a month or so. I do all those things. Years ago, I'd sometimes drive and park, because the meters were so cheap. Now that it would cost me $24 to park at a meter downtown, I Uber or take the train if I'm not running late. I can afford whatever. But I still just do what's cheapest, after considering a time/value convenience regression.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

All I can say is, a congestion charge and higher Uber taxes will only fill my coffers more

I spent most of the last decade investing in several properties that are near (or fairly near) L stops. I also have a property right off the Chicago Ave bus line.

When the cost of driving and Ubering goes up further, proximity to transit will continue to become more and more valuable.

And that increased rent will continue to drive the lower-paid service workers further and further away, keeping them from accessing reasonable transit, and therefore they will continue to pay more and more and more for transportation. It's a vicious cycle, one where the lower-paid members of our society will continually and perpetually lose.

BTW, please don't take this the wrong way, tup, but can you just for a few posts stop bragging about the property you own and how much money you make from them? I swear, speaking for myself it's growing quite tiring!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by glowrock

Did I specifically state this? And rideshares are not your personal car, neither are taxis. What I stated was that the increased time and/or cost would make it prohibitive for many employees to stay at their current service/industry positions in the Loop area as well as for employers to fill open positions. Of course if employers would actually increase wages in the downtown area to compensate for these commute time and/or commute cost increases, that would likely resolve the issue. Even then, you're now basically taxing employers in the Loop area specifically, which I'm not sure is such a smart thing to do when you're trying to increase overall job density, not decrease it.

Aaron (Glowrock)

Given that all locations within a reasonable congestion zone would be very CTA accessible, employees could instead take an Uber to the nearest CTA stop to them, which in almost all cases will be closer than the loop and is likely cheaper overall than what some might be currently doing. It may take a little longer (transfer time and extra walking at the end) and be less comfortable but I don't think it's that bad.

I should check to see if the city updated its ridesharing data and update. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=238550. I wonder what the best way to estimate downtown retail workers with that data may be? I suppose many retail establishments open at 11 or so instead of 8-9 when most office workers would be commuting. Cafes would open earlier. So I could look at non-ohare to loop data with arrival time of ~11 and ~630 as a start.

I suppose congestion charges could only apply at certain hours, but arguably there is congestion during peak "leisure" times as well in River North and West loop.

[Vlajos]

I can't imagine many retail workers are taking Ubers or cabs to work downtown. I doubt a congestion tax would have much impact on them.

[aaron38]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

But I don’t think it’s a right to drive your personal car for free into the third largest city in the U.S. because you want to avoid the CTA.

Public streets are public. That’s either true or it isn’t. There is no right to drive a car into the loop and park it for free. Never has been.
But if I choose to drive my elderly parents to the theatre and drop them off, that is my right. I’m already paying all the state taxes to fund those streets. And the economic activity of that theatre also pays for the streets.

Use taxes have their place. But if the loop is made artificially expensive, people will go elsewhere.

[glowrock]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

I can't imagine many retail workers are taking Ubers or cabs to work downtown. I doubt a congestion tax would have much impact on them.

The congestion tax proposals include private vehicles, correct? If so, then yes, they'd be hit hard.

It's all about ease of transit access. If you've got to walk a mile to get to a train stop and then walk another half mile from the train to your destination, that adds a LOT of time. I know people need to account for that, but it's tough for the service industry people, especially when so many of the jobs are in the Loop area.

One of the real issues is that there aren't many bus routes that actually are relatively quick. CTA needs to have a network of express buses that don't stop every block, they need some priority signaling at intersections, that kind of thing. With the relative lack of wide roads in Chicago, instituting bus/BRT lanes is all but impossible throughout much of the city, with the possible exception of Western, maybe Ashland, perhaps a few others. E-W streets are all nearly impossible, as they're generally only 2-lane streets with a few 4-lane areas (ie: Irving Park)

SIGSEGV has a reasonable idea about getting to main transit stations. I guess this is where the scooters could come into play, but that opens up a whole different can of worms right there!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by glowrock

And that increased rent will continue to drive the lower-paid service workers further and further away, keeping them from accessing reasonable transit, and therefore they will continue to pay more and more and more for transportation. It's a vicious cycle, one where the lower-paid members of our society will continually and perpetually lose.

BTW, please don't take this the wrong way, tup, but can you just for a few posts stop bragging about the property you own and how much money you make from them? I swear, speaking for myself it's growing quite tiring!

Aaron (Glowrock)

Sorry you feel that way. But I think you're lumping in LVDW's posts together with mine, because he talks about his properties doing well a lot too. It's not all coming from me

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by glowrock

The congestion tax proposals include private vehicles, correct? If so, then yes, they'd be hit hard.

It's all about ease of transit access. If you've got to walk a mile to get to a train stop and then walk another half mile from the train to your destination, that adds a LOT of time. I know people need to account for that, but it's tough for the service industry people, especially when so many of the jobs are in the Loop area.

One of the real issues is that there aren't many bus routes that actually are relatively quick. CTA needs to have a network of express buses that don't stop every block, they need some priority signaling at intersections, that kind of thing. With the relative lack of wide roads in Chicago, instituting bus/BRT lanes is all but impossible throughout much of the city, with the possible exception of Western, maybe Ashland, perhaps a few others. E-W streets are all nearly impossible, as they're generally only 2-lane streets with a few 4-lane areas (ie: Irving Park)

SIGSEGV has a reasonable idea about getting to main transit stations. I guess this is where the scooters could come into play, but that opens up a whole different can of worms right there!

Aaron (Glowrock)

You think retail workers are driving their cars downtown and paying $25 plus per day to park? Sorry, but I find that extremely hard to believe.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

You think retail workers are driving their cars downtown and paying $25 plus per day to park? Sorry, but I find that extremely hard to believe.

It's possible that hotels provide free employee parking but I imagine most places in the loop don't. I could be wrong though!

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by glowrock

And that increased rent will continue to drive the lower-paid service workers further and further away, keeping them from accessing reasonable transit, and therefore they will continue to pay more and more and more for transportation. It's a vicious cycle, one where the lower-paid members of our society will continually and perpetually lose.

Except that's not how it works in reality. The fact is that most of the working poor do not use transit. Some of the densest working class neighborhoods in the city lie along the Pink Line which only occasionally runs 6 car trains with 4 cars being the standard for 90% of the day. That's a train running directly downtown from areas like Little Village which has 70,000 working class residents.

The fact is most of the people working service jobs at the local cocktail bar are NOT the working poor, but starving artist hipster types living in places like Logan Square. People who live in places like little village work construction or warehouses or other businesses that have roving jobsites or are located in the inner ring suburbs.

[SIGSEGV]

Here are Uber/Lyft arrivals to the Loop from Oct 1 2018 to June 30 2019, organized by originating community area and arrival hour of week (there are 168 bins on the y axis although only every third is labeled). This is a ~35 week period so you can roughly divide by 35 to get the number arriving each hour each day (not exact it's not an exact number of weeks..some days are represented 6 times). I have a non-log version of this as well but it's dominated by Near North Side / Near West Side.


Click to make bigger.



As you can see, there are relatively few rideshare commuters from non-transit-rich neighborhoods. The people commuting dowtown by Uber every day are primarily <1 mile from downtown (or maybe coming from train stations).

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

If it costs $12 to take an Uber downtown to your job, and that increases to $22, more people will figure out a new way to get downtown through rail and buses. Then add in a $12 Uber home for a total price of $34.

If it costs $20 to drive downtown and park all day, and that increases to $30, more people will figure out a new way like rail or buses.

Higher price = less demand

Quality of life has to figure in somewhere here, right?

What if you have to take a bus, transfer, then take a train, transfer..etc etc...

All this could easily double someone's commute time. I used to spend an hour and ten minutes a day commuting, it was miserable. My gf spends 4-5 minutes walking to work.

Commuting is literally a waste of time.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by OrdoSeclorum

Maybe. But we would be a better, more productive city if the people who *had* to drive had less congested roads and there were incentives for people to walk, bike and live in the city center.

I don't think people in Austin are just choosing to live there over the Loop. People don't live in that area for many reasons I assume, but the price has got to be one of the biggest issues.