Chicago - Mayoral Race - Rahm Emanuel Wins

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by Zerton

Ok, not to sound like a dick, but does extending the red line to 130th mean anything to anyone's life on this forum? I personally never go that far south. A loop line would be a hell of a lot more beneficial to people living closer to the core of the city.

It might not directly affect people on this forum, but it indirectly affects us because it is the right thing to do. That's a historically under-served community down there. Better access to mass transit is long overdue.

[sukwoo]

Originally Posted by Zerton

Ok, not to sound like a dick, but does extending the red line to 130th mean anything to anyone's life on this forum? I personally never go that far south. A loop line would be a hell of a lot more beneficial to people living closer to the core of the city.

You do realize that this forum is not exactly representative of the average CTA rider?

[Thundertubs]

Originally Posted by Zerton

Ok, not to sound like a dick, but does extending the red line to 130th mean anything to anyone's life on this forum? I personally never go that far south. A loop line would be a hell of a lot more beneficial to people living closer to the core of the city.

It doesn't mean anything to my life in the sense that I would probably never personally ride it down to 130th, but I'm still a Chicagoan who is interested in what is best for my city. The ridership figures for the 95th St terminus of the Red Line shows that there is high demand for transit down there.

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by Zerton

Ok, not to sound like a dick, but does extending the red line to 130th mean anything to anyone's life on this forum?

Yes, because I'm not a self-centered voter. I'm not a "hey, what's in it for me?" kinda guy. I'm not voting for a mayor who is going to make my life better, I'm voting for a mayor who is going to make the city of Chicago better.

[ametz]

This is good for Chicago and, therefore, it's good for all of us, whether or not any of us ever use it. One thing to consider: its primary benefit will no doubt be to connect the residents along this line to downtown, but I'm curious to see what businesses will develop along the line. If a good restaurant, say, emerged from this, I'd take the red line down there. But ultimately, it's just a damn shame that such a large swath of the city has no rapid access to downtown. I grew up in and around Bucktown/Wicker Park (when it was a hell hole), and we moved just south of 130th during my first year of high school. I remember going on a field trip downtown and I recall my best friend saying that that was only the 2nd time he'd ever been downtown. Downtown felt like a foreign country, especially if you didn't own a car. As I write this, a friend of mine from back in the day who still lives down there is coming up to my place in Bucktown (MUCH nicer now!) to watch the Bears game, and his journey sounds like a rough draft of "Planes, Trains, and Automobiles". It shouldn't be that way.

[Baronvonellis]

To be fair 130th street is a long ways from downtown. It about as far from the loop as Oakbrook is.

[paytonc]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Seems like he's the only person who has even talked about transit.

Nope.

http://chicago.timeout.com/articles/...ation-platform

http://www.activetrans.org/blog/rbur...ransit-funding

[Zerton]

Originally Posted by Baronvonellis

To be fair 130th street is a long ways from downtown. It about as far from the loop as Oakbrook is.

My point. It's very far from the city. The economy is lackluster and I don't think a train line is going to pick it up. There are far better transit routes I can think of.

I live on the South Side, by the way, in Bronzeville. That being said, I don't think spending all the budget on a route so far into the periphery is money well spent.

[ChiMIchael]

I understand that, but why does the trains have to be so downton-centric? Why can't residents south of 95th get direct train access? Is south of 95th too blighted, hence very spotty???

[Nowhereman1280]

I think the extension to 130th is a good thing because it will help support the re-development of Chicago's heavy industrial far south side along the shores of Lake Calumet. That area has seen an uptick in new industry moving back into the abandoned sites and I think ready access to workers via mass transit will only increase the appeal of that area as heavy industry begins to return to the United States. The first industries we will see come back here as Chinese workers get ever closer to wage parity with the US will be the ones that create goods that are too expensive to ship, I.E. heavy industry. Chicago should do all it can to enhance the attractiveness of our far south side and be ready to return to prominence as the industrial center of North America when it again becomes profitable to locate factories and industry here.

This will happen, maybe in the next decade, maybe not for 30 years, but its best to be as ready as possible since we are the only area that has really retained large swaths of open land that could easily be returned to industrial use.

[Ch.G, Ch.G]

Originally Posted by Zerton

My point. It's very far from the city.

Wilmette's pretty far from downtown Chicago, too, yet its residents are served by the CTA. Anyway, as people already pointed out, the demand is there.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Zerton

I don't think spending all the budget on a route so far into the periphery is money well spent.

Why? Those neighborhoods are dense and transit-dependent. Many of the people who live there work downtown, or journey through downtown on their way to work. The distance from downtown is irrelevant, since (for the forseeable future) we will not all be living within 3 miles of our jobs in the Green-washed Kumbaya Hippie Commune of Chicago.

Also - as I keep stressing - a Red Line extension will also pick up a new market of riders due to its large park-and-ride at 130th. These are people currently driving downtown who might be willing to go a very short ways off the highway and switch onto a train to avoid the Ryan congestion and the high cost of downtown parking. Are there a lot of people who fall into this boat? I'm not sure - maybe not. I do know that the availability of Cumberland has enabled me to go to the city from my place in the suburbs at times when Metra service is infrequent, and that means more money spent and at least one more person in the downtown area.

Finally, the CTA can provide a much greater level of service to the South Side for only a minimal rise in overall operating costs, since all the current bus routes now have to slog up to 95th. Eliminating this leg of the bus journeys will save fuel, lower emissions, and ultimately allow CTA to run fewer buses overall (and employ fewer drivers) without reducing the service level. Alternatively, the savings here can be applied elsewhere, such as introducing new bus service on Elston or Clybourn, or bringing back the X-express buses.

Does all that make sense, or am I just drinking the kool-aid of the CTA planning staff? The rail network, since the 1960s, was supposed to be a citywide skeleton, and the bus lines would fill in all the gaps to provide comprehensive transit across the city. The Red Line south to 130th is the biggest missing bone in that skeleton.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

I think the extension to 130th is a good thing because it will help support the re-development of Chicago's heavy industrial far south side along the shores of Lake Calumet. That area has seen an uptick in new industry moving back into the abandoned sites and I think ready access to workers via mass transit will only increase the appeal of that area as heavy industry begins to return to the United States. The first industries we will see come back here as Chinese workers get ever closer to wage parity with the US will be the ones that create goods that are too expensive to ship, I.E. heavy industry. Chicago should do all it can to enhance the attractiveness of our far south side and be ready to return to prominence as the industrial center of North America when it again becomes profitable to locate factories and industry here.

This will happen, maybe in the next decade, maybe not for 30 years, but its best to be as ready as possible since we are the only area that has really retained large swaths of open land that could easily be returned to industrial use.

Except that:
1) the low density (employees/acre) of industrial jobs means in the modern era, the vast majority of workers drive and always will, and

2) even if #1 weren't an issue, no new heavy polluters will be allowed to open plants by the state or federal EPA because Chicago is a non-attainment zone. If those manufacturing activities come back to the US from China, it won't be to the south side of Chicago, for regulatory reasons.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by ardecila

The distance from downtown is irrelevant, since (for the forseeable future) we will not all be living within 3 miles of our jobs in the Green-washed Kumbaya Hippie Commune of Chicago.

From a financial/operating standpoint, of course the distance from downtown is relevant. Would the extension cause systemwide average trip lengths to increase? If so, would this result in a necessary fare increase just to maintain existing service levels (since otherwise, the revenue-per-vehicle-mile would decrease as a result of the increasing average trip lengths). These are relevant issues, even if they are much more technocratically-inclined than the more straightforward politics of simply having the Red Line serve the city end-to-end. Note that CTA already has one of the highest average trip lengths of heavy rail systems, on par with DC (where distance-based fares are charged). The flat-fare rail rapid transit operating model has definite limitations regarding the trip lengths being served.

The Dan Ryan branch is actually (generally) characterized by shorter trips and less of a downtown-orientation, so I'm not saying the extension would necessarily result in longer trip lengths; I'm just clarifying that the distance is a relevant topic of evaluation.

Also - as I keep stressing - a Red Line extension will also pick up a new market of riders due to its large park-and-ride at 130th. These are people currently driving downtown who might be willing to go a very short ways off the highway and switch onto a train to avoid the Ryan congestion and the high cost of downtown parking. Are there a lot of people who fall into this boat? I'm not sure - maybe not. I do know that the availability of Cumberland has enabled me to go to the city from my place in the suburbs at times when Metra service is infrequent, and that means more money spent and at least one more person in the downtown area.

True, but just to play devil's advocate, couldn't this market be served with a shorter extension to 103rd/I-94 with a massive park-n-ride facility, as was the original concept of the line? This would also allow for decongesting the 95th bus terminal, since all of the feeder routes coming from the east could route to the new 103rd terminal, and would be a somewhat more desirable park-n-ride situation than 130th because of the quicker travel time to downtown.

[wrab]

The Chicago Tribune
12:00 p.m. CST, January 24, 2011

Court rules against Emanuel on residency

BREAKING

[Via Chicago]

Originally Posted by wrab

The Chicago Tribune
12:00 p.m. CST, January 24, 2011

Court rules against Emanuel on residency

BREAKING

He'll appeal. But still shocking.

[Steely Dan]

WOW!

off to the supreme court they go. i wasn't expecting this at all.

[Haworthia]

Whoa!

Assuming that Emmanuel is out for good, does the black vote that he attracted swing back to Braun? I'm curious if Chico could do better in this regard. Regardless, my bet is if Emmanuel stays out, Chico wins.

[the urban politician]

If this means Mayor Braun, then I am praying for Chicago's future..

[wrab]

No constructive habitation if you rent out your home?