CHICAGO: Transit Developments

[Taft]

Beyond the environmental and cost concerns, have they thought about safety? As depicted, it would seem like someone could just jump on top of that garden car when the train is stopped. Can't stop people from doing idiotic things, I suppose, but it just seems like they'd be tempting idiocy...

[Segun]

Good point. I think they should add a cage around it, with barbed wire to prevent people from clinging to it. Matter of fact, better be safe than sorry, and add another car to it with attack dogs and security personnel toting assault rifles while guarding it. I might have to create a rendering for this.

[Thundertubs]

Whether intended or not, the Green Car is a very effective parody. How about driving some green flatbed trucks around to bring some much needed plant life to the interstate? Sometimes folks get their head so far into an idea that the lines between clever and idiotic vanish to them.

[the urban politician]

I will go ahead and already give this thing a name:

'The trash car'. I can just imagine the sound of beer cans clinking together from a half a mile away, and people on the platform saying, "hey, I think the train's coming!"

[sammyg]

Originally Posted by Taft

Beyond the environmental and cost concerns, have they thought about safety? As depicted, it would seem like someone could just jump on top of that garden car when the train is stopped. Can't stop people from doing idiotic things, I suppose, but it just seems like they'd be tempting idiocy...

I've never seen anyone do anything like that with Santa's open car on the Holiday Train.

[Taft]

Originally Posted by sammyg

I've never seen anyone do anything like that with Santa's open car on the Holiday Train.

Sure, but the santa car at least has one guard: santa.

I'm just picturing this car rolling along the red line route at 11pm on a friday...oh the fun the bar crowd would have...

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Thundertubs

driving some green flatbed trucks around to bring some much needed plant life to the interstate

Good material, I'm stealing that.

[OhioGuy]

I'm wondering if this garden car would be the 9th car in a train and rather than stopping at the platform, it would extend backwards beyond the platform? Though that still wouldn't stop people from being able to jump onto it once the train starts moving forward...

[emathias]

The safest place for it would probably be as the lead car, being pushed. That way the operator can see it at all times and slap around any hoodlums who get on it.

Past that, though, I think it's a really stupid idea to actually implement. It's a cute idea as long as it's ONLY an idea, but if implemented, it's pretty stupid.

[Thundertubs]

It's funny because it's such a fantastic overthinking of a minor issue. Need more greenery for commuters? Put some freaking plants in the stations. Done. Having a train pull them around means than no one will be able to be near them. How much time do you spend standing next to trains? At best people might encounter this plant car for 15 seconds while waiting for another train at a loop station. Otherwise people just get on the train when it arrives. The riders on the train would have no perception of a car of plants at the end of the train.

The fact that the artist responsible had enough time to create a slick graphic before realizing any of this...

It's 5% cute, 95% waste of everyones time.

[the urban politician]

Chicago didn't get a penny of the FTA's 2011 New Starts Construction Grants.

Way to go Chicago!

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Chicago didn't get a penny of the FTA's 2011 New Starts Construction Grants.

Way to go Chicago!

Hardly surprising ... none of the Chicago projects is far enough long to receive any substantial award (a completed EIS/preliminary design would do wonders here), and the availability of local funding is highly questionable.

If the Red/Orange/Yellow extension EISs proceed this year rather than continuing to get peridodically delayed for various political reasons like the Alternatives Analyses were, it's conceivable the 2012 and 2013 New Starts could have something for the region, but until then...

That's just CTA. Then there's Metra. The unglamorous but useful projects for the UP-W and UP-NW could well both qualify by 2012 (preliminary engineering supposed to occur in 2010). The Southeast service is farther behind, I don't think there's even an approved "locally-preferred alternative" yet so it may not be up for another few years. And the STAR Line, well, we should be so lucky that atrocity dies.

That said, the luck of any "small starts" projects for the region is a tad less explainable or defensible.

In defense of Chicago and in critique of the entire program and structure of American transit funding, note that Houston is getting money for it's $600 million Southeast Light Rail line projected to serve... 12,000 daily transit riders. CTA has, roughly, 40 distinct bus routes that serve that level of ridership or greater. Money well spent, dear taxpayers.

EDITED per ardec's correction below.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

That's just CTA. Then there's Metra. The unglamorous but useful projects for the UP-N and UP-NW could well both qualify by 2012 (preliminary engineering supposed to occur in 2010).

It's the UP-W, not the UP-N. The only project on the UP-N is the viaduct replacement in the city, and Metra is paying for that without federal funds.

[intrepidDesign]

"Could Cars Have Caused the Mortgage Meltdown?"

Part of the study was done in Chicago, they cited that people who lived in densely populated areas with easy access to public transportation were less like to foreclose that those who lived in sprawling suburbs with no PT acess. I think the title is a bit of a stretch obviously, but an interesting article none the less.

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/02...wn/#more-19091

[jamesinclair]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

The train of course isn't diesel, but even an electric trains carbon foorprint is tracked back to the source of energy production, and that is overwhelmingly emission belching coal fired power plants. See how it works?

The thing is, carbon based power plants do not change their putput throughout the day that much. Its cheaper to just let them run.

So how much extra electricity is needed to propel one additional rail car? Im guessing very little. So the rail car will use up a tiny bit of electricity that would have existed anyway.

[Busy Bee]

^its still stupid. Just admit it. Rebuild the L station and put a green roof on the canopy or grow ivy on the L structure before you haul a potting soil wagon around. And what someone said about idiots hopping on it or throwing garbage on it is true, that's exactly what would happen.

[Chicago Shawn]

^Not to mention the extra costs of maintenance and additional electricity that CTA must pay for. I still really don't understand how this adds greenery to commuters, it will sit in each station for 30-60 seconds, and its not like anyone can ride with the garden if they choose to.

Originally Posted by VivaLFuego

Hardly surprising ... none of the Chicago projects is far enough long to receive any substantial award (a completed EIS/preliminary design would do wonders here), and the availability of local funding is highly questionable.

If the Red/Orange/Yellow extension EISs proceed this year rather than continuing to get peridodically delayed for various political reasons like the Alternatives Analyses were, it's conceivable the 2012 and 2013 New Starts could have something for the region, but until then...

That's just CTA. Then there's Metra. The unglamorous but useful projects for the UP-W and UP-NW could well both qualify by 2012 (preliminary engineering supposed to occur in 2010). The Southeast service is farther behind, I don't think there's even an approved "locally-preferred alternative" yet so it may not be up for another few years. And the STAR Line, well, we should be so lucky that atrocity dies.

That said, the luck of any "small starts" projects for the region is a tad less explainable or defensible.

In defense of Chicago and in critique of the entire program and structure of American transit funding, note that Houston is getting money for it's $600 million Southeast Light Rail line projected to serve... 12,000 daily transit riders. CTA has, roughly, 40 distinct bus routes that serve that level of ridership or greater. Money well spent, dear taxpayers.

EDITED per ardec's correction below.

In fairness to Houston, there is a lot of private money flowing in by way of a private-public partnership to build out much of the LRT system. METRO is in very good financial standing, and built the Main Street (Red Line) LRT without any federal funds. Additionally, because of the lack of zoning in Houston, that ridership level might grow significantly after the line opens. The Red Line is already way ahead of its initial ridership projections.

[pip]

while Houston is building a transit system Chicago is dismantling.

CTA cuts coming this weekend
http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-cta-...,1347570.story

get ready for a 20% reduction in bus service and a 10% reduction in train service. That reduction is enough to make getting around the city as a primary means of tranportation not reasonable. Its time to seriously reconsider living here, oh I know, its the same old threatening to leave that everyone does but I like having no car and the urban lifestyle. If Chicago can't provide that than adios, I live once and am going to live and enjoy life how I want whether it be here or elsewhere.

[Haworthia]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,4856524.story

CTA unions lose arbitration
1,100 layoffs expected

By Jon Hilkevitch, Tribune reporter
Labor unions at the CTA lost a challenge to the transit agency's plans to lay off more than 1,100 employees starting Sunday as part of major service cuts to reduce a budget deficit.

An arbitrator's ruling Wednesday against the unions means that the cuts — an 18 percent reduction in bus service and 9 percent for trains — will be implemented, barring any developments to erase a $95.6 million deficit that remains for 2010, transit officials said.

CTA management has introduced more than $200 million in internal cuts and other cost savings, and it said the unions must agree to salary and other concessions to help erase the rest of the deficit and stave off the service cuts. The unions representing CTA bus and rail workers have so far refused, saying they made concessions in the past.

The unions had contended that the agency violated contract provisions pertaining to the seniority of full-time and part-time employees. The unions filed a grievance alleging that the CTA is laying off too many full-time employees, while an inflated number of part-time employees are being retained.

But arbitrator Edwin Benn, who was selected by the unions, issued an opinion that the CTA followed proper procedures in laying off workers based on seniority lists pertaining to their job classifications.

Leaders of the unions, Locals 241 and 308 of the Amalgamated Transit Union, had said they would not meet with CTA management until after Benn's decision. No meeting was immediately scheduled.

CTA President Richard Rodriguez reiterated after receiving the decision that he is available at any hour to try to prevent the service cuts.

"Unfortunately, we spent a lot of time on an arbitration hearing on a matter that has nothing to do with service cuts,'' Rodriguez said. "I am very much willing to accept any dollar amount the unions are potentially willing to identify so they can help me restore jobs and service.''

The union's leaders expressed disappointment over the arbitrator's decision and said in a statement that they "always understood, unfortunately, that our members would be laid off.''

The unions also asked the CTA to postpone the service cuts for 30 days, while seeking additional funding from the state and federal governments.

It blows my mind that the Unions get to pick the arbitrator and that it isn't a joint choice between the union and the CTA. Still, they lost. Now they want another month in the hope the money will appear. They clearly were not taking this seriously enough. It's a shame. Transit ridership has been on climb over the last decade and I bet this takes a chunk out of that ridership.

[VivaLFuego]

Originally Posted by Haworthia

It blows my mind that the Unions get to pick the arbitrator and that it isn't a joint choice between the union and the CTA.

The arbitrator has to be approved by both parties, I believe. Each side proposes a few arbitrators and then they agree on one. The wording here suggests management proposed this particularly arbitrator and the union approved the choice.

Of course, this still begs the question of why an unelected, unaccountable arbitrator is in the position to make decisions impacting the level and quality of public services and implied changes in taxation.