[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ Hear, hear.

[Abner]

Kind of interesting that all the comments on that story are about how 110 mph is a waste of money and we should go whole hog. Wouldn't have minded getting ten times as much in the stimulus so that could happen. I would be pleasantly surprised if the Chicago lines got $2 billion of this money though.

The times he mentions are pretty lackluster. Chicago to Madison in under three hours? You can drive in two and a half, or even stop in Milwaukee first in just over three. It's only 170 miles.

[arenn]

The Chicago-Milwaukee line is well suited to incremental improvement via the "Amtrak+" approach. It's probably the only city where that works, however.

[nomarandlee]

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/theskyline/2009/02/the-conventional-wisdom-forming-about-barack-obamas-infrastructure-investment-is-that-it-will-take-care-of-small-stuff--filli.html

Chicago as a high-speed rail hub: Has the time for this idea finally come?

http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/.a/6a00d834518cc969e20112790b6de428a4-320wi

......... Groups pushing for a Midwest, high-speed rail network centered in Chicago, an idea that the Chicago Architectural Club explored last year with an ideas competition for a station for such a network (above left). It would be located just east of Union Station. Despite the practical hurdles in its way, like the two buildings now on the site, perhaps this is an idea whose time has finally come.


Been thinking about this of late and want to get thoughts. If theoretically Chicago were to develop a new HSR/inter-city "hub" what/where plan would you like to see.......

- Union St./Gateway Cener - Demolishing of 222 S.Riverside Plaza (like the Chicago Architectural Club winner depicts). Pros - Could make Union Stations platform areas much brighter and modern instead of the dingy caves they are now. Has a great potential riverside aspect. Cons - The demolishing of a +40 story building isn't very environmental sensitive plus downright expensive, hassles for commuters for a few years. How I see it (please correct me where I have facts/logistics wrong)....

- West Loop Transit Center -.....Pro's - It fully built out as planned would be a highly integrated intermodal station with new tracks that would no longer crowd commuter and inter-city trains for same space. Not really sure how many tracks could be devoted and built under Clinton St. Cons - Sounds expensive if just HSR portion is built, sounds dreadful expensive if all transit levels are built. A subterranean hub may be a wonder of engineering but doesn't provide much of a street presence.

- Old Post Office - Only listing this because I have seen it mentioned a few times as a possibility. Pros - The building and tracks are already in place and potential adjoining hotel and offices subway (could build a connection to Clinton Blue Line I imagine rather easily). Cons - Still dingy subterranean platforms. Not sure if track logistics would provide for good traffic flow or make it even feasible. Plans for the Old Post Office seem in place.

- Completely new station outside of downtown connected by transit. I think there are cases where this is being done in Europe/Asia. Pros - Much more creative freedom and less expense to build since no need to demolish or excavate any building or streets. Could provide plenty of room for expansion and be built so there would be minimal interference of current commuter rail. Cons - Not sure if I am looking over some major hurdles that would prevent these locations or not. Not immediately accessible to downtown destinations. Would have to build or extend a transit line to connect the station to downtown which greatly increases cost. The area of the locations I have in mind are dreary to say the least.

Two Potential locations?
#1 - Racine / Kinzie
#2 - Canal / 14th Pl.
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=41.882103~-87.64266&style=r&lvl=15&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11385686&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&cid=A03E0B51830706E7!2538&encType=1

[electricron]

Been thinking about this of late and want to get thoughts. If theoretically Chicago were to develop a new HSR/inter-city "hub" what/where plan would you like to see.......

- Union St./Gateway Cener - Demolishing of 222 S.Riverside Plaza (like the Chicago Architectural Club winner depicts). Pros - Could make Union Stations platform areas much brighter and modern instead of the dingy caves they are now. Has a great potential riverside aspect. Cons - The demolishing of a +40 story building isn't very environmental sensitive plus downright expensive, hassles for commuters for a few years. How I see it (please correct me where I have facts/logistics wrong)....

- West Loop Transit Center -.....Pro's - It fully built out as planned would be a highly integrated intermodal station with new tracks that would no longer crowd commuter and inter-city trains for same space. Not really sure how many tracks could be devoted and built under Clinton St. Cons - Sounds expensive if just HSR portion is built, sounds dreadful expensive if all transit levels are built. A subterranean hub may be a wonder of engineering but doesn't provide much of a street presence.

- Old Post Office - Only listing this because I have seen it mentioned a few times as a possibility. Pros - The building and tracks are already in place and potential adjoining hotel and offices subway (could build a connection to Clinton Blue Line I imagine rather easily). Cons - Still dingy subterranean platforms. Not sure if track logistics would provide for good traffic flow or make it even feasible. Plans for the Old Post Office seem in place.

- Completely new station outside of downtown connected by transit. I think there are cases where this is being done in Europe/Asia. Pros - Much more creative freedom and less expense to build since no need to demolish or excavate any building or streets. Could provide plenty of room for expansion and be built so there would be minimal interference of current commuter rail. Cons - Not sure if I am looking over some major hurdles that would prevent these locations or not. Not immediately accessible to downtown destinations. Would have to build or extend a transit line to connect the station to downtown which greatly increases cost. The area of the locations I have in mind are dreary to say the least.

Potential locations?
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=41.882103~-87.64266&style=r&lvl=15&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11385686&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&cid=A03E0B51830706E7!2538&encType=1

The 110 mph trains the Midwest High Speed Rail Association plans to use are FRA compliant. Therefore, they can continue to use Union Station. A new HSR train station in Chicago isn't needed, just as new train stations in every town and city aren't needed. That's one reason why the Midwest High Speed Rail Association plans costs are so low.

Off hand, I can think of two manufactures of 110+ mph trains that are FRA compliant.
(1) Bombardier - using the same passenger cars Amtrak's Acela uses but using the JetTrain locomotive.
http://www.texasrailadvocates.org/bombardier/JetTrain.jpg
http://www.trainweb.org/railpix/ampix/acela2019f1-holmes-trn2183-3-8-01.jpg
(2) Talgo - using the same passenger cars Amtrak's Cascades uses, with Talgo diesel locomotive or a more traditional American locomotove.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df/df06042001d.jpg
http://www.socalwizard.com/trainphotos/albums/userpics/10001/Talgo_Surfliner.jpg

But Union Station in Chicago could be remodeled and refurbished.

[mcfinley]

Been thinking about this of late and want to get thoughts. If theoretically Chicago were to develop a new HSR/inter-city "hub" what/where plan would you like to see.......

- Union St./Gateway Cener - Demolishing of 222 S.Riverside Plaza (like the Chicago Architectural Club winner depicts). Pros - Could make Union Stations platform areas much brighter and modern instead of the dingy caves they are now. Has a great potential riverside aspect. Cons - The demolishing of a +40 story building isn't very environmental sensitive plus downright expensive, hassles for commuters for a few years. How I see it (please correct me where I have facts/logistics wrong)....

- West Loop Transit Center -.....Pro's - It fully built out as planned would be a highly integrated intermodal station with new tracks that would no longer crowd commuter and inter-city trains for same space. Not really sure how many tracks could be devoted and built under Clinton St. Cons - Sounds expensive if just HSR portion is built, sounds dreadful expensive if all transit levels are built. A subterranean hub may be a wonder of engineering but doesn't provide much of a street presence.

- Old Post Office - Only listing this because I have seen it mentioned a few times as a possibility. Pros - The building and tracks are already in place and potential adjoining hotel and offices subway (could build a connection to Clinton Blue Line I imagine rather easily). Cons - Still dingy subterranean platforms. Not sure if track logistics would provide for good traffic flow or make it even feasible. Plans for the Old Post Office seem in place.

- Completely new station outside of downtown connected by transit. I think there are cases where this is being done in Europe/Asia. Pros - Much more creative freedom and less expense to build since no need to demolish or excavate any building or streets. Could provide plenty of room for expansion and be built so there would be minimal interference of current commuter rail. Cons - Not sure if I am looking over some major hurdles that would prevent these locations or not. Not immediately accessible to downtown destinations. Would have to build or extend a transit line to connect the station to downtown which greatly increases cost. The area of the locations I have in mind are dreary to say the least.

Potential locations?
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=41.882103~-87.64266&style=r&lvl=15&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11385686&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&cid=A03E0B51830706E7!2538&encType=1

I've been thinking about this a lot lately too. I think it's important to use the existing Union Station or some other location between it and Ogilvie, relatively. Even if that means using an ugly subterranean station with little street presence, I believe maintaining high connectivity with existing Amtrak/Metra/CTA trains should be the highest priority to maximize its use. A separate station for South/East bound trains at Millennium would also be smart, and I believe two dedicated tracks are about to be abandoned for such a thing with the CN-EJ&E merger. That said, I would very much like to see some sort of CTA extension if we get real HSR--one that runs along Canal, between Kedzie and Roosevelt and connecting every form of mass transit in between.


Regarding the routes, I think the decisions that are made now will determine what type of connectivity is prioritized in the future. I believe that a Chicago to Minneapolis corridor is more important to establish first than one from Chicago to St Louis. The length of the routes are approximately the same, but Minneapolis has a greater international presence and a more complimentary service industry than St. Louis. Therefore, the amount of business travel between Chicago and Minneapolis would be increased by a much greater degree than Chicago-St Louis, particularly in winter when flying becomes unreliable for short trips.

Secondly, I don't think that a Chicago-Milwaukee-Madison-...Minneapolis line is smart, precisely because the amount of intra-city slowdown that is necessary will substantially reduce the end-to-end commutes that are established to compete with the travel times of flying. A 110 line between Milwaukee-Chicago and Milwaukee-Madison will take care of most intercity jaunts; HSR isn't really needed. But I think a smarter connection north would be Chicago-O-Hare-Rockford-Madison-Rochester-(MSP? a wee bit out of the way)-Minneapolis. That would provide a well used route that isn't crippled by slow zones near the ends.

Third, I would very much like to see a connection among the Midwest's elite universities play a role in where inter-city stations are established. This would both improve the pedigree of established universities, and would also make the Midwest a more attractive location for graduate student immigration--a valued population that doesn't necessarily own a car. Broadly, the Mega-region around Chicago has 9(?) schools that are top 100 all around, top 20 in specialized fields: U. Chicago, Northwestern, U. Wisconsin, U. Minnesota, U. Illinois, Purdue, Washington U. St Louis, Notre Dame, and U Michigan. For this reason, I think a Chicago to St Louis route should pass through Champaign rather than Bloomington. Also, this is another reason that a Madison to Chicago route should not be hampered by Chicago-Milwaukee slow zones.

[the urban politician]

Completely new station outside of downtown connected by transit. I think there are cases where this is being done in Europe/Asia. Pros - Much more creative freedom and less expense to build since no need to demolish or excavate any building or streets. Could provide plenty of room for expansion and be built so there would be minimal interference of current commuter rail. Cons - Not sure if I am looking over some major hurdles that would prevent these locations or not. Not immediately accessible to downtown destinations. Would have to build or extend a transit line to connect the station to downtown which greatly increases cost. The area of the locations I have in mind are dreary to say the least.


^ All good ideas, but I'll strike this one down for the reasons you mentioned above. Any station that is not downtown simply loses any of the advantages that rail offers. You really do have to have the HSR system terminate in downtown Chicago, not anywhere else (including O'Hare, which a few people have proposed, and which I would consider a huge mistake that, if ever proposed seriously, I would hope city leaders would strike down in an instant).

I have discussed this before, and I'll propose this again: Chicago should have 2 major transit nodes:

1. West Loop Transportation Center (Blue line spur, Metra and Amtrak terminals, HSR terminal)

2. East Loop Transportation Center (Connects to the Red Line, the Elevated train, connects via walkway to Millennium Station)

The above should be connected to eachother by an underground subway akin to the Times Sq/Grand Central Terminal shuttle in NYC.

Finally, the city should build that Carrol Avenue BRT to finally link Streeterville/Navy Pier/Mag Mile/Northwestern Univ to its downtown rail terminals, especially since it's eliminating the free trolley system.

[orulz]

What reasons are there that the current union station could not be used without demolishing 222 S Riverside Plaza? Subterranean platforms do not necessarily have to equate to dark and dingy. It could be dressed up to be much less depressing. Keep the 40 story building, but rebuild the rest of the block to be a modern rail station.

While we're on the subject, if platform space at Union Station is one of the reasons they're looking for alternatives, aren't some folks thinking of rebuilding it to have run-through tracks? Through-routing trains (both commuter and high speed) could increase efficiency and require fewer platforms.

One problem might be if the columns from the building above make that impossible. Although I'd hate to think they built it without taking that into account, but if that's the case then demolishing the building might make sense after all :rolleyes:

[Abner]

What reasons are there that the current union station could not be used without demolishing 222 S Riverside Plaza? Subterranean platforms do not necessarily have to equate to dark and dingy. It could be dressed up to be much less depressing. Keep the 40 story building, but rebuild the rest of the block to be a modern rail station.


According to the MWHSRA, Union Station is already at capacity during rush hour, so any intercity trains would have to depart or arrive outside of the rush, which is suboptimal. There's a bunch of information about what they think should be done at Union Station here: http://www.downtownairport.com/index.htm

I think Millennium Station supposedly can't handle diesel trains. No idea how difficult it would be to make it possible to do so.

Is there capacity left at Ogilvie during the rush?

How about LaSalle? Could southbound trains use that station, perhaps if connectivity to the other stations were improved?

[schwerve]

How about LaSalle? Could southbound trains use that station, perhaps if connectivity to the other stations were improved?

part of the CREATE program is to build a connection at 75th and parnell to allow the Metra SW service to move to the Lasalle Terminal.

[Nowhereman1280]

Or we could just get really creative with Union Station and preserve the 40 story building, open up the tracks to light, and have a street presence. I love how people always assume things undoable. Its this simple, empty out 222 of tenants for the time being, then demolish the cladding on the lower 4 or 5 floors of it. Wherever possible, take out the floor plates as well, essentially leaving the whole building on stilts with nothing but the core and supports remaining. Then reenforce the building if necessary and re build the whole thing with a giant crystalline structure taking up the whole bottom of the block forming a base which 222 juts out of and allowing huge glass atrium that allow light to pour down through the passageways, food courts, waiting areas, ticket lines, and tracks below.

I don't know why people don't think of stuff like this as a solution more often. I mean "we need to build under this building", its a skeletal building, just remove everything but the essential skeleton on the lower floors and go from there. Yeah you'd have to work around it, but the end result would be stunning...

[orulz]

Its this simple, empty out 222 of tenants for the time being, then demolish the cladding on the lower 4 or 5 floors of it. Wherever possible, take out the floor plates as well, essentially leaving the whole building on stilts with nothing but the core and supports remaining. Then reenforce the building if necessary and re build the whole thing with a giant crystalline structure taking up the whole bottom of the block forming a base which 222 juts out of and allowing huge glass atrium that allow light to pour down through the passageways, food courts, waiting areas, ticket lines, and tracks below.

That's probably possible - but even given such a radical rebuild of the building's base, my question is: Would it be possible to increase the number of run-through tracks and platforms at Union Station? That's the key to increasing the station's capacity. If the core and supports of 222 are advantageously configured, it might be possible. I've not seen or heard any word on this one way or the other. Anybody know?

If it is possible, the other question is, would it be more or less expensive than digging a deep trench under Clinton for the West Loop Transportation Center and sticking in four HSR run-through tracks on the bottom level? Will 4 run-through tracks be enough? Which offers better operational characteristics such as grade, curvature, track layout; connections to other modes, proximity to amenities, etc.?

[BVictor1]

Kind of interesting that all the comments on that story are about how 110 mph is a waste of money and we should go whole hog. Wouldn't have minded getting ten times as much in the stimulus so that could happen. I would be pleasantly surprised if the Chicago lines got $2 billion of this money though.

The times he mentions are pretty lackluster. Chicago to Madison in under three hours? You can drive in two and a half, or even stop in Milwaukee first in just over three. It's only 170 miles.

Again, I think that we must remember that the money we're talking about now is just coming from the stimulus package. Seeing as a lot of road projects are getting money as well, that could bode well for us and rail when it's time to renew the Transportation Bill. Also, don't forget the posibility of the Olympics. If we get them, that'll mean even more money. 3 possible sources: stimulus, transit bill and olympics.

Also, the fact that Ray LaHood is the Transportation Secretary, could really be helpful. Even though he's a suburban republican, from what I understand, he likes rail transportation.

[Mr Downtown]

Would it be possible to increase the number of run-through tracks and platforms at Union Station?

During WWII, when long cross-country troop trains were regularly passing through Chicago, there was a scheme to connect tracks 17 & 26 to create an additional through track at the east end. Apparently the original caissons had been placed with that in mind, and I'm guessing 222 South Riverside didn't change that. There's another runthrough track that doesn't have platform access. Also there's a service roadway next to the river that's underused. With a few million dollars of work, I think there's room for a total of four through tracks next to the river.

To say Union Station is "at capacity" will provoke laughter from anyone who's ever stood on the platforms at Cologne or Bern Hbf, watching several dozen trains depart during a single hour. We've been so sloppy for so many decades that it seems easier to build an entirely new facility rather than change work rules or operating practices to efficiently use what we have.

Pedestrian congestion in the concourse is probably much more of an intractable problem. I'm not sure if it could be solved by moving a lot of the passenger waiting rooms and food service to the west end of the headhouse, or by pushing some facilities upward into the "ground floor" of 222 or the health club.

[emathias]

...
Even though he's a suburban republican, from what I understand, he likes rail transportation.

He's from Peoria - that's not (yet) a suburb of Chicago. Put high-speed rail from there to here, and maybe it could be, though. :-)

[bnk]

Again, I think that we must remember that the money we're talking about now is just coming from the stimulus package. Seeing as a lot of road projects are getting money as well, that could bode well for us and rail when it's time to renew the Transportation Bill. Also, don't forget the posibility of the Olympics. If we get them, that'll mean even more money. 3 possible sources: stimulus, transit bill and olympics.

Also, the fact that Ray LaHood is the Transportation Secretary, could really be helpful. Even though he's a suburban republican, from what I understand, he likes rail transportation.


I agree. The moment I heard Ray LaHood was a candidate for Transportation Secretary I was pleased. I know LaHood's politics and his downstate district rather well so my opinion was very quickly solidified.

[Taft]

I can't believe we aren't talking about this yet...


Mayor Richard Daley names new CTA, aviation bosses

Richard Rodriguez takes over transit; O'Hare expansion chief Rosemarie Andolino adds duties

By Jon Hilkevitch | Tribune reporter
February 27, 2009

Richard Rodriguez had barely enough time to learn his way around Chicago's airports before he was reassigned Thursday to the CTA, the nation's second-largest transit system.

Mayor Richard Daley selected Rodriguez, whom he touted as a manager extraordinaire, to become Chicago Transit Authority president.

It was part of a double Cabinet appointment that elevated O'Hare expansion chief Rosemarie Andolino to the additional post of aviation commissioner, the job that Rodriguez held only since April.

Rodriguez, 38, said he wasn't ready to talk about the direction he would take the CTA, nor was he familiar enough to comment on the transit agency's latest budget crisis or equipment problems that have sidelined more than 200 CTA buses.

...


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-new-cta-boss-27-feb27,0,7236624.story

So is this good move or a bad move? I really don't know anything about either of these two appointments.

[Abner]

Is Daley allergic to the idea of appointing any experts to anything, ever? The CTA is heading into probably its worst budget crisis in history and the person in charge of the organization has no idea what's going on there? What?

[the urban politician]

^ That's because Daley doesn't want to appoint anybody to any organization who isn't completely under his control

[arenn]

Ron Huberman goes to show that an infusion of outside talent can make a big positive difference. Let's hope Rodriguez stays the course.

Domain expertise is always good - but is only one of the qualities that make a good organizational leader, and arguably not the most important.

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ Yeah, I would think him not being a rail expert to be an advantage. The top manager of an organization should be an expert in management, not in the dedicated purpose of the organization. He has the knowledge of how to run a business (or organization) and lets face it, the CTA has to be run more like a business and less like a charity (cough losing 50 million a year to free rides for seniors cough) if we don't want to see massive service cuts.

[Abner]

I don't see how appointing somebody who has absolutely no knowledge whatsoever about an organization or the service that organization provides, during what is probably that organization's biggest crisis ever, is an advantage. You know, there are people on this earth who are both good managers AND know something about public transportation. The CTA is not some small town bus service, we can attract the best.

Huberman did good things for the CTA, but he wasn't thrown into the thick of things at a time like this--just a run of the mill crappy time for the CTA by comparison--and he had the common sense not to cast doubt on his ability by informing everybody at once that he knew nothing about the CTA. That does not inspire confidence. This is a guy who might have to go before Congress, might have to work closely with the governor and our senators (or senator, anyway) to figure out a solution for the CTA, and if he has to learn all about the CTA, how its budget works, and what the possibilities for change are within the next few weeks, he has a LOT of learning to do.

I have no idea how the policy of free rides for seniors that was forced by the former governor is evidence of bad management or a charity mentality on the part of the CTA. And by the way, public transit IS a public service, not a business.

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/autocorner/chi-getting-around_02mar02,0,4436134.column

CTA puts out 'for sale' sign
Transit agency hopes to sell or lease properties
Jon Hilkevitch | Getting Around
March 2, 2009


For commuters looking to buy a home or start a business near a transit line, the Chicago Transit Authority may have just the deal.

The CTA is opening up its vast real estate portfolio in Chicago and the suburbs in a bid to sell or lease surplus properties and bolster the transit agency's sagging bottom line.

The timing of this endeavor to unload non-essential assets could hardly be worse, given the sorry state of the economy.

But potential bidders can start their searches by doing an Internet drive-by at ctarealestate.com..........

The Web site includes about a dozen parcels for sale and 19 retail spaces for lease in rail stations. The transit agency hopes to fill the spaces with businesses that offer more appealing and upscale services to commuters...........

The CTA and Jones Lang LaSalle have not inventoried the total number of properties that could potentially be put up for sale, Kabira said. The transit agency owns more than 400 properties, although the total includes bus turnarounds and other facilities that are needed for operations, he said..............More in article.

[bnk]

I am getting more than a little fed up with Chicago selling or leasing out money generating assets. I thought it was stupid for asshat Blago to try to sell and lease back the Thompson Center [1]. Thankfully that tactic failed.

I could live with the Skyway deal, I am against Midway, and the parking meters and garages was the last straw for me.



This really needs to stop for there will be no assets left at some point with no income coming from them. The one time payouts will have been more than blown away, way before some of these 99 year leases are expired.:hell:


I am not saying that some of these CTA assets are not worthy of sale but this continued sell off city assets and privatization is starting to piss me off.


"We don't have the luxury to wait for three years" when the market may improve, Kabira said. "We think it is in our best interests to dispose of those assets."

But in the very next sentance


The CTA generated more than $7.2 million last year from property including retail concessions at rail stations and storefronts near stations, as well as park-and-ride facilities, parking spaces underneath elevated train structures and office space, officials said.

Yea lets dump all of our assets ASAP we need the upfront money now! As an individual one can also get payday loans, loans on income tax returns, bulk payouts on legal settlements too. But those are only for the most desperate and ill informed getting their financial ass handed to them by loan sharks.

This short sightedness is rather corporate American. Screw the future, gimme now, and how is our quarter looking.





[1] Proposed sale

When he first came to office, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich proposed selling the building to assuage the state budget.[4] The proposal was heavily criticized.[4] Lawmakers at first agreed to the plan,[5] but later a $200 million mortgage was agreed to instead, payable over 10 years.[6] The plan was declared unconstitutional by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan in June 2004.[7] The plan was set aside, although it had already cost the state $532,000 in legal fees.[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_R._Thompson_Center

[Mr Downtown]

I'm with you on the Skyway, Midway, Thompson Center retail, and the meters.

But this is different. It's odds and ends of surplus real estate that CTA should have sold off years ago. I hate to see them take fire sale prices, though, or sell property that could be leased for a good long-term income stream.

[Abner]

bnk, you single out Blagojevich regarding the Thompson Center, but let's not forget that the Skyway, Midway, and the parking meters are pure Daley.

[bnk]

:previous:


Yeah but I am loyal to my Avatar. It is one of my weaknesses.

[arenn]

The government shouldn't be holding onto this land. Why turn the CTA into a land bank? Let's put it back on the tax rolls and raise some money at the same time.

[Attrill]

I'm with you on the Skyway, Midway, Thompson Center retail, and the meters.

But this is different. It's odds and ends of surplus real estate that CTA should have sold off years ago. I hate to see them take fire sale prices, though, or sell property that could be leased for a good long-term income stream.

Exactly - this is very different. Many of the properties they're selling were bought for the Brown line rehab project and used as staging areas. You can see the properties for sale here (http://www.ctarealestate.com/opportunities_land.html). There really isn't a lot up for sale.

[Haworthia]

The government shouldn't be holding onto this land. Why turn the CTA into a land bank? Let's put it back on the tax rolls and raise some money at the same time.

I agree with this in principle, but trying to do something with the land now? It's one of the worst real estate markets we've had in a long time. Seems like a waste. That land should have been leased or sold during the boom, not during this bust.

[Mr Downtown]

Haworthia, can you PM me next time we're going to have a big recession? There are some things I'll want to do in advance, and having that knowledge ahead of time would be very helpful.

[Taft]

Haworthia, can you PM me next time we're going to have a big recession? There are some things I'll want to do in advance, and having that knowledge ahead of time would be very helpful.

It hardly would have taken a crystal ball to know that:

a) the CTA would be strapped for cash in the near future, and
b) that the real estate market had some hard times ahead

Suspecting that EITHER was going to be true should have had the CTA looking to either develop some of the land in an attempt to make a profit or sell some of the land to make some cash and/or diversify their investments.

Believe me when I say that I am generally one of the CTA's biggest supporters. However holding on to mass amounts of valuable real estate, passing on capitalizing during the biggest boom years this country has seen only to divest those assets when they were bottoming out? Not great business moves, IMO.

That said, much of this land was probably acquired pre-boom, so unless land values REALLY plummet, the CTA will still end up making a profit. Still, a lot of missed opportunities here, I think.

[Haworthia]

Haworthia, can you PM me next time we're going to have a big recession? There are some things I'll want to do in advance, and having that knowledge ahead of time would be very helpful.

The sale of assets has been proposed in the MIDDLE of a collapse in real estate prices, when these assets are the LEAST valuable. Yes the CTA needs to plug holes in it budget. That need is from falling tax revenues. I recognize that need. But this really is the worst timing. I understand the urge to sell now, but it's a mistake to give up valuable assets at a discount (leasing of properties might make sense, but I think that's a separate issue).

But you bring up a good point. Why didn't the CTA do something useful with these properties when the market was strong? You don't need to be all that savvy to know you are in the midst of a boom. I may not be able to PM you when the economy will turn sour, but pretty much anyone can tell you when times are good. If the CTA had done this in good times, they could have used the revenue to fix slow zones instead of taking out bonds at the time they did. That was a missed opportunity.

There is also the argument that it's better to have transit oriented development near stations which could add potential transit customers than to just sit on the land. That could be a two fold way to increase revenue. There is merit to this argument, but I don't think there is any market for that right now. I think what is most likely to happen is someone with deep pockets will buy up the land and sit on it until the market recovers and then flip it. I don't think the CTA is likely to see any development on land they sell, so I think they are best served by sitting on the land themselves for the time being.

[Mr Downtown]

Only a dozen parcels are currently listed for sale, and several of them were needed until recently for Brown Line construction.

[nomarandlee]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-stimulus-projects_04mar04,0,2935700.story

Illinois still has not submitted its list of transit projects for stimulus money
State transportation officials vow to get moving on the application but don't fear losing any funds

By Jon Hilkevitch | Tribune reporter
March 4, 2009

Illinois still has not officially submitted a list of shovel-ready road and mass transit projects to the federal government for funding under the economic stimulus package, U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said Tuesday, warning that time is running out.

"The law requires us to get the money out the door very quickly," LaHood said. But "we have not received a list from the state or from Chicago."

State transportation officials vowed to get moving with the application process, but they expressed no concerns about possibly losing federal aid.

Mayor Richard Daley has been tight-lipped about disclosing Chicago's projects, other than to say he wants $50 million to push along the expansion of O'Hare International Airport. A mayoral aide said Tuesday that the city is "on track" to receiving stimulus funding..............

[brian_b]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=alwTE0Z5.1EA

The Chicago Transit Authority retirement plan had a $1.5 billion hole in its stash of assets in 2007. At the height of a four-year bull market, it didn’t have enough cash on hand to pay its retirees through 2013, meaning it was underfunded to the tune of 62 percent.

The CTA, which manages the second-largest public transit system in the U.S., had to hope for a huge contribution from the Illinois state legislature. That wasn’t going to happen.

Then the authority found an answer.

“We’ve identified the problem and a solution,” said CTA Chairman Carole Brown on April 16, 2007. The agency decided to raise money from a bond sale.

A year later, it asked Illinois Auditor General William Holland to research its plan. The state hired an actuary, did a study and, on July 17, concluded that the sale of bonds would most likely result in a loss of taxpayers’ money.

Thirteen days after that, the CTA ignored the warning and issued $1.9 billion in bonds. Before the year ended, the pension fund was paying out more to bondholders than it was earning on its new influx of money. Instead of closing its funding gap, the CTA was falling further behind.

In the CTA deal, the fund borrowed $1.9 billion by promising to pay bondholders a 6.8 percent return. The proceeds of the bond sale, held in a money market fund, earned 2 percent -- 70 percent less than what the fund was paying for the loan.

The public gets nothing from pension bonds -- other than a chance to at least temporarily avoid paying for higher pension fund contributions. Pension bonds portend the possibility of steep tax increases.

By law, states must guarantee public pension fund debts.

Disgusting. It's way past time to clean house at the CTA. Now I know why people are protesting Huberman at the CPS HQ every other day.

[MayorOfChicago]

I've lived here for 8 years, and always had faith in Daley while shaking my head at state government.

Now I'm just sick of it all, extremely disgusted is more like it. Is there NO ONE in this state who can stand up, snap their fingers, and draw attention to what's happening here??????? Not even the CTA, but just the god awful mess that has become Illinois...Cook County...Chicago.

For 7 years I was along with almost everything Daley did, now I'm not just questioning his leadership, but I'm starting to seriously doubt the man and his actions.

Blago...Burris....pulling Huberman right when he started getting things right. No one gives two shits about the actal CTA, it's all about people in charge and who's-who, what's in line next for the stars of Illinois politics.

If we blow this whole stimulus wad without getting anything because of sheer incompetence, I'm seriously going to think about setting up shop somewhere else. It's getting too depressing to live in this state, and yes I DO understand what's happening all across the country. It's still pathetic for Illinois, and inexcusable.

[the urban politician]

^ I'm as skeptical as you are, but the State won't let nearly a billion dollars in transportation projects slip away. I realize that there is concern because Daley lost $153 million for BRT from missing a deadline, but that was a very different situation (passage of a huge & complex public-private transaction as well as legislating highly unpopular parking rate tax hikes, followed by the Fed's unusual refusal to extend a deadline by 13 days due to changing of administrations). I'm reassured by this:

The transit projects must first be approved by the transportation committee of the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, which plans to vote on the projects Friday, said Diane Palmer, spokeswoman for the Regional Transportation Authority. Then, the CTA, Metra and Pace must file applications to the Federal Transit Administration, she said.

"When Gov. Quinn was sworn in, I told him the importance of getting deadlines met," LaHood said.

Quinn on Friday named Gary Hannig, a state representative from Litchfield, to replace Milton Sees, who was IDOT secretary under ex- Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

IDOT will submit its list "after our public comment period closes at the end of business today," department spokeswoman Marisa Kollias said Tuesday.

State transportation authorities have met with officials from the Federal Highway Administration and "they do not believe we are at risk yet to lose anything," Kollias said.

[ChicagoChicago]

Jesus Christ! What does it take to submit your “wish list?” If this isn’t used as ammunition to get Daley out of office, then nothing can uproot this clown.

And for Quinn not to have made an issue out of this is equally disappointing.

[Abner]

You forgot to quote this fun tidbit from the article:

"In early February, Daley said he has a wish list of projects he wants funded. Unlike other leaders, however, Daley said he wouldn't tell the public because of concerns "the newspapers, the media is going to be ripping it apart," he said."

Does he even pretend to be held accountable democratically anymore?

[ChicagoChicago]

You forgot to quote this fun tidbit from the article:

"In early February, Daley said he has a wish list of projects he wants funded. Unlike other leaders, however, Daley said he wouldn't tell the public because of concerns "the newspapers, the media is going to be ripping it apart," he said."

Does he even pretend to be held accountable democratically anymore?

Shizer!

Fuhrer Daley does not answer to anyone!

Seriously though, I kind of laughed at that...God forbid he have to EXPLAIN his use of taxpayer money.

[VivaLFuego]

You forgot to quote this fun tidbit from the article:

"In early February, Daley said he has a wish list of projects he wants funded. Unlike other leaders, however, Daley said he wouldn't tell the public because of concerns "the newspapers, the media is going to be ripping it apart," he said."

Does he even pretend to be held accountable democratically anymore?

If he goes public with it, then it becomes subject to the standard racially-charged City Council childish feces-flinging - or at least that's how I interpret his remarks. This is a snub of the Council moreso than of you or I or Joe Taxpayer, since we never really had a say anyway even if the list were public. As a lesser evil, I'd take Daley's politically-motivated project selection over that of the aldermen any day.

[Abner]

Blah blah blah. What exactly is Daley afraid of from the City Council? Perhaps it'll cost him the vote of one alderman on some frivolous proposal as he successfully strong-arms the other 49? He's the mayor, he was elected, and elected officials don't make lame excuses for keeping secrets from their constituents. If he's afraid of the media contesting his choices, he should get out of the mayor business.

[ChicagoChicago]

If he goes public with it, then it becomes subject to the standard racially-charged City Council childish feces-flinging - or at least that's how I interpret his remarks. This is a snub of the Council moreso than of you or I or Joe Taxpayer, since we never really had a say anyway even if the list were public. As a lesser evil, I'd take Daley's politically-motivated project selection over that of the aldermen any day.You honestly think this is a better idea that having any community involvement? LaHood could easily reject Daley’s plan as is, and in all likelihood it has a higher chance at failure the less public vetting occurs on it.

These are SHOVEL READY projects. The Alderman shouldn’t be left out in the cold on this. We have elected officials for a reason.

[VivaLFuego]

If he's afraid of the media contesting his choices, he should get out of the mayor business.

I don't think he's afraid of the media contesting his choices. That's just what he said, not necessarily what he means. The media in this town tend to join in the cheerleading/promotion of his initiatives when it is made clear that they should (e.g. Olympics).

You honestly think this is a better idea that having any community involvement? LaHood could easily reject Daley’s plan as is, and in all likelihood it has a higher chance at failure the less public vetting occurs on it.

These are SHOVEL READY projects. The Alderman shouldn’t be left out in the cold on this. We have elected officials for a reason.

Community involvement would seem to be more important before projects are identified and designed. The stimulus is money going out the door to start construction on projects that are already at 100% design.

Either way, I'm pretty sure we aren't getting the whole story behind what's cooking in City Hall, Springfield, and DOT, and I see no reason to take Daley's weird remarks at face value. I could speculate 100 different scenarios regarding who is pulling whose strings, but really we don't know. I'd be surprised if certain Aldermen didn't know exactly which projects in their ward will be happening, with others being deliberately kept in the dark. And again, for as much as I could gripe about Daley, the notion of our Aldermen making important decisions is even more terrifying.

[Nowhereman1280]

You honestly think this is a better idea that having any community involvement?

Yes, it is better. The "community" doesn't know what's best for it when it comes to some things. For example, do you think anyone would support it if Daley wanted 500 million for a new EL line up Ashland? People would freak out because they don't want the noise, yet having an El line that would be great for the communities. Daley has done nothing but improve Chicago, Democracy is overrated, get over it...

[Busy Bee]

Did anyone see the Peoples Republic of Capitalism w/ Ted Koppel on Discovery Channel? It has an American architect working in China pretty much saying that if China had a true democratic government, the huge scaled development and rampant construction that has grown the Chinese economy by leaps and bounds probably would never happen. Sound familiar? He's describing 'don't tread on me' - 'Not In My Back Yard' America.

[Abner]

Okay, this is getting to be a little much for the Chicago Transit thread. Surely there is somewhere else to rally against democracy.

[ChicagoChicago]

Yes, it is better. The "community" doesn't know what's best for it when it comes to some things. For example, do you think anyone would support it if Daley wanted 500 million for a new EL line up Ashland? People would freak out because they don't want the noise, yet having an El line that would be great for the communities. Daley has done nothing but improve Chicago, Democracy is overrated, get over it...
Ok Stalin... Easy to say democracy is overrated when you live in one.

[Nowhereman1280]

Ok Stalin... Easy to say democracy is overrated when you live in one.

So you admit your criticisms about Daley and Chicago being undemocratic are complete BS then? :D

And how is thinking Democracy is overrated in anyway similar to Stalin's views? I'm pretty sure democracy never even crossed his mind. Remember, thinking its overrated implies you still think its good, but not as great as everyone says it is...

Anyhow, Yay for transit! I think we need some new El lines what do you guys think? :)

[ChicagoChicago]

So you admit your criticisms about Daley and Chicago being undemocratic are complete BS then? :D

And how is thinking Democracy is overrated in anyway similar to Stalin's views? I'm pretty sure democracy never even crossed his mind. Remember, thinking its overrated implies you still think its good, but not as great as everyone says it is...

Anyhow, Yay for transit! I think we need some new El lines what do you guys think? :)Uhhh...No. Daley may not run the CITY government in democratic fashion, but our federal government is doing just fine in that regard.

To say Daley has done nothing but improve Chicago is shortsighted. Some things have improved. Corruption has not. Daley just recently lost the city a $150m in free BRT funds. Stellar job there, DICK!

We can't even comment on transit funding from the stimulus because dipstick Daley hasn't submitted the paperwork...again. He's probably busy, off flying around on some non-profit's private jet.

You might call Daley's tactics fine, but Chicago's economy is overall is in WORSE shape than the rest of the nation, and that's a reflection of it's leadership, not it's people.

[Taft]

You might call Daley's tactics fine, but Chicago's economy is overall is in WORSE shape than the rest of the nation, and that's a reflection of it's leadership, not it's people.

This is WAY off topic, but you'll have to back that with some figures. Look at unemployment rates for a statistic that doesn't support your view: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/03/03/us/20090303_LEONHARDT.html?scp=2&sq=unemployment&st=cse

I know the economy overall is hurting the CTA. The budget forecasts from last month were downright alarming. But I think it is a stretch to say that Chicago's economy in particular that is hurting it. If anything, the strength of Chicago's economy is one of the things that has kept the CTA alive this long.

[ChicagoChicago]

This is WAY off topic, but you'll have to back that with some figures. Look at unemployment rates for a statistic that doesn't support your view: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/03/03/us/20090303_LEONHARDT.html?scp=2&sq=unemployment&st=cse

I know the economy overall is hurting the CTA. The budget forecasts from last month were downright alarming. But I think it is a stretch to say that Chicago's economy in particular that is hurting it. If anything, the strength of Chicago's economy is one of the things that has kept the CTA alive this long.At the end of December, Chicago's unemployment rate was 7.6%. The nations was 7.2%. In addition, look at Chicago's unemployment rate to other large cities. LA and NY both have lower unemployment rates, by almost 3/4 of a percent.

http://www.ides.state.il.us/economy/cps.pdf

In January, we saw national unemployment jump to 7.6%. I think it's fair to say Chicago's employment situation worsened also, though we don't have that number yet.

I'm not saying chicago's economy is hurting the CTA so much as I'm saying it's tax base (real estate transfer taxes, for one) were of a poor design. That was Daley's and Blago's concession and it's bombed, and not only hurt the CTA but it also has been prohibitive to real estate transactions. It is essentially the city's "EF U" tax to home buyers and sellers.

Daley has mismanaged this town for too long. Nothing he’s ever placed his hands on has come in on budget. He’s pawned off income producing assets and is mayor of the highest taxed city in America. Bottom line, Chicago is a wonderful town in spite of Daley, not because of him.

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ This discussion should go to another thread.

[VivaLFuego]

Daley just recently lost the city a $150m in free BRT funds. Stellar job there, DICK!


The proposal was ready to go, but Daley didn't want to bring the congestion charge before the Council who would have shot it down, coming on the heels of the meter lease. As usual, the story is more complicated than "Daley lost the city money omglol!!11." I still don't get why you take everything you read in the papers at face value when everything out of every politician's mouth (perhaps in this town more than most) is some sort of charade or game.

[ChicagoChicago]

The proposal was ready to go, but Daley didn't want to bring the congestion charge before the Council who would have shot it down, coming on the heels of the meter lease. As usual, the story is more complicated than "Daley lost the city money omglol!!11." I still don't get why you take everything you read in the papers at face value when everything out of every politician's mouth (perhaps in this town more than most) is some sort of charade or game.
You actually believe Daley’s excuse about the meter vote timing? Really? The vote should have occurred LONG BEFORE that proposal, which might I add was shotgunned through for a vote on purpose.

Then Daley had the balls to blame the previous administration for being inflexible…with a GRANT…after NYC missed out on this same money for missing a deadline. Sadly, people like you believe him, and that’s why he continues to get elected. The stockyards might be gone, but Chicago is still full of sheep.

[10023]

You might call Daley's tactics fine, but Chicago's economy is overall is in WORSE shape than the rest of the nation, and that's a reflection of it's leadership, not it's people.

Chicago's actually in a lot better shape than the rest of the Midwest and most large American cities, I think.

Regarding the virtues of democracy, Winston Churchill said it best ("Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others"). But while they're necessary as a check on mayoral power, I wouldn't want city aldermen to have any real decision-making abilities. Most people whose political careers peak at that level (that is to say, most city aldermen) aren't qualified to be dogcatcher. This is true in any city - the NY city council is filled with people who are either incompetent, crooks, or both. Benevolent dictatorship isn't actually a bad form of governance for a city like Chicago or New York, provided the dictator is effective and benevolent, and I think Daley and Bloomberg are both pretty decent in this regard.

[emathias]

At the end of December, Chicago's unemployment rate was 7.6%. The nations was 7.2%. In addition, look at Chicago's unemployment rate to other large cities. LA and NY both have lower unemployment rates, by almost 3/4 of a percent.
...

I can't find directly comparable numbers for all three cities, but:

LA county's unemployment rate in January was 10.5% source (http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/feb/28/1n28jobs005142-californias-jobless-rate-tops-10-pe/?zIndex=60021)

New York City's unemployment rate in January was 7.3% source (http://www.labor.state.ny.us/workforceindustrydata/laus.asp)

Chicago's metro area unemployment rate in December was 6.9% source (http://lmi.ides.state.il.us/laus/Chicago-Naperville-Joliet_MD_notseasadj.htm) (city of Chicago data for January available next week)

[VivaLFuego]

You actually believe Daley’s excuse about the meter vote timing? Really? The vote should have occurred LONG BEFORE that proposal, which might I add was shotgunned through for a vote on purpose.

Then Daley had the balls to blame the previous administration for being inflexible…with a GRANT…after NYC missed out on this same money for missing a deadline. Sadly, people like you believe him, and that’s why he continues to get elected. The stockyards might be gone, but Chicago is still full of sheep.

LOL. Ok.

[ChicagoChicago]

I can't find directly comparable numbers for all three cities, but:

LA county's unemployment rate in January was 10.5% source (http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/feb/28/1n28jobs005142-californias-jobless-rate-tops-10-pe/?zIndex=60021)

New York City's unemployment rate in January was 7.3% source (http://www.labor.state.ny.us/workforceindustrydata/laus.asp)

Chicago's metro area unemployment rate in December was 6.9% source (http://lmi.ides.state.il.us/laus/Chicago-Naperville-Joliet_MD_notseasadj.htm) (city of Chicago data for January available next week)I've already answered this in another question, but LA county is not encompassing LA's full metro, including parts of Orange county. That said, I was probably (our current unemployment rate is not available yet) wrong in the assesment of the UE, but that isn't a assessment of the full economy.

[Chicago Shawn]

Uhhh...No. Daley may not run the CITY government in democratic fashion, but our federal government is doing just fine in that regard.

To say Daley has done nothing but improve Chicago is shortsighted. Some things have improved. Corruption has not. Daley just recently lost the city a $150m in free BRT funds. Stellar job there, DICK!


How long have you lived here? Did you experience this city in the 80's-early 90's? I was still a young one at the time, but let me tell you in the 80's, this city was a rotting shithole. In 1982, the Chicago Tribune declared that the city of Chicago was in a decline with no end in sight and no bright future. Seriously, the amount of investment that has occurred here is nothing short of a miracle. Daley has done many great things for this city and has quite a bit of vision for the future. Yes, he may be shortsighted in some respects, yes his strong-arm political maneuvers aren't popular with some folks; but the man can get things done, has gotten many things done, and knows how to work the system. You need an iron fist to cut the red tape of bureaucracy, and that red tape exists everywhere, in every major city. Chicago is particularity difficult because our city government is structured as weak mayor, strong city council, which means 50 butting heads concerned more about their own little kingdoms than the city as a whole. Council wars in the 80's during the Harold Washington administartion is a perfect example, when city government just broke down.

Look at every other city in the Midwest. See a difference? I do. Don't give me the "Chicago was always a stronger city" argument either, because this place was hemorrhaging for 50 years and on its way to becoming a sequel of Detroit. Many of the infrastructure issues we are dealing with now are a result of a half century of neglect. That is a lot of shit to repair, especially when we get the shaft from the federal government, being the major donor state that we are. Much has improved, and yes we still have a long way to go.

You can't fault Daley solely for the BRT collapse. This wasn't "free", we had to hike parking rates in the already high garages. That had to pass the city council, and believe me, the alderman where getting quite an earful from angry car-driving constituents. There needs to be time to build a consensus in the democratic forum that you are preaching about, and it was scheduled for a vote, which was just ~13 days over the original deadline. Put some blame on Bush's plant for Transportation Secretary, Mary Peters. She had proven herself to be very pro-car over her tenure anyway.

[emathias]

I've already answered this in another question, but LA county is not encompassing LA's full metro, including parts of Orange county. That said, I was probably (our current unemployment rate is not available yet) wrong in the assesment of the UE, but that isn't a assessment of the full economy.

True, but LA County accounts for almost 10 million people of the LA metro area. The O.C. has about 3 million, so even if they were at 0% unemployment it would only drop the combined OC/LA Counties to 8%. And while OC isn't at 10.5% unemployment, it ain't at 0% unemployment either. For December, O.C. was at 6.5%, and based on how LAC and CA in general did, I'd guess they were pushing 7% in January.

It's not a measure of the full economy, but it is definitely significant.

EDIT: Found LA Metro figure for December - 9.5% - here (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/metro.nr0.htm)

[jjk1103]

How long have you lived here? Did you experience this city in the 80's-early 90's? I was still a young one at the time, but let me tell you in the 80's, this city was a rotting shithole. In 1982, the Chicago Tribune declared that the city of Chicago was in a decline with no end in sight and no bright future. Seriously, the amount of investment that has occurred here is nothing short of a miracle. Daley has done many great things for this city and has quite a bit of vision for the future. Yes, he may be shortsighted in some respects, yes his strong-arm political maneuvers aren't popular with some folks; but the man can get things done, has gotten many things done, and knows how to work the system. You need an iron fist to cut the red tape of bureaucracy, and that red tape exists everywhere, in every major city. Chicago is particularity difficult because our city government is structured as weak mayor, strong city council, which means 50 butting heads concerned more about their own little kingdoms than the city as a whole. Council wars in the 80's during the Harold Washington administartion is a perfect example, when city government just broke down.

Look at every other city in the Midwest. See a difference? I do. Don't give me the "Chicago was always a stronger city" argument either, because this place was hemorrhaging for 50 years and on its way to becoming a sequel of Detroit. Many of the infrastructure issues we are dealing with now are a result of a half century of neglect. That is a lot of shit to repair, especially when we get the shaft from the federal government, being the major donor state that we are. Much has improved, and yes we still have a long way to go.

You can't fault Daley solely for the BRT collapse. This wasn't "free", we had to hike parking rates in the already high garages. That had to pass the city council, and believe me, the alderman where getting quite an earful from angry car-driving constituents. There needs to be time to build a consensus in the democratic forum that you are preaching about, and it was scheduled for a vote, which was just ~13 days over the original deadline. Put some blame on Bush's plant for Transportation Secretary, Mary Peters. She had proven herself to be very pro-car over her tenure anyway.

....I agree !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D :D :D :D :D :D

[Chicago3rd]

I am getting more than a little fed up with Chicago selling or leasing out money generating assets. I thought it was stupid for asshat Blago to try to sell and lease back the Thompson Center [1]. Thankfully that tactic failed.

I could live with the Skyway deal, I am against Midway, and the parking meters and garages was the last straw for me.



This really needs to stop for there will be no assets left at some point with no income coming from them. The one time payouts will have been more than blown away, way before some of these 99 year leases are expired.:hell:


I am not saying that some of these CTA assets are not worthy of sale but this continued sell off city assets and privatization is starting to piss me off.




Yea lets dump all of our assets ASAP we need the upfront money now! As an individual one can also get payday loans, loans on income tax returns, bulk payouts on legal settlements too. But those are only for the most desperate and ill informed getting their financial ass handed to them by loan sharks.

This short sightedness is rather corporate American. Screw the future, gimme now, and how is our quarter looking.





[1] Proposed sale

When he first came to office, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich proposed selling the building to assuage the state budget.[4] The proposal was heavily criticized.[4] Lawmakers at first agreed to the plan,[5] but later a $200 million mortgage was agreed to instead, payable over 10 years.[6] The plan was declared unconstitutional by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan in June 2004.[7] The plan was set aside, although it had already cost the state $532,000 in legal fees.[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_R._Thompson_Center

CTA is selling the land now when it has gone down so far so that the Corporate/Rich people in Chicago can buy it cheap. As usual our Capitalist system is based on redistribution of the wealth from plain people to the rich.

[Attrill]

You can't fault Daley solely for the BRT collapse. This wasn't "free", we had to hike parking rates in the already high garages. That had to pass the city council, and believe me, the alderman where getting quite an earful from angry car-driving constituents. There needs to be time to build a consensus in the democratic forum that you are preaching about, and it was scheduled for a vote, which was just ~13 days over the original deadline. Put some blame on Bush's plant for Transportation Secretary, Mary Peters. She had proven herself to be very pro-car over her tenure anyway.

Exactly. The BRT money had too many strings attached, NYC was unable to meet an earlier deadline for exactly the same reasons. Add to that the fact that Obama had won the election and it seemed kind of pointless to expend a lot of political capital on what is a relatively small project of questionable value. It makes a lot more sense to just wait a few months and ask for the money with no strings attached if there is a real need for BRT.

[Attrill]

CTA is selling the land now when it has gone down so far so that the Corporate/Rich people in Chicago can buy it cheap. As usual our Capitalist system is based on redistribution of the wealth from plain people to the rich.

lol - have you even looked at what they are selling? Only 13 properties out of over 400 that they own. More than half are buildings that were cut in half by the recent Brown Line work, or are lots that were bought to be staging areas for the Brown Line project.

The Brown Line work is wrapping up, they're selling off buildings and lots as part of that.

[Abner]

This is getting to be more appropriate for another thread just for this purpose, but it is so bogus to compare Chicago to other Midwest cities, or to Chicago 30 years ago, as some kind of proof of Daley's brilliance that I don't even know where to begin. Any ninth-grader can tell you the question isn't "Are you better off than you were 30 years ago" but "Are you better off than you would be had you done something different." No knowledgeable person ever believed that Chicago was going to be "like Detroit," period, unless they believed that about all American cities. And Chicago was so bad 30 years ago? Name one single major American city that wasn't. We like to preen and crow, but Chicago's comeback is no more spectacular than that of half a dozen major cities in this country. There were bigger forces at play than Daley, and he doesn't get all the credit.

So that kind of thinking is totally beside the point. It makes a lot more sense to look at things that Daley has actually done. Many of these things are politely left undiscussed here. Probably the most important of these is TIF. The city collected $550 million (www.cookctyclerk.com/pdf/Chicago%20TIF%20Revenue%20Totals%20by%20Year.pdf) [pdf] from TIF in 2007, an amount that has grown explosively during Daley's mayoralty. If that money were included in the City's budget (http://www.cityofchicago.org/webportal/COCWebPortal/COC_EDITORIAL/4_2008_Proposed_Budget_Analyses_1.pdf) [pdf] (it's actually excluded from the budget even though we pay it), it would have increased the total amount of reported appropriations by 10%. Anybody who looks at the way the Daley budget completely ignores TIF--neither "TIF" nor "tax increment financing" appears ANYWHERE in the published budget--can only conclude that the administration's level of willful misinformation about appropriations in its budget is matched only by that of the Bush administration.

The Community Development Commission is supposed to oversee the TIF program, but over 99% of the individual votes cast in the CDC are yea votes (from Cook County Commissioner and soon to be Congressman Mike Quigley, here (http://www.commissionerquigley.com/library/taleoftwocities.pdf) [pdf]. That is a rubber stamp if ever there was one. It is a system with essentially zero oversight, and it covers one third of the land in this city. Many studies conducted at UIC have concluded that the TIF program raises taxes and does not improve neighborhoods enough for the extremely high cost.

Think about where Chicago would be if, instead of giving that money away to developers, we had used it to lower taxes, contribute to schools and police, and spend it on transit repairs.

Everybody complains about corruption. But only about the aldermen and the county. Tell me, who is the most powerful politician in Cook County? Do you really think Mayor Daley has no influence whatsoever over the corruption in the city? I don't mean that he profits personally, but it's clear that there is a general agreement between him and the aldermen: they get carte blanche over developments in their wards, and in return they look the other way and let him do as he pleases with everything else. Do you really think the mayor has no ability to stop spot zoning? No ability even to get on the soap box to speak out against it?

Can anybody here, by the way, name one single thing Mayor Daley ever did for transit in this city that even begins to make up for his decades of neglect? He famously said that transit has lost its constituency, and he has continued to govern under that apparent belief since then. He left Kruesi in charge of the CTA LONG after he was known to be harming the agency's position. He virtually ignored the CTA's funding problems until they reached the breaking point, then threw a fit about how the state had to do something about it without actually working toward a solution himself. He is known to never take CTA except for publicity events. During that glorious boom he takes so much credit for, at no point did he ever even appear to consider a campaign to improve our desperate, dying transit system. On transit, he gets an F.

[Chicago Shawn]

lol - have you even looked at what they are selling? Only 13 properties out of over 400 that they own. More than half are buildings that were cut in half by the recent Brown Line work, or are lots that were bought to be staging areas for the Brown Line project.

The Brown Line work is wrapping up, they're selling off buildings and lots as part of that.

And wasn't the purchase of those properties largely subsidized by the federal government's new starts funds? Seems to be that any selling of the Brown Line properties would come to the CTA as a profit.

Sure, I would like to see the CTA get a little more creative and lease out these properties to business and residents, but that would mean that CTA would need to keep people on the payroll to just keep track of those lease agreements. Does CTA have such people already on the workforce? And if so, would the extra labor be worth the monetary gain of new leases? Perhaps someone in the CTA loop could answer that....

[the urban politician]

This is getting to be more appropriate for another thread just for this purpose, but it is so bogus to compare Chicago to other Midwest cities, or to Chicago 30 years ago...

^ It may be impossible to ever know if another mayor would have done a better job than Daley. It certainly is quite a chore to analyze the 20+ years of the Daley administration for all its successes and misgivings. It may be impossible to say for sure what Daley got right and what he got wrong..

When Daley said that transit had lost its constituency, for example, it was in the early to mid-90's and transit ridership truly was hitting an all time low (if I read the data right). It was just the beginning of the SUV boom, which captivated America, and an era of national economic prosperity was just hitting its stride. Gas was consistently priced at under a dollar a gallon! Daley has largely been Mayor during an era in which transit simply wasn't a priority for Americans in general.

But the Orange Line was built, the Blue Line was rebuilt, the Brown Line capacity was expanded, and slow zones are being eliminated. World Business Chicago was formed, the city has done well in the headquarters race, and Chicago is definitely a very serious contender for the 2016 Games. With a new Federal Administration in power, perhaps Daley will recognize a renewed interest in transit and go with it...or perhaps not.

I'll defer to you lifelong Chicagoans on judging your benevolent dictator. My personal opinion? If Chicago doesn't get the Olympic Games and if Daley doesn't get on the transit bandwagon, it may be time to seriously consider whether this benevolent dictator has become a wee bit antiquated..

[ChicagoChicago]

How long have you lived here? Did you experience this city in the 80's-early 90's? I was still a young one at the time, but let me tell you in the 80's, this city was a rotting shithole. In 1982, the Chicago Tribune declared that the city of Chicago was in a decline with no end in sight and no bright future. Seriously, the amount of investment that has occurred here is nothing short of a miracle. Daley has done many great things for this city and has quite a bit of vision for the future. Yes, he may be shortsighted in some respects, yes his strong-arm political maneuvers aren't popular with some folks; but the man can get things done, has gotten many things done, and knows how to work the system. You need an iron fist to cut the red tape of bureaucracy, and that red tape exists everywhere, in every major city. Chicago is particularity difficult because our city government is structured as weak mayor, strong city council, which means 50 butting heads concerned more about their own little kingdoms than the city as a whole. Council wars in the 80's during the Harold Washington administartion is a perfect example, when city government just broke down.

Look at every other city in the Midwest. See a difference? I do. Don't give me the "Chicago was always a stronger city" argument either, because this place was hemorrhaging for 50 years and on its way to becoming a sequel of Detroit. Many of the infrastructure issues we are dealing with now are a result of a half century of neglect. That is a lot of shit to repair, especially when we get the shaft from the federal government, being the major donor state that we are. Much has improved, and yes we still have a long way to go.

You can't fault Daley solely for the BRT collapse. This wasn't "free", we had to hike parking rates in the already high garages. That had to pass the city council, and believe me, the alderman where getting quite an earful from angry car-driving constituents. There needs to be time to build a consensus in the democratic forum that you are preaching about, and it was scheduled for a vote, which was just ~13 days over the original deadline. Put some blame on Bush's plant for Transportation Secretary, Mary Peters. She had proven herself to be very pro-car over her tenure anyway.

This is a "what have you done for me lately?" world. I'll give Daley all the credit in the world for cleaning up Chicago. But that was almost 20 years ago.

Chicago was given a deadline. We were awarded the grant in February (I think) 2008. Our city officials screwed the pooch on it. Even allowing the city council to vote it down is better than letting it sit on his desk and ROT. Blaming Bush on this will get you nowhere. They set the rules. We knew the rules. We watched as NYC lost out on this money, and somehow expected a different outcome if we missed the deadline too?

[the urban politician]

We watched as NYC lost out on this money, and somehow expected a different outcome if we missed the deadline too?

^ No, that's not true. NYC didn't lose the money because of a missed deadline. It lost the money because the city council did not approve a congestion charge.

[Abner]

But the Orange Line was built, the Blue Line was rebuilt, the Brown Line capacity was expanded, and slow zones are being eliminated.

I'll try to stay focused on transit from here on. The Orange Line started construction in 1985, during those supposedly hellish inter-Daley years (the O'Hare extension was done during those years too). That had nothing to do with Daley. The only "new" el service under Daley has been the reconstruction of the Paulina Connector. You note that the Blue Line was rebuilt, but let's remember that it was only repaired after what could have been a catastrophic derailment, and that the inspection process that should have resulted in earlier repair was completely broken (I'll defer to Viva on whether or not that dismal failure can be attributed to Daley's buddy Kruesi).

The real accomplishments of the last 20 years in el service have been in keeping the system from actually falling apart. These were the rehabs of the Green Line and the Douglas branch, and the capacity expansion on the Brown Line. I won't say that Daley himself committed any egregious errors with those projects (although the Green Line rehab generally suffered from the poor relations between the City/CTA and the black community, not Daley's fault) but rather that he passed up opportunities to do things that should have been done. He has had a completely hands-off approach to transit matters.

He has shown no interest in working to repair the North Main Line, convince RTA to work on fare integration, or promote any service expansions. On the rare occasion that somebody asks him about these things, he bloviates about how it's not his responsibility and the city doesn't have the money, etc., of course always studiously ignoring his half billion dollar slush fund and the fact that as it is the city contributes a dismally tiny amount of funding to the CTA compared to comparable cities. And the one project he did decide to champion, the Block 37 superstation connected to an airport express train, was always a harebrained scheme and became a spectacular, unmitigated disaster.

Of course, then there's the matter of his selling the Olympics by promising transit improvements, then dropping any plans there might have been completely once Chicago won the US bid.

[pip]

^been here 6 years, I think you ought to take a look around and see what else is out there, especially considering here is on the cheap for what Chicago is comparable to. Go to other cities without renting a car, aside from maybe 5 or 6 US cities, you know the very expensive ones, it won't be easy. In those cheaper or equel cost of living cities go around and hit the downtowns and the neighborhoods and try to do it by transit. Check out there income, property and overall tax rates too. Tell me what you think after. Yup there are a few better cities but they are too pricey in especially cost of living and have higher taxes also.

[Nowhereman1280]

He has shown no interest in working to repair the North Main Line

Of course, then there's the matter of his selling the Olympics by promising transit improvements, then dropping any plans there might have been completely once Chicago won the US bid.

Sorry not buying either of these statements.

A. No repairs on the North Main Line? Have you paid any attention to the north main line? Ummm in the last 3 years alone Howard has been completely rebuilt, Fullerton and Belmont have been completely rebuilt. The Brown Line stations have been completely rebuilt. Large areas of track have been completely torn up and the old wood ties replaced with composites vanquishing almost all of the major slow zones except the one north of Loyola stop. They have been systematically improving all of the stops not only replacing the stairwell screens and lighting, but also tearing out the old rotting ceilings and wiring in the stops Lawrence, Argyle, Bryn Mawr, Berwin, Thorndale, Granville, Morse, and Jarvis. There are plans to completely renovate Wilson stop as well. You obviously don't use the North Main line very much if you haven't noticed the huge improvements that have ocured in the last year or two...

I mean just the other day I was coming home and got off at Berwin and thought to myself "man, with the exception of the old floor with the worn ruts in it, this looks like a brand new station." I hope they don't replace the floor anyhow because I like the ruts by the turnstiles where millions of feet have worn down the floor.


B. Have you read anything at all about the Olympic bid? The Federal government never allocates funds for transit for Olympic bids until after the city wins the bid. If you look at the history of it, Chicago is in line to receive about $2 billion in transit if we win the bid. Why don't you read a little bit before you start spouting off BS that you heard somewhere...

[the urban politician]

Posted at SSC:

Planners meeting today at 9:30am CMAP Offices, 233 S. Wacker Dr

Looks like METRA's big splurge will be on the White Sox/35th St Station on the Rock Island line.


http://www.chitowndailynews.org/Chicago_news/CTA_Metra_vie_for_stimulus_dollars,23410

CTA, Metra vie for stimulus dollars


DONATE BY ADRIAN G. URIBARRI
March 05, 2009 | 1:15 PM
Hundreds of millions of federal dollars are up for grabs, and Chicago-area transit agencies are finally ready to claim them.

At a meeting tomorrow, the Transportation Committee of the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning will choose whether to approve a $1.6 billion improvement plan that includes projects for the Chicago Transit Authority, Metra commuter rail and Pace suburban buses.

The committee, made up of 30 representatives from various transportation groups around Chicago, meets regularly to discuss ongoing projects and decide on changes. But the meeting tomorrow will have added importance as it will determine which projects will have the chance to secure funds from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act.

"In terms of the stimulus package, this is new and even unique," CMAP spokesman Tom Garritano says. "It's not business as usual."

The improvement plan's 116 projects include bus and rail-car overhauls and repairs, signal replacements and upgrades, rail-station reconstruction, preventative maintenance, infrastructure renovations and facility improvements for the CTA. The Pace suburban-bus system would receive money for vehicle replacement and repairs.

For Metra commuter rail, the plan includes $7.9 million for the new 35th Street Station in the Rock Island District, east of U.S. Cellular Field, where the Chicago White Sox play. The agency would also receive money for vehicle repairs, replacement of rail lines, station upgrades, commuter-car improvements, bridge renovations and an underground cable from Cook County to Kane County.

It also includes plans for highway, road and bridge improvements.

To be eligible for federal stimulus money, Garritano says, local agencies must coordinate projects on a regional level. CMAP, which serves as the coordinating regional body, must approve the projects before implementing agencies such as the CTA can submit proposals to the federal government.

Holly Ostdick, assistant planner at CMAP, says that under the improvement plan, the agencies are switching from previous federal funding sources to the stimulus package.

According to the plan, CMAP officials anticipated $612 million for projects. They now expect more than $1.6 billion.

Nationally, the federal stimulus package includes $48 billion for transportation infrastructure of highways and bridges, mass transit, rail and aviation, according to the Illinois Department of Transportation. Of that funding, $936 million will go to the state for highway and bridge projects, and $468 million will go toward mass transit.

To secure all of the money, officials must adhere to what they have called "use it or lose it" rules. For transit projects, half of all stimulus money must be obligated for projects within six months of when they become available. For highway and bridge projects, the deadline is two months earlier.

The federal government will distribute money to the states no later than March 10, according to IDOT documents.

Tomorrow's meeting is at 9:30 a.m. at the CMAP offices, 233 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 800 in Chicago.

[Taft]

Posted at SSC:
...
Holly Ostdick, assistant planner at CMAP, says that under the improvement plan, the agencies are switching from previous federal funding sources to the stimulus package.

According to the plan, CMAP officials anticipated $612 million for projects. They now expect more than $1.6 billion.
...


This is interesting. Good to see this money going for improvements which will be useful. I hope that when the stimulus money runs out we can get that federal funding back, paltry though it may be.

[Chicago3rd]

lol - have you even looked at what they are selling? Only 13 properties out of over 400 that they own. More than half are buildings that were cut in half by the recent Brown Line work, or are lots that were bought to be staging areas for the Brown Line project.

The Brown Line work is wrapping up, they're selling off buildings and lots as part of that.

Hah....have do you believe it would have sold for less than it will now when the market was higher?:koko:

[Attrill]

Hah....have do you believe it would have sold for less than it will now when the market was higher?:koko:

Obviously not. But I don't think the CTA bought property along the Brown Line years ago "so that the Corporate/Rich people in Chicago can buy it cheap" when the market tanked. For starters I don't think the CTA could predict the real estate market, and if prices were higher they would be selling them for more. The majority of properties being sold were bought to facilitate Brown Line work. Now that the Brown Line work is wrapping up they are selling the properties off. I don't know why you see some conspiracy by the CTA to help the "Corporate/Rich people" in this.

If the CTA ends up selling properties to politically connected people for less than market value then you will have a point. But nothing of the sort has happened and there is no indication that it is in the process of happening. They have put the properties on the open market to be bought by the highest bidder. Where is the problem with this?

[BVictor1]

http://www.chitowndailynews.org/Chicago_news/CTA_gets_green_light_for_241_million_in_stimulus_projects,23458

http://cdnassets.s3.amazonaws.com/images/logo-974.jpg

CTA gets green light for $241 million in stimulus projects

BY ADRIAN G. URIBARRI
March 06, 2009 | 6:01 PM
The Chicago Transit Authority scored a quick one-two punch this week.

Yesterday, days ahead of the stimulus-package funding deadline, the federal government handed the CTA $241 million for capital projects. Today, a regional planning committee gave the go-ahead for the CTA to start work on them.

Metra will receive $141 million, and the Pace suburban bus line will get $33 million. Chicago-area transit agencies will also receive an additional $245 million in federal capital and planning funds unrelated to the stimulus package.

"This was about as fast as humanly possible," says Tom Garritano, spokesman for the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning. "The clock has started ticking."

He's referring to the "use it or lose it" rule in the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act. The measure requires regional transit systems such as the CTA to commit half of their stimulus money within 180 days. For highway and bridge projects, the deadline is 120 days.

The rest of the money must be spent within the following six months.

CMAP's list of 116 projects include:

Bus and rail-car overhauls and repairs, signal replacements and upgrades, rail-station reconstruction, preventative maintenance, infrastructure renovations and facility improvements for the CTA.
$7.9 million for the new 35th Street Metra station in the Rock Island District, where the Chicago White Sox Play at U.S. Cellular Field. Metra also received money for vehicle repairs, replacement of rail lines, station upgrades, commuter-car improvements, bridge renovations and an underground cable from Cook County to Kane County.
Vehicle replacement and repairs at Pace.
At today's committee meeting, most of the gallery was filled with staff members from various government agencies, and not one layperson volunteered to speak during public-comment periods. Since the meeting was at the high-security Sears Tower, visitors needed to call ahead of the meeting to receive a pass.

Under federal guidelines, CMAP needed to approve the projects to allow transit agencies to fund them through the recovery act.

Most of the projects funded under the recovery package were originally scheduled for 2010 and 2011.

"You can't just replace every project that you were going to do this summer anyway," CMAP Executive Director Randy Blankenhorn says. "That doesn't create jobs."

More money needed

Yet in their rush to spend stimulus money and accelerate projects, transit officials say one thing remains clear: They still need more cash.

"It isn't a lot of money," Blankenhorn says of the recovery package. "We really need a capital program in the state of Illinois."

The last time state legislators passed a spending bill for infrastructure capital was 10 years ago, a decade after the previous capital bill came through in 1989.

Last year's state transit bailout, worth about half a billion dollars, was meant for only operating expenses at transit agencies and funded primarily through higher taxes.

Sidney Weseman, division manager for strategic and long-range planning at the Regional Transportation Authority, says that to meet future needs, officials would need a spending bill worth $10 billion over five years.

He says that the federal stimulus package, while helpful, is not enough.

"It doesn't solve our long-term problem," Weseman says. "We've got a lot of junk on the street. The average lifespan of a bus in the city is about 12 years. We've got buses entering 13, 14, 15 years of service."

That plea didn't prompt much sympathy from state Rep. Luis Arroyo (D-Chicago), vice chairman of the House Mass Transit Committee.

"They always come back for money," says Arroyo. "They're mispending their money. They should be safeguarding it. They should have accountability and transparency for how they're spending it."

But Arroyo says he agrees the transit agencies need more money, and would support a spending bill with strong oversight measures.

[Chicago3rd]

But nothing of the sort has happened and there is no indication that it is in the process of happening. They have put the properties on the open market to be bought by the highest bidder. Where is the problem with this?

Right...Chicago????:jester:

[jcchii]

Chicago has prospered, and Daley gets some of the credit. But transit is headed toward a funding crisis, and I'll agree he does need to make it more of a priority.

And of course there's been corruption in his administration, most notably in hiring. One of his recent IGA/patronage chiefs is in prison right now.

[the urban politician]

"They always come back for money," says Arroyo. "They're mispending their money. They should be safeguarding it. They should have accountability and transparency for how they're spending it."

But Arroyo says he agrees the transit agencies need more money, and would support a spending bill with strong oversight measures.

^ Which one is it, Arroyo? You complain that they "always come back for money", and immediately follow that with agreeing that more money is needed.

Make up your mind. Fund transit or don't fund it, but stop bitching :rolleyes:

[whyhuhwhy]

^ Which one is it, Arroyo? You complain that they "always come back for money", and immediately follow that with agreeing that more money is needed.

Make up your mind. Fund transit or don't fund it, but stop bitching :rolleyes:

Give the man a break, there is no reason we should just throw more money at the CTA without actually seeing how it is being spent. It is amazing when you read the large percentage of funds that just goes to people's retirements and pensions and not to actual infrastructure. I'm 100% for an amazing transit system but we should all know by now that the CTA is seriously mismanaged and we could get a lot more for our money. Giving them a half a billion dollars and their entire plan seems to consist of bus repairs? Unbelievable.

[whyhuhwhy]

CTA is selling the land now when it has gone down so far so that the Corporate/Rich people in Chicago can buy it cheap. As usual our Capitalist system is based on redistribution of the wealth from plain people to the rich.

I'm sure that's exactly what happened, the CTA plan all along was to eventually sell as much land as possible right when the market tanked just so all those rich people out there would benefit. :jester:

[emathias]

This isn't good ...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/03/a-man-was-stabbed-this.html


Man stabbed during argument on CTA Red Line
March 9, 2009 2:08 PM | 10 Comments

A man was stabbed and seriously wounded just after noon today on a CTA Red Line train near the Chicago stop, the agency said.

A passenger on a northbound train that was approaching the Chicago station told police he had been injured by two people, CTA spokeswoman Catherine Hosinski said.

The victim was taken to Northwestern Memorial Hospital in serious to critical condition, said Fire Cmdr. Will Knight.

Belmont Area detectives are investigating the attack and speaking with "persons of interest," said Chicago Police Sgt. Antoinette Ursitti.

Jamie Huberty, 19, a DePaul University student, was sitting just a few feet from where the attack occurred at about 12:15 p.m.

Two men and a woman, all in their 20s, got on the train at the Roosevelt stop and were sitting facing each other -- the man seated alone on one side of the car, the other man and the woman seated together on the other side.

At first, the group seemed to be trading good-natured "sarcastic insults, laughing, being loud and obnoxious," Huberty said.

At some point, though, things turned heated and the woman screamed at the man who was seated alone, Huberty said. The man yelled, "Get out of my face," and shoved her. The other man leaped forward and started punching him.

"The woman pulled out a knife and started stabbing the man in the neck and shoulders," Huberty said.

Someone pulled the emergency stop and the train halted. Huberty ran to the first car and told the conductor, who ran back to the car where the attack occurred and didn't reappear for about five minutes.

...

[BVictor1]

This isn't good ...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/03/a-man-was-stabbed-this.html

Well, most stabbings aren't good are they?

In other news...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/09/high-speed-rail-to-the-re_n_173265.html

High-Speed Rail To The Rescue: Durbin, Quinn Make Stimulus Funds Pitch For Train Project

March 9, 2009 05:12 PM

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/67999/thumbs/s-DURBINQUINN-large.jpg

CHICAGO - Illinois leaders want stimulus money to develop high-speed train travel between Chicago and St. Louis.

Gov. Pat Quinn and U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin say the priority is to upgrade Amtrak's existing service between the cities so trains can travel at up to 110 miles per hour. That could cut travel times to under 4 hours from the current 5.

Quinn and Durbin met with other officials Monday at Chicago's Union Station to discuss an Illinois request for some of the $8 billion set aside for high-speed rail in the federal stimulus bill.

They didn't offer a price tag for improving the Chicago-St. Louis line. But it's expected to run into the billions.

Several states also want money for high-speed routes, so competition for the stimulus money will be stiff.

Listen to the entire press conference at Chicago Public Radio.

http://www.chicagopublicradio.org/Content.aspx?audioID=32686

[ardecila]

Ground floor plan for the new Morgan Street station on the Green Line:
http://www.gazettechicago.com/img/feb09/greenline.jpg


I'm glad that they didn't decide to build a suspended station like the ones in the Loop. Those are usually pretty sparse, minimal structures and they offer little opportunity for a major presence. Instead, CTA chose a more substantial (and cheaper) design that occupies some of the sidewalk and the parking lane with stationhouses.

Architecturally, I see some major problems with this design - the doors into the stationhouses, when opened, will reduce the sidewalk width to only 3 or 4 feet. An extremely easy solution would be to set the doors back from the wall, so they have a little alcove. I sincerely hope the architects are revising this... :rolleyes:

[the urban politician]

^ Sorry if this is a silly question, but why are there both north and south stations? Why not just one?

[pottebaum]

This isn't good ...

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/03/a-man-was-stabbed-this.html

I know a girl who was on that train--so close that one of them actually stepped on her foot during the scuffle.

[Mr Downtown]

I think it's because there isn't room underneath the Lake Street elevated structure for a mezzanine. So you have to either have a monstrous transfer bridge with two elevators from there to the platform and then two different elevators from platform down to street level—or build separate inbound and outbound paid areas.

[Attrill]

Giving them a half a billion dollars and their entire plan seems to consist of bus repairs? Unbelievable.

It isn't half a billion, it is $240 million. It isn't just repairs - it is purchasing new buses and trains, replacing signals and switches, and building a couple new stations. Full details are here (http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=14472).

I'm very happy to see that they are replacing the old equipment - there is equipment that needs to be replaced and the contracts can be quickly signed fulfilling the requirements of "stimulus". Replacing this equipment has a great impact on the CTA's operating budget - lower fuel and repair costs will result from these purchases. Kruesi deferred a hell of a lot of maintenance that we need to catch up with, I think a few billion dollars needs to be spent on making up for that until any new lines, facilities, or services are even considered. Hopefully we'll see that money in the full transportation bill.

[Abner]

Carole Brown told Congress the CTA could easily spend more than twice that amount in 90 days on basic repairs and options in existing contracts. But before they should spend that money they need to figure out how they are going to keep the lights on as sales tax revenues plummet.

[the urban politician]

It isn't half a billion, it is $240 million. It isn't just repairs - it is purchasing new buses and trains, replacing signals and switches, and building a couple new stations. Full details are here (http://www.cmap.illinois.gov/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=14472).


^ Thanks for finding that. Just for you guys to know, the transit stuff begins on page 40

[whyhuhwhy]

It isn't half a billion, it is $240 million.

http://www.chitowndailynews.org/Chicago_news/CTA_gets_green_light_for_241_million_in_stimulus_projects,23458

"Yesterday, days ahead of the stimulus-package funding deadline, the federal government handed the CTA $241 million for capital projects."

"Chicago-area transit agencies will also receive an additional $245 million in federal capital and planning funds unrelated to the stimulus package."

$241 million + $245 million. That's about a half a billion.

[Taft]

http://www.chitowndailynews.org/Chicago_news/CTA_gets_green_light_for_241_million_in_stimulus_projects,23458

"Yesterday, days ahead of the stimulus-package funding deadline, the federal government handed the CTA $241 million for capital projects."

"Chicago-area transit agencies will also receive an additional $245 million in federal capital and planning funds unrelated to the stimulus package."

$241 million + $245 million. That's about a half a billion.

OK, if you want to play semantics with WHERE the money is coming from, fine.

I think the point you have failed to make is that the CTA is somehow aiming low with their aspirations for spending the money. I personally think you are overestimating the effect of money on a system with the size of the CTA. While you'll get no arguments from me on the fact that some of the money isn't going where it should be (for instance the pension drag), the fact is that the CTA is the nation's second largest public transit organization and that carries a big price tag.

[Taft]

I'm sure that's exactly what happened, the CTA plan all along was to eventually sell as much land as possible right when the market tanked just so all those rich people out there would benefit. :jester:

You are mocking a strawman here. If you think the CTA planned the sale of their real estate assets well, I've got a bridge to sell you. They are selling at a time where real estate is going for fire sale prices and further are being FORCED to sell due to inclement financial conditions. While it does appear that much of this land was being used for Brown Line reconstruction, I really think the CTA could have been smarter with its assets in this circumstance.

[emathias]

Ground floor plan for the new Morgan Street station on the Green Line:
http://www.gazettechicago.com/img/feb09/greenline.jpg


I'm glad that they didn't decide to build a suspended station like the ones in the Loop. Those are usually pretty sparse, minimal structures and they offer little opportunity for a major presence. Instead, CTA chose a more substantial (and cheaper) design that occupies some of the sidewalk and the parking lane with stationhouses.

Architecturally, I see some major problems with this design - the doors into the stationhouses, when opened, will reduce the sidewalk width to only 3 or 4 feet. An extremely easy solution would be to set the doors back from the wall, so they have a little alcove. I sincerely hope the architects are revising this... :rolleyes:

I actually really dislike this design. Its impact on the street level is horrendous - how long will it be before there's a mugging against the wall there, where the sidewalk is now hidden from the street? Why couldn't they have made the station more like the ones to the west?

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ I dunno, assuming those are glass station houses, the odds of crime in the area would probably drop due to one or two city employee's being stationed there nearly 24-7 with a clear view through the glass. Less important to the crime thing would be the fact that CTA Police (and regular police) frequently hang out in and outside of station houses and that increased presence will also decrease criminal activity.

[Abner]

I would wager that the increase in pedestrian traffic would at least make up for any increased risk of crime. This is a pretty sleepy area as it is. I do wish they could have found a way to put the bike racks inside though. I've noticed they're much better used when they're within sight of CTA employees and protected from rain and other unpleasantries.

[Chicago3rd]

OK, if you want to play semantics with WHERE the money is coming from, fine.

I think the point you have failed to make is that the CTA is somehow aiming low with their aspirations for spending the money. I personally think you are overestimating the effect of money on a system with the size of the CTA. While you'll get no arguments from me on the fact that some of the money isn't going where it should be (for instance the pension drag), the fact is that the CTA is the nation's second largest public transit organization and that carries a big price tag.

And we all know that a few years ago CTA estimated it needed at least $6 Billion just to get all that we have up and running right and upgraded. Nothing fancy. So even though $.5 Billion would look good in my bank account...it is greatfully received but woefully short.