View Single Post
  #8917  
Old Posted Mar 30, 2012, 4:01 PM
emathias emathias is offline
Adoptive Chicagoan
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: River North, Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 5,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by aic4ever View Post
emathias, you're arguing against your own argument. You say that loop should have been put in 50 years ago to accommodate the growth that was just starting to occur, so that it could better serve the capacity that Streeterville has now reached, today. Then you turn around and say that we shouldn't provide new infrastructure to under-served growth areas because we need to serve where people already are. You can't stand on both sides of the fence at once.
I never said once that we shouldn't provide infrastructure in outer parts of the central area and I'm not on both sides of the fence. Nowhereman1280 is the one saying he thinks a West Loop to Streeterville link is silly and unnecessary (paraphrased). I have said that an outer line is of less pressing need than a central line, but I never said it was silly and unnecessary - in fact in my last post I pointed out that doing two lines would be synergistic and provide better than 1+1 results.

My entire point has been that because we have limited funds, the money should first go to areas that are already set up to take the most advantage of the transit investment. If we can fund both, then by all means let's do both. But I don't think we should do the outer ones first. I would prioritize *both* the 1968 West Loop-Streeterville project *and* the Circle Line ahead of the Red Line extension, for example.

As I've said in multiple posts that it's a matter of prioritizing existing needs and high-density areas ahead of presently developing needs and less-dense areas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aic4ever View Post
Other than that, am I missing something? Are the people who live in Streeterville crying for public transportation? Are they under-served by buses or cabs? I would find a claim to that effect very dubious. If you need to make it from Northwestern to Union Station in under 20 minutes, you're either taking a cab or running, even if there is a subway line, because you can't count on the train being there immediately when you need it anyway.
Listen, Nowhereman1280 has tried to make this about Streeterville residents, which really is a very tiny percentage of who would find utlity in the 1968 plan. I focused on Streeterville originally because it has the high density that I thought would make it more obviously a beneficial link, but the plan includes linkes between all of the West Loop, Streeterville, Museum Campus, and McCormick Place. It could also relatively easily be extended to include east Bronzeville and further south, and the east edge of the Lincoln Park neighborhood.

Beneficial links in original plan, without extensions:
1) West Loop train stations to Central Loop, East Loop, greater Grant Park, Museum Campus, Soldier Field, McCormick Place, Streeterville
2) Streeterville/Michigan Ave to greater Grant Park, Museum Campus, Soldier Field, McCormick Place (remember, lots of hotels in Streeterville/Mag Mile district

So you do benefit Streeterville residents, but more than that, you benefit commuters and day-trippers coming from the suburbs by rail who want to get to Grant Park or the Museum Campus or Michigan Avenue. You also benefit people in hotels in Streeterville/Michigan Ave who want to get to McCormick Place. And, yes, you do benefit people who want to get from Streeterville/Mag Mile to the West Loop and vice versa.

Ultimately what connecting Streeterville, McCormick Place, and the West Loop through the central Loop accomplishes is the unification of the Central Area. Whereas the Circle Line seeks to make it easier to work around the Central Area, the 1968 distributor subway makes it easier to operate within the Central Area.

Beyond that:

Extension north to SE corner of the Lincoln Park neighborhood could yield additional benefit of a rail link to the Zoo, the densest part of Lincoln Park, the north portion of the Gold Coast, the Chicago History Museum, a transfer at Clark/Division, and the potential to serve as a different routing tie-in for a Circle Line. Taken together, this could provide a higher-capacity supplement for lakefront express buses and the 151/156 routes. I'm not against buses by any means, but a subway provides more consistent service and frees up road capacity without additional investment in roads. Getting some of the buses off Michigan Avenue would improve the speed there for the remaining buses.

Extension south from McCormick Place would serve the South Lakefront and support development in what should naturally be a highly desirably part of the city. This is much more speculative, so I'm not really advocating it, but the 1968 plan makes this sort of investment more possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aic4ever View Post
I think you're all mentally masturbating over this because there's not a whole lot else to talk about at the moment.
We'd love there to be more to talk about, 'tis true, but I also do think that the 1968 plan would still be a great benefit to the city - and if that gets funding, then I also think the Circle Line adds a lot of value.
Reply With Quote