Yeah I've seen that before, rgolch
. It could be better IMHO but they're on to something.
Viva, I say this with all due respect because I recognize the knowledge you've demonstrated on the matter of transit, but I'm beginning to interpret your arguments as thinly-veiled opinions that a Red Line extension should NEVER be built even after the a Circle Line is done (Norsider's already seemed to have taken that position), and you're practically going out of your way to both make that point and keep it thinly-veiled.
I'll grant you your first point. I mean, nobody (WHO CAN AFFORD IT) HAS to live ANYWHERE. In saying that you're like Cosmo Kramer when he always tells Jerry, "Well, no one is holding a GUN to your head!"
. And that's a valid point if not a universally applicable one, as there are many determinants on where people live sepearate from mere choice. But for the purposes of this discussion I'll go with what you say.
Even taking into the validity of that, let's just say that there's some major trend of West Pullman, Roseland, and Morgan Park residents to Kenwood, Oakland, Grand Boulevard, and Douglas, etc--the 30s 40s ad 50s. Does that automatically mean that people aren't going to take their place in the Hundreds? And I mean regardless of the background of these hypothetical new residents--these communities may or may not stay Black forever. This take the supposition that the population in Chicago city limits can't ever grow significantly again (probably not, but not impossible, I don't think). And the verticality of future closer-in development is only going to go so far no matter how much you all (smartly) promote it here on this forum.
Originally Posted by VivaLFuego
2. If the current demographic trends continue, i.e. the formerly-working class residents of the south side are increasingly middle class and more affluent, car ownership and usage will also continue to increase. Since the southland is essentially totally built out, both residentially by bungalows and commercially, this suggests that there is little long term ridership growth potential with a red line extension.
Are you aware of current car ownership levels in these communities? I don't. Not in the sense of citing figures. But I seen with my own eyes. Besides 95th, the busiest stops on the Ryan are 87th-69th. They serve communities as far east as South Chicago and probably as far west as Ashburn, with Calumet Heights, Avalon Park, Burnside, Chatham, etc. in between. ALOT of people own cars in these communities--A. LOT. Go on a major artery like Halsted, Stony Island or Cottage Grove pretty much any time during daylight and you'll see what I mean. After a certain time every day, parking in my little hood is very much an issue.
That said, if you get on the L inbound after 79th (or, sometimes, 87th) between like 7:30-9AM, you're standing. Same going outbound between 3:30 or 4-6ish in the PM. Of course there are significant amounts of people who don't have cars in these areas who ride the L, but there are more "choice" riders, I argue, that there is credit being given to (including myself)--that's why Wabash and in some cases Michigan in this stretch are residential parking zones from 8-10AM. While the Hundereds are not generally as well off (tho for the record they are largely well-off nevertheless) I don't buy the case that it wouldn't be the same here. ALOT of people have cars there also, and drive because, what are the alternatives besides the Electric Line and Rock Island Line? And I've stated the insufficiency of Metra down there.
I'll take that argument and pose this question to you: If the Howard branch didn't already run thru Uptown and Edgewater and Rogers Park, where ALOT of people own cars, would you be opposed to extentions from, say, hypothetical terminal at Wilson up thru these areas, assuming everything esle about the character of these places were the same? What about everyone's favorite Lakeview and Lincoln Park? Parking there is impossible--does that mean they don't deserve transit either, tho the Red Line is well-used up there?
Listen, I know I said I would "agree to disagree" and this isn't consistent with that, but I just couldn't let that ride. We can go on about this ad infinitum but why? I'm already on record supporting the Circle Line, which is irrelevant anyway because its a foregone conclusion. The choir of SSP is being preached to in support of it anyway. And don't say extension will be acceptable to have if you're going to support an argument for why it should NOT be had.
And PLEASE don't base your arguments in the "con" camp on conceptions you have on the eneighborhood based on biased heresay and what you read about the community in the Trib. Take the time to see for yourself one day; nobody'll hurt you. Promise. Also, while I believe in statistics, they don't have eyes. While I can't cite numbers like some of you can, I have the experience in the area that is less tangible but as useful. Right now, Viva, you're making your case based on the assumption (at least I've concluded it's the assumption), that I've seen you mention regularly in this thread and others, that the vaaaaaaast majority of South Side is some a grimy ghetto. That's a makes what you've been saying, candidly, a mis-informed argument.