Today’s Headlines for Friday, December 22

  • To Improve Bus Service, We Need a Local Dedicated Funding Source for Transit (Active Trans)
  • …And to Make Bus Lanes Work Well, We Need to Get Creative With Enforcement (Active Trans)
  • A Recap of Last Week’s Mayor’s Bicycle Advisory Council Meeting (Active Trans)
  • Prosecutors: Man Charged in DUI Crash That Killed 2 Had Phone Open to Social Media (Tribune)
  • Man Goes on Pink Line Tracks to Get Skateboard, Is Truck by Train, Walks to Ambulance (CBS)
  • Woman Uses Kennedy Overpass as a Platform for Her Political Opinions (CBS)
  • Chicago Reader Readers Also Hate Traffic Cams, the #22 Clark Bus, and the MiCA TOD Towers

Get national headlines at Streetsblog USAwide banner copy

  • Tooscrapps

    Would like to see the CTA do a pilot like Boston did for the 22 bus/bike lane during the morning rush:

  • F. Hayek 69

    A dedicated revenue source for the CTA already exists, it’s called fares. CTA should have raised train fare to $3 and bus to $2.50, then they would have some money for improvements.

  • ohsweetnothing

    The fact that Reader readers (I know I know) hate Rahm over the police department says…a lot. About the readers.

  • david vartanoff

    Fares cover only a fraction of transit costs no matter where in the world you look. Raising fares merely disincentivizes use. Since transit is a necessity because there is not enough cheap land to have everyone drive solo, let alone park anywhere near job centers, encouraging transit use is an economic benefit even for drivers.

  • F. Hayek 69

    No one is asking fares to cover. The website says a dedicated funding source would help improve buses. You responded with a big strawman.

    Transit use is not elastic, and still cheaper than driving as you point out. The decrease in customers would not be significant.

  • Jeremy

    Based on your nom de guerre, I am assuming you are really Harvey Weinstein.

  • FlamingoFresh

    A rather large obstacle the City would have to tackle is reimbursing the Parking Authority for the removal of metered parking spots, due to the 2008 parking meter 75-year lease. It could be a costly move. The idiotic parking deal that will be in place for another 60+ years will really limit how the city can alter the roadway configuration when there is metered parking present.

  • FlamingoFresh

    In regards to the Active Trans Article about a Funding Source for Transit:
    Vote out all the politicians that voted for the new budget. The legislature proposed an unbalanced (expenditures exceed revenue) budget that cut funding from the transit budget. Don’t just vote for a budget so that you have a budget. It’s on the legislature to come up with a budget to help out the state not cripple it. Need to start holding these people accountable. Below is all who voted in favor of this abysmal budget:

    Democrats voting yes (61): Ammons, Andrade, Arroyo, Beiser, D. Burke, K. Burke, Cassidy, Chapa LaVia, Conroy, Conyears-Ervin, Crespo, Currie, D’Amico, Davis, DeLuca, Drury, Evans, Feigenholtz, Fine, Flowers, Ford, Gabel, Gordon-Booth, Greenwood, Guzzardi, Halpin, Harper, G. Harris, Hernandez, Hoffman, Hurley, Jones, Kifowit, Lang, Lilly, Madigan, Mah, Manley, Martwick, Mayfield, C. Mitchell, Moeller, Nekritz, Phelps, Riley, Rita, Scherer, Sente, Sims, Slaughter, Soto, Stratton, Tabares, Thapedi, Turner, Wallace, Walsh, Welch, Williams, Willis, Zalewski.

    Republicans voting yes (10): Andersson, Bryant, Fortner, Hammond, D. Harris, Hays, Jimenez, B. Mitchell, Phillips, Unes.

  • Side streets. And give the residents permit parking on anything left that isn’t already permit parking. Also encourage creating off-alley lots.

    And raise the parking rates nearby. The deal is a dollar amount deal not a number of spots deal. And it is calculated over the whole city, not a block by block or even ward by ward.

    The real threat to Chicago over the parking deal may come from driverless cars and driverless transit. If you don’t need to own a car then you don’t need to park it.

  • FlamingoFresh

    Do you have a link about how parking management is compensated for “lost” spots? I was under the impression it was on a per spot basis not any revenue baseline. Parking rates seem to increase every year and it seems the city is still paying additional costs from the removal of parking spots for construction, etc.

  • Tooscrapps

    The meters on southbound Clark don’t collect until 9AM. So no issue on this route.

  • Sorry I’m fresh out of links. All I have left are a few day-old memories.

    As I recall the deal calls for the city to guarantee the “lender” of the original money an annual amount. If the lender collects less than the city pays up the difference. If the lender collects more than the city makes some money. When I read the report (1-4 years ago? sorry) the city had never made money. But it was felt that it was a real possibility. At that time anyway.

  • I call it the “Parking Steal err Deal”. I felt Daley should have been arrested for theft of city property.