Think tank proposes $52 billion in solutions to Chicago area's traffic burden

[cpzilliacus]

Chicago Tribune:  Think tank proposes $52 billion in solutions to Chicago area's traffic burden - Local planner disagrees that region could build its way out of congestion

A California think tank on Thursday plans to unveil its vision for a transformation of the Chicago region's transportation system that rivals the Burnham Plan in scope and soars past it in cost – at a colossal $52 billion that would be paid for entirely through new road tolls and private-sector investment.

The Reason Foundation, a libertarian public policy research organization based in Los Angeles, proposes a network of regional tunnels to accommodate traffic under the Kennedy and Eisenhower expressways and key arterial streets, including an 11-mile crosstown tunnel under Cicero Avenue in Chicago.

Other elements include a new suburban beltway through Cook, DuPage and Will counties with three toll lanes in each direction; highway extensions and bus rapid-transit corridors in the suburbs; and 275 miles of new toll lanes that Reason researchers say would generate billions of dollars from drivers to help pay for the infrastructure improvements.

[Zmapper]

So the libertarian think tank proposes to solve traffic congestion in the most un-libertarian way possible; have the government pour a sh1t-ton of concrete everywhere. Brilliant, just brilliant!

First of all, as with any big project, costs will easily double or triple before a single construction truck arrives. Notice how the California High-Speed Rail project went from 30 B to 100 B in the span of a few years. Remember, this is Chicago we are dealing with, and they aren't the most efficient or trustworthy government to exist.

If they wanted to actually fix their traffic problem, get the bus network to run every 10 minutes during the day and 30 minutes thought the night on the main routes, electrify Metra and turn them into an RER or S-Bahn like system, and hasten repair and rehabilitation of the Chicago "L" so the trains can actually run at the speeds of which they are capable of. At the same time, increase the fare to at least $3 and use the additional revenue to fund transit, which is the Canadian approach.

On the auto side, turn the far-left lane or two into a HOT lane, and make basic geometric improvements while you are at it. Work to reduce the signal cycle time on arterial streets down to 90 seconds, through the use of alternative left-turn movements such as Michigan Lefts or banning left turns and telling people to make three rights.

The end result is that the people of Chicago could have useful alternatives to automobile travel, while people using autos could get where they are going quicker with less strain on the taxpayer.

[Revive 755]

Actually document:
http://reason.org/files/chicago_transportation_plan.pdf

The network (shown on Page 46/131, mostly consist of variants of currently proposed projects (Illiana, Elign O'Hare, and the IL 53/120 fiasco), or previously killed projects (Fox Valley Freeway, I-494/Crosstown, Lake-Cook Road corridor route - see www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/2ee4a600-8136-4f4f-81ef-f1bbe47a15ee).  The only non-previously proposed facilities are the express tunnels for I-90/94 and I-290.

[Brandon]

Actually document:
http://reason.org/files/chicago_transportation_plan.pdf

The network (shown on Page 46/131, mostly consist of variants of currently proposed projects (Illiana, Elign O'Hare, and the IL 53/120 fiasco), or previously killed projects (Fox Valley Freeway, I-494/Crosstown, Lake-Cook Road corridor route - see www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/2ee4a600-8136-4f4f-81ef-f1bbe47a15ee).  The only non-previously proposed facilities are the express tunnels for I-90/94 and I-290.

I noticed that from the map they had in the Trib.  It is mostly a pipe dream with the exception of the Illinois 53 Extension.  The connection to Indiana through Will County will meet I-55, not I-80, and is in the planning stages currently.  They also failed to go further out and push for the Prairie Parkway.

[Anthony_JK]

Actually document:
http://reason.org/files/chicago_transportation_plan.pdf

The network (shown on Page 46/131, mostly consist of variants of currently proposed projects (Illiana, Elign O'Hare, and the IL 53/120 fiasco), or previously killed projects (Fox Valley Freeway, I-494/Crosstown, Lake-Cook Road corridor route - see www.cmap.illinois.gov/documents/20583/2ee4a600-8136-4f4f-81ef-f1bbe47a15ee).  The only non-previously proposed facilities are the express tunnels for I-90/94 and I-290.

I wonder why they think that all these cancelled projects will be revived and approved??  Just because they are tolled??

Not to mention, what's to say that they don't pull a bait and switch and simply convert all of the free lanes to electronic tolls?

This is a non-starter. Seriously.  As bad as the "kill all the freeways" crowd is, this is far, far worse.

[Jordanah1]

ya, throw out the tunnels, and you will likely cut the cost in half, and really $7.00+ to use the tunnels at rush hour? who would actually pay that! i would really like to see the Ill 53 corridor be built (all the way to wisconsin), the illiana corridor is in its early phases, and will likely happen eventually, the elgin extention would be nice, and the outer beltway woud help aswell, possibly as a better alternative to bypass chicago as congestion continues to grow on the existing freeways for those of us in wisconsin heading south, or vise versa, i hope they realize though that joliet is not just some town located on the dot, and that it is a large city, that would have a highway cut off some of its northside.

[J N Winkler]

It comes from the Reason Foundation.  Enough said.

[3467]

I think there might be engineering problems with those tunnels because there is a massive flood control tunnel system called deep tunnel -maybe we could let cars use it during droughts......maybe not since because of the suprise storms.

More realistically the tollway could build a high fee 4 lane tollway in the crosstown/midcity tranistway corridor and maybe western avenue. The prairie parkway could be extened to 90. There maybe a few local toll/parkways like the Richmond bypass and of course some arterial widenings. Otherwise CMAP and the tollway have it right.
But "Reason" wouldnt like to admit that

[NE2]

It comes from the Reason Foundation.  Enough said.

Careful, don't let Beltway (who already has a road named after him) see this: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6048.msg148319#msg148319

[kphoger]

If they wanted to actually fix their traffic problem, get the bus network to run every 10 minutes during the day and 30 minutes thought the night on the main routes, electrify Metra and turn them into an RER or S-Bahn like system, and hasten repair and rehabilitation of the Chicago "L" so the trains can actually run at the speeds of which they are capable of. At the same time, increase the fare to at least $3 and use the additional revenue to fund transit, which is the Canadian approach.

Suburban public transit is sorely thin for a metro area of this population size, especially in the second-to-outer ring of suburbs (such as Naperville), whereas the CTA seems to do a decent job of handling the masses in the city itself.  I don't think too many people served by CTA are hindered by buses running less than every 10 minutes–maybe by sparse nighttime coverage, but that probably doesn't affect traffic volumes very much.  The L may be built on ancient structures, but it's still usually at least as fast as driving your own car for cross-town trips, and a fare is cheaper than a parking garage in many places; I've never heard of people choosing a car over transit due to the speed of the L.

MetRa could use some beefing up, true, but Pace bus needs much more beefing up, IMO.  I recall the RTA annual budge back in the early 2000s being $900 million.  $450M was for CTA, $350M was for MetRa, and only $100M was for Pace.  Less than 12% of the budget was supposed to serve the entire suburban area.  If people in the suburbs had easier alternatives to driving everywhere, it might make a difference.  But, when bus routes don't run on the weekends (at least Sunday) at all, and stop running before 7:00 PM, most people just write it off as not doable.

[Zmapper]

Pace should be beefed up as well, and that is what I was trying to get at with my bus proposal.

------

EDIT: Another solution to Chicago's traffic problems can be found in turning the "L" into a two-lane comfort cruise. 

[Brandon]

The difficulty with transit the suburban areas is one of density.  Quite frankly, The city has the density to make the busses work well.  Pace, not so much.

[Zmapper]

Density is one of the biggest myths for public transit. While it is true that there is some correlation between density and transit use, it is rather weak. Paul Mees in Transport for Suburbia (the important stuff is in the free section of the book) has demonstrated that service quality is more important. If your area is dense enough to have traffic congestion, it is dense enough for frequent bus service.

Why is it that Toronto has a 24% regional mode share, while Chicago is stuck at 11%? Perhaps it is that the suburbs of Toronto have better bus service than cities in the US. Compare the schedules of Brampton Transit to those of PACE; there is no real comparison. Brampton has a policy of expanding service to the new neighborhoods while they are under construction (see route 56), while American transit agencies might possibly expand in 5-10 years.

One key component of Canada's success with transit is the fare levels. In the US, the liberals in particular have managed to keep bus fares below market rate under the auspices of "helping the poor". What helps the poor with a 3p-Midnight job more; hourly bus service that stops at 7 pm but costs only $1.50 a ride, or service every 10-15 minutes with night service every 30 minutes or so, though it costs $3.25 a ride? While the Canadian approach certainly costs more in fares, it is still much cheaper than owning and maintaining a vehicle.

How many times have you heard someone say that they are willing to use the bus, but it is too infrequent/doesn't run at the times needed/takes roundabout routes? I bet you could easily find 20% of the population willing to do so. If Toronto shows anything, it is that Transit demand is very latent.

To succeed, transit must not just focus on Chicago, it must focus on all urbanized neighborhoods. It is possible to have a functioning transit system, even in the suburbs.

[Brandon]

The suburbs of Toronto, which I have been to, are in fact far denser than the suburbs of Chicago.

[Zmapper]

Ever been to Ames, Iowa? They seem to have very good transit despite fairly low densities. Granted, they are a college town, but how many towns surrounding Chicago also have colleges?

[Brandon]

Ever been to Ames, Iowa? They seem to have very good transit despite fairly low densities. Granted, they are a college town, but how many towns surrounding Chicago also have colleges?

Not as many big ones as you might think.  Most are fairly self-contained and have a lot of commuters (Lewis University, Governors State University) or fairly small (Wheaton College, Elmhurst College).  The few big ones are Northwestern (Evanston), UIC (Chicago), and University of Chicago (Chicago).

College towns have to have good transit for a reason; college students don't always have access to vehicles.  Even most of the poor in the areas outside Chicago have vehicles or access to vehicles.

[hobsini2]

Ever been to Ames, Iowa? They seem to have very good transit despite fairly low densities. Granted, they are a college town, but how many towns surrounding Chicago also have colleges?

Not as many big ones as you might think.  Most are fairly self-contained and have a lot of commuters (Lewis University, Governors State University) or fairly small (Wheaton College, Elmhurst College).  The few big ones are Northwestern (Evanston), UIC (Chicago), and University of Chicago (Chicago).

College towns have to have good transit for a reason; college students don't always have access to vehicles.  Even most of the poor in the areas outside Chicago have vehicles or access to vehicles.

Brandon, let's also not forget Aurora University, North Central College and University of St Francis in Joliet. 
All kidding aside, the main thing with PACE in the outer suburbs that I have noticed is that the majority of the buses are used as links to Metra stations with a couple of exceptions.
Metra really needs to do a bit more expansion IMO to serve places like Bolingbrook and Plainfield better.
They could have had a "McHenry Spur" kind of connection with the Heritage Corridor using the freight rail line that goes through the Internationale Pkwy Business Park (Pro-Logis) and then extend that line along Crossroads Pkwy into Plainfield. If they did that, the congestion on I-55 would get some much needed relief.

[Brandon]

Most agreed.  We really need to use Chicagoland's rail assets far better than we are.  There's a great rail system here, and it could be put to better use.  Hopefully, CREATE will help to provide that opportunity.

[kphoger]

Ever been to Ames, Iowa? They seem to have very good transit despite fairly low densities. Granted, they are a college town, but how many towns surrounding Chicago also have colleges?

Not as many big ones as you might think.  Most are fairly self-contained and have a lot of commuters (Lewis University, Governors State University) or fairly small (Wheaton College, Elmhurst College).  The few big ones are Northwestern (Evanston), UIC (Chicago), and University of Chicago (Chicago).

College towns have to have good transit for a reason; college students don't always have access to vehicles.  Even most of the poor in the areas outside Chicago have vehicles or access to vehicles.

I used to live in Wheaton, and used public transportation there.  Only a few miles away is College of Dupage, a community college with a student population of around 20 000.  Wheaton College is within easy walking distance of MetRa, but the bus line that runs along the street stops running in the early evening and none in the area run on Sundays at all; many students there don't have a car.  COD (which I attended in the evenings) is served by a line that also stops running in the early evening.  I have personally met more than one person in the area who specifically said they weren't going to college because they couldn't take the bus in the evenings.  I bummed rides and hitchhiked home from class every evening for about four years.  My point:  even college towns in the Chicago area are not well served by transit.

[DevalDragon]

I-290 at LaGrange road backs up inbound constantly, almost 24 hours a day, and there is no solution in sight. Whoever thought it would be a good idea to have 5 lanes go down to 3 at same place should be taken out back and shot.

On a side note, I'd like to see the Blue line extended from Forest Park to Lombard or O'Hare to Schamburg. Both would do wonders for congestion on the Tollways.

[Brandon]

I doubt they would help congestion at all.  There's already Metra lines to some of those areas directly, or near those areas.  Those using transit are already on Metra.  Extending the Blue Line, IMHO, will do nothing.

[NWI_Irish96]

I doubt they would help congestion at all.  There's already Metra lines to some of those areas directly, or near those areas.  Those using transit are already on Metra.  Extending the Blue Line, IMHO, will do nothing.

CTA trains are cheaper, run more frequently, and have more stops than Metra.  It most certainly would have an impact on highway congestion.  I used to live in Oak Park and commute to Oak Brook.  Price and schedule made it impossible for me to use Metra, but if the blue line had gone to Oak Brook, it would have worked very well.

[kphoger]

I doubt they would help congestion at all.  There's already Metra lines to some of those areas directly, or near those areas.  Those using transit are already on Metra.  Extending the Blue Line, IMHO, will do nothing.

CTA trains are cheaper, run more frequently, and have more stops than Metra.  It most certainly would have an impact on highway congestion.  I used to live in Oak Park and commute to Oak Brook.  Price and schedule made it impossible for me to use Metra, but if the blue line had gone to Oak Brook, it would have worked very well.

Compare the number of people boarding the UP-W MetRa line at River Forest to the number of people boarding the green line L at Harlem/Lake to get an idea of how much more appealing the L is than MetRa.

[hobsini2]

DevilDragon, the reason that when they "fixed" the Strangler that they did not widen it to 4 lanes (like it should be) is because of the NIMBYS in Oak Park and the 3 cemetaries. The only way to widen that section (Austin Blvd to I-294/88) would be to double deck the highway similar to I-880 in the Bay Area. I wish IDOT would but not likely any time soon.