rwsolinski.bsky.social
chicagoan, architect, cyclist, urbanist
487 posts
170 followers
321 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
access not permitted for us dirty south-siders
comment in response to
post
wells is still closed at the south end afaict
comment in response to
post
you can also bond against future revenue in many cases!
comment in response to
post
honestly it might be doable so long as you don’t use the “c-p” word
comment in response to
post
yep, since the kennedy and dan ryan were funded by the feds thru the interstate highway program in the 1960s.
but there is a history of republican support for HOT lanes in other states. not sure how duffy’s FHWA would come down on it.
comment in response to
post
(sorry to mix metaphors) carrots are easy but you get precious few opportunities to try out new sticks.
i’d rather something like congestion pricing where the benefits are tangible and proven, and not just more revenue.
comment in response to
post
we are a fraction of the size of california… illinois’s tail can’t wag the auto industry dog.
likely result of this policy is pissing off a bunch of potential allies.
comment in response to
post
i hate to say it but that might be a good use for battery tech.
short line, long dwells at either end to allow charging, no cold-weather issues, etc.
comment in response to
post
‘ACU’ nahh miss me with that clinical language
comment in response to
post
this type of chart seems very appropriate for elevator data
comment in response to
post
window salesmen pitch them on vinyl windows “to save on energy bills”, then leave the old wood sashes for the homeowner to dispose of.
comment in response to
post
they did in fact “fix” the strangler, but the law of induced demand means there is always gonna be a bottleneck somewhere.
comment in response to
post
you love to see it
comment in response to
post
the “SCAL bridge” over the river is actually two movable spans with two tracks each.
the south one is still in use by the SCAL, the north one (BOCT) was abandoned in place but could be refurbished.
ofc this does nothing to avoid conflicts at the 16th st diamond…
comment in response to
post
even if CN will block use of the SCAL itself, the BOCT bridge is just sitting there abandoned with another 2 trackways if you want to link RID into Union Station.
comment in response to
post
you could already do this at root street for a fraction of the cost!
comment in response to
post
it’s trivially true that the opposite does not hold - voters don’t reward politicians for LOW gas prices to the exclusion of other factors.
but leaders really do need to address prices when they start creeping up.
comment in response to
post
it’s all relative. the transit access at lincoln yards beats that of a built-up, suburban downtown like elmhurst or arlington heights.
maybe not enough to support a forest of highrises, but i think a midrise, parking-lite neighborhood could definitely work
comment in response to
post
if forest park was in better condition it would be the clear winner, but wasting time crawling down that line may not be the best use of very limited labor hours.
plus a closure could allow an opportunity to rebuild some sections of track on an expedited schedule.
comment in response to
post
a more equitable plan would be to close the loop entirely. run red/blue service on a reduced schedule in the subways, maybe thru-route brown+orange via state st.
the least bad option for the west side may be to send blue line to douglas again and close the lake st/forest park branches.
comment in response to
post
this is a crayon map by star:line. the final doomsday plan will absolutely be painful, but CTA would probably not abandon the south and west sides like this.
their staff is 82% minority, and due to the residency rule they all live in those affected communities.
comment in response to
post
the 3/5 majority is a high bar to clear. dems can only lose 6 votes in the house.
but very soon voters will start hearing the specifics of doomsday from the agencies. it’s all fun and games until your specific 7:42am metra train or neighborhood bus route is on the block
comment in response to
post
actually this isn’t fair to dillard - he isn’t quibbling with the reforms, and he’s right that it will be very difficult to avoid some service cuts given the 12 month budget horizon
comment in response to
post
this aligns with RTA’s position that funding is key and reforms are not.
it’s more likely they will pass a reform bill now (maybe with delayed inplementation) and maybe a few, less-controversial funding measures. then deal with a larger funding package in the veto session.
comment in response to
post
Tony is great!
comment in response to
post
i think politically it might be better to pair expressway tolls with a big, exciting expansion plan in a few years (build the tunnel, etc 🙂)
otherwise it just seems like a lot of pain in order to maintain the status quo.
comment in response to
post
maybe, but this is one area where republican voters and heritage foundation wonks have VERY different opinions.
so far duffy has cone down on the side of the voters.
comment in response to
post
this is the correct answer, but i’m skeptical that FHWA would authorize it under the current administration.
which means it isn’t a great answer for the fiscal cliff happening now. the existing tollway system is blessedly free of their interference
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
even with the requirements rolled back, i don’t see suburban builders doing less than 1 space/unit.
most burbs are not 15-minute cities and transit is infrequent, but there’s no need to assume everybody is a 2-car household; just roll back some restrictions on overnight street parking.
comment in response to
post
this is facially fair! but the reality is that the CHA’s lack of funding holds the entire neighborhood back at all income levels. very little gets built and land sits fallow.
the solution has to be broader organizing for more CHA funding citywide. all of the PFT sites face this exact limitation.
comment in response to
post
it shouldn’t be surprising to anyone that market rate units are easier to finance. this is a strong location where buyers are willing and able to pay the actual cost of building a new home.
CHA has made sure the market rate moves in lockstep with the public housing component
comment in response to
post
i think it’s folks confusing strategy with tactics.
2-way streets were just a tactical compromise at first. DOTs & business owners could be persuaded on 2 way streets, but not road diets.
somehow this tactical compromise got coded as the new urbanist ideal (along with parallel parking lanes!)
comment in response to
post
i wonder what the terms of the grant were? can FTA claw back their funding?
i can’t believe how badly they bungled this.
comment in response to
post
in fairness, the article doesn’t specify where in wicker park she lived (and folks use that name very loosely sometimes), or what kind of “safety” she was concerned about.
safety from speeding drivers is surely a valid concern
comment in response to
post
if true, that would mean CHA is in fact keeping their commitments within the Roosevelt Square plan!
clearly the chicago fire deal ruined the trust CHA had with many residents though.
comment in response to
post
for years Related claimed the market conditions weren’t right for new luxury townhouses, but i’m guessing CHA demanded completion of the public and mixed-income midrises before they would authorize the townhouse component.
comment in response to
post
these townhomes have been planned for about a decade in their present form, and owner-occupied housing (attached or detached) has been a part of the ABLA/Roosevelt Square plan since its inception.
also - CHA just opened >100 new public and affordable housing units in the neighborhood!
comment in response to
post
somehow i didn’t realize “bed and breakfast” was a loanword.
in my mind the concept is highly US-focused, both in its reliance on large Victorian era homes and its Boomer-era embrace of yesteryear nostalgia
comment in response to
post
i just dunno if the juice is worth the squeeze unless you get full automation, but to your point we might still need security staff in that scenario!
comment in response to
post
sorry, i guess the upside is to security and only to security, but that seems like a long term solution to a short term problem, and the visibility isn’t much better than cameras if the conductor is 400 feet down the train.
comment in response to
post
but then why make the investment at all?
huge capital cost, zero savings on ops to re-invest in shorter headways or better service.