A very well researched and written story in today's Chicago Tribune by John Lippert and Sarah Freishtat describing the need and complexity to invest in Chicagoland's train infrastructure. The article focusses on the infrastructure constraints at the Belt Railway of Chicago, one of our region's most notorious rail bottleneck. A lot of different organizations and public entities, including Metra Commuter Rail, Amtrak have been working for more than 20 years to rebuilt Belt Junction. The ambition is to invest over $2.5 billion for new tracks, viaducts and flyovers to double the Belt Junction corridor’s annual capacity to 4 million rail cars. The Belt Junction is an essential building block in the ambitious plan to increase the rail capacity by nearly 80% in the Chicago region by 2052. The complexity of this plan is enormous, ranging from finding sufficient funding, listening to community concerns, balancing short-term versus long-term environmental benefits, align & coordinate with the different freight train corporations, and the need to include as many influential stakeholders as possible. I was glad to see Erin Aleman from Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) quoted in the article, since her organization has been an important voice and driver to solve complicated regional challenges. I strongly believe we need to continue to invest in our region's infrastructure to both drive economic growth and accelerate the transformation to cleaner and more efficient transportation solutions. The enormity and complexity of this ambition shouldn't deter us but inspire and motivate all of us.
.... This efficiency would attract regional residents downtown more frequently. Packages dont spend money in downtown Chicago, people do. If a freight train is held at the Belt Crossing for 10 minutes, no recipients know. If a worker heading home/visitor heading downtown to dinner, is held up for 10 minutes at the same crossing, everybody knows. Yes, all of us might receive our packages faster and .02 cheaper, but the day-to-day effect on most of our lives is minimal. Infrastructure investment is important, a significant part of that investment can focus on passengers. Congratulations on the new position!
Financial Services Professional -- former-JPMorgan, S&P, Forbes
1yMichael Fassnacht excellent highlight of an important Chicagoland infrastructure issue and some of its potential business effects. The focus is on structure and business, but the (alleged) positive effect on people is minimal, if at all. When I spoke with transportation executives, they admit that chicago passenger train traffic is a secondary priority. The freight companies can have this view since they own most of the track that chicago-area passengers travel on. In a few other large cities, like NYC-metro, the passenger org owns most of the track and dictates the rules and costs. An innovative idea would be for Metra to 'buyout' the CTA (yes, I know it is more complex than that), own the track and use it (along with CTA). Track could be extended to the suburbs, exclusive to passengers, frequency can be increased and service could be improved without worrying about Freight Co input. As many post-pandemic workers seek the rural/city life balance, Chicago should look at the economic investment that can directly benefit the City from citizens who would step aboard a 22 minute ride from a suburb 40 miles away (Acela speed.) Same distance in 14 minutes on Japanese Shinkansen. more...