Top Story on KTLA: People Abandoning Their Cars for the Train
 

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> This is how it starts, folks. Since the last time gas prices hit
> $3/gallon a few weeks ago, Metrolink has ordered new cars and
> announced plans to expand service. As the service gets better, more
> people will find the train useful, more people will start taking the
> train, leading to more service improvements, and so on, and so on, and
> so on...

Here is how it ends, because of the price of fuel and increased ridership,
those who run metrolink decide to raise fares and cut service to cover these
costs. Service improvements would consist of removing the durable
materials from stations that have served for a 100 years and replacing
them with very expensive modern construction which will look like crap
inside of one year and maybe last 15. End result, higher cost, less
effective transit. Least that is how the CTA would do it. Afterall, what
are they going to do? Drive? It's just an opertunity to squeeze the
ridership.

Top Story on KTLA: People Abandoning Their Cars for the Train
 

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> I realize your expectations have been colored by your experiences
> living in Crook ounty, IL, and how chronic budget shortfalls at the
> CTA and Metra have resulted in once-grand facilities being remodeled
> using somewhat lower standards. However, I see no evidence to indicate
> that those things will occur here.

Chronic budget shortfalls = not enough money left to do the work after theft.

Top Story on KTLA: People Abandoning Their Cars for the Train
 

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 10:17:10 -0500,
> (Brent P) wrote:
>
>>Chronic budget shortfalls = not enough money left to do the work after theft.
>
> Where did you get the idea that Metrolink is suffering from chronic
> budget shortfalls?

Do you not remember what you wrote that I was replying to? Think about
it. (hint, not metrolink)

Top Story on KTLA: People Abandoning Their Cars for the Train
 

In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 23:11:37 -0500,
> (Brent P) wrote:
>
>>>>Chronic budget shortfalls = not enough money left to do the work after theft.
>>>
>>> Where did you get the idea that Metrolink is suffering from chronic
>>> budget shortfalls?
>>
>>Do you not remember what you wrote that I was replying to? Think about
>>it. (hint, not metrolink)
>
> Do you remember what this thread is about? Hint, not Metra. ;)

You commented on the budget shortfalls of c(r)ook county. I replied
regarding them.

Top Story on KTLA: People Abandoning Their Cars for the Train
 

In article >,
(Brent P) wrote:

> In article >, Scott en Aztlán
> wrote:
>
> > This is how it starts, folks. Since the last time gas prices hit
> > $3/gallon a few weeks ago, Metrolink has ordered new cars and
> > announced plans to expand service. As the service gets better, more
> > people will find the train useful, more people will start taking the
> > train, leading to more service improvements, and so on, and so on, and
> > so on...
>
> Here is how it ends, because of the price of fuel and increased ridership,
> those who run metrolink decide to raise fares and cut service to cover these
> costs. Service improvements would consist of removing the durable
> materials from stations that have served for a 100 years and replacing
> them with very expensive modern construction which will look like crap
> inside of one year and maybe last 15. End result, higher cost, less
> effective transit. Least that is how the CTA would do it.

That may be how CTA (Chicago) would do it, but it certainly isn't how the
Southern Californian Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA, who runs Metrolink)
does it.

Service has been constantly expanding since it started back in 1992(?),
with plenty of future expansion in the plans. Fares have been adjusted
slightly for inflation (and, if market driven, should rise with demand).
Fixed infrastructure (tracks, stations, etc.) has been improved greatly
over what existed before SCRRA took over operation. Stations are built
with quality materials and with aesthetic consideration.

Even venerable Union Station (1939) is in better condition and is handling
more train and passengers than it ever did in the hayday of rail passenger
service.

Merritt