Today’s Headlines for Thursday, May 11

  • More Coverage of Public Meeting on Fixing North/Damen/Milwaukee (Active TransDNA, Chicagoist)
  • Personal Injury Lawyer Floats Other Ideas for Making North/Damen Safer (Stefani)
  • U. of Illinois Lobbyist Is Being Questioned in IDOT Hiring Scandal Probe (News Gazette)
  • Police: Driver Who Killed 3 Members of Family Was Guilty of Reckless Homicide (Tribune)
  • $6M Settlement for Woman Whose Feet Were Run Over by CTA Bus driver (Tribune)
  • Police Release Photos of Suspect in Ashland Pink/Green Stop Robberies (DNA)
  • Crain’s Looks at What Might Happen to North Branch Land After Zoning Is Relaxed
  • After Pushback, “Teacher’s Village” Plan for Humboldt Park Lowers Number of Units, Spaces (DNA)
  • Sauganash Neighbors Say 21 Spaces for a 21-Unit Building With 7 Offices Isn’t Enough (DNA)
  • Video: CDOT Crews Install Contraflow Lane on Glenwood (And a Neighbor Gripes About It) (CBS)
  • Floating Museum” Art Installation Planned for the Chicago Riverwalk (Curbed)
  • Citizen Jane” Documentary About Jane Jacobs Begins Weeklong Run at Siskell Center Friday

Get national headlines at Streetsblog USA

wide banner

  • planetshwoop

    I’m not sure I can give a big enough eye roll to Sauganash. There is plenty of surface parking. Street parking there isn’t a big deal, and if it is, there are three large surface lots nearby (Monastero’s, the Assyrian church, and the banks on the W side of Pulaski).

    Since the area is already pretty sleepy, I have a tough time imagining why parking is suddenly going to be a crisis for a small office. It will be OK and should be built. The existing place is ugly, and everyone benefits from multi-family housing in the area.

  • rohmen

    Sometimes sleepy areas with plenty of available street parking are the worst on these issues. We go through it in Oak Park. No lack of street parking at all, but residents push for permit-only or no-parking restrictions during certain times of the day because they simply don’t like the aesthetic of someone’s car being parked in front of their house.

    Completely ridiculous in my opinion, and it leads to needless parking lots/garages near business districts and transit, but it’s what motivates a lot of people in those areas.

  • planetshwoop

    Agree. What I don’t understand is the concern. Almost certainly most of the participants in that meeting are homeowners, and there is really very very little reason to parallel park on this stretch of Pulaski. So why the concerns? It’s not like there’s a ton of businesses that this is going to make a mess into; it’s pretty quiet up there.

    “Pro-Active Parking Worry” seems to be prevelant.

  • Carter O’Brien

    I could see a reasonable case to be made regarding concern over illegally parked vehicles. Municipalities don’t seem terribly concerned or able to enforce their own laws concerning parking in parkways/blocking the sidewalk, encroaching into crosswalks, etc.

    If we can learn anything from Dibs, it is that people searching for street parking do desperate things. So while I don’t agree with the logic, I can see how frustrated residents simply start thinking “less new people = less cars and less headaches.”

  • what_eva

    As the article notes, Monastero’s is soon to be another church, so that lot will get even less use during the work week.