Today’s Headlines

  • CTA Showcases New Bus Model, Loaded With Security Cameras (Tribune, NBC)
  • Police Looking for Hit-and-Run Driver Who Killed Pedestrian Last Month (Tribune)
  • Merchants Complain of 10-20% Lost Business Due to Free Sunday Parking (WGN)
  • Lobbyists Work Behind the Scenes of Ccago’s Taxi / Ride-Share Debate (WBEZ)
  • Illinois Considers Ban on Driving While Using Google Glass (Crain’s)
  • Grace Period for Buying City Stickers Will Go Away in 2016 (Tribune)
  • Emanuel Promises He’s on Top of the Pothole Problem (DNA)
  • How Drivers Get Reimbursed for Pothole Damage — May Work for Cyclists Too (Chicago)

Get national headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Anne A

    No big surprise about free Sunday parking, lack of turnover and effects on business. I can picture a few folks saying “told you so.”

  • Jim Mitchell

    Can’t argue with statistics, although my own experience has been that the free Sunday parking encourages me to go out and shop or eat in neighborhoods like Rogers Park and Uptown that are logistically not worth the trouble for me to go to via public transportation from my home in Logan Square. Ah, well. I’m also not single-handedly keeping any merchants in business with my meager Sunday trade.

  • CL

    Free parking works well in most of Rogers Park because there isn’t huge demand for metered parking. During the week, there are always lots of empty spots on Morse, Sheridan, and Clark. But on Sunday, people take advantage of the free parking, and I imagine businesses benefit. However, I can see it hurting businesses in more dense neighborhoods where it’s hard to find metered parking all week long.

  • City Hall has been actively blocking changes to reverse Sunday parking in some Wards (or streets in some Wards). Mayor Emanuel said that any alderman could petition to retain metered parking on Sundays and that’s what Alderman Waguespack refers to when he says he’s been “trying for a year”. If any solution or method comes out of City Hall in two weeks like the WGN article states, I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

  • rohmen

    A ban on using google glass while driving makes complete sense, and it’s a shame to see google spending any money in Illinois or elsewhere on a lobbying effort to prevent it.

  • CL

    The article describes it as a ban on “wearing” google glass, so I wonder if the concern is that people wouldn’t be able to use google glass as their regular glasses, even if they turn it off to drive.

    I’ve been trying to imagine whether seeing navigation instructions on google glass would be better or worse than glancing down at a GPS / a phone / written directions. I’m not sure because I’ve never experienced anything like Google Glass. I wonder if the temptation would be to focus on the directions, not what’s in front of you, because you have a false sense of confidence that you’re still “seeing” what’s in front of you. While when you look away, you know you’re not seeing anything and that you need to get your eyes back on the road ASAP.

  • Fred

    I understand why they are against it – it’s literally money out of their pocket. Any second you are not viewing an ad is a second you are not generating revenue for them.

    I think overall its a mixed bag. The glasses certainly have to potential to be useful while driving, but they have equal or greater potential to be distracting. I think until the technology matures some it makes sense to fully ban them. Once certain features can be proven to be safe and have value while driving, they can individually be allowed.

  • rohmen

    Maybe I’m not familiar enough with google glass, but can you really not remove the device from a prescription pair of glasses when you’re not using it? That seems silly to me, but maybe I’m just old.

    The whole gps argument is probably the best argument google has going for it, but, even though it may be better than staring at your phone (which you’re not suppose to do anyway under mobile device bans), it’s still a level of distraction that I’m personally not cool with.

  • CL

    From what I’ve read, I don’t think it’s removable. But I’ve never tried it.

  • what_eva

    The areas complaining are Lake View and Lincoln Park, where it is very difficult to find a street spot on a Sunday. People can park in a meter spot anytime after 8pm on a Saturday and not have to move their car until 8am on Monday (meters on until 10pm on Sat, but can pay through 10 and not move again). The very low turnover has the exact opposite effect of what you’re describing in RP/Uptown.

  • cjlane

    The worst part of the recent revision to the deal. I was all for continuing to pay on Sunday. I love me some easy to get metered parking–absolutely worth the extra $$ I spend on it (since it’s still maybe $40/yr)

  • Jim Mitchell

    I had heard about that sort of abuse going on, and I can see why many would be tempted to try it in those heavily parked and popular areas. Metered spaces are supposed to be used only for short term parking. One solution might be to charge a nominal fee (maybe $0.25/ hour) on Sundays, which would require folks to come out every two or three hours and re-up their parking time. Of course, enforcement might be tough. I doubt the parking meter company wants to allocate meter readers to a day when they are not making maximal parking fee collections; and while the potential ticket fines would accrue to the City, I would wager CPD doesn’t have enough folks to allocate to Sunday parking enforcement in neighborhoods, either.

  • cjlane

    “Maybe I’m not familiar enough with google glass, but can you really not remove the device from a prescription pair of glasses when you’re not using it?”

    It appears that it is removable, from the prescription frames. See

    Would be crazy to *have to* take off your glasses any time you need to recharge the thing.

  • Jim Mitchell

    Google Glass ver. 2.0 will solve that problem. It will be plugged directly into the user’s medulla oblongata and will pull an induced DC charge directly from the neuronal activity in the brain stem and spinal cord, eliminating the need ever to remove the device.

  • cjlane

    I’ll wait for the replacement eyeball version (beta testing soon!), with 20x optical/1000x digital zoom, and infrared vision capabilities.

  • rohmen

    I read up on it, and you’re right, you can’t remove it easily at least.

    I’d imagine the whole not being able to remove it thing is going to have to be changed pretty quickly, especially since places like music venues, courts and other facilities are likely not going to be cool with people having it on since it can be used to secretly record video/audio.