Today’s Headlines for Tuesday, August 2

  • More Coverage of Wrongful Death Lawsuit in the Ginny Murray Case (TribuneDNA, CBS)
  • After Confrontation, Motorist Drives Into Motorcyclists in Aurora (Tribune)
  • Test of Manor Street Greenway Traffic Diverters Slated for September (DNA)
  • Forbes Looks at Chicago Study of Ride-Share Vs. Transit Travel Times & Costs
  • New Stoplight Light Planned for Ridge/Rogers/Touhy Intersection in Rogers Park (DNA)
  • Metra Access Touted as a Selling Point for the Former U.S. Steel Site (Crain’s)
  • MPC‘s Peter Skosey Moving on After 2 Decades With the Organization
  • A Nifty Seating Plaza Opens in Portage Park — But Is It Actually a “People Spot”? (DNA)
  • What the Beiderbecke? Quad Cities Promoted as a Cycling Destination (QC Online)
  • Lots of Events on the Lakefront Trail This Month (Active Trans)

Get national headlines at Streetblog USA

  • The ride-pooling study was interesting. I have an el to el transfer with a one block walk connection and frequent service but it still takes about twice as long compared to driving (hour vs half-hour). So my own experience does not quite prove my own theory for filling the transit gap/niche that ride-pooling is designed to opportunize.

    From the article:

    Schwieterman agrees neighborhood-to-neighborhood travel is particularly challenging here.

    “Such trips can be painful to transit users in Chicago, in part due
    to our slow pace of getting bus rapid transit off the ground and our
    ‘legacy’ rail system, with its radial design that focuses primarily on
    travel to and from downtown. And buses on some routes stop every few

    The theory is that neighborhood-to-neighborhood travel is covered by Chicagos excellent grid-system bus transit. Or often an el-bus combination. But the effective gridded-bus network was destroyed by automobile congestion. And the only way to get it back is via dedicated lane BRT.

    Of course the ride-pooling neighborhood-to-neighborhood niche may also fall prey to congestion especially during rush hours.

  • Ravenswood Manor car diversion. I have to admit I am of two minds here. Partly it is due to living in a residential mini-neighborhood within an actual urban neighborhood. I get that cars destroy what I love about living in the city. I get too that me and my neighbors love having our cake and eating it too. Our neighborhood is like a little suburb nestled in the big city. So on the one hand we benefit from an open grid street system, yet we want to ward off cut-thrus the same as suburbanites do with cul-de-sacs. It breeds NIMBYism to the point that we resist making the city a better place, a more urban place, when it conflicts with having our own bit of sub-urbanism.

    So I support Ravenswood Manor’s desire to make car driving more difficult even as I recognize that they too want their cake and eat it too. A recent interesting example arises in my own neighborhood. A proposal to build a mid-rise building next to an el stop has folks complaining that there are too few parking spaces (40 for 170 units). “They will park on our streets,” goes the cry. That more infrastructure for cars brings more cars is often a hard logic to communicate.

  • ohsweetnothing

    re: Skosey and MPC….it reads like he’s doing a bit more than celebrating 20 years at MPC. :(

  • ohsweetnothing

    I won’t dare click on the comment sections to any of the Divvy lawsuit articles.

  • planetshwoop

    I think a reasonable “parallel” is neighborhoods further out on the Northwest side. Sauganash has eliminated any cut through traffic except for bicycles. So it’s quiet and very peaceful, and you could play soccer in the streets there most of the time.

    But. Their peace comes at a price for all of the surrounding neighborhoods. Since the street grid is broken at Bryn Mawr, all of the cars trying to get to the Edens on Foster or Peterson go as fast as possible, and make it quite dangerous to use parks (esp. Gompers). It also — likely — pushes the Foster volumes above what is OK for a road diet, further enhancing the Indy 500 feel to Foster.

    The Manor’s peace will come at the price for those who leave nearby. It would be great if this actually removed the cars from the roads; unfortunately I think this is a zero-sum project so others will simply suffer for the Manor’s benefit.

  • johnaustingreenfield

    Sorry, I didn’t skim the post carefully enough. Fixed, thanks.

  • ohsweetnothing

    no prob, tbh I wouldn’t have caught it but for Marisa Novara’s twitter announcement about him leaving.

  • what_eva

    IIRC, it’s not just “likely” that the counts prevent a road diet on Foster, that’s the case.

    google found this post on Steven’s blog from 2013 that covers Foster among other streets.

    Basically CDOT refuses to narrow the striped-as-one-defacto-two lane on that section of Foster, but they also don’t stripe it as two because it’s too narrow for that.

  • what_eva

    I’m having an issue getting into Forbes, did they actually study ride-sharing in the traditional concept or was it “ride-sharing” in the gypsy-cab uber/lyft concept?

    I really, really hate uber/lyft using the term ride-sharing, because it’s not. You’re just an unlicensed cab. Fine, whatever, just don’t lie.

  • Forbes does not call it “ride-sharing”. The article is actually about a new product that Uber and Lyft are attempting to Beta, I believe, which is a form of car-pooling of several riders at the same time to the same general area. So it is more and less than a cab ride. More people per cab but less personalized service. Therefore less cost to the rider.

  • what_eva

    Oh that. That’s analogous to those shared ride vans to/from the airport, SuperShuttle and the like.

  • planetshwoop

    Yes, the counts absolutely prevented the road diet. (I was at the meetings about it.) However, I said likely as I can’t say for certain that the counts would be meaningfully lower if Bryn Mawr went through and was stopped in Sauganash.

    This will become an issue again when the North Branch Trail is completed with the Foster terminus and trail users will lack a reasonable way to connect to the street network. The options now are either meander through nowhere in Gompers (CDOT’s recommendation) or ride on the sidewalk (technically illegal).

  • planetshwoop

    Wells St. in Old Town is now a carpool lane for Uber. There has been a marked uptick in the number of large livery vehicles driving down there, and the pick-up spots are fairly apparent. (The corner near Stanley’s on Lincoln is an obvious one.)

  • what_eva

    Aha, so if Bryn Mawr just went another couple hundred feet and connected to Cicero, would that alleviate some of the pressure on Foster/Peterson.

  • You say “another couple hundred feet”, but I’m not sure it’s plausible to do that. You’d have to make a huge bridge over the forest preserve land to connect.

  • what_eva

    Wouldn’t need a bridge, could have just stayed north of the river to Cicero. I don’t think the point is that it should be done now, it’s that it should have been done when this area was laid out. Instead of putting one more lot at the end of Bryn Mawr where it tails north along the river, they should have kept the road going and connected to Cicero.

  • That whole area is quiet wide-lot residential, though. I guarantee they don’t want Bryn Mawr turned into an arterial through their neighborhood.

  • what_eva

    Oh, I know, that’s a mistake the city made ages ago in allowing these suburban-style cul-de-sacs and such crap to be laid out.

  • planetshwoop

    Bryn Mawr is physically blocked for automobile traffic at the Weber Spur (~4400 W). From talking to residents when advocating for the Foster Ave. road diet, apparently the road did go through some time back. (Could have been as far back as the 70s when it was cut off.) Even if Bryn Mawr doesn’t go all the way to Cicero, the side streets and Forest Glen Ave would provide a short-cut through the neighborhood to avoid Foster or Peterson, not unlike the reason many take the Manor.

  • planetshwoop

    Since the Alderman for the 39th lives there (and the family has lived there for a LONG time), the sense I got was it was a concession to residents to keep out traffic.

    Also, they don’t even want the bike path extension! Many residents from Sauganash fought the extension of the North Branch Trail. (I’m sure many do support it, but they didn’t turn up to the meeting.) Their argument was a kooky number based upon the economic value of trees.