Today’s Headlines for Wednesday October 10

  • FWIW, Chicago Has Dropped From #1 to #6 in Bicycling’s City Rankings
  • Police Chase Alleged Mercedes Thief, Resulting in Gold Coast Taxi Crash (CBS)
  • Metra to Test Reverse-Commute Service in Lake County (Crain’s)
  • MD-W Passengers Discuss Getting Stranded by Morning Switch Problems (NBC)
  • Bike and Walk to School Day Has Special Significance in Illinois This Year (Active Trans)
  • After SBC Reported on Randolph Bike Lane Blockage, CBS Discusses The Issue With Cyclists
  • Chainlinkers Critique the New Concrete Protection on the Dearborn Bike Lane
  • Just in Time for Halloween, the CTA Is Seeing an Influx of Spiders at Stations (Tribune)
  • MWHSRA Luncheon on Thursday: Learn About California’s Revolutionary Rail Plan

Get national headlines at Streetsblog USA.

donate button
Did you appreciate this post? Consider making a donation through our PublicGood site.

  • Jeremy

    Regarding the Bicycling Magazine ranking, something working in Chicago’s favor for bike and transit infrastructure going forward is the parking meter contract. As the Lincoln Yards and Rezko properties get developed, more metered spaces can be activated.

    The parking vendor paid for a set number of metered spaces, so adding spaces in one location allows for removal of spaces elsewhere. This should allow for more space allocated to bike lanes and bike parking, as well as bus stops.

  • Kevin M

    I really appreciate the coverage of the Upper Randolph bike lane blocking issue by CBS. It felt like they were standing up for cyclists. Good finishing remark, too–re: “we’re still waiting to see what the city will do before” they get notified of bike lane blocking (ie. what is the city prepared to do to proactively address this issue?).

  • rduke

    I’ve always wondered if a loophole to that deal would just be to have the city buy some vacant lots, reclassify them as streets, and just put metered parking on them. Just out in the middle of nowhere.

  • Carter O’Brien

    I think I read that this loophole was anticipated, and that replacement spaces are also judged by revenue, so if you want a space back that pulls in $x you need to either provide an equivalent space, or multiple ones to make up the difference.

    A really good future Streetsblog post would be a link to, and analysis of, the actual contract.

  • Sam K

    Good luck with that. They’ll need a team of lawyers to parse it. The contract is over 300 pages long and written in the most obscure legalese imaginable.

  • Carter O’Brien

    Of course it is, but do you think CDOT has a team of lawyers doing this on a regular basis? Highly doubtful. It couldn’t hurt to simply link to it and crowdsource the fine print.

  • Courtney

    Or like a parking deck, as despised as they are…..

  • planetshwoop

    I’ve looked at it. It’s not that hard. (I am not a lawyer.) Much of it is not relevant, like which state has governing law, so the 300 pages are less than expected.

  • planetshwoop
  • planetshwoop
  • Carter O’Brien

    I love how it starts “Ladies and Gentlemen:”

    And the administrative costs/fees are insane!

  • Carter O’Brien

    I don’t have time to go through this with a tooth and comb, but a quick scan seems to confirm that there is ample language in place to ensure the City doesn’t get to just remove meters willy-nilly, and we also don’t get to simply make one-for-one swaps in the absence of financial considerations. So it seems possible/probable that a redevelopment of formerly industrial land to mixed-use residential may provide some opportunities to move meters around, I just highly doubt there are any loopholes large enough that Gabe Klein and his team missed.

  • Someone already tried that about ten years ago. Didn’t go over well.