Today’s Headlines for Thursday, October 18

  • CPD Sergeant Charged With DUI After Failing Random Drug and Alcohol Test (ABC)
  • Police Chase in Altgeld Gardens Ends in a Crash, No Injuries (Sun-Times)
  • Confused Motorist Drives Down the Washington PBL on the Loop Link Corridor (Block Club)
  • CBS Marks the 5th Anniversary of Chicago’s Only Pedestrian Scramble Intersection
  • Active Trans Presents Recommendations for Improving Glencoe Bike/Ped Facilities (Tribune)
  • Condos Planned for Former 7-11 Site Near Diversey Brown Line Stop (Curbed)
  • Spending 36 Hours in Chicago? Be Sure to Take a Spin on the Lakefront Trail (NYT)

Get national headlines at Streetsblog USA

Note: Streetsblog Chicago will be on vacation the week of Monday, October 22.

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

  • Austin Busch

    The Lincoln Park condos is possibly the least TOD project, with 2 whole garage spots for each unit, and yet a project across the street was turned down for “traffic and safety concerns”. *Shakes head*

  • Courtney

    Car2Go exceeding expectations with 10,000 members during pilot

    I’d love to see this come to Rogers Park! I’d love it even more if Car2Go replaced their cars with Prius Primes (or some other fuel efficient car) but I don’t see that happening.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-biz-car2go-10000-members-pilot-program-20181017-story.html

  • Jared Kachelmeyer

    Aren’t they owned by Mercedes? If that’s the case don’t expect a Toyota in the fleet anytime soon.

  • Courtney

    Oh yeah, they are. It’s just wishful thinking.
    If only the city could get into the car sharing business.

    https://la.streetsblog.org/2017/06/09/ladot-and-bluela-partner-for-low-income-electric-car-share/

  • rohmen

    Are any of the Car2Go cars here not the Smart car versions? Those things already get like 46 mpg, and without having to rely on additional electricity to get it (I think a Prime gets something around 50, but that doesn’t account for the extra energy consumption to do it). I get your point, but I’d bet the Smart car versions are probably better for the environment than a lot of hybrids in the first place in terms of carbon footprint.

  • Courtney

    There is a Mercedes sedan and a Mercedes SUV available as well.

  • rohmen

    Got it. That’s the weird thing with Car2go. The smart cars are all labeled as such (and would stick out anyway), so they’re the ones I’ve seen, but I forget the Mercedes are probably still in heavy use as well. I looked yesterday at the rates, and it was a bit disappointing to see the first-level Mercedes are only like ten cents more to operate. Not a ton of incentive to use the cheaper smart cars outside of ease of parking.

  • FlamingoFresh

    It’s completely asinine! That other development originally proposed 45 rentals with ground floor retail space and only 17 spots was denied. That’s three spots less than the 10 unit building that was just approved! How can traffic and safety be the issue when there would have be less spaces for parking. FYI pedestrians don’t cause congestion to the roadway network. Have you been on that stretch of roadway it’s a dead spot with no foot traffic, it needs shops and additional foot traffic. It offered the best of both worlds more foot traffic (increased eyes on the street improves safety) and less spots for cars all withing a short walk to a CTA train (reduces traffic).

    This is all on the Alderman Michele Smith for not embracing TOD in a very transit rich area. Shes not fit to preside over and approve development in transit rich areas (Lincoln Park). Time to hold her accountable and vote her out.

  • Or even better Tesla M3s.

  • Jeremy

    The Lincoln Park people who complain about too much traffic mean they don’t want people parking on “their” street. In their minds, every household has at least one car. A 45 unit building with 17 spots means, to them, at least 28 cars parking in the neighborhood.

    If you think Michele Smith is bad, the people who run against her are usually worse. At least she approved the TOD building on Lincoln, south of Wrightwood. The irony is, she wanted the #11 bus to be started again, but she vetoes those couple of redevelopment opportunities that would actually put housing on Lincoln.

  • rohmen

    Part of this is the realities of zoning in the City, and how Alderman can use the variance-request process (for good and bad) to control what goes in. I think they have way too much control over there individual ward on these issues.

    As the article notes, this building didn’t have any issues, and was able to be fast tracked, because they’re building within the current zoning guidelines. That’s not to say the residents would have opposed this (“traffic and safety” never seems to be a concern if a mid-size luxury condo that will spike property comp. values in the area is at issue), but to be fair they likely never even had a chance to review or fight it. I wish we could get meaningful reform of zoning period so it wasn’t so at the whim of alderman regarding whether anything outside the status quo can get built. Otherwise, we’ll just see more and more of this.

    I’d imagine if this project does well, you’ll see a similar luxury building that fits within current zoning go in on the gas station lot.

  • Anne A

    I see plenty of people making diagonal crossings at Jackson and State. I wish there was some enforcement on the NO TURN signage. The intersection would function better if that happened. I wish we had more intersections configured this way, including 119th & Halsted, where the Major Taylor Trail crosses both streets.

  • FlamingoFresh

    “In the residents’ minds” they think 28 additional cars will be added to the street, when in reality that’s not the case because not everyone moving in will own a car. That’s up to the developer and the Alderman to ease the residents’ concerns rather than bending over backwards for them. As a resident in an area with a wealth of transit options you should expect that parking will be tight and that maybe you need to reassess your position on owning a car when in reality it may not be necessary. The NIMBYism demonstrated by this development is over the top for a location appropriate development.

    The Alderman should be the one pushing for this and addressing the residents concerns and letting them know what type of area they live in at the end of the day. The reality of it is that development would have been beneficial to the area as a whole, so it’s not like she would be in the wrong for advocating it.