Lifelong Chicagoan, lived other places, & it just reinforced my desire to live here. My opinions are mine alone. Find me on the other sites, w/ the same handle.
Trying to shift more of my housing opinions to bluesky, so find me over there with the same handle.
I still will be here to respond to discourse on this site & boost content that originates here, but you might see fewer original posts by me on this site.
@foxyjewishmama They do not seem to be selling these at the store, & clicking on the order now links redirects immediately back to the home page. So I guess I will never know if that Kamala sandwich slaps or not.
@JGrantGlover It got lost in the announcement that Related was pursuing 2 stadiums on the site (a throw back to the 1967 proposal for what is now Dearborn Park)
https://t.co/0AP7OzGGgT
@VazquezOchoa@dadawg77@JGrantGlover Article also mentions using existing office space downtown, which was harder to come by when the project was first announced, but now can be had for a song.
"already crowded neighborhood" is such a galling NIMBY way of saying "I got mine & I'm slamming the door closed behind me"
There are multiple 5 story buildings already on this block. This low of a parking ratio is not out of keeping w/ many nearby buildings that have no parking.
Plans to build a 6-story apartment building on a vacant Rogers Park lot are not moving forward after the alderwoman announced her opposition to the project. https://t.co/yRlxULgpjP
@mollyfleck An MLS stadium is likely to be larger than the USL stadium that was proposed & the park land that is proposed for this site would need to be relocated somewhere within the development. So it probably involves amending at least 4 of the sub areas.
@mollyfleck That was the original plan, but was killed by opposition from neighbors.
I am skeptical that such a deal can get done since it would require amending the planned development, which feels like a third rail.
@IvorEkta@cornoisseur @ChiAlderwoman That’ll also crash the economy by removing the same amount of contributors to the economy (both as consumers and employees).
@tnertz@pancho247365@ChicagoDPD@Pres_Chicago@CDot Hopefully Pratt because it is the only one that is bike/ped only (606 isn't going to be its own bridge, it's a side path on the new Dominick/Throop bridge.
@rwsolinski@stevevance@itskylelucas Yeah, & providing that access by car for 1/2 mile trips instead of bike ped only will increase car traffic in the area more compared to if residents of those developments only used their cars to access highways via 18th or Ida B. Wells.
Such an outdated planning solution.
@tnertz@pancho247365@ChicagoDPD@Pres_Chicago@CDot Especially since Taylor dead ends at Wells. This will create additional traffic on Wells north to Polk. If this was a bike/ped only bridge it might actually cause modal shift by making walking & cycling the fastest way to access the stores west of the river from the housing east.
@ChicagoDPD@CDot Due to the dead end of Taylor at Wells, this should be a bike & pedestrian only bridge. As such a bit of infrastructure would actually encourage a modal shift, since both would be more convenient for accessing the shopping west of the river than driving.
@rwsolinski@stevevance@itskylelucas It also doesn’t need to be a car bridge, & it might be detrimental to traffic flow for it to accommodate car traffic given that Taylor doesn’t continue under the Metra tracks.
@stevevance@JGrantGlover North/Damen making it to the final was kind of nonsense. It’s bad, but there are so many worse intersections that it beat.
We still should make that intersection safer by eliminating all diagonal non bus traffic.