When I lodged my disapproval about the lack of a parking plan at the new Morse Theatre, I was greeted with hisses by all the critics. I stood firm, as I live directly behind the place.
Well, it's with worthy note, the McGhee's and the Rogers Park Entertainment Group have been working on the parking issue. They have come up with some spaces at the Morseland's lot. (Still, it's not enough parking spots in my opinion, but it's a good start.)
Now I wonder when they'll start working on the theatre again. Construction has come to a halt recently.
23 comments:
I went to the meeting in Edgewater about the Hollywood/Sheridan TIF, and again noticed two major differences between Rogers Park and Edgewater:
1. Edgewater meetings are more polite and orderly.
2. Parking is never discussed. There is NO parking in Edgewater, so forgetaboutit. Don't even talk about it.
Somehow, even though East Edgewater is a lot denser than RP, people seem to get on just fine without parking. Same with Lakeview- their entertainment venues don't suffer for lack of parking.
Why is it such a big problem around here?
I'm sure this has probably been argued about in the past, but residential parking permits would help keep parking available for residents....and I imagine we might see a decrease in suburban commuters who use our streets as a park and ride. Sure, it will cost you a few extra bucks a year, but as someone who lived next to Wrigley for a few years, I believe it would be well worth it and a small price to pay while allowing development to fixup the hellhole that inspired the name of your blog.
Permit parking would be a good start-make the suburbanites who ought to be parking in the garage on Rogers pay for parking around here.
The parking space costs the taxpayers money in the form of extra space and pavement, so nobody should park for free, least of all suburban commuters.
North Coast said:
"Permit parking would be a good start-make the suburbanites who ought to be parking in the garage on Rogers pay for parking around here.
The parking space costs the taxpayers money in the form of extra space and pavement, so nobody should park for free, least of all suburban commuters."
Don't forget all the CTA employees who street park on Fargo, Rogers, Birchwood and Jarvis, when the CTA should be utilizing parking at the gateway for these folks. Oh Yeah!!! I forgot, that would probably cause the suspension of yet another bus route.
CTA ought to be making it possible for their employees to use the transit, and actively encouraging them to use it.
There are too many garages and train rooms located on lines that don't run all night, making it impossible for CTA employees who have to show at 3 AM, which is very common, to use public transit.
Better to reactivate old bus lines and reinstate the all night rail service we will ALL be needing in a few years than to enable these people in gasguzzling.
In the meantime, permit parking is the only solution. CTA employees, like other people, need to pay the full costs of their cars, and given that there are many CTA employees who COULD use the transit, that is what they should do if they don't want tickets and/or parking garage costs. CTA does not owe them parking spaces.
The public way belongs to the public. Permit parking is unneighborly and hostile. I for one do not want permit parking on my street.
Generally speaking I am adamantly against permit parking in most cases. My car is fully licensed, plated, insured and City Stickerd. I feel that gives me the right to park in any public way. The permit parking thing has grown from areas around, say hospitals, to entire neighborhoods like Wicker Park. The former use of permits makes sense; the latter is the type of use that I disagree with.
Actually, it is amazing that the areas around (to the South and East) of the Howard stop aren't permit parking. They should be. I agree that this would be a good and proper use of the permit parking idea. A parking garage has been provided for transit users. In the same vein, the area around the Lunt Metra stop should rightfully be permitted. I would hate to have daily commuters constantly using up all available street parking if I lived there.
How do we get the Alderman to endorse this idea?
I too would like to see permit parking around all the L stops. Many times I have watched commuters drop their cars off, forcing me to park several blocks away. In addition I have noticed areas that until recently have been used for parking, now labeled as no parking, making a bad situation, worse.
If the neighbors around Loyola have it, why not the neighbors around the L stops?
I am with "I live here too" We (who have cars) pay a minium of 75.00 for a city sticker. What do you get for this nothing!
I always belived that should you as a person who lives (and pays for the right to have a car) in the city havea right to park their car on the city streets, make the suburban people pay to park their car in lots. What do you get for your sticker? NOTHING just a sticker with a Chicago landmark on it!
Instead of focusing on makeing themselves have better benifits for their part time job , the aldermem should see to it that the tax payers get alittle crumb for what they pay into. The city sticker program would be a nice start.
Also on a different note there is a bill in the State Senate that will pay back tens of millions of dollars to the people who lost their mony on a failed casino!!
Think about this fact and the mind set that is behind this bill ; if we get the Olyimpic games I am sure our lawmakers will compensate the loses of any private funding, because they have tax moneies to do this with!!
Did I mention, the Morse Theatre secured some off street parking for it's out of the neighborhood patron's.
WOW Ryne, but you have just taken this thread off in an interesting direction!
WHAT state senate bill could you be talking about? Do you have a number (the number of the bill, that is)?
PLease tell me you're pulling my leg. Tell me it's a joke of some kind.
I mean, we can't REALLY be considering making either the state or the casinos make good to gamblers for their losses.
We must take action IMMEDIATELY to get this bill killed, if it is even for real.
Tell me it ain't so.
I just looked at recent senate actions. There's nothing like this pending, just the usual garbage, mostly for MORE TAXES.
It's a joke.
Sorry to say North Coast it is true, it is the bill that would expand gambling in the state. The reason you (taxpayes) don't know is beacause it is part of the bill a alittle amendment (you know the fine print)
Again we get stuck!! I have to remember that next time I go to the casino and lose money, North Coast do you think the state will give me back my money??
Ryne, do you know the number of the bill? I want to read it, to see if there is anything in it that makes restitution to gamblers?
What there likely is, is the requirement that casinos provide counseling and treatment to people with gambling problems. There was supposed to be such a requirement when casino gambling was first permitted in the 90s. Really sort of humorous, when you think about it.
Craig,
This is a little off topic, but are you aware of any web sites or resources in RP where residents may get stats about our area, such as average income levels, percentage of housing (apartments, houses, condos), types of businesses, percentages of families, percentage of singles, etc.?
I did not make myself clear (my mistake) the bill has an amendment that will give back the backers (oweners)of the Casino that failed in Rosemont there money back. You talking tens of millions of dollars.
Again I am sorry for the miscommunication, but why should the tax payers pay back millions to the millioniers who lost mony on the failed business!
Regarding parking, I don't believe that $75 dollars a year for a city sticker comes near paying for the space a car takes up on the street.
So, to establish a clear connection between the cost of the service, and what the user pays, I would like to see the city sticker requirement dropped, and all parking either metered or by permit.
I'd like to extend this principle to other modes of transit, including interstate highways and other limited access roads, and the public transit, including all METRA, CTA, PACE, and AMTRACK
Completely defund the interstate highway system and all limited access roads. All users will pay tolls as necessary to maintain the roads. No more city stickers or gasoline taxes, and no more portion of federal income tax revenues devoted to any federal, state, or local highway or limited access road- only public streets and roads necessary for normal access and egress will be funded.
At the same time, defund all public transit. ALL OF IT. Let the user pay for that, too. At first, the transition will be very rough. Fares will ratchet up drastically, but it will still be cheaper than operating a car, so I'll continue to ride and so will most other people who depend on it now. But not to worry, because the situation will correct itself just fine over a relatively short span of time.
If you defund the highways and roads and make the auto user pay for his use of these expensive roads, you will no longer need government assistance for public transit. It will pay for itself, as many people are forced out of their autos as they are confronted with the full cost of operating them. Oh, yeah, open the field to competition, too. No more government-mandated monopolies.
Same thing goes for that other greenhouse-gas producing, fuel-wasting subsidy hog- the commercial air travel industry. No more government funds for airports or civil air control. No more help for failing airlines. They fail, they fail.
Why? Because only half the auto owners will be able to afford to drive on these roads, and driving will become prohibitively expensive for the non-affluent.
And most non-rich will stop flying. Most rich will cut it way back.
People will be piling onto the trains and buses and they will once again run in the black as they did before the end of WW2. Lines will multiply and start to run all night again. Other carriers will set up and offer competing service. People won't like it, but they will ride anyway, because cars will be out of their reach.
And we will once again have walkable, compact cities and towns, with lots of retail close by, and more people living closer to work and other things they need to live comfortably.
And parking will not be a problem.
Boxing Tomboy, I had a recent study link on these subjects sent to me by a reader.
I hope the reader is reading this. I lost the link to the above mentioned question. Please re-send.
Craig wrote: "the Morse Theatre secured some off street parking for it's out of the neighborhood patron's."
What, Craig, so you don't want people from outside the neighborhood to come to the Morse Theater? That's fuzzy logic. I understand residents' frustration at parking space being reserved for business patrons, but if you ever want your area to improve you'll have to *encourage* economic development, even from non-49th Ward citizens!
boxing tomboy -
Much of this information was gathered in the 2000 census. The problem is, that data is pretty out of date by now. The site still interesting.
http://www.census.gov/
Brian White's organization Lakeside Community Development Corporation did a housing audit in 2006 to track conversions of certain rental housing to condo and changes of ethnicity of residents living in this housing. This report may give you some of the information you are looking for. www.lakesidecdc.org/
If you are looking for marketing/business demographic information, you might start here (sorry, you'll have to paste it to your browser):
http://www.claritas.com/
claritas/demographics.jsp
There are lots of others no doubt. Will post when there is more time.
Ryne, I agree with you.
It is OBSCENE for the state to give money to the backers of casinos for any reason.
How can we possibly deny welfare assistance to needy individuals who are homeless and starving when we are handing out HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN CORPORATE WELFARE TO THE FILTHY RICH?
It's bad enough to hand gifts worth $40 MM in the form of tax abatements and TIF funding to, say, Target or Walmart under the guise of promoting "economic development".
But our public officials have reached the very final stage of immorality when they pay back the backers of a failed business, in an enterprise as intrinsically parasitical and destructive as gambling. What other critical public needs could that money have been used for?
I'm sick reading this, but you've inspired me to do the research so I can read the bill myself. I really think that if the public as a whole had any idea this was happening, there would be a huge outcry.
Thanks, Craig, and especially you Rebecca! The pastor of my church is applying for another grant (the church recently received one to boost up its youth program). The foundation that gives out the grant wants to know all kinds of demographic info about Rogers Park.
tomboy -
Here is another resource that might have some useful links:
Donors Forum of Chicago
www.donorsforum.org
Post a Comment