For those of us who live in Lakeview or end up there pretty often, the amount of car traffic there can be pretty awful. This was sent to me, and it seems like it's a pretty crappy deal by an alderman that I thought would be more in favor of reducing traffic in his turf:

Alderman Tom Tunney is negotiating with the Cubs, and he wants more parking -- as much as 20 percent of Wrigley Field's capacity.*  Many of us feel Lakeview has enough cars on our streets already, and we would rather see investments in bicycling, transit, shuttles and sidewalks instead to serve residents and visitors.  Do you agree?
Please sign the petition TODAY and send this message to Alderman Tunney and the Cubs.  The Cubs have set a deadline of Monday, April 1 for an agreement around renovations, parking, and more.  They need to hear our voice.

Thanks!

Views: 3279

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Maybe it is times for the Cubs to move to Rosemont. Plenty of parking out there, or so I heard.

How the Chicago Cubs dominated political giving. And they ain't pitching for progressive causes. Anyone all that surprised?

Yeah, really. They're more of a nusiance than a help to the community.

Duppie 13.5185km said:

Maybe it is times for the Cubs to move to Rosemont. Plenty of parking out there, or so I heard.

I would like to hear more about why I should sign this. I am a little confused by the issues here and would love to read opinions.  My understanding (which may not be accurate) is that the Cubs want to add to the ballpark, perhaps close off a street and open a hotel.  My understanding is that the alderman, amongst other things wants the Cubs to increase parking if they do this. I am aware he has other issues as do the residents.

If this is accurate, it would make sense to support additional parking rather than oppose it.  Sure, we want people to take all modes when they go to ballgames.  I am not a Cubs fan but have ridden my bike to 75% of the games I have gone to over the years and taken public transportation to most of the others.  I have rarely, rarely driven.  The reality is that many people drive to baseball games. If  you are having a baseball game in your neighborhood you will be bringing in cars.  If cars are coming they need to have a place to park. I lived in that neighborhood in the early 1980's and parking was always difficult on baseball game days. In 1984 when the Cubs won their Division it was even worse.  Wouldn't we want the club to increase parking?  This does not mean that the club or the alderman are bringing in more cars. Those cars are already coming. If so, they have to go somewhere. If they are going to a parking lot they are not impatiently trolling the streets making life more dangerous for you and I when we happen to ride by. If we don't want parking perhaps we are saying that we don't want a baseball game in a city neighborhood.  I think we are pretty low on the totem pole of impact for that decision.  Its one thing to say that if they put in parking make sure to put in bike parking, make sure to create bike pathways, make sure to encourage multiple modes of transportation.  But, to simply oppose additional parking does not seem to make a whole lot of sense to me.  Am I missing something? I am humble enough to believe that this could be so.  Sound off...

I love this Rosemont nonsense. The cubs will *never* move to Rosemont, it's a bluff, an obvious one. Actually it isn't even a bluff since it was the mayor of Rosemont that started the entire thing, the Cubs never showed any interest. Instead, the announced that they wanted to spend $300 mil. to rehab the stadium and another $200 mil to build a hotel across the street (Ricketts already spent $20 mil to purchase that lot).

Also, the political giving article is misleading, Joe Ricketts, the guy that gives millions to conservative causes isn't associated in anyway with the Cubs. His son Tom, who gives much much less to political organizations, is the stated "owner" and board chairman. His siblings also sit on the board. His sister is a lesbian and donates to politically left organizations.

So let's look at the entire picture, shall we.

Duppie 13.5185km said:

Maybe it is times for the Cubs to move to Rosemont. Plenty of parking out there, or so I heard.

I'm with David. Why is a dedicated parking facility, which will presumably relieve some of the demands on available street parking a bad thing?

David Barish said:

I would like to hear more about why I should sign this. I am a little confused by the issues here and would love to read opinions.  My understanding (which may not be accurate) is that the Cubs want to add to the ballpark, perhaps close off a street and open a hotel.  My understanding is that the alderman, amongst other things wants the Cubs to increase parking if they do this. I am aware he has other issues as do the residents.

[snip]

I don't know that this is correct. The more nightmarish the parking situation, the more people will opt for alternative modes of transportation. I would like to see some numbers regarding Wrigley vs. U.S. Cellular, but I suspect that a lower percentage of fans drive to Wrigley simply because there is less parking. Why not try to make that percentage even lower?

David Barish said:

Wouldn't we want the club to increase parking?  This does not mean that the club or the alderman are bringing in more cars. Those cars are already coming. If so, they have to go somewhere.

Improvements to promote walking, biking and transit for getting to/from Wrigley and nearby destinations is a much smarter idea than more parking.  There are already way too many cars there on game days.

Exactly. If people don't know they can find parking, they're less likely to drive.  If they know there's a big parking garage and they're thinking of driving there, it would seem that they'd be much more likely to drive.

Alex Z said:

I don't know that this is correct. The more nightmarish the parking situation, the more people will opt for alternative modes of transportation. I would like to see some numbers regarding Wrigley vs. U.S. Cellular, but I suspect that a lower percentage of fans drive to Wrigley simply because there is less parking. Why not try to make that percentage even lower?

David Barish said:

Wouldn't we want the club to increase parking?  This does not mean that the club or the alderman are bringing in more cars. Those cars are already coming. If so, they have to go somewhere.

I agree. Give more space for cars, and more cars will come.

Alex Z said:

I don't know that this is correct. The more nightmarish the parking situation, the more people will opt for alternative modes of transportation. I would like to see some numbers regarding Wrigley vs. U.S. Cellular, but I suspect that a lower percentage of fans drive to Wrigley simply because there is less parking. Why not try to make that percentage even lower?

David Barish said:

Wouldn't we want the club to increase parking?  This does not mean that the club or the alderman are bringing in more cars. Those cars are already coming. If so, they have to go somewhere.

I think the bigger clashes are over the building of the hotel and an expansion of night games.  Those will both increase the number of people in the area so Tom Tunny is wanting to make sure there's something that can handle the increase, including traffic.  There's really no place to park now and not a lot of open space for garages, either.  Having driven and biked around Wrigley during games I can't say I'd want to do either one if I could avoid it.

Tricolor said:

…there's something that can handle the increase…

There is, it's called the Red Line.

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service