Connect with us

News

Rivian Motorway name change approved by city council despite opposition

Rivian Automotive's Normal, IL factory. (Photo: Rivian)

Published

on

The City Council of Bloomington, Illinois approved a motion last night to rename the highway where Rivian’s main manufacturing plant is located to Rivian Motorway. The road, which has parts located in both Bloomington and Normal, is currently named Mitsubishi Motorway after the prior owner of the facility. After some deliberation, the Council voted 7 to 2 to move forward with the requested name change.

Prior to the Bloomington Council’s meeting, the vote on the naming matter was expected to largely be a formality. However, one council member was decidedly against the motion. Donna Boelen, Alderwoman of Ward 2, objected over several concerns focused on the long-term ramifications of the move.

“Is this really in the best interest of the City of Bloomington and the region? It’s an unfortunate precedent that streets have been named after companies, and I would like to see that come to an end,” Boelen commented. “Rivian has two other operational entities, one in California, and one in Michigan… Rivian did not meet its incentive goal last year. They promised 1,000 employees over the next ten years, and that only means 100 per year.”

Along with casting doubts about Rivian’s long-term prospects in Illinois, Boelen further asserted that street names are free advertising that could deter future businesses from setting up shop nearby as there are several vacant lots near Rivian’s facility that could be developed.

Rivian’s 2.6M SQFT Factory in Normal, IL (Photo: Christian Prenzler)

Renaming Mitsubishi Motorway would also require local businesses to incur significant expenses, Boelen further claimed, citing one business owner’s quote of $5,000 to update their website and advertising materials with the new street name. This particular point caused a bit of debate among the members, specifically with regard to the amount cited.

“I have a really hard time understanding where a $5,000 total could possibly come from,” one member objected. “I mean, changing a website and changing the line to Rivian from Mitsubishi should take somebody like 5 minutes at the most… I think maybe he should have some serious conversations with his web developer at that point.” Mayor Teri Renner also added a comment about the overall street naming precedent in response to Boelen’s concerns. “It’s pretty common throughout the entire United States to name streets after major investors,” he said. “That is part of what some people think of as pro-business.”

The Town Council for Normal, where Rivian’s facility is actually located, had its own debate about the name change despite its motion ultimately being approved 4-2 in early July. Council member Stan Nord cited concerns about electronic databases adjusting to the temporary nature of businesses in the long term. Other members were not convinced that a problem existed, though, noting that new streets and street name changes were very common across the country.

Advertisement
-

Rivian specifically requested the name change earlier this year, according to a memo written by Assistant City Manager Eric Hanson to the Normal City Council. “Obviously, it’s not necessarily advantageous for them to bring (potential investors) down Mitsubishi Motorway,” he said. “ A second road for access to Rivian’s factory is also planned for renaming, citing the same reasons – Sakura Lane will be renamed Electric Avenue.

The nascent car maker bought their factory headquarters from Mitsubishi in 2017, and efforts are currently underway to transition to the electrified lineup they have in the works to include the R1T pickup truck and R1S SUV. Interestingly, many of the workers currently involved in Rivian’s changeover process were part of the original Mitsubishi team that opened the factory when it was new.

Rivian must gain one more approval from the McLean County Board before Rivian Motorway is final. Along with the Normal and Bloomington Councils, the Illinois Emergency Telephone Systems Board has also approved the move. The County Board will consider the request later this month.

The City Council’s deliberations in full can be viewed below:

Advertisement
-

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla opens the Q&A for its biggest earnings call yet

Tesla opens its Q3 earnings Q&A, and Cybercab, Robotaxi, Optimus and regulators loom over October 21.

Published

on

By

Tesla has opened its shareholder question portal for the Q3 2026 earnings call, with the Say Q&A page already listing questions. Investors have until 4:00 p.m. EDT on October 20 to submit and vote on what management should answer.

The call is set for Wednesday, October 21. Tesla will post results after the market closes, with a live webcast at 4:30 p.m. CT, or 5:30 p.m. ET, through its investor relations site.

Say ranks questions by the number of shares behind the votes, which gives institutional holders extra weight over the retail crowd.

Ahead of Q2, retail investors asked why Robotaxi growth had stalled, when Cybercab would start customer rides, and where the Optimus Gen 3 ramp stood, while an institutional holder asked how Tesla and SpaceX would split Terafab duties. Cybercab has since answered one of those. Tesla said last week it has 300 plus Cybercabs serving Austin, up eightfold in 30 days, with Dallas named as the next city. The questions now are likely to move from when to how fast.

There is also a regulatory question hanging over the call. NHTSA has demanded sworn answers on how the pedal free Cybercab was certified against federal safety standards, with responses due October 30, nine days after the call. Whether an analyst raises it live is unknown, but it is the kind of exposure that tends to find its way into a Q&A.

The numbers will not be the main draw. Tesla already reported 486,532 deliveries and 13.7 GWh of storage for the quarter. Consensus sits around 43 to 45 cents per share on roughly $27.8 billion in revenue, according to Zacks, after a Q2 report that missed on EPS. Goldman Sachs, which holds a Neutral rating and a $360 target, argues the outlook for Robotaxi, FSD and Optimus will matter more to the stock than the quarter itself.

Advertisement
-

The call also lands six days after the rescheduled Roadster event, which Tesla will stream on X on Thursday, October 15, at 7:55 p.m. CT. If the Roadster shows up with a production date or a SpaceX thruster package, expect it to climb the voting list before the deadline.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Ukraine says Starlink is cutting out its military drones as Poland calls out Elon Musk

Ukrainian officials allege SpaceX limited military Starlink speeds, disrupting drone missions; SpaceX has not commented.

Published

on

By

Credit: Mykhailo Fedorov/Twitter

Ukrainian officials are accusing SpaceX of placing a speed limit on the military version of Starlink that their forces use to fly drones, but SpaceX has not confirmed that any change was made. Presidential adviser Serhiy Beskrestnov said in a Telegram post on Wednesday that Starshield terminals have begun losing service when they move faster than about 100 miles per hour, according to a Reuters report. “Our defense forces did not receive a warning about this limitation, and this led to the disruption of several missions,” he wrote.

Ukraine’s 7th Rapid Reaction Corps told Reuters that connections dropped for 10 to 20 seconds at just 68 to 75 mph, which made the drones harder to control. Volunteer Serhiy Sternenko, citing military reports, said the dropouts are now starting at 37 to 43 mph. These accounts come from Ukrainian officials and military sources and have not been independently verified. Regular civilian terminals were reportedly not affected, according to EUalive.


SpaceX has not publicly commented or explained what, if anything, changed. Beskrestnov and other Ukrainian officials believe the issue is intentional and point to the timing. Washington has been pressing Kyiv to stop long range strikes on Russian oil refineries after President Trump called for an “energy ceasefire,” and Musk posted on Saturday that “Zelensky has gone too far.” EUalive noted that neither Ukrainian nor Polish officials have presented evidence that the limit was ordered by Washington or by SpaceX, so the link to politics remains an allegation. Other explanations, such as a technical or policy change affecting fast moving terminals, have not been ruled out.

Poland’s foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, responded on X by quote tweeting a Kyiv Independent report and writing: “Hey, @elonmusk, big man, are you playing politics with your products again? As your European customers, we are watching you.” Poland is the largest funder of Ukraine’s Starlink service, having supplied more than 29,000 terminals and covering operating costs Sikorski has put at roughly $50 million a year. The wording echoes their 2025 clash, when Musk told Sikorski to “be quiet, small man.” At the time of writing, neither Musk nor SpaceX had responded to the claims.

The dispute sits on top of a long history. Musk confirmed in February 2022 that Starlink was active in Ukraine after a request from a Ukrainian minister. That October, SpaceX asked the Pentagon to share the bill and Musk said the cost was approaching $20 million a month, before he reversed course and said SpaceX would keep paying. In December 2024 the Pentagon moved some of those terminals onto the Starshield service, the government version now at the center of the complaints.

SpaceX has also changed how its network treats certain terminals in Ukraine before, and that time it was with Kyiv’s cooperation. In February, Ukrainian officials confirmed that terminals believed to be used by Russian troops were disabled after coordination with SpaceX, a step that Ukrainian commanders later said hurt Russian assaults. Whether anything similar is behind the latest reports is unclear, which is why Kyiv is asking for answers.

Ukraine is already looking at backups. Defense tech company Stetman is developing its own satellite system, UASAT-NANO, and officials in Europe have discussed alternatives to Starlink since early 2025, though none match its scale yet.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

FAA kicks off review of SpaceX’s bid to fly Starship nearly every day

FAA is reviewing SpaceX’s plan for 456 Starship launches a year, up from 25 today.

Published

on

By

Rendering of Elon Musk overlooking a Starship fleet (Credit: Grok)

The FAA said Tuesday that it will prepare an environmental impact statement on SpaceX’s proposal to run as many as 456 Starship launches and 912 landings a year from Starbase, Texas. SpaceX is currently authorized for 25 launches and 50 landings annually, which makes the request roughly 18 times the existing ceiling. The notice of intent is set to publish in the Federal Register on Wednesday.

The plan comes in two phases. Phase 1 would allow up to 100 launches and 200 landings a year, on any day and at any hour. Phase 2, which the FAA says could arrive within several years, would raise the limit to the full 456 launches, still at any hour but only on weekdays. The agency noted that 912 landings is the upper limit for the Texas facility no matter where a given mission begins, and that Starship and Super Heavy could come down at the launch site or in the Gulf and open ocean.

A draft statement will be released for public comment at a later date, and the FAA has not said when. According to the Federal Registar, written comments are due November 30 on regulations.gov under docket FAA-2026-12808, with in person scoping meetings on November 17 in Brownsville and November 19 in Port Isabel, plus a virtual session on November 18. The review will weigh air quality, wildlife, coastal resources, water, noise, and aviation, and the FAA said any increase beyond this proposal would need its own separate review.

The numbers look large next to what Starbase has actually done. Starship has flown three times from Texas this year, including Flight 14 on September 28, the first orbital flight, which deployed 26 Starlink V3 satellites. Bloomberg reported that Starbase has never launched more than five times in a calendar year. The current cap of 25 comes from an FAA approval in May 2025. In February, the agency also approved up to 44 Starship launches a year from Launch Complex 39A in Florida, so Phase 1 in Texas alone would more than double that allowance.

Musk has said Starship could eventually fly more than once per hour within less than a decade, per Bloomberg. The nearer term target is Flight 15. Musk said on October 10 that it is hopefully four to six weeks away and will try to catch the ship with the tower, as Teslarati covered. That flight still runs under the existing 25 launch limit, and so would every Starbase launch for as long as the new review takes.

Advertisement
-

As of mid morning Pacific time on Tuesday, SpaceX had not posted about the filing on its own account.

Continue Reading