Pier pressure: is the Navy Pier Flyover bike/ped bridge really worth $45 million or is there an alternative?
Everyone agrees that conditions on Chicago's Lakefront Trail between the river and Ohio Street Beach need to be improved. The Chicago Department of Transportation is planning to build the Navy Pier Flyover, a bridge-like structure that would carry trail users up over the river, Illinois Street and Grand Avenue, bypassing these problem spots, at a jaw-dropping $45 million price tag. To put that in perspective, in 2008 the Portland, Oregon, Bureau of Transportation estimated the entire replacement cost of that city's then 300-mile bike network at about $60 million. Today on Grid Chicago Steven Vance proposes an alternative: http://gridchicago.com/2012/navy-pier-flyover-is-it-worth-45-million-or-is-there-another-way/
What do you think: is it worth spending $45 million on the flyover or do you prefer Steven's proposal?
Keep moving forward,
John Greenfield
Views: 1554
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Steven Vance on -
If I had better graphic design skills, or a better command of Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop, I would have added the guardrails in myself. I'm working with someone else to get a proper rendering produced.
Thank you for the discussion about this proposal. I've requested more information from CDOT, via a FOIA request (I wish it didn't always have to come to that).
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin C on -
How much discretion would CDOT have over the use of these funds if the flyover weren't built; i.e. does the $44.5 million in funding from the State of Illinois and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality grants from the Federal Highway Administration just disappear if not applied to this infrastructure project?
-
Permalink Reply by Steven Vance on
-
If CDOT wanted to use the funds (or any part of the funds – the project is divided into three distinct segments) for a different project, I believe they would have to get approval from the State DOT (a funder), Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP, the administrator of CMAQ funds), and U.S. DOT (a funder).
The project might have earmarks, which is a different story.
Kevin C said:How much discretion would CDOT have over the use of these funds if the flyover weren't built; i.e. does the $44.5 million in funding from the State of Illinois and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality grants from the Federal Highway Administration just disappear if not applied to this infrastructure project?
-
Permalink Reply by Michelle Stenzel on -
Just needs a little barbed wire to finish it off.
John Greenfield said:The Lake Point Tower residents should be satisfied with the current design. It'd be pretty hard to scale that fence.
-
Permalink Reply by John Greenfield on -
Razor Ribbon (C) ?
-
Permalink Reply by Cameron 7.5 mi on -
Scaling the fence was only one of their concerns. Although that design would also seem to address throwing things over then fence and looking through the fence, so the only issue still to be addressed is talking loudly. The amount of NIMBYism coming from Lake Point Tower at the meetings I went to was amazing.
John Greenfield said:The Lake Point Tower residents should be satisfied with the current design. It'd be pretty hard to scale that fence.
-
Permalink Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) on -
What do the people at Lake Point Tower expect? They live right next to the #1 tourist attraction in Chicago. If they were worried about people being near their building, then they shouldn't have moved there in the first place.
Cameron Puetz said:Scaling the fence was only one of their concerns. Although that design would also seem to address throwing things over then fence and looking through the fence, so the only issue still to be addressed is talking loudly. The amount of NIMBYism coming from Lake Point Tower at the meetings I went to was amazing.
John Greenfield said:The Lake Point Tower residents should be satisfied with the current design. It'd be pretty hard to scale that fence.
-
Permalink Reply by James BlackHeron on -
There i$ alway$ an element of the "Eye-$ore" argument which theoretically might detract from Property Value$ -which i$ u$ually what all of thi$ boil$ down to when it come$ to Nimbyi$m.
-
Permalink Reply by Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) on
-
It's always about money, isn't it?
James BlackHeron said:There i$ alway$ an element of the "Eye-$ore" argument which theoretically might detract from Property Value$ -which i$ u$ually what all of thi$ boil$ down to when it come$ to Nimbyi$m.
-
Permalink Reply by James BlackHeron on
-
With that set, unfortunately yes.
Adam Herstein said:It's always about money, isn't it?
-
Permalink Reply by Lisa Curcio 4.0 mi on -
Without rereading, my memory is that the flyover will not solve the Jane Addams Park problem. Perfect example of the problem there: Today--I assume because of the storms--there were not as many people as one would expect on a Friday afternoon. There was, however, just at the top of the hill heading north from Grand, a family of four holding hands and stretched across the entire right side of the path into the left side of the path. On the side of this charming chain that was closest to the middle of the path was a very small child. They seemed quite surprised when I came up behind them--slowly--and told them that there would be a lot of bikes coming through.
-
Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on -
That's how I felt, too.
Cameron Puetz said:Scaling the fence was only one of their concerns. Although that design would also seem to address throwing things over then fence and looking through the fence, so the only issue still to be addressed is talking loudly. The amount of NIMBYism coming from Lake Point Tower at the meetings I went to was amazing.
John Greenfield said:The Lake Point Tower residents should be satisfied with the current design. It'd be pretty hard to scale that fence.
© 2008-2013 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C. Julie Hochstadter, Director
Powered by
