Plan to build a 45 million dollar cyclist bridge along Lakeshore Drive gets ok (taxi, taxes)

[Chicago60614]

The city has been actively pushing and designing this project for 9 years now. There has been a request to fix this bottleneck for decades.

The city has by now secured 85% of the funding from outside sources (federal government). This isn't just some random proposal that was coughed up last week and wants the city to chuck out $40 million. It's been years in the making - especially getting the funding secured.

It's taking 6 years because they can only secure specific amounts of funding each year - so they have to push it out depending on how much money they're being allocated.

[prinsessa]

Something needs to be done because it is very dangerous to have a bike path and sidewalk cross like it does close to Navy Pier. I was yelled at by a biker because I was crossing the sidewalk/bike path on foot ("Hello! Bikes coming through!") I know it wasn't mature but I had to yell back at her.

[Chi-town Native]

this will address the biggest problem I have with the bottleneck, the blind corner, thanks to Lake Point Tower, coming from the south.

compounding this is the reality that the City merges the bikepath with a sidewalk crossing the river - with no real signage or instructions to anyone. it's ok in the mornings, but can be really bad during the summer, and god help you on Fridays (forget the weekends, period) if there's a concert or event in Grant Park. Then you have hordes of tourists all stopping on the bridge to take pictures.

In terms of who could pay for it - tax the bejeebuz out of those stupid segways and rental bike cars. neither of those have any business on the lakefront paths, the bike cars are too wide and the segways are essentially motorized, which is supposed to be forbidden.

btw, another little fundraising opportunity could be properly taxing SUVs in Chicago. right now trucks of any kind (pickups, even) are not allowed on Lake Shore Drive. the government classifies SUVs as light trucks.

So why on earth can someone drive a Toyota Tundra or Chrysler LeBehemoth on LSD when the working bloke can't drive his little F150? That's bs. The wear and tear caused by SUVs is monstrous, and they are not taxed appropriately.

[cubssoxfan]

Originally Posted by tonythetuna

There is nothing unfair about it. Bike riders cause accidents that cost people and insurance companies money just like car drivers do. They should be required to have insurance.

The city has spent buku money on making bike lanes on city streets. Bike riders have paid not one cent for this privilege.

Not true. I am a cyclist and I pay taxes. Your argument makes it seem that there truly is a mode of transit that is completely self-funded without any tax money going to it. And that is false! And please don't go down renter's lane. They pay taxes too, indirectly via their monthly rent.

Now regarding insurance, it may have merit.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by cubssoxfan

Not true. I am a cyclist and I pay taxes. Your argument makes it seem that there truly is a mode of transit that is completely self-funded without any tax money going to it. And that is false! And please don't go down renter's lane. They pay taxes too, indirectly via their monthly rent.

Now regarding insurance, it may have merit.

oh, please - insurance for what? show me the last motorist who had their car destroyed/was killed by a cyclist.

yeah, brilliant idea to add more bureaucratic red tape to society from one of the allegedly shrink-the-government goofs.

I bike AND I drive. Why the ($*(#! should I have to pay taxes TWICE for the roads?

Here's some common sense:

Cityscapes: Newly-approved lakefront overpass is no bridge to nowhere

[cubssoxfan]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

oh, please - insurance for what? show me the last motorist who had their car destroyed/was killed by a cyclist.

yeah, brilliant idea to add more bureaucratic red tape to society from one of the allegedly shrink-the-government goofs.

I bike AND I drive. Why the ($*(#! should I have to pay taxes TWICE for the roads?

Here's some common sense:

Cityscapes: Newly-approved lakefront overpass is no bridge to nowhere

Or, it may not.
Are you calling me a "shrink the government goof"? I resemble that remark! Gee, private sector workers having to do more work for stagnant pay, but puh-leeze don't ask public sector to do the same?! Now I'm not advocating eliminating essential workers, but with all the political "friends & family plan" hiring going on, those who advocate shrinking the government may not be so goofy after all!! And all that bull going on in Mad-town? I can fully fund my retirement and pay over 50% for my group health care, but these Bozo's cant come up with small contributions? Have these people tried to find jobs in the private sector?!
Geez!
I will now get off my soap box(for the time being).

[dewthedru]

what about all the tourists that come and spend time on the path? going to have to charge them as well? then you'd have to start paying somebody to check for insurance and permits. and i agree with chi-town above...i have live in the city and already pay taxes on two cars and a house. why should i have to pay again for a public park? you going to force people that walk the trail to pay as well?

[Irishtom29]

That so many are squabbling about this trivial bridge (in a nation that once took the building of the transcontinental railroad in stride) shows the decline of this nation. Loss of faith; rather than taking a chance looking forward to the future we fight over the remaining crumbs. We're toast (pun intended).

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by cubssoxfan

Or, it may not.
Are you calling me a "shrink the government goof"? I resemble that remark! Gee, private sector workers having to do more work for stagnant pay, but puh-leeze don't ask public sector to do the same?! Now I'm not advocating eliminating essential workers, but with all the political "friends & family plan" hiring going on, those who advocate shrinking the government may not be so goofy after all!! And all that bull going on in Mad-town? I can fully fund my retirement and pay over 50% for my group health care, but these Bozo's cant come up with small contributions? Have these people tried to find jobs in the private sector?!
Geez!
I will now get off my soap box(for the time being).

You totally missed my point - which was directed at Tony.

When you howl that you want more taxes/regulations, you are growing the size of government.

It takes employees to write, incorporate, and enforce these rules.

So don't go complaining about taxes when you are simultaneously demanding more services that require taxes.

The idea that these niche-demographic taxes will "pay for themselves" usually works out as well as it did for our plan to finance the War in Iraq with the oil.

[Irishtom29]

Originally Posted by cubssoxfan

And all that bull going on in Mad-town? I can fully fund my retirement and pay over 50% for my group health care, but these Bozo's cant come up with small contributions?

You don't know what's going on, not that it stops you from flapping your jibs anyway. The people up there are upset more because they are threatened with losing their right to collective bargaining than because they might have to make concessions.

This isn't about concessions from government workers, it's about destroying unions, something right wingers have always wanted to do.