For starters, my thanks to John Rocker for focusing on issues related to I-35W instead of personalities. I'd also like to apologize ahead of time for the length of this e-mail and trust that folks not interested in this subject will simply scroll down to the next message.
Let's remember that our friends at the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) are famous -- make that infamous -- for dividing and conquering communities. MnDOT gets its way every time a community does not stand united. Instead of criticizing each other, let's see if we can find common ground that will strengthen the City's hand. The current proposal for re-working I-35W, including access ramps between Franklin/5th Avenues and 38th Street, is yet another indication of why I-35W should be treated as a corridor, rather than being expanded and re-worked in a piecemeal fashion, segment by segment. That holistic approach (if you will) is the one MnDOT used when it first proposed in 1986 a massive expansion of I-35W between Washington Avenue north of downtown Minneapolis and I-35W's junction with I-35E out in Burnsville. In May of 1992, the citizens of Minneapolis brought that mega-project to a screeching halt by turning the State's official public hearing on its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) into the largest public hearing ever held in the State of Minnesota. The crowd in attendance was estimated by one media outlet to be as high as 3,200 people. I can assure you that most of that crowd came from Minneapolis. The net effect of that strength was that the mega-project was abandoned, thereby saving 700 buildings in Minneapolis from being demolished and 3,100 Minneapolis residents from being dis-located. The Final EIS rejected the notion of adding high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes from 42nd Street on north. Some readers will likely recall the years of worry related to the proposals to add a massive bus transfer station at 46th Street and I-35W. In the Spring of 2001, Brian Herron and I seemed to be on the verge of reaching agreement with Metro Council Chair Ted Mondale and Metro Council Member Frank Hornstein on a new concept to be proposed for public comment and input -- namely, simple bus transfer facilities UNDER 46th Street (at the I-35W level) that would occur next to the outside shoulders of I-35W. Buses using the shoulders on I-35W (as they do today) would simply pull off onto wider shoulders for riders to leave or enter. It was an intriguing proposal; I really wanted to know whether the public and adjacent neighborhoods would find it acceptable. Unfortunately, shortly thereafter Brian's woes came to light and that effort came to a halt. I wrote the above paragraph simply to make the point that what happens at Lake Street can affect what happens at 46th Street and elsewhere. The new proposal we were developing at 46th Street would have worked well with the wonderful new bus facilities once proposed at Lake Street, which would also have occurred adjacent to the highway's shoulders. The current Lake Street proposal puts the bus facilities in the highway's median instead. I suspect that would render the new concept at 46th Street infeasible. But we'll never really know unless the corridor is considered as a whole, so that we'll know all of the pluses and minuses and all of the effects near and far. Also, widening I-35W between 38th Street and Franklin Avenue will mean that the sections south of 38th Street (and probably north of Franklin) will also have to be widened if I-35W is going to work as a comprehensive whole. In effect, this is MnDOT going back to its original mega-project proposal but without looking at it as a whole and without the "real" public transportation that light rail transit would have offered. [By the way, I'm NOT trying to re-open that debate since MnDOT has already filled in with additional lanes south of 46th Street the space that could have been devoted to light rail.] With that background and setting in mind, I'll offer my reactions to some of the aspects of the current "Lake Street Access Project". 1. It offers no access to Lake Street. In fact, it would be more accurate to call it the "Lake Street By-Pass Project". That's a real affront to the owners of Lake Street businesses who have fought for access to/from the north side of Lake Street since I-35W opened in 1967. 2. It should not be described as an economic development tool. The primary beneficiaries of the proposal are already in place. In fact, some of the biggest losers under the proposal are the small businesses that would see their buildings demolished to accommodate the new ramps and HOV lanes. And who works in those small businesses now? Do they tend to be residents of the area? 3. It would displace residents of some relatively modest homes. I would venture to guess that a significant number of those residents use public transportation regularly and don't own cars. Why would we want them to lose their homes and good access to public transportation so that some folks can shave a minor amount of time -- what, a minute or two? -- from their weekday commutes. 4. Do we know that workers at the major employers (such as Wells Fargo and Allina) FAVOR the current proposal? Are they aware of what it would mean to their neighbors and the adjoining neighborhoods? Do they know how construction would impinge on their commutes and for how long? Do they think the proposal is "worth it"? 5. Adding more lanes does NOT equal better safety. In fact, most of the accidents on I-35W (at least during the previous EIS work) were side-swipe type accidents attributable to changing lanes. If there are more lanes, there will be more lane-changing and hence MORE accidents. 6. The proposal would have ripple effects both north and south of the area now in question. Those effects have not been identified, let alone studied. Let's not make major changes in ANY area without knowing the full effects of those changes. I see no good in the current proposal. If people truly want more access to Lake Street, add it -- to the north side of Lake. That can be done very simply, without massive fly-over ramps or other ill-conceived ideas that can only damage a neighborhood. When I chaired the Neighborhood Transportation Network, we had simple ramps designed to add access to the north side of Lake Street so I know it can be done. It is also clear that the environment I-35W provides to its neighbors MUST be addressed. A proposal to do just that was approved by the City Council while I chaired its Tranpsortation and Public Works Committee. But please don't link that effort to highway expansion. The next thing you know, somehow the dollars for environmental improvements will be lost. Just look at the Hiawatha corridor for an example of how a transportation project will eat up all of the dollars available, leaving nearby neighbors with far less than they had expected. The aesthetics environment of I-35W can and MUST be greatly improved, but that is unlikely to happen as part of an expansion project. In fact, it appears to me that the current proposal merely tosses a proverbial small bone to the community with the hope that it will cause enough disarray to allow MnDOT to build the expanded highway-only I-35W that it wanted in the first place. Let's not let MnDOT conquer us by dividing us. In any event, I don't think it really matters any more what some neighbors and neighborhoods approved several years ago based on information that was available at that time. What matters now is the proposal that is before us today. And neighborhoods like Whittier and Kingfield have let all of us know in no uncertain terms that the current proposal is unacceptable. As former Mayor Sharon Sayles Belton wrote last year, " ... accommodating more lanes will jeopardize the Access Project. ..." Sharon was right. It's time for people who think the additional lanes are cause for killing off the Access Project to speak up now. My heart goes out to all of the people who have devoted so much time and energy in pursuit of better access and improved aesthetics. I know you've worked long and hard to improve our community. But please, turn your anger not at your neighbors but at MnDOT, where it belongs. Let's all work together to demand that MnDOT honor the work you set out to do by providing access AT Lake Street and improving aesthetics. I look forward to reading postings from people who agree with me as well as those who don't. I look forward to a real dialog on the issues. I look forward to residents and businesses of Minneapolis coming together and building consensus so that the City has real negotiating power in these matters and our elected officials feel they have a mandate to march in a certain direction. Thanks. Dore Mead Tangletown Minneapolis Award Winner! [1992, I think] _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
