David Piehl asks: (about the 28 the street exit ramp) So, this is an outright admission that the new ramps will bring congestion, and that truck traffic will move to 28th Street, a residential street. Haven't project promoters been saying all along that the objective is to get traffic out of the neighborhoods and on to Lake Street? How will the neighborhoods gain if we see increased truck traffic???
Scott happily answers: I think it's a universally accepted notion that more ramps bring more traffic, the 28th street ramp is designed to offload the pass-thru traffic (cars and trucks) directly to 28th rather than having to traverse two lights (Lake and 31st) and then go to 28th street. If David would like to make the 28th street ramp a car only ramp and require trucks to use the 31st Street ramp I think he should go to the next public forum and suggest that. I would agree with David's assertion about this being disruptive if 28th was a two way street. Thankfully it is not, the part of 28th street where the ramp leads to is very commercial, not residential (Abbott, the Sears site, Wells Fargo, etc.). Rhetorically David's argument is clever but it just doesn't stand up to the reality of the situation. David takes some issue with my claims of the benefits of infrastructure investment: And what's this about "capital begets capital"? I don't believe it's true, and have to say that after all of my graduate level economics courses and time with Fortune 500 companies, I can't think of anything to substantiate that thought. Even if it were true, does that mean we NEED or WANT whatever capital investment is offered? Should we build a huge jail, or a nuclear power plant in Lyndale neighborhood? That would certainly be capital investment! Scott responds: While I am always impressed to hear how many classes and experience people have I wonder how David reconciles his study and real world experience with all the small business and corporate support for this project in the affected areas. Why do businesses want this infrastructure investment and the learned and experienced Mr. Piehl rejects it? Businesses want this project because it brings more customers to the area so they can grow and invest in their businesses, they believe it will make their business better. Please find me a business owner who wants the status quo who isn't just saying that to appease residents who are hostile to the project. The last part of this baiting is just silly, I love the hyperbole but a ramp is an apple and a nuclear reactor is an orange any way you slice it. Lastly David puts words into my mouth: Come on folks, all development and all investment is not by definition a good thing! Some is appropriate, some is not - it all depends on the impact; who bears the costs and benefits, and in what ratio. Scott says: I have never said all capital investment is a good thing. This project on balance is a good thing for the affected areas, there are trade offs but it is a beneficial investment for our community and a certain improvement over the status quo. Addressing infrastructure needs is the proper role of government. This infrastructure upgrade makes our area businesses more competitive on the whole by making them more accessible. By making our businesses more competitive, we increase their profitability and their tax contributions and employment capacity grow. Pretty simple stuff really, but I haven't taken any graduate level economics courses, I just listen to successful people rather than trying to preach to them. Off to the Northwoods, Happy Fourth to one and all! Scott Persons Lyndale Neighborhood TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. 2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject (Mpls-specific, of course.) ________________________________ 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
