Scott Persons wrote:
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.  

David Piehl writes:
Shame on me for suggesting that $160 million is an
excessive method of avoiding two traffic lights....

Scott Persons wrote:
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 Piehl writes:
Truck traffic is disruptive no matter where they will
be.  I travel on the frontage road each morning that
connects with 28th Street, and there are already
traffic backups as cars arrive at the 28th St Wells
Fargo ramp; I predict future backups onto the freeway.
 

Claiming that the area along 28th street is not
residential in nature is untrue.  From 5th Ave all the
way to Hiawatha, with the exception of the "Sears
Block", is all primarily residential - including the
multi-million dollar new housing development adjacent
to the Wells Fargo site.  This would be a case of
potential capital investment jeopardizing existing
capital investment. In light of that fact, Scott's
argument is simply false.

Scott writes:
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.

David responds:
In response to your attempt at character assasination,
I am VERY familiar with small businesses, because I'm
a partner in one.  I'm also working on forming another
partnership for a small business, and had hoped that
this entertainment-oriented business could be located
somewhere on East Lake Street; the entrepreneurs I'm
working with dismissed that notion out of hand when
they learned about "the 8 lanes of Lake Street" that
the Access Project includes; it's so pedestrian
unfriendly that it will kill businesses, according to
my potential partners, and I have to conceed that they
are right.  We're now looking at a location in NE
Minneapolis.  

As far as businesses wanting the plan - I know many
supported the initial concept, but relatively few
support the current version, it is too destructive. 
Basim Sabri and the owner of the Office Max strip mall
support it, but they are not small busninesses, they
are landlords; it's a different set of concerns. 
Again, bringing traffic into an area doesn't mean you
are bringing "customers" into an area.  Why did the
West Broadway Target fail even though they have
freeway access??


Scott wrote:

I love the hyperbole but a ramp is an apple and a
nuclear reactor is an orange any way you slice it.

David clarifies:

Exactly, which is why you don't automatically assume
or conclude that capital investment is a good thing;
often it does damage to the people who can least
afford it, and benefits moneyed interests - just as it
does in this case for Wells Fargo and Allina.

Scott Persons wrote:
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 courses.

David Piehl writes:
That is clear; your comments paint an overly
simplified and unrealistic version of economics, all
based on your unsubstantiated assumption that extra
traffic is a good thing, an assumption urban planners
across the country would certainly dispute.  A major
change in freeway access is not the panacea you
describe.

Scott Persons wrote:
I just listen to successful people rather than trying
to preach to them.

David writes:
I haven't noticed.


David Piehl
Central








__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
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

Reply via email to