Jeff Rosenberg wrote:

Does "big shoulders, working street" necessarily have anything to do with
the amount of car traffic that goes down Lake? I don't see that as making
sense.

WM: Most assuredly it has everything to do with traffic. Between Park and Portland, for example, every working business is about cars--selling them, towing them, painting and repairing them. If Lake St. is cut from four lanes--not five, it was never five--to three, which is what Zimmerman, Niziolek, Lilligren, and the mayor are proposing, traffic from Lake St. will filter into the neighborhoods. We already have too much through traffic on narrow side streets, particularly for the number of small children we are rearing.
Also, Lake and Chicago is already the busiest transit transfer point in the city. When the Sears Building comes on line (due in 06 I believe) we will have yet more traffic--mass trans, trucks, and automobiles. It is in our best interest to facilitate that change in the movement of traffic with turn lanes. Otherwise stalled traffic will have all of us who work and live on the street breathing noxious fumes much moreso than we already do. The "rush hour" on Lake St. now goes from 7 a.m. till 7 p.m., with mini-rushes at 9, 10, 11 p.m., midnight, one and two a.m. It's only from about 2:30 a.m. till 6:45 a.m. that the street is "clear", which I define as five or fewer motorized vehicles per red light in each direction.


Lake Street indeed has been a haven for start up businesses in the past...

WM: We already know that street parking is inadequate and parking lots are being tucked in where space is available. Businesses are arranging among themselves to have shared parking. Since it is a working street, it's important for people to get in and out. For a few short years, probably, Sears will have adequate parking once it opens. A transit hub is planned for the site as well.

As far as turning the street into a "yuppie paradise with strings of coffee
shops with outdoor tables," I used to worry about this factor of design
myself. But lately, I've realized that good design doesn't do that. Rather,
a pedestrian-oriented design with wide sidewalks, a continuous street wall,
and a balance between auto and pedestrian needs really just allows the
character of the neighborhood to come through more clearly. Two
neighborhoods that accomplish this design, to some degree at least, are
Uptown and Cedar-Riverside. Does Cedar-Riverside strike you as a yuppie
paradise?

WM: We have 80 ft. of width total. 10 ft. sidewalks; 4 -11 ft. lanes, 2 -8 ft. parking lanes = 80ft. Where we have to put turn lanes, the parking is the only movable usage.
If you will notice, both Cedar-Riverside and Hennepin-Lake have had several transfigurations of traffic over the years. Making Lagoon and Lake one way streets in Uptown, putting in a turn light at Hennepin and 31st., introducing a transit hub, all those followed Calhoon Square. Still, it's aggravating to drive in the area


Whatever solution we choose, it will not last 50 years. If it lasts 10 years at Chicago-Lake, I'll be very surprised.

WizardMarks, Central

________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls



REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.


For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to