Thanks Sean for highlighting the work still ahead for I-35W. The payoff of the City withholding consent for the Crosstown project and the growing reality of BRT as part of 35W's future is clearly good news.
According to a recent letter the I-35W Access Project Advisory Committee (PAC) received from Lt. Governor Molnau addressed to the City and County, it looks like a whole lot more activity than just BRT on I-35W is in motion. The letter lays out: 1) The city, county and Mn/DOT have been working "cooperatively" to develop a plan for the entire "I-35W Corridor Improvement Project". 2) This plan includes the reconstruction of I-35W and the "addition" of an HOV/BRT lane between 46th and Lake Street. 3) The goal to implement the whole 35W Access Project plan - new ramps at Lake Street and 28th Street and relocation of 35/36th ramps to 38th Street. 4) The reconstruction of the I-35W/94 ramp and surrounding area, through the I-35W/I-94 Downtown Commons Area Study. 5) A new Technical Advisory Committee will be formed comprised of Mn/DOT, city, and county staff, Metro Transit, Bloomington, Richfield and representatives from bordering neighborhoods. 6) Last, but definitely not the least, community involvement for the I-35W Corridor Improvement project will "CONTINUE (my emphasis) to flow through the 35W Access Project Advisory Committee (PAC)." These revelations are concerning. It's not clear what the I-35W Corridor Improvement Project. When, how and by what authority did this emerge? Today's Star Tribune editorial states: "It makes no sense to construct highways and transit projects piecemeal; they should be planned and built in an integrated way, along an entire corridor". So they are, but apparently not in an upfront way. By using the Access Project PAC as the way to process citizen input for the I-35W Corridor Improvement Project, Mn/DOT avoids a potentially ugly and protracted battle with Minneapolis residents opposed to highway expansion. Mn/DOT's successfully skirted public input on highway expansion goals three years ago when it "required" the Access Project to "accommodate" the "potential" addition of an HOV lane in the design of the reconstruction of the Lake Street ramps. Now the Access Project's PAC has been anointed as the advisory body for the entire I-35 Corridor Improvement Project. This is a dream come true for Mn/DOT. Something's not right. A body created to provide input on a limited scope of I-35W should not be entitled to provide input on a project running from Richfield to downtown. When the full stretch of construction is taken into account, there are several affected neighborhoods that should be at the table but don't sit on the 35W Access Project. Even if these neighborhoods are invited to the table, the scope of the work proposed for the I-35W Corridor Improvement Project goes way beyond the charge - and I would argue ability - of the Access Project PAC. Additionally, Smith Parker, the convener of the Access Project PAC, should no longer be responsible for facilitating a process of this scope. Its role was always questionable in facilitating the Access Project since the Phillips Partnership is one of the firm's clients and because the Phillips Partnership had an agenda from the onset to build new ramps at Lake Street. Smith Parker was clearly contracted to advance the pre-existing solution of new ramps. The PAC, not surprisingly, was weighted with business interests and had inconsistent neighborhood and elected official representation. While I believe that project staff made great effort to get community input on this project, the process was not neutral and could not act on behalf of the neighborhoods and businesses jointly in a fair manner. The stage was set for new ramps and the PAC really merely helped decide the details. It was a case of using public process for private gain and it was a serious strategic error because an infrastructure project like this is a thoroughly public one, not a private one. The community process should have been convened by a government entity, with balanced and fair representation on any community advisory body and led by a neutral project facilitator. So it was really bad news when Smith Parker was subsequently retained to facilitate the Lake Street reconstruction PAC process. And it's really, really bad news that it might facilitate the I-35W Corridor Improvement Project through the 35W Access Project PAC. It's simply beyond the scope and authority of the Access Project PAC and Smith Parker to morph into a facilitating role for the I-35W Corridor Improvement Project. It should not be allowed to happen. I'm not surprised by Mn/DOT's effort to use any means possible to expand 35W in the least visible way possible, but the city and county should not follow suit and should back up to review what is needed and in the best interests of the city. What the city and county should be doing instead: 1) Make public and clear what the I-35W Corridor Improvement Project is and what authority it has. Who's leading it and who's in charge? Is it a joint city/county/state effort? Did city council authorize it? 2) Make public and clear the scope of highway reconstruction to accommodate new HOV/BRT lanes. Are new lanes the plan or is the conversion of lanes north of 46th Street the plan. The City should promote the goal of lane conversion not expansion to accommodate BRT/HOV. 3) Insist on and promote the formation of a NEW citizen input process(es)for further design and study on what's being called the I-35W Corridor Improvement Project (including BRT/HOV lanes and the reconstruction of the I-35W/I-94 Commons Area). The possibility of BRT wasn't even on the table a year ago. Thanks to Representative Frank Hornstein, Minneapolis council members and others, it is now central to any future planning for 35W. But planning for this (and combined HOV lanes) will require a new citizen input process, not tied to the Access Project. While clearly any planning for highway reconstruction will logically consider Access Project designs, a separate and broadened planning process for highway reconstruction is now needed. The process should be convened by the city or county (or jointly) as public entities and done on behalf of the public. A citizen review body should be formed to help select a facilitation/project consultant if it is not done in house. 4) Disband the I-35W Access Project Advisory Committee and save the public money. To reiterate, the 35W Access Project Advisory Committee has completed its charge and should not be used as a front citizen advisory body for any additional highway projects. 5) Complete the Access Project environmental review study and hold public hearings on the project. The Mpls city council has merely given concept approval to the project (under threat of job loss by Allina if the city didn't support it), not final approval. The Access Project continues to move forward, with additional federal funds recently added to the $175 million plus pot needed to make the Access Project happen. Over $100 million is still needed. With BRT and a fix for the I-94W ramp now a part of the plan, and with inflation going up, the cost of infrastructure changes related to the Access Project may be much more. I personally continue to oppose the Access Project because the cost outweighs the benefits - it's a costly and imposing solution that is out of step with the problem. The benefits of access and economic development of the project are unquantified, uncertain and do not justify the monetary cost and impacts of the project. I don't believe it is possible to retrofit 35W now at any affordable price tag. What began as a small initiative, was expanded into an estimated $175 million project that now includes new northbound entrance and southbound exit ramps at Lake Street; a northbound ramp to 28th Street; relocation of the 35th/36th Street ramps to 38th Street; reconfiguration of the 5th Avenue entrance ramp; widening of Lake Street; new auxiliary lanes on 35W; additional lane and related improvements on the I-94 westbound flyover ramp; and traffic mitigation and landscape enhancements throughout the project area. There remain serious public concerns about the neighborhood impacts of this project, namely, increased traffic volume; noise and pollution in the project area and beyond; widening of Lake Street; and loss of housing and businesses. The bulk of public funds needed to finance the Access Project is not, and is unlikely to be, available in the foreseeable future. The State can't fund the existing transit system, let alone a massive infrastructure plan that has not yet been approved. And the City's funding situation doesn't make it easy for council members and the mayor to convince the public of the value of its financial contribution to the project. So what if the money is never in hand for the current plan OR what if it's not given final approval? In the meantime, the Lake Street area at 35W (including Lake, 35th and 36th Streets) remain a problem and access to and from the area poor and difficult. 6) Therefore, the city (and the Philips Partnership) should not put all of their eggs in this basket of fixes to address the Lake Street access problem and should instead consider alternative options. The city and count should establish a new community process to bring together impacted communities and to develop an alternative community plan for improved access to hospitals and other Life Sciences Corridor and community businesses and a redeveloped, transit-oriented, walkable and pedestrian friendly Lake Street area. BRT should be central to this planning. This planning should also focus on: - The redevelopment of Lake Street at I-35W (including opening Nicollet Avenue at Lake Street) with the goal of making it a destination point, not pass-over point as the current Access Project plan calls for. - A full-scale redevelopment, street-scaping, traffic mitigation and beautification plan for the entire Lake Street-Life Sciences Corridor from Franklin Avenue, down Chicago and to/from the interchange ramps at 35th/36th Streets that clearly distinguishes and demarcates access to, from and within the area. The plan should promote urban village goals of safe, livable, walkable, accessible and mixed-use space with multi-model forms of transportation. - A circulator transit system from the BRT station at Lake Street throughout the Life Sciences Corridor area. The city can use its power, ability and jurisdiction to plan for and implement this type of vision or it can wait for $100 million plus to appear to make the Access Project happen. Jeanne Massey Kingfield and former member of the I-35W Access Project Advisory Committee REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
