I-35W expansion could jeopardize historic homes

  • Article
  • Updated: November 20, 2013 - 11:57 AM

MPLS.

  • 13
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
optionNov. 20, 1311:43 AM

Seems to me that everyone who has significant involvement in the planning of transportation needs to sit in the same room and do some strategic planning. This should include the recognition of problems associated with expanding our interstates, streetcars, LRT, bikes, highways and roads under the authority or MNDOT and whatever else comes to mind. From my perspective, our approaches seem piecemeal, divided by state, county, city, and neighborhood lines. A significant investment upfront could go a long way to solve our long-term transportation problems and turn the Twin Cities into a model rather than an increasingly inadequate system of independent programs.

23
3
FrankLNov. 20, 1312:01 PM

Just put the station between Lake and 31st street, nothing but commercial on both sides.

8
13
RanickNov. 20, 1312:11 PM

If feel the guys pain, but a growing city needs its arteries. This is really a failure of the city planners back in the late sixties when 35W was initially constructed. If they had had any foresight at all they would have given the freeway a full two block buffer on both sides all the way down to Bloomington. I think current planners are better than they were back then about projecting future demand, but in my opinion, if you're going to do a big project, plan for what you think you're going to need, then make it 20% bigger.

12
16
firebirdNov. 20, 13 1:30 PM

Maybe we can build a tunnel.

11
2
mattaudioNov. 20, 13 4:55 PM

@Ranick you do realize these neighborhoods existed long before 35W, right? A two block buffer on each side would have required displacing 500% more residents than the thousands who were forced out of their homes. 35W should have never been built inside the beltway.

11
17
bfinstadNov. 20, 13 9:08 PM

Nothing but commercial between Lake Street and 31st? LOL I used to live on that block. In a house!

14
2
dlevine74Nov. 20, 13 9:17 PM

I agree with mattaudio, the freeway is a blight to the neighborhoods it bisects and should never have been brought so close to the urban core. The proposed bus station doesn't bother these folks (check out www.stop35w.org), it is the proposed widening which is to add a shoulder and snow storage. It is foolish to do that much damage for something as dumb as a shoulder. Urban Planners are better than they used to be, but highways are still the purview of MNDoT and engineers who can design a useful structure but aren't at all able to think creatively when complex urban environments require that. Does anyone remember the light rail that was supposed to go down the center of 35? That makes a lot more sense than expanding the blight that is the freeway.

6
8
rogerbNov. 21, 13 4:27 AM

Wow - the $150 million for improvements including 46 mil for a bus station could go a long way in adding a third lane to 494 in Plymouth. Which is wanted/needed by more people?

4
8
br00talNov. 21, 13 8:09 AM

While the initial implementation of 35-W could have been better, I don't feel 35-W is the worst case of roads needing a re-working. Take a look at Crosstown/62. It was just redone, and it's still a total joke. Traversing Richfield and Edina on Crosstown during even remotely "peak" hours is a tedious affair, while I've always found 35-W to at least have some sort of flow, even if it's slowed a bit. Let's not forget we lost numerous Healy Victorians during the initial 35-W construction. The Healy houses are among my favorite homes in the city, and make driving on 35-W a bit more visually pleasant. It would be a total shame if they were either removed or unlivable in the near future.

6
3
mdcastleNov. 21, 13 8:34 AM

Even as pro highway, pro sprawl, as I am, I admit 5 blocks for a freeway is a bit much. But if they had only taken a half block more that probably would have been adequate considering the smaller population of this area compared to Chicago or Houston. With another half block (which was actually proposed in the 90s) you could have another three traffic lanes, reversible so you'd have 8 lanes in the peak direction, and a light rail line also. Since induced demand has a finite limit (If there's a 10 lane freeway to Fargo I'm not going to be induced to go there at 3:00 AM to buy ice cream, therefore there is a limit to induced demand at some point) that would have probably built our way out of congestion here.

4
4

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT