|
Minneapolis to fight I-35W upgrade
published 08.25.04
online at http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/4946309.html
by Laurie Blake
Star Tribune
Minneapolis moved ahead Tuesday with plans to oppose the Crosstown/Interstate
Hwy. 35W road construction project, and the strategy is drawing
angry response.
The City Council's Transportation and Public Works Committee recommended
that the council vote Sept. 3 to withhold municipal consent for
the interchange upgrade until the state makes high-speed I-35W bus
service part of the plan.
Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak and key council members insisted that
their intent is to offer leadership on transit -- not delay the
long-awaited road project. They said withholding municipal consent
is the only avenue they have for making their point.
But the Minnesota Department of Transportation said the city's
position would likely delay work because funding for high-speed
bus service would require an act of the Legislature.
Minneapolis legislators are geared up to pursue the funding in
the 2005 session and there are early indications of bipartisan support.
But the city is "putting the cart well before the horse from
a legislative point of view," said Bob McFarlin, assistant
to Transportation Commissioner Carol Molnau, who also is the lieutenant
governor.
"If Minneapolis wants the project to stay on schedule, they
can approve the Crosstown and then pass an accompanying resolution
expressing their strong support for all of these bus rapid transit
items," McFarlin said.
Sen. Geoff Michel, R-Edina, said constituents contacted his Senate
office in St. Paul to complain about Minneapolis' move.
Michel said he likes the idea of high-speed bus transit, but he
disagrees with the city's tactic. "I can't believe they would
hold 100,000 drivers hostage.
"From a state legislative standpoint, it makes me think we
should review the municipal consent laws and make sure that for
future major regional projects we don't allow any one city to be
able to threaten a veto and hold it over the rest of the region,"
he said.
The Minnesota Taxpayers League, a special-interest group that monitors
government spending , also agreed that the Minneapolis position
is an argument for eliminating municipal consent on road projects.
And Chuck Abrams, a resident of Richfield, sent a comment to the
StarTribune saying that while he supports transit he believes that
"the delaying of such a large bottleneck as the commons will
create more pollution, more accidents and, frankly, more stress
than adding a few high-speed buses will relieve."
Typically, more than 100,000 vehicles use the commons each day.
Because bidding for the contract to build the new interchange is
more than a year away, Minneapolis officials said there should be
time to reach an agreement with MnDOT without pushing back the spring
2006 start of construction.
"MnDOT does not oppose bus rapid transit," said City
Council Member Scott Benson. "I'm not sure we are on opposite
sides of this issue."
McFarlin countered: "Minneapolis has chosen to mix apples
and oranges.
"Decisions on committing to new transit service that involves
capital investment are the Legislature's to make. The city seems
to think that this agency can speak for the Legislature and make
commitments on funding and policy that we simply are not able to
make, whether we support them or not."
Council Member Benson said the law that gives cities municipal
consent over road projects "doesn't give us the option to approve
and work out details later." The one chance to raise transit
and environmental concerns is with this single vote, Benson said.
The resolution before the City Council is eight pages long and
raises more than 30 concerns or points of discussion either about
the project or matters outside the scope of the project.
City officials started informing MnDOT about its position in January
with a resolution, followed by a letter in April. McFarlin said
MnDOT has been puzzled over how to respond to the transit and environmental
concerns that are beyond the scope of the project and is still hoping
that the city will change its course.
In the design for the interchange, MnDOT has included a lane for
buses and carpools. Such a lane exists on I-35W south of the Crosstown
to Burnsville.
The interchange project would extend the transit lane to 42nd Street
in south Minneapolis.
North of 42nd, the fate of the transit lane is not sealed. MnDOT
proposes to at some point continue the fifth lane into downtown
Minneapolis.
Also proposed is new access to and from I-35W at Lake Street. No
money has been committed for these improvements, and they are not
in MnDOT's 10-year construction plan.
Minneapolis is wary of this uncertainty. The city also is critical
of the fact that the Crosstown/I-35W project includes construction
of freeway access and stopping space for a future 46th Street transit
station but not the station itself.
"Right now we've been presented with an option that says cars
now, transit later -- maybe. That's not good enough," Rybak
said.
-- Laurie Blake is at lblake@startribune.com.
|
