|
Why this project sucks: ten easy reasons
There are many reasons that explain why this
project sucks. But to make it easy and convenient for all,
we have distilled most of them into ten easy reasons to oppose this
misguided project:
(Bonus: For additional fun, forward
this list to your local,
state and federal representatives)
1 - Current residents do not benefit from the project itself; the
"benefits" are derived from the mitigation/enhancement
efforts. The original freeway was never mitigated, so mitigation
and enhancements should be undertaken separately on the existing
version of the freeway.
Why would we trade a bigger freeway for mitigation!? The existing
project essentially asks the neighborhood to swallow a very bitter
pill in exchange for some design concessions.
2 - Doesn't giving away space for two
additional highway lanes now (conveniently discussed as "potential"
HOV lanes) rob us of the ability to influence the shape of our future
transportation system?
In fact, giving away space now ensures we get a bigger freeway
in the future, because the sunk costs of accomodating the new lanes
(which is a $40 million chunk of this $150 million project) will
"justify" completing the expansion.
The expansion has never been agreed to by the residents or the
City of Minneapolis! The Access project was hijacked by Mn/DOT to
include it with minimal comment (and without any environmental review),
morphing it into the Access/Expansion Project.
3 - This project disproportionately and negatively impacts existing
businesses; they won't survive the construction phase or the gentrification
to follow.
Why are we "revitalizing" a street that is already vital?
Couldn't a much smaller amount of money make a bigger impact supporting
existing businesses and creating additional small business opportunities?
4 - This is an automobile-only solution, despite previous studies
(the 1995 35W EIS; see
the memo from Mayor Sharon Sayles Belton) that called for light
rail as the preferred alternative.
5 - How does rearranging a few off-ramps compare in importance
to other state-wide Mn/DOT projects? (such as the Northstar Commuter
Line), and why is Hennepin County willing to front the money for
the state and ask for reimbursement rather than permission?
6 - What kind of value does the $150+ million project create in
the area? If this is being referred to as an "investment"
in south Minneapolis, then what is the payoff? Keep in mind that
the major tenants for both Nic/Lake and Chicago/Lake have stated
that they do not require additional access for their proposals to
move forward.
7 - Why have Access Project coordinators attempted to link their
project to unrelated neighborhood goals? (witness their efforts
to say that the Nicollet/Lake reopening is tied to the Access Project
going through; however, at the recent meeting of the Nicollet/Lake
Transportation Task Force
8 - The project disproportionately affects minority homeowners;
nearly all of the units to be demolished are occupied by minorities.
Why do our elected
officials and public agencies continue to allow this?
9 - The project demolishes affordable housing - compensation to
the owners will not be sufficient to allow them to find new affordable
housing in the present market.
10 - The project goal seems to be to convert Lake Street back to
its previous status as a regional commercial space dependent on
commuter traffic; neighborhood goals promoting small business and
owner operated businesses have not been taken into account.
Why do we want to destroy what is re-emerging on its own, and replace
it with development guided by suburban values?
If we just respect what Lake is today, we can allow it to become
a regional attractor, just like Nicollet Avenue, only that larger
and potentially even more successful.
Does this fit in any way with the city's goals??
|
