Minneapolis/ St. Paul Traffic (Marshall: environment, work, health)

[Isaysos]

Well yes Tim, I sure a few decades ago St. Cloud never thought that they would become a suburb of the Twin Cities, but low and behold they now are. Decades from know, people will be abandoning the inner suburbs of Lakeville and Hasting to move to the new suburbs of Albert Lea, Willmar and Eau Clarie. Wouldnt that be lovely?
Golf Gal, we can deffinatly fit more people in the Mpls proper, it once held a population twice of what it now is before everyone left for the suburbs, once North Minneapolis was a nice neighborhood, full of many different people from different backgrounds!
Now Im not saying we have to try to fit everyone in Mpls/St.Paul, but we can do a lot better job of planning our development to reduce the amount of land we take up and the traffic that poor development generates. As far as the U.S feeding the world, IMPOSIBLE! But obviously you know more about geography than I do and all those years of college were a waste.
No, I am not a 22 yo college student, (not sure what made you think that) and we probably dont know eachother as I just started spending a lot of time in Marshall within the last year. I spend most of my life in St. Paul and Oak Park, IL (a lovely, well planned suburb with awsome residential neighborhoods, served by mass transit yet does hold 50K plus in a 2 square mile area, simply because of smart planning back in the 20's and 30's).
My folks live in Eden Prairie now, and they do have a pond in thier back yard. Granted it is nice, Eden Praire is a planning crap hole. Traffic is crazy trying to get around and is full of bottle necks. They mananged to fit 65,000 in a 36 sq mile area, whopde de do. No wonder why growth is already out to Waconia. But who needs those peskey farmers with their noisy steeds any way.
Pave it over with cookie cutter subdivisions, strip malls, and freeways!

[Isaysos]

Oh, and Tim. Perhaps you dont care about anyone else in the world such as those in the straving countires, but some of us do. I guess I was brought up to think about and the rest of humanity and show concern for others beside myself, so sorry if my belifs conflict with yours. I guess my views are a dying breed as the U.S. becomes a full flegged "me" society that blockes other world events from their mind in an attempt to make themselves feel better and seek out to fulfill only thier wants and desires.

[JenLee]

Can everybody take a deep breath and calm down please?

The problem is that you ALL are right in bits and pieces. This isn't a personal debate or attack; but it sure sounds as though each of you are taking this very personally.

I'm a firm believer in protecting the environment myself and belong to a number of conservation groups (Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, etc.). I used to belong to GreenPeace; and once even "gave" my kids whales for Christmas one year -through the adopt a whale program at The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society! BTW, they were the ONLY kids in their Minnesota classrooms who got whales that year!

If you all back down and listen (or read, rather) what the others are saying; you can see that there IS common ground here.

This is a thread about how bad our traffic is here; how can we solve THAT problem?

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

Remember, GolfGal, that I lived in Lakeville for ten years. I have some idea of what I am talking about. The city is full is thousands move, but YOU are just one. You could move if you wanted to. If many people chose to live in the city, free markets would accomodate that growth (and very quickly) like they accomodated sprawl. Nothing on here is making any attempt to pass judgment on you, rather, the suburbs in which you live. Note that distinction. People control their environment, not the other way. You were not forced, by an inanimate city, to move twenty miles from it. It was a communal choice. People left because they wanted a big yard, big house or "contact with nature". Suburbs, meant to be the idealized concoction of city and nature, serve neither those parts. You cannot have both. That crane you so admire is actually rather lost in the absence of trees, natural ponds or prairie. He is on your deck only because you chose to build your house on his. Lastly, just because we can feed the world, doesn't mean we do. Our farm bills are written by ADM, Cargill and ConAgra. They could care less about starving babies OR a yeomen farmer. Still, in light of argicultural dilemmas which I will not extrapolate on, your lot was more prodcutive as polluting farm. But that isn't your fault, really.

But you also seem to forget that we moved her because it WAS a short commute. If we moved to the city our commutes would be LONGER then they are now. If you read these boards you will see that just about everyone is looking for a place to live that is close to work where they don't have to commute very far but the fact is, not everyone can afford to live in EP, SLP, the nice neighborhoods in Minneapolis, etc. nor are they comfortable in the cities themselves OR they want to live where they can have some space. There are other ways that people can conserve besides living in a high rise apartment in Minneapolis.

You also never did say what kind of car you drive.

[SlyFrog]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

The point he was trying to make is that he refuses to believe people who actually go to a university to learn how to STUDY TRAFFIC PATTERNS. He, obviously, knows better. It has been proven, like gravity. I am more than happy to add roads. But when you use those roads, don't come back in ten years complaining about how slow said roads have become.

Yes, I do know better. Enough to know that saying, "University educated to STUDY TRAFFIC PATTERNS" is a base appeal to authority, a standard and demonstrable error in logic.

What has been proven, that if you have horribly clogged and congested roads and don't build more of them and more lanes, that people tend to want to stop living in an area? Wow, that's amazing. And it conveniently makes everyone live in a packed in, dense urban environment. No political motive for that whatsoever.

Another way to say what you are saying is that if you build more roads, people actually use them. Building more roads does not increase congestion. It allows people to live in suburbs, which you don't want in the first place. So you pretend that building more roads is somehow a problem in itself.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by The Icy River Vagabond

I ride my bike to work everyday, so the rest of you suck.

Try riding your bike in the Atlanta metro. :-)

(Hint: lots of hilly/winding roads with no shoulders, and VERY few bike trails).

[Isaysos]

So you pretend that building more roads is somehow a problem in itself.

Yes SlyFrog, that is exactly right. The construction of the freeway is what allowed suburban growth become unchecked and led people a way to abandon the city in search of the country living "which ironically because so many people wanted that country living" is now surrounded by traffic, suburban malls, and office parks. Therefore we build more freeways further out, and the process repeats itself. Do you, Golf Gal, and Tim, suggest we keep building like this forever with decreasing density and using substantially more space?? Please answer the question, do you actually and truly believe, using all of the logic that you posses, that we can keep developing like this forever and build more freeways like we have already and that this just wont lead to even more traffic problems like we have seen already? (yes or no question)

Oh, and I drive a toyota camrey, which I mostly use when I have to go out of town or it is below freezing. But would gladly take a train or light rail if it was an opiton (in Marshall anyway) do take the bus and light rail when I in the cities. Otherwise I enjoy walking or biking.

[Minnehahapolitan]

Again, GolfGal, I am not talking about you personally. "You" is my shorthand for average suburban resident. SLP is no more expensive than Rosemount. However, I keep getting the works "high rise apartment" put into my mouth. I have explained how development should proceed in the past, go back and look at it. You seem to be willing to associate my arguments with every other argument against sprawl, it is not. I drive a Focus. Not the best, but decent enough. Besides, that isn't my argument.
SlyFrog, unlike GolfGal, you are actually pissing me off.
Traffic Engineering is a college program. People, scientifically, study how you move in your car. Their results are against you. I personally have no problem building roads, simply expanding them. No bias. I am on record as such. If I were biased, I would not say to build roads at all. That logic rates up there with Pebbles and BamBam. If you choose to defy science, or the entire profession of urban planning, so be it. You are wrong, and the conspiracy theory needed to reinforce your beliefs will serve to put you on the fringes of debate. An appeal to authority may have worked in your High School debate club, but it means that the authority is incorrect and barred from criticism, which I am not debating here. Go look up the definition of logical fallacies after you actually watch the lectures (from one of the nation's most renowned planners) I told you to look at. Tell me something he said in any of the lectures (seriously) and you can come back with that much more credablity

[Isaysos]

In response to Sly Frog's argument, can someone say "Robert Moses"?
Dang, this thread is addicting. I must stop it soon.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Isaysos

So you pretend that building more roads is somehow a problem in itself.

Yes SlyFrog, that is exactly right. The construction of the freeway is what allowed suburban growth become unchecked and led people a way to abandon the city in search of the country living "which ironically because so many people wanted that country living" is now surrounded by traffic, suburban malls, and office parks. Therefore we build more freeways further out, and the process repeats itself. Do you, Golf Gal, and Tim, suggest we keep building like this forever with decreasing density and using substantially more space?? Please answer the question, do you actually and truly believe, using all of the logic that you posses, that we can keep developing like this forever and build more freeways like we have already and that this just wont lead to even more traffic problems like we have seen already? (yes or no question)

Oh, and I drive a toyota camrey, which I mostly use when I have to go out of town or it is below freezing. But would gladly take a train or light rail if it was an opiton (in Marshall anyway) do take the bus and light rail when I in the cities. Otherwise I enjoy walking or biking.

You could always take the MAT bus in Marshall if you don't mind the wild drivers that drive them .