The Cedar Ave BRT Transitway work continues moving forward even though funding is still up in the air and politicians are not pleased with what the feds have decided is mandatory to receive their huge chunk of money. While Dakota County and the MVTA are out and about extolling the virtues of their massive waste of funds, time, and energy they are conveniently ignoring the woes of people who are giving up even more to the county than their tax dollars all while purposefully attempting to generate low response rates and increase confusion, especially for non-natives, so they can easily get their way.
The Star Tribune put out an article this weekend about the noise abatement standoff that exists between the Apple Valley City Council, Dakota County, and the Federal Highway Administration. The article makes it seem like that’s the only real issue separating BRT’s dream from reality and while that may be true, there is a much deeper story which is affecting people in a way which really hits home. The taking of land, by eminent domain if necessary, all so that Will Branning can look like some sort of hero for spending over $100 million on a poor transit concept forced upon us due to poor residential and commercial planning around Cedar.
While the Star Tribune article quotes Will Branning as saying that they don’t want a tunnel along Cedar, they should have quoted Apple Valley City Councilmember John Bergman as he’s the one that originally said that more or less trying to make a point, half-jokingly out of frustration. While the cities and county do not want to believe Cedar is a freeway and that it does not need to be walled off from the commercial businesses around it, people who live with the traffic noise feel differently. Honestly the noise mitigation issue, while heated at the City Council meeting, isn’t one which most people feel is the worst part of BRT. The scariest part of BRT is the fact that the county is planning to take even more land away from businesses (#7) and residents as part of this wasteful project.
Last week I was contacted by a Lakeville resident who was surprised and unhappy with the county’s most recent communication to them which basically said that they’re going to take their land whether they like it or not–all in the name of progress. They were so thoughtful to include a brochure entitled, Acquisition Information for Property Owners (PDF) which tells you, in great detail, all the ways which they will go about taking what is rightfully yours, lowering your future property value, and paying you a pittance and how you have no choice but to take it up the ass and like it. This particular resident felt that due to budget issues, which are still on-going especially with the noise mitigation issues going unresolved and putting a large chunk of funding in jeopardy, that no land acquisitions would occur south of 160th. During a meeting back in 2001 November 2008, pencil marks were visible on a large aerial map but residents were told they were incorrectly marked and should be ignored. After asking three different county officials about the lines and receiving three different answers, 8 years later the purposeful misinformation about the pencil marks become reality and residents are left to suck an egg. Why is it that they couldn’t be upfront about all the changes they were planning years down the road? Obviously they prefer keeping people in the dark regarding the government taking over property so that you have less of a chance to fight them when the time comes. [If you're interested in seeing which areas in both Lakeville and Apple Valley will be affected by BRT, check out the preliminary layout documents provided by the county.]
This resident also feels that they were duped on the sound mitigation issue. They feel that the county purposefully made the questionnaire look like junk mail to keep response rates low so that they could get their way and not move forward with the noise walls (I have taken some liberties with the quote below to protect the personal privacy of the resident):
What makes it the me so mad is how they handled the notification. They said they sent a questionnaire out to 33 people and only 8 responded. That is because the county had a post card and letter sent out in a very large envelope, not your standard white envelope a large envelope, with a marketing company as the return address, it was a blue logo and name, don’t remember now who it was. I tossed it in the recycling and my significant other just happened to pull it out and opened it. I then filled out the card and sent it in with my responses to their 5 questions.
So not only are people very upset that the county is planning to take their land but they’re also disappointed in how they went about notifying people of all the changes that were going to take place. When I watched the meeting in Apple Valley I had many questions about the contact methods employed by Dakota County as I felt that the low response rates were out of character. People are definitely more likely to get fired up about something that involves changing their yards and their land and it was surprising to me that more people weren’t banging down the city council’s door trying to get in and scream at the county for this project. If what this particular Lakeville resident says is true (and I believe it is) then my questions are answered. Unfortunate for everyone, Dakota County is purposefully manipulating things so that Will Branning can get his way.
Other affected residents have contacted the county and asked how much land they are planning to take and they were told between 4 and 6 feet. With lots that already line Cedar, by closing the gap between the noise and the houses, the County is making the already large road noise problem much worse for a transit project which will be of little benefit to anyone. What a shame.
What do you think about the BRT project and how the county has handled both the noise mitigation and land acquisition issues? Do you think that it’s right that people’s land should be taken from them, increasing the noise problem, while cities and the county argue with the feds over not putting in the most desired (by the residents) mitigation devices? Do you believe the county purposefully made the questionnaire difficult to discern in the mail just so the response rates would be low? Perhaps you just feel that anything Will Branning does is terrible and you want to tell the world what a fucking horse’s ass he is. Whatever you think about Dakota County lying, cheating, and stealing to get their way on BRT go ahead and comment on as I’d love to hear what you have to say!
Related posts:
Dakota Complaints Map
Dakota Inmate Dashboard
Loading ...
Lazy Lightning Gear
BPAC Financials Archive
August 24th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Interestingly enough, while the StarTribune article indicates that the county seems committed to the idea of promoting biking and walking in Dakota County, it is primarily the mammoth-sized (and ever enlarging) County roadways that making biking & walking difficult.
I’ll say this: if a couple sections of noise wall are what stand in the way of receiving federal funding, the County would be wise to just build them already. I guarantee that noise walls are definitely NOT the biggest challenge to walkability or aesthetics Dakota County will face over the next few decades.
August 24th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Although the methods are underhanded and deplorable, I wouldn’t characterize this as stealing. There’s the whole Fifth Amendment/Bill of Rights thing that the government has been operating gladly under for a long time. This isn’t one of those disputable cases of public use either – roadway projects like this are almost always public uses and the government can and will take your property as long as they compensate you (unless it is completely unreasonable, which then they will have to just pay a little more to make you go away).
So what bothers me is the fact that the property owners won’t receive truly fair compensation in these times of depressed property values, even if just 4-6 feet of their land is being taken away. However – in the case of businesses – each of these property owners have one of the busiest non-freeway roads in the State running by their properties. They have been benefiting for 15+ years from the rush-hour parking lot known as Cedar Avenue and are complaining because they are going to have an *even wider* street deliver *more* cars directly in front of their businesses. If they can’t turn a wider, non-freeway street with even more adjacent traffic into more profits, there’s something wrong with their business.
August 24th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
From what I have come to understand, Lakeville has rarely left land owners with a good taste in their mouth when they choose to take over a piece of land for whatever reason.
One thing to keep in mind, both the cities and the counties do feel a responsibility to all tax payers, not just the land owner. And as such, they use this feeling of responsibility in the offers that they make. This was evident in the discussion I had with a Dakota County engineer a while back regarding round-a-bouts.
The idea of BRT on Cedar ave is a joke. Imagine trying to do something like that on Lyndale ave in Bloomington? I don’t have a lot of patience though for folks in Dakota County bitching about costs of things. We are the idiot citizens that voted for a tax increase to set aside land.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
I voted for the land preservation. I have no problem paying a little more for things like that if they are spent well. If done well I think it can be a huge win for the folks that will take over when we’re gone. I think it’s very cool to preserve some quality pieces of land before we’ve stripmalled everything from St. Cloud to Rochester.
I think there are a lot better budget items to attack than this one.
August 24th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
John,
BRT, as explained by the County/MVTA, will not fucking work. Why? Because people do not want to lose express service to downtown just so it can be filled with buses only going to the MoA.
BRT will be great if it’s left to run on off-hours and off-days (like late nights and weekends) but because of the way the budgeting works and the fact that they want BRT to “succeed”, they’re going to drop express service to Minneapolis and force you to use BRT.
Doubling people’s commutes and calling it progress is fucking horsehit.
August 25th, 2009 at 11:17 am
As far as I know the express service to downtown won’t be canceled. However I don’t think that the Cedar BRT will be that successful. Nobody really lives on Cedar Ave, and increasing the frequency and hours of the local buses (and adding more routes) would be more useful to people who don’t drive to the transit centers. The Cedar BRT tries to connect a suburban center (MOA) to the suburbs and local bus ridership is too low to justify such a level of investment. The new report on the Cedar BRT service and stations should be out shortly so we will know soon.
I also don’t see why the lanes for the BRT aren’t going to be built in the median. They’re going to rebuild the entire road anyways, so it wouldn’t cost anything extra, but it would provide a faster trip for BRT riders.
The comment about making Dakota County walkable is such a joke. Who the hell is going to walk somewhere in the suburbs if they don’t have to. Apple Valley would need to redevelop into a denser, more pedestrian-friendly area if they want people to actually use the BRT. It would be nice to see better designed developments, however building high density office and residential developments in Apple Valley would be irresponsible in a regional focus. High-density developments belong in the central and first-ring areas not in the fourth-ring.
Good luck trying to get people out of their cars!
August 25th, 2009 at 11:23 am
TCM wrote:
Problem here is that Will Branning wants BRT to be successful and the only way that is going to happen is if people use it. If they keep express service to Minneapolis, there is no way that there will be enough ridership to justify keeping BRT running. So it is my opinion that Will Branning is going to push the MVTA to limit the number of express buses running to Minneapolis (if not eliminate them all together) so that it appears that BRT is a success.
August 25th, 2009 at 11:49 am
If it ever comes to that I would hope that the Met Council/Metro Transit take over the MVTA. The south metro politicians don’t really care how their decisions affect the residents.
August 25th, 2009 at 11:52 am
Should’ve added this in the last comment…
The 35W Lakeville Express bus is going to be run by Metro Transit, because Lakeville doesn’t want to be a part of the MVTA because of their poor decisions. (like building a new Apple Valley Transit station instead of turning the existing facility into a parking ramp.)
August 25th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Oh come on, like a $20+ million parking ramp with an unnecessary skyway wasn’t a good idea?
August 25th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
I went off my open space land preservation tangent in my last comment and never made a comment on BRT. My comment about there being better budget items to go after was referring to the land preservation program (replying to Mikeh)
Anyway…My opinion on BRT is that Cedar ave is just flat out screwed and that we are throwing money away with a severe half ass fix. I’m guessing that the real fix for this road will happen about 10-12 years from now at about 10 to 15 times the current price. At some point it will get so bad that there will no longer be a choice for AV and the other clowns to admit that yes…it really should be a frickin highway. Until then we can all just enjoy the cool buses with those high speed wheel covers.
August 28th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
I took a look at the attached PDF files, and didn’t realize how close to home this could’ve hit. I used to live in a house where the backyard was right against Cedar Avenue. My parents and I moved out of that house in, go figure, 2001.
Now I see it’s one of those houses affected by the “noise mitigation”. Odds are, if we were still there, we may have lost the row of trees my dad planted in the backyard about 15 years ago with the intent of helping drown out the road noise.
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:33 am
[...] According to an article which appeared in Thisweek, Dakota County has run into serious budget overruns due to the high cost of negotiating with landowners surrounding the CR-70 and I-35 bridge upgrade. One of the County Commissioners wondered if those same problems would come up again with all the land they plan to steal from residents along Cedar Ave for BRT. [...]