Not sure if this is precedence or not, but I am trying to recall any individual business that has gotten it’s own traffic light entrance or a similar traffic advantage paid for by taxpayers?
The last I can recall is the McDonalds at 41st & Minnesota getting their own turn lane off of Minnesota Ave.
I wonder what the rule/law is with spacing between controlled intersections? Is there enough space between 41st and 49th to justify another traffic light?
The irony in all this is how the city has actually harmed a lot of private retail businesses throughout the city by putting in mediums so you can’t make a left turn into them from the right side of the street.
I wonder if a sizable donation to the Ice Plex may have something to do with it. Just curious.
Ditto on those mediums!! There is nothing else to say.
We have to take care of all the big businesses in town, without all of us subsidizing them they might move to a different city! …..where is that sarcasm font when you need it?
Median. Not Medium. Medium is the size of pizza you order when you don’t feel like nuking a Hot Pocket.
By the way, the medians that have been added to existing roads (I assume you are probably thinking of 12th street) were added by the state – not the city. However new roads will now often include medians because they increase safety and can help improve traffic flow significantly.
As to the new stoplight, all traffic signals are based upon traffic counts and occasionally upon dangerous or accident-prone areas. If you have driven that section of road you quickly realize how many people turn in and out at that entrance point and it isn’t just Scheels causing it. There is an entire mall there and probably the most popular nightclub in the entire city. On the other side of the road, you have a strip mall that also generates a fair amount of vehicle in/out traffic.
I also know there have been a number of accidents there which is probably a big reason why they felt the need to add a light.
So is this about Scheels? No… it is about traffic. Scheels is likely the largest draw of that traffic mind you, but they aren’t the only factor at play. You’ll also note there is already an existing signal on 41st that primarily benefits Best Buy… and I don’t think they sponsored a city park to get that privledge.
For other examples, think of the traffic signal between Kohl’s and the Empire Mall, the signal at the entrance to Walmart on Louise, or perhaps the signal on 60th Street North that serves the parking lot of Citi. Are Walmart, Kohls, the Empire Mall, and Citi all special? Not really – but they all draw a large amount of traffic and that is what dictates where signals are added.
This is an artifact of suburban big-box design. When a single business takes up a land area equal to several city blocks, this sort of thing will happen. It just goes to show you that, on a per-acre basis, suburban commercial development almost never generates enough financial productivity to pay for its necessary infrastructure costs.
An interesting case study was done in Brainerd regarding this same phenomenon:
http://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2012/1/2/the-cost-of-auto-orientation.html
Tom, exactly what I was going to say. While I agree with Craig, that is a trouble area for traffic, it is caused by so much retail crammed into a small space, look at the Barnes & Noble area. Two pounds of shit in a one pound bag. This is why I oppose all the annexation the city has been engaging in, not just at 85th and Minnesota either. The infrastructure costs and maintenance the tax payers will have to put out will be way more then the economic impact on our community. And while WM and Scheels swim in profits, the lowly taxpayer will have to foot the bill for their infrastructure. That is why I have often said they should have to help pay for those upgrades or better yet a corporate tax to offset those costs.
I hope the appropriate genius at City Hall remembers to make it flash yellow all night long, so as not to inconvenience any drunk drivers or street racers.
It’s 10 O’clock folks! Cross traffic, be damned!
That intersection is WAY too close to 41st and Western. The other examples listed are a lot farther away from their closest lights. This is going to create a mess with southbound traffic on Western.
One other light that exists to only benefit a business is the one on E. 26th Street for McDonalds. The other street there is a dead end, so it is clear it was put up there just for good ol’ Ronny McD.
All those people who run yellow/red lights at 41st and Western will be backed up into that intersection by another stop light just one block away. It could get interesting given that the intersection at 41st and Western is one of the busiest in the city.
On a different subject, I’m wondering how long it’s going to take the SFPD to figure out that between 5 and 6pm there is a steady line of traffic using the turn lane between 8th Avenue and Cliff as a DRIVING LANE (headed east)!!!!
DL – have to say – the whole premise of the Strong Town’s movement just flew right over your head – as made obvious when you said “…..it is caused by so much retail crammed into a small space,…..”.
It isn’t too much crammed into a small space – it is too much SEGREGATION/SEPARATION of retail from other uses – and too much DISTANCE – necessitating an auto-oriented culture that is the problem.
More MIXED USES is the antidote – as in retail and residential in close proximity – not separated by miles and miles un-walkable 6 lane roads.
“And while WM and Scheels swim in profits, the lowly taxpayer will have to foot the bill for their infrastructure.”
I’m not sure I’m understanding this one. Let’s look at the Scheels store in the current location. When it was built they simply added a structure to the existing Western Mall. They added no streets, they added no traffic signals, and all of the associated costs were covered by the property owner.
Now, years later, they are adding a massive expansion to their facility – renovating parking lots, improving site access etc. Again all of those costs are paid by the property owners.
Now the city has opted to add a traffic signal to that location and you are worried about the cost? Do you have any idea how much tax revenue has been generated not only from sales at Scheels, but sales at all the other stores in that region? They all contribute to our tax base, and the tax receipts from Scheels alone would probably cover the cost of that traffic light in what… 30 days?
Also look at the revenue generated by the construction project, and the increased density by not building another store on the edge of town but instead expanding the existing one. Also look at how they designed the expansion so that the East side strip mall that holds Hu Hot and the Man Salon can be extended to add several more small retailers – again increasing density and decreasing urban sprawl.
So really I’m wondering what you are worried about. The tax revenue generated by the businesses in that area has increased exponentially over the past two decades and they are doing it all on existing property. The infrastructure costs you speak of consist of what… a bit of concrete for a turn-out, and a traffic light?
I think you also fail to acknowledge that Scheels itself is a two story retailer. They could have purchased land elsewhere and expanded outward on a single level and it would have been cheaper for them in the long run and more efficient (escalators and elevators are expensive, but moving freight up and down levels is VERY logistically expensive), but that would have resulted in yet even more sprawl – the exact concept you seem to dislike. So here we have one of the better examples in Sioux Falls of how a retailer decided to expand upward and outward in the core of the city while not requiring annexation or additional roads, bridges, or sewer lines to be installed for their benefit and yet the armchair city planners here somehow decide this is a bad thing?
The truth is, the Western Mall area is as close to multi-use as we really have in this city, so you should be embracing it. Look to the edge of the Western Mall to the West and what do you see? Multi-story apartments. You have places to eat, places to shop, places to entertain – all within a block or two of several hundred rental units.
Could it be better? Sure – but for everyone I see complaining about a lack of multi-use, I also see people who live in single family homes and who drive to work.
“The truth is, the Western Mall area is as close to multi-use as we really have in this city…”
I don’t really know what to do with this statement.
Maybe he is counting Graham Tire, the self-service carwash and BK into his assumption?
Once again – damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Seriously, Scheels gives money to the Ice Plex and now we tie it to a traffic light? For cryin’ out loud. Scheels gives a ton of money back to this community. I am involved with a couple of boards and they make nice sized gifts to both just because we asked. Yes, they are very profitable in SF, but they give back and offer good employment options to full-time and part-time workers in a positive environment. I was surprised to see this stop light as well, but I think you’re reaching for the sky on this one.
I was just curious. Still think this light will cause more traffic issues then fix them.
And I think you are evolving at an accelerated pace into a grumpy old world-hating coffee-clatchy fart.
Better then being a grumpy old liberal who got his ass handed to him by a cuckoo-teabagger.
Tom – you have a mall that was essentially vacated in the late 70s early 80s which now includes major retail, dining, entertainment, office space, personal services etc. and it is across a parking lot from three story apartment complexes on the SouthWest and West.
There are several more multi-story apartment complexes a block east on Willow. Several more a block South on 46th. All together there are hundreds of units within a block of that Mall, and thus we should embrace further development there instead of complaining about a traffic signal because those people can actually walk to and from the movie theater or to Best Buy to do some shopping or to a half dozen places to eat or to have a drink.
I know some feel no development is good development unless it includes retail on the ground floor, office space two stories up from that, three levels of residential on the top, a grocery store within 100yds, minimal surface parking, and a mile of bike friendly trails in all directions. That’s a nice pipe dream, but it isn’t going to happen anytime soon so perhaps instead we can embrace improvements as they occur and be a tad more realistic about our growth.
Let’s face it – there is a lot of potential in the Western Mall region and it is sad to actually go in the mall portion of that property. The infrastructure has existed for decades so we should embrace anything that brings more people into that area to eat, shop, and live or anything that improves density. The alternative is what… more big box stores somewhere south of 90th street?
I think the misunderstanding is that having lots of different land uses (and apartments) in ‘close’ proximity is the same as a truly mixed-use neighborhood. I’ll point out that the ‘small area’ in which all of these uses are contained is probably close to 200 acres in size. Whether or not these things are within walking distance doesn’t really matter – nobody actually walks to them, so it’s a moot point.
Again, it’s not so much the diversity of uses (of which there is a lot here – I’ll give you that), it’s the scale of it all. This area was built, from the beginning, for the automobile. It can only be effectively utilized by automobiles. And because of that, we have to pay for all of the infrastructure (5-lane roads, stoplights every 1/8 mile, acres of unproductive surface parking).
I just need to point out that the most successful mixed-use neighborhood in the city is also the most successful neighborhood of any kind in the city: downtown.
Medians are better for traffic flow and safety and I agree with the addition of them. However, instead of adding another traffic light or traffic lights in the 41st street retail district, they need to start closing driveway entrances and exits onto 41st street and 49th street, Louise Ave, etc. All of those driveways create more traffic accidents and affect safety. This has been done all of the Twin Cities metro area (Hwy 77 in Apple Valley, County Rd 41 in Burnsville, Snelling Ave around the Rosedale Mall, areas around Maplewood, Hwy 13 in Eagan). Some of these closures were MNDot funded and some were county funded. But than the city needs to consider that frontage roads may be needed for better access to those retail centers or better traffic planning with stop lights planned in the appropriate places and the removal of the unnecessary, frivolous ones.
Tom, there is too many traffic lights DT also.
I appreciate what Craig’s getting at but I think Tom nailed it in comment #18. The thing that kills anything along 41st from functioning in a true mixed-use capacity is that the whole area is so unfriendly to pedestrians. You’ve got a major thoroughfare with high traffic counts where everyone speeds and there are no medians, pedestrian bridges, etc. The entirety of 41st, from Marion to Minnesota, is arguably the least pedestrian-friendly area in the city. All the right pieces are there but there’s no good way to move people around it without cars.
There would have been great opportunities to do true mixed-use at 57th and Western or 57th and Louise. Instead we built strip malls. I still think there’d be a great opportunity at 69th and Cliff.
The crux of mixed-use is that people can walk or bike. Like Tom said, once people are in their cars, you’ve lost, because at that point, what does it matter that the grocer is next to the barber is next to the restaurant or if they’re all a mile away from each other?
rufsx, if detroit is turning into a grumpy old, whatever, I can’t remember what all you said, you should see and hear what this weather has made me, of course I am already at the old part, but this kind of weather turns me into a cranky granny. Ha!
Throw your hat in the ring DL – let’s see what you got. I’ll wager it’d be somewhere south of 28%.
And if you wanna put your “Independent” or even “Libertarian” headband on that hat – good luck getting double digits.
Ruf – How did this turn into me running for office? I wouldn’t step a foot into Pierre if they paid me double and flew me on a Concord there everyday.
Liberalism has it’s place, as well as Indy and Libertarian, the secret is combining them all. Too often, old guys like you, have embraced a certain philosophy, I have not, I like ‘ideas’ big and small, conservative and liberal. Do I know what works? No, not always, by I have said ‘I told you so, more often then not.’
“The thing that kills anything along 41st from functioning in a true mixed-use capacity is that the whole area is so unfriendly to pedestrians.”
Have you ever ‘observed’ the sidewalks on 41st? It grinds me to watch those stupid Channel 16 commercials w/the wheelchair in the snow and code enforcement, when you look at the condition of the sidewalks on 41st street. Shit. Not good for wheelchairs or walking. Where is code enforcement on this? There is a reason people don’t walk down 41st, because they would need mountain climbing gear.
1. City traffic light are used based on traffic flow and in this case, an increased number of traffic accidents due to poor design.
2. You must have a certain number of exits from any property or development in the case of fire or other emergency which allows increased egress from that area. This is based on the maximum amount of people possible in an area. Hence not limiting the number of entrance points to funnel to limited areas.
3. Hasn’t it been said on this site multiple times by multiple posters that urban sprawl is the cause of all our problems? This is prime example of when you try to cram all the shit into the core of a city. Scheels should not have been allowed to add that large of a building into that small of an area. A good example for all of you who wanted a big ass Walmart on a small lot at 69th and Cliff.
AGAIN, not everything is a conspiracy Scott.
Huh?
The thing that has often perplexed me is that from I-29 to almost 14th street on Cliff there is NO fast food, except, Mr. Good Cents. That’s it. Not that I care, or want that, I just find it odd that we concentrate so much crap in certain areas. The Western Mall area is not pedestrian friendly, duh, because we have made it into car centric.
Talk is cheap DL – cuts across ALL political ideologies.
How running for office came up? You brought it up – made it personal. Mirroring.
DL – I-229 I assume you meant.
Tom: “I just need to point out that the most successful mixed-use neighborhood in the city is also the most successful neighborhood of any kind in the city: downtown.”
Depends on how you measure success I suppose. I spent more than my fair share of time downtown, and honestly aside from a few great places to eat or a few places to grab a drink…. there isn’t much to draw me down there. The shopping would be great if I’m a 68 year old woman with an excess of disposable income and a shortage of good taste… but for most of us it is just sad.
I could walk to Sunshine for groceries but if you think people aren’t willing to walk two or three blocks by the Western Mall, they surely aren’t willing to walk five or six just because it is downtown. I actually know a few people who live down there – and yet they still drive to the grocery store rather than walking – so where is the efficiency?
There are a lot of banks so getting cash at the ATM is easy, but spending that cash is difficult. There are also a lot of apartments and condos downtown these days – but unfortunately most are so expensive they are out of the range of the average Sioux Falls renter, so what you are left with are people who like the idea of walking to Parkers or Minvervas for dinner three or four nights a week. Those that are most reasonably priced still force people to drive everywhere since there is still nowhere to shop or eat for the typical person with an average Sioux Falls income.
I think the whole philosophy that suggests we should abandon our cars isn’t realistic. We need to remember that we live in an area of the country where we are prone to temperatures in the single digits, ice and snow packed sidewalks, wind from every direction, hail and rainstorms in the summer…. it goes on an on. Even if you have a great mixed use area where people can actually work, live, and play all within a several block radius, you soon find that they still want their cars in the winter because they don’t want to walk more than a block or two in any direction. This is why we are one of the few areas of the nation where an indoor mall is still thriving – because people like the idea of being able to shop and dine without ever having to leave the comfort of a climate controlled building… and when they do leave you can bet the car better be within 3/4 of a city block from the entrance.
Then you have the cases where parents need to pick up children from daycare or school meaning they have to drive a vehicle regardless of where they work or live. Aside from retired persons who really don’t have to go anywhere unless they really, really want to, a true mixed use neighborhood simply doesn’t work for most lifestyles in this area no matter how hard we wish it to be so. The automobile gives people freedom to live away from their work and away from the fast paced retail core – and frankly that is how most people want it.
The only reason you see true multiuse in larger cities is because land values dictate it. When you live in the prairie where land is cheap – people like to stretch out and claim their own slice of the pie.
That is why I think the future of true multiuse probably isn’t realistic because that isn’t how most people want to live. Call it a mindset, call it stubborness, call it whatever you want but that is the reality. I suspect we will see a shift in transportation long before we see a shift in how people choose to live and shop, so we will probably have something like personal pod transporters that self-drive to and from work long before we see people living in 20 story buildings where everything they need is within a 10 block radius of their homes.
Perhaps the true measure of what is a successful neighborhood should be the ones that people actually want to live in and want to shop in. Clearly that isn’t downtown.
I’m not going to do a point-by-point rebuttal of your response, but I’ll summarize thusly:
Eliminating cars is not the solution; creating a cohesive transportation system with multiple options is.
In the end, a city that sees only one solution to transportation issues (build more roads) will find that they can never build enough to solve the problem.
P.S. Sioux Falls’ climate is not as uniquely hostile as you might think. There are many world-class cities with walkable infrastructure that are at least as cold and/or snowy as we are (Stockholm, St. Petersburg, Minneapolis, Moscow, Copenhagen…)
I will agree based on direct personal experience that both Stockholm and Copenhagen – as well as Oslo – are very walkable/public transit easy to live in cities. And it’s waaayyy colder seeing as how the sun don’t come up ’til 10:30 in the AM and by 2:30 in the PM it’s frikkin’ DARK in the winter there. Geez – Stockholm is built/spread out on several ISLANDS and still works.
There are numerous “small” cities the size of SF in those countries – and in Germany that are just as good, so it ain’t all about size either.