A north-south route is needed, but where?
Alternative 3 was selected as the preferred corridor alternative because it would address all project needs, avoid unacceptable project impacts, and is consistent with the officially mapped corridor and adopted local plans.
There were plenty of differing opinions during an open house about a new road proposed for the east side of Owatonna, but also one thing nearly everyone agreed upon: An “east side corridor,” as it’s called, is needed.
“A lot of people definitely recognize that we don’t have any north-south routes between Oak Avenue and County Road 43, or 44th Avenue,” said Paul Sponholz, Steele County assistant engineer.
Those two north-south routes are four miles apart.
“If you’re on the north side of the city, you have to go downtown to get to anywhere else to the south,” he said.
But even the attendees realized the decision comes down to NIMBY: not in my backyard.
For Mike and Janell McLeish, the saying is literal.
“We’re going to be one of the most impacted” residents, Mike McLeish said. “It’s almost in our back yard” – within about 50 feet, he said.
“We used to live on Lincoln,” McLeish said, “but we wanted to get away from all that traffic. We were told that (the nearby property) may be a neighborhood someday, but never a 45-mile-an-hour road right next to our house.”
In fact, he said, “I even went down to the (Steele County) Recorder’s Office at the courthouse to verify how it was plotted out – and it was residential. That’s why a lot of people are so upset, because they completely changed it.”
Though the couple moved there in 2015, a discussion about the east side of Owatonna has been ongoing for nearly 30 years. Two different routes were planned: a beltline and a corridor. Both projects are a partnership between the city and Steele County.
A “beltline” road is designed to reduce traffic congestion in the downtown area, providing an alternative through-route to Interstate 35 and U.S. Highway 14.
A study from 2011 identified Steele County Road 43 in Havana Township as the preferred east beltline route. While that provided a direct connection to U.S. 14, it didn’t meet the need of a north-south route closer to the city – a corridor.
The city and county approved the beltline, Sponholz said, but were still left without a firm plan for a corridor.
“This is very much a city and county project,” he said. “We always recognized that this is going to be needed, in addition to that beltline.”
New development on the east side brings more traffic, “and those corridors are important,” Sponholz said. “We have a great spoke system here in Owatonna, but no north-south routes.”
The goal is to keep a new route as close to the current development and potential new developments as possible and keep more traffic off Mineral Springs Road and Oak Avenue.
Add the increased traffic from the new high school opening this fall on the southeast side of town, and the congestion intensifies.
“We need something now,” Sponholz said, “and 34th Avenue is just too far away for the current needs.”
The route already exists – and it runs north and south – but it’s about a mile and a half east of Owatonna.
It’s still the option that most appeals to Matt Sennott, who also lives in the study area.
“Ultimately, I’d love to see it on 34th Avenue, because it wouldn’t negatively impact our neighborhood, you’d still have the new road …” he said. “It would impact one farmer, which I get, but instead of an entire neighborhood…”
Sennott said the property owner who farms behind him supports the 34th Avenue plan, too.
But a woman who declined to give her name – “there’s already enough controversy” – said the preferred route is best for their farm.
“We don’t want it in the middle of our property,” she said. “If they stay with what they’ve got, we’re fine.”
She, too, recognizes the need for the corridor, saying, “that’s not a debate; it needs to be done.”
Re-opening the discussion after 12 years means many new players, and many more considerations.
Richard Meier and his wife have lived in Owatonna less than three years, after moving from St. Paul.
“This city’s got a lot of weird roads,” he smiled, “where you wind up not being able to go through.”
None of the possible corridor routes would affect his property on Rose Street, Meier said, “but it’ll probably affect the traffic flow a lot. If they make it so that development out by Turtle Creek … if they can get out onto that new road easily, that’ll eliminate” traffic on Rose.
An open house in July 2022 served to collect feedback on the options from the past. Last week’s open house was to share that feedback – and what officials have determined is the best route from 26th Street Northeast to 18th Street Southeast.
“They have been listening,” McLeish said, “and at the last meeting, I heard them say, ‘hey, we’re going to try to push it as far east as we can.’ For us, every foot will help.”
He said with the previous preferred route, “we wouldn’t even be safe out in our yard. It feels like you could reach out and touch cars” driving by.
The McLeishes brought up the possibility of the project including a berm as a form of barrier for their property.
“The folks in the meeting have been receptive to that,” McLeish said of city/county officials and engineers.
“We’re OK with a road, we just want it done right,” Janell McLeish said.
Letters were expected to be sent to property owners last week, requesting permission to do the necessary studies that are involved in any project like this, Sponholz said.
The most important part of the project, Sennott said, is advance planning.
“They said they want to develop up in that area, so it doesn’t make sense to sneak a 55-mph road right through an area they’re supposed to be developing,” he said.
The McLeishes feel the same way.
“We realize there’s going to be a road, but I think more than anything, we’re worried about safety,” Mike McLeish said.
So if they’re uncomfortable, will they move?
“If you would’ve asked me six, eight months ago,” he said. “I was ready. Then interest rates went … So now we can’t. Now we’re just hoping and praying that it’s not as awful as we think it’s going to be.”
Construction on the project is expected to begin in 2025, and last two years. The county has already secured a $3.96 million federal grant for the work; no estimate on the total has been provided.
