Green Line Extension - Southwest LRT

[froggie]

Don't have access to your Google Maps Engine so I can't see the visualization. But based on your description, the only way you'll get it along Hennepin south of 94 is if you tunnel it. *THAT* IMO would be an acceptable alignment…but as David noted, cost would be a huge factor, nevermind the disruption along Hennepin during construction.

[BigIdeasGuy]

Don't have access to your Google Maps Engine so I can't see the visualization. But based on your description, the only way you'll get it along Hennepin south of 94 is if you tunnel it. *THAT* IMO (obviously) would be an acceptable alignment…but as David noted, cost would be a huge factor, nevermind the disruption along Hennepin during construction.

What is the reason why it would have to be tunneled under Hennepin instead of running at street level? Is it solely because of width of the ROW needed?

[talindsay]

Don't have access to your Google Maps Engine so I can't see the visualization. But based on your description, the only way you'll get it along Hennepin south of 94 is if you tunnel it. *THAT* IMO (obviously) (obviously) would be an acceptable alignment…but as David noted, cost would be a huge factor, nevermind the disruption along Hennepin during construction.

What is the reason why it would have to be tunneled under Hennepin instead of running at street level? Is it solely because of width of the ROW needed?

Heh, you're kidding right? You've been on Hennepin, no? The level of traffic and the ROW needed could not accommodate rail at grade on Hennepin. There are plenty of roads that are overbuilt for demand, but Hennepin is most certainly not one of them. Northeast of downtown, sure. South of 94, no way it would work. I'm all for your plan if there's a tunnel under Hennepin, however. Of course, funding may be a challenge.

[ECtransplant]

I think he's assuming you don't need to take any traffic lanes if you remove the on street parking. There are people here more knowledgeable th than me on that who can weigh in if that's feasible. That said, a tunnel under Hennepin is much more sensible than a tunnel in the middle of lakes and parkland

[BigIdeasGuy]

Allow me to clarify, I was operating under the assumption that you could run LRT down the middle of Hennepin only taking the parking on either side of the street without losing any lanes. I'm judging by the responses that isn't the case.

I'm also not a fan of tunneling under Hennepin either, granted it's better than tunneling in Kenilworth but in my opinion it's still not the best use of money. I would argue tunnels in general aren't a good use a money unless there are no other viable options.

[ECtransplant]

You'd need to take both lanes of parking in order for it to work I think.

[EOst]

Would that really be a huge loss? I'm always amazed by just how much street parking there is in this city, especially on arterial streets like Hennepin.

[ECtransplant]

I'd 100% support removing the parking to run rail down Hennepin, but, yes, it would be contentious

[MSPtoMKE]

Even removing parking wouldn't be enough, if you want to fit such luxuries as turn lanes, station platforms, and well, sidewalks. This isn't totally scientific, but here is more or less what a 4 lane Hennepin Ave. with light rail would look like with split side station platforms like most of those along University Ave.

http://streetmix.net/-/118658

This is with pretty narrow lanes. There was simply much more room to work with along University Ave. The only option to make it all fit would be to have Hennepin be 2 lanes, which I certainly don't see happening. But just for fun:

http://streetmix.net/-/118666

[Tcmetro]

Having on-street parking is good for the pedestrian realm. It prevents people from having to walk directly adjacent to a moving lane of traffic. Ramming LRT in the median of Hennepin seems like it would cause a lot of problems.

Previously, it has been said that the water table along Hennepin Ave is pretty high, and any tunnel is going to require a lot of water pumping. Certainly something that can be overcome, but not necessarily idealistic pricewise.

[ECtransplant]

If you put the auto traffic in the middle and light rail adjacent to the sidewalks you have 8' wide sidewalks with the stations on the sidewalks and still 4 traffic lanes. I get that it would be tight though and would probably prefer to pay for a tunnel for anything down Hennepin anyway.

[talindsay]

Rail on the outside means no crossovers between tracks and dramatically more "opportunities" for car and rail collisions. A scheme like that precludes dedicated row by any decent definition of the term.
Which brings up another issue, turning movements are frequent and dense on Hennepin, much more than on University. This would probably make it a non-starter as high speed transit.

[Tcmetro]

http://www.startribune.com/local/west/251730521.html

[ECtransplant]

“I think it’s going to take some leadership by folks in Minneapolis to recognize that freight rail is not going to move,” Hennepin County Commissioner Mike Opat, a member of CTIB, said after a board meeting last week.

Well, IMHO, it's going to take some leadership by folks on the Met Council to recognize that tunneling in the middle of parkland while bypassing dense urban neighborhoods is asinine

[froggie]

“the council by statute does have authority then to consider what it wants to do.

If true, this will be key. And at the rate things are currently going, Minneapolis will probably get the shaft.


On a side note, who edited my comment from the 22nd to add the (obviously)? That was not me, nor do I think it was needed/appropriate. Or was it some sort of glitch?

[Silophant]

There's a filter set to automatically do that whenever someone uses 'IMO' or 'IMHO'. Note that it also happened in ECtransplant's post above yours.

[David Greene]

“the council by statute does have authority then to consider what it wants to do.

If true, this will be key.

It's not a matter of "if." It's right there in statute.

[twincitizen]

Studies do little to bridge Southwest LRT impasse
Read more: http://finance-commerce.com/2014/03/stu ... t-impasse/

[Sara Bergen]

Corridor Management Committee Meeting tomorrow:

Wednesday, March 26, 2014
8:30 AM – 11:30 AM
Beth El Synagogue
5224 W. 26th Street
St. Louis Park, MN 55416

Call to Order
Approval of Meeting Minutes from March 12, 2014
New Starts Program Update
Final Independent Reports
Shallow Tunnel Update
Project Schedule
Project Budget
Next Steps
Adjournment
Next Meeting: April 2, 2014, 8:30 AM – 11:30 AM at Beth El Synagogue

[Ubermoose]

I would love to go to the meeting, but a coworker is out and I can't get off work.
I have been looking to try to find a copy of a letter to post from Xcel Energy to James Alexander in regards to the substation in SLP that would be affected if the reroute were to go through. It was pretty clear that the impacts would be very expensive due to relocation of underground feeder lines and clearances of other equipment from the rail.It would also hinder planned expansions at that site, which would be critical to serve future load growth in portions of Minneapolis, Hopkins, SLP, Edina, and Minnetonka. I didn't realize that this is a major substation for a good portion of the west metro.