Green Line Extension - Southwest LRT

[mattaudio]

Seems more critical than a park & ride.

[matt91486]

I wasn't sure if the EP plan was deferring Town Center or deleting it - the Minnpost article listed it as delete, which thoroughly confused me. It couldn't be too hard to make it possible for a future infill station there.

[MNdible]

From what I can piece together, the big costs associated with the EP Town Center station are land acquisition costs. So if you defer it, I think you'd still be obligated to buy the land for it now. Where as if you delete it, but then decided to add it back in later...

[Sara Bergen]

Anyone have an update from the CAC meeting tonight?

[David Greene]

We just got out. Whew! The vast majority of the meeting was spent crafting a statement to the CMC and Met Council. I'll post that when the final version is available. Overall I think it was quite good. Not exactly what I would write, of course, but surprisingly forceful coming out of a committee of 20. It was a very good and productive discussion and I think we got some good clarity out of it.

The biggest news points:

Penn station is back in

Three of the Minneapolis reps were obstructionst, unable to let the past go and generally focused only on themselves. It was pretty pathetic. They actually insisted that the CAC specify that $341 million in cuts must be made (we rejected that) and actually voted against prioritizing the inclusion of any deferred stations when funding becomes available. Since decreasing cuts from $341 million would allow Minneapolis to get a bunch of stuff it wants, the only thing I can figure is that they were operating out of spite to stick it to Eden Prairie. At one point one of them actually suggested that Eden Prarie should be cut even more and Minneapolis held harmless because "Minneapolis has already lost so much," despite the fact that as it stands, Minneapolis is facing a trivial amount of additional cuts.

The sense of the CAC is that the line should go to SW Station and everything possible should be done to include all of the stations to that point.

CMC is making its decision tomorrow. Meeting starts at 8:30am at Beth El in SLP.

[David Greene]

From what I can piece together, the big costs associated with the EP Town Center station are land acquisition costs. So if you defer it, I think you'd still be obligated to buy the land for it now. Where as if you delete it, but then decided to add it back in later...

I got clarity on this at tonight's meeting. Deferring the station would allow the project to avoid acquiring some land. They would need to acquire enough to build the foundation and utilities but would need to acquire more land to actually build the platforms and access points. The options assume the deferring Town Center saves some cost of land acquisition.

[acs]

Hypothetical question about the political side of this: Which scenario is the most likely for getting infill or extension stations funded for this line in the near future? A. Major transportation compromise is reached in the next session and the CTIB tax gets bumped by .5% to .75% BUT the CTIB has to take on the state's $160m share of this project and ditto for future lines (this is Dibble's plan) or B. No changes to the tax rate but the proceeds grow with the economy and the state does commit it's 10% share on time.

[Silophant]

I would guess the first option. Outstate Republicans (and some Democrats) are always always always going to fight spending any money on LRT. Putting transit responsibility entirely on the metro counties, and giving them the money to do it, is the best option.

[David Greene]

The most likely scenario is C. other funding sources get tapped. Livable Communities, TIGER grants, foundation money and so on. Folks are really looking at every single option to get dollars into this project without requiring more contribution from CTIB because the politics just won't allow the latter, no matter how much money CTIB has.

This kind of funding seeking wasn't possible with Central because CEI was a pass/fail and the rules didn't care where the money came from. The feds could have contributed 10% to that project and it still would have been on the same CEI chopping block.

It's a reminder of how important rulemaking is, why public comment on them matters and the kind of power the executive branch holds.

[David Greene]

A couple other interesting pieces of news from the CAC meeting:

Staff is recommending additional parking at Shady Oak (taking it to 800 stalls) and Louisiana (IIRC). The latter happened because there are some parcels that need to be acquired that won't be needed for the actual line. I'm assuming it's for construction staging and the like. So staff is recommending a small amount of parking there. Apparently the ridership numbers are greatly improved with the additional parking, getting the project more comfortably in the Medium CEI ranking.

I know many people here hate parking on this project but I guess I'm ok with it if it gives some breathing room under the CEI.

There's a proposal staff came up with to shift the Town Center station slightly east if the line is terminated at Town Center. Doing that shaves off $15-20 million or so. Staff isn't recommending that this variation be the POR but rather would like to see it kept as an option in case we need to shave off a bit more budget in the future.

[David Greene]

Below is the text of the CAC statement. The text is kind of ragged so I don't know if it was cleaned up before the CMC meeting. It's what we got over e-mail so I'm going with it.

Most of the "against" votes were from Minneapolis reps. IIRC, the fourth "no" on the SW EPTC stations statement was from the Minnetonka rep, who felt the statement wasn't strong enough. I think on one of the votes (the first one?) one of the "Minneapolis three" voted yes but one of the EP reps voted no. Don't take this as gospel, though.

SWLRT Community Advisory Committee Recommendation to the SWLRT Corridor 
Management Committee 
June 30, 2015 

The SWLRT Community Advisory Committee agreed on the following recommendation 
to be presented to the SWLRT Corridor Management Committee prior to their vote on 
SWLRT scope and budget scheduled for July 1, 2015: 

We urge leaders on the Corridor Management Committee, and eventually the 
Metropolitan Council, to consider adopting cuts that would total less than the 
$341 million target. If we value this project as an economic and equitable 
development catalyst, as many of us do, then it is worth paying some of the extra 
cost that has recently been identified from the project budget itself. At some 
point the cuts being considered are more about addressing geographical balance 
and serving political sensibilities – we should not reduce the functionality of the 
line to concerns about broadly “sharing the pain” of service reductions. This 
corridor project is worth every dollar we invest in it if we apply an equity lens, and 
the return on that investment will drive economic growth and employment 
opportunities for many decades into the future – it’s worth the extra cost. (Text 
from June 30, 2015 Southwest Equity Commitments table letter to SWLRT CMC) 
Vote: 17 for, 3 against

Honor community MOUs/Agreements and recognize the sacrifices that have been 
made by cities and the sacrifices they are now being asked to make while making 
the line as beneficial as possible for people and the communities.  
Vote: Unanimous

Regarding, safety and accessibility: 
- Need to ensure that budget reductions don’t end up creating dangerous 
traffic patterns for cars, bikes, pedestrians, especially in the long run 
- Accessibility to work, housing, and recreation for all should be the reason 
for this project. Reductions in parking, stations, etc. should be done with 
caution as they impact ridership and overall benefit  
Vote: Unanimous
 
We urge that both Eden Prairie Town Center and Southwest Stations be built 
because the potential future affordable housing and job/business development at 
Eden Prairie Town Center. Southwest Station has strong bus connections that 
represent 12% of total ridership, which is the largest percentage of any station. 
Vote: 16 for, 4 against

Recognize that at least six stations; EPTC, SW, Blake, Penn, Van White, and 21st 
are critical for low wealth communities and communities of color. 
Vote: Unanimous
 
If stations are deferred, the first priority should be to add back deferred stations, 
as funding becomes available. 
Vote: 17 for, 3 against

The second priority is improving accessibility to stations 
Vote: 17 for, 2 against, 1 Abstention

Value and protect bicycle infrastructure  
Vote: Unanimous

We urge the Metropolitan Council to create and make public the plan to mitigate 
and lessen the impacts of cuts; and aggressively seek additional funding sources 
to mitigate the impacts of these cuts including but not limited to: 
- Art/landscaping/beautification 
- Mitigate the environmental impacts along the light rail line. 
- Lost opportunities of Transit Oriented Development 
Vote: Unanimous

[acs]

Seems reasonable. If you want to mitigate the cuts to the line in your area your city should pay for the extras. Except Minneapolis because they're special (lol).

http://www.startribune.com/southwest-li ... 311219391/

My question is how the heck are municipalities going to come up with $90mm to bridge the gap? That's quite a bit. Also, is Eden Prairie planning to pay for EPTC station included in that?

[David Greene]

http://www.startribune.com/southwest-li ... 311219391/

Cuts reduced from $341 million to $250 million. EPTC deferred. Budget is now $1.7 billion. Cities agreed to help cover the funding gap.

[David Greene]

Seems reasonable. If you want to mitigate the cuts to the line in your area your city should pay for the extras. Except Minneapolis because they're special (lol).

http://www.startribune.com/southwest-li ... 311219391/

My question is how the heck are municipalities going to come up with $90mm to bridge the gap? That's quite a bit. Also, is Eden Prairie planning to pay for EPTC station included in that?

I read it as they will cover *some* of the gap. There's going to be a hodgepodge of funding going into this.

Did it say EP is going to pay for EPTC? The article says it's deferred.

It's absolutely ridiculous to defer that station. Not only is it important to equity, it will cost in the single-digit millions. It's a drop in the bucket and its utility is very high.

I, ahem, "passionately" made that case last night.

[EOst]

The [SWLRT] line... is the first transit project in the Twin Cities to dip into the suburbs.

So, do the people who write these stories actually follow these things, or what?

[FISHMANPET]

Eric Roper should just write every article on transit or development in the core cities, I'm not sure I'd trust anyone else at the Strib to have the understanding to do those topics justice.

[grant1simons2]

Southwest Station has strong bus connections that represent 12% of total ridership, which is the largest percentage of any station.

Not only that. Recently I've been noticing more senior housing and affordable housing that is very close to the SW Station. The Town Center Station is close to market rate apartments. Also SW Station is already near a heavily commuted trail around Purgatory Creek.

[David Greene]

Southwest Station has strong bus connections that represent 12% of total ridership, which is the largest percentage of any station.

Not only that. Recently I've been noticing more senior housing and affordable housing that is very close to the SW Station. The Town Center Station is close to market rate apartments. Also SW Station is already near a heavily commuted trail around Purgatory Creek.

Apparently there is affordable housing scheduled for EPTC. This was a key point discussed last night.

Both of these stations are very important to the utility of this line, though I'm not sure I buy the bus connection argument. SWT is just going to continue running commuter buses, right? Do they have any intention/plan to run regular route service to feed LRT? They *should*, but will they?

[Anondson]

Hennepin County coming up with a funding package for $38M for part of the $90M shortage.

http://content.govdelivery.com/accounts ... ns/10ce5b7

[HiawathaGuy]

http://finance-commerce.com/2015/07/sou ... 7-billion/

Unlocked article. I felt it reported all the money stuff the best.