Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)

Roads - Rails - Sidewalks - Bikeways
beykite
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 199
Joined: July 21st, 2012, 6:36 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby beykite » October 12th, 2012, 8:49 pm

UptownSport wrote:twincitizen wrote:
I think most of us here are hoping that the Green Line isn't built at all.

I'd agree with that- Can't see this as being anymore than a realtor's dream, much like 394
I'm confused, did you change his quote? He said 21st St Station, not Green Line as a whole.

min-chi-cbus
Capella Tower
Posts: 3131
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:19 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby min-chi-cbus » October 13th, 2012, 9:31 am

UptownSport wrote:
twincitizen wrote:I think most of us here are hoping that the Green Line isn't built at all.
I'd agree with that- Can't see this as being anymore than a realtor's dream, much like 394
Speak for yourselves, I think many of us here want to see a rail NETWORK, not just a couple of lines through the cities. The more expansive and interconnected this network is the better the system is and the more it will be embraced by suburbanites (at some point in the future the suburbs will begin to take on more urban forms, if they haven't already).

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1353
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby Tcmetro » October 13th, 2012, 10:20 am

The SW line will probably see high use in the areas from West Lake to Hopkins; however, I would imagine that the Minnetonka and Eden Prairie stations will see little use outside of peak hours. Also, the 21st, Penn, Van White, and Royalston stations will likely see little use as well. That being said the 12 and 17 buses do have decent ridership, and there will be a lot of people transferring at West Lake Street.

I think the best thing that could happen for this line is an extension of the crosstown buses. Bring the 46 to OPUS, the 540/542 to Eden Prairie, the 23 to Beltline, the 21 and 53 to West Lake, the 2 to 21st St, the 705 to Louisiana Ave. The 27 could also be extended along W 24th St to replace the 17, and the 12 and 17 could be shortened to West Lake. Perhaps when Bottineau opens, the 19 buses can go to the Penn Station, and maybe a crosstown bus from Broadway and Emerson along Van White and 15th to Elliot Park, Cedar Riverside, and the U.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5813
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby MNdible » October 13th, 2012, 10:21 am

min-chi-cbus wrote:
UptownSport wrote:
twincitizen wrote:I think most of us here are hoping that the Green Line isn't built at all.
I'd agree with that- Can't see this as being anymore than a realtor's dream, much like 394
Speak for yourselves, I think many of us here want to see a rail NETWORK, not just a couple of lines through the cities. The more expansive and interconnected this network is the better the system is and the more it will be embraced by suburbanites (at some point in the future the suburbs will begin to take on more urban forms, if they haven't already).
Agreed. Whether or not you like the specific routing, this is a critical piece of regional infrastructure. And while we may not love the SW suburbs, they're going to hold a lot of the region's future growth. And we're not talking about sending a rail line out into the cornfields like NorthStar -- this is a line that should increase the employment and residential density in an already developed area.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6203
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby twincitizen » October 13th, 2012, 1:44 pm

For the record, I said I hope the 21st St Station isn't built, not the Green Line entirely. That jerk UptownSport misquoted me, which should be illegal or something. BAN HIM ;)

I'm not going to lie though, a small part of me wishes this whole thing falls apart until we have better census numbers that cannot ignore both the population and commercial growth that has occurred in Uptown and Lyn-Lake (and soon Eat Street).

I honestly believe the best option would have been the urban routing, terminating at Shady Oak in Hopkins (4C on the DEIS). The rest of the line out to Eden Prairie should be still be built, but not all at once. Those distant areas have far less hope for all day ridership and currently have damn good express bus service, some of which could have been re-routed to a Park&Ride at Shady Oak to build demand for the rest of the line.

UptownSport
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 607
Joined: July 23rd, 2012, 12:07 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby UptownSport » October 13th, 2012, 2:25 pm

Agree ^^^^ (except the banning part)

We have an immense amount of people that need transit in the core- Not only rail-
and an immense amount of destinations.

I can't see justification for ignoring many, many other destinations and populations over mansions sparsely built on cornfields. And it'd be mindless to ignore 'specific routing' when deciding the merits of a line.

The first line did a great job of hitting those destinations; Mall, airport, Downtown Mpls. It also provided distant suburbs (albeit a partial distance) with an EZ ride into Minneapolis. I have no idea how many from those suburbs actually take advantage of either formal or informal park and rides (I see the VA has big warning signs against commuters using the lot, and is now building a huge parking complex)

The next line will connect three major destinations, and serve density at (a portion of) the core.

They are heavily networked in that myriad of lines covering a vast, expansive area connected to current or future stops, and, obviously, they come together. There's been much discussion of those new connections, and eventual arterial BRT they could enable.

My understanding of terms 'interconnected network lines', in strictest definition, would mean rail from airport to a St. Paul station, and / or the line across Greenway, if a more sensible, shorter line were built as Citizen suggests.

min-chi-cbus
Capella Tower
Posts: 3131
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:19 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby min-chi-cbus » October 13th, 2012, 7:17 pm

twincitizen wrote:For the record, I said I hope the 21st St Station isn't built, not the Green Line entirely. That jerk UptownSport misquoted me, which should be illegal or something. BAN HIM ;)

I'm not going to lie though, a small part of me wishes this whole thing falls apart until we have better census numbers that cannot ignore both the population and commercial growth that has occurred in Uptown and Lyn-Lake (and soon Eat Street).

I honestly believe the best option would have been the urban routing, terminating at Shady Oak in Hopkins (4C on the DEIS). The rest of the line out to Eden Prairie should be still be built, but not all at once. Those distant areas have far less hope for all day ridership and currently have damn good express bus service, some of which could have been re-routed to a Park&Ride at Shady Oak to build demand for the rest of the line.
If that Shady Oak station somehow includes both Cargill and UnitedHealth Group then I agree, otherwise I think you're missing out on HUGE ridership numbers from those two corporations alone. UHG will have over 3 milllion square feet of office space near the line that will employ tens of thousands of people who could use the train to get to work instead of drive (I was one of those people, and I wished for rail as an alternative to work when I lived in the West Calhoun area). The Master Plan for that area includes an ADDITIONAL 3 million square feet of office space and additional retail and housing.......all because of the line (went to those meetings when the line was first being proposed). I don't care at all if the line extends to Eden Prairie Mall but I guess it makes sense, and that "Golden Triangle" of tech and biotech in Eden Prairie should probably have accessibility to the "network" as well. So I'm okay with the current alignment, save for the complete bypass of the Uptown area, which I think should have been a subway from the east side of Lake Calhoun to downtown.....but I realize that is cost-prohibitive and requires probably DOUBLE the population AND employment density. Someday....................................

UptownSport
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 607
Joined: July 23rd, 2012, 12:07 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby UptownSport » October 14th, 2012, 1:26 pm

min-chi-cbus wrote: which I think should have been a subway from the east side of Lake Calhoun to downtown.
Interesting! That's one way to crack a very tough nut.
Flow is set now for a commuter rail to blast past the immense density, with a 'token' wilderness station at 21st to claim it serves the area

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7936
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby mattaudio » October 15th, 2012, 1:56 pm

Glad to see my non-revenue connector idea taking off! That's really the best way to salvage the line for the future, to make sure we can get real transit in the city in the future and get a LRT connection to West End (twincitizen's awesome stub line idea) or beyond down the Wayzata Blvd corridor.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6203
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby twincitizen » November 6th, 2012, 11:02 am


VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 782
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby VAStationDude » November 7th, 2012, 7:36 am

The dfl take over at the Capitol makes this project a near certainty. Unless the president and the us house strike some budget deal that cuts federal transit capital funding.

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1553
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby talindsay » November 7th, 2012, 9:30 am

Yes, my thought exactly. We should see this go forward without issues now, as long as the federal New Starts program isn't completely eliminated (which seems unlikely). I think as long as New Starts gets any funds, this will get funded since Obama called it out as a priority, and its only missing funding commitment was from the MN Legislature.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5813
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby MNdible » November 7th, 2012, 11:11 am

Nice! In all of my excitement, I hadn't even thought of this excellent wrinkle.

lordmoke
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1377
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 1:39 pm
Location: Nicollet Island

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby lordmoke » November 7th, 2012, 12:19 pm

MNdible wrote:Nice! In all of my excitement, I hadn't even thought of this excellent wrinkle.
Haha, I think my second or third thought on seeing the MN legislature result was, "Bring on the trains!"

mullen
Foshay Tower
Posts: 986
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 7:02 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby mullen » November 7th, 2012, 12:23 pm

i agree, with the obama administration already issuing that directive a couple months ago to move this project up for funding and now a full DFL legislature this all bodes well for southwest LRT.

min-chi-cbus
Capella Tower
Posts: 3131
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 9:19 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby min-chi-cbus » November 7th, 2012, 12:37 pm

I thought the problem was funding from our end, not the Govt....?

talindsay
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1553
Joined: September 29th, 2012, 10:41 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby talindsay » November 7th, 2012, 1:23 pm

The problem is funding on *our* end, *MEANING* the state government. The funding breakdown is standard MSP formula since CTIB came into existence: 50% federal, 30% CTIB, 10% local (in this case Henn County) and 10% state. The CTIB has committed their funds, Henn County has committed their funds, and the feds are in line to commit their funds *IF* the full 50% "local" (in this context meaning non-federal) funding can be committed and all the studies work out. The holdout had been the state, whose lack of a $120 million total funding commitment to the project was putting the whole thing at risk.

We certainly can't make sweeping assumptions, but it's likely that the $120m will be forthcoming now.

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 6203
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby twincitizen » November 7th, 2012, 1:30 pm

Yep, I'd look for it in the next bonding bill.

mullen
Foshay Tower
Posts: 986
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 7:02 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby mullen » November 7th, 2012, 2:06 pm

i wonder if they'll do a bonding bill next session. next session is usually budget only, no bonding. repubs will scream about dems spending money like drunken sailors. i thought the feds needed to have the local match assured in the next year. but that move by the obama admin seems to put the project ahead of the line and a priority for federal matching funds.

User avatar
woofner
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1327
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:04 am

Re: Southwest Corridor (Green Line Extension)

Postby woofner » November 7th, 2012, 2:27 pm

I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bonding bill next session. They can still justify it based on economic recovery, the state has plenty of debt capacity, and last year's bonding bill was the smallest in 20 years. Sure, Republicans will scream, but voters have a short memory and most will forget 2013 by 2014. They could probably put $20-30m for SW LRT - enough to get going on engineering - into a transportation bill, too.
"Who rescued whom!"


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: abess15 and 3 guests