urbanMSP

F&C has the full, unbroken Bender quote: “I think the city has been put in a very difficult position here,” said council member Lisa Bender, who represents Ward 10. “We are building a regional transit system that serves suburban commuters over urban neighborhoods. That is just a fact. … I still think that’s a better transit system than having no regional system at all.”

Read more: http://finance-commerce.com/2014/08/min ... t-project/ (unlocked)

VINDICATED!

In her naivety, yes.

I don't want to pick a fight, but how is anything she said naive? She stated the facts, and strongly supports moving forward. Nothing she said is untrue or naive.

The City has been put in a difficult position here. I don't think anyone would dispute that, following the promises that were made regarding freight relocation and the City's previous statements on that issue.

The Southwest Line serves suburban commuters over urban neighborhoods. Even if you strongly believe that this line will uplift Harrison, Near North, and beyond, etc., it does not nullify the previous statement. Even under the rosiest of forecasts for ridership and development at Penn, Van White and Royalston, with the best imaginable bus service connecting North, this line is still mostly about getting suburbanites downtown quickly. Check the ridership forecasts. It's all in there. That's what the FTA rules at the time favored. New transit riders and moving them quickly.

That's what the FTA rules at the time favored. New transit riders and moving them quickly.

That's not accurate. The CEI is basically time saved / cost. Since longer rides have more potential to realize saved time, it does tend to favor long trips. There's nothing in the formula about "new" riders. Places that already have well-used transit tend to suffer under the CEI because the time savings (if any) doesn't justify the cost. If 3C had been hugely faster than buses it wouldn't have mattered to the formula that riders would be coming over from buses.

I can't recall whether the AA or DEIS hadtrips broken down by origin/destination pair. I don't think ridership is "only" from suburbs into downtown. There's a large potential for suburb-to-suburb trips on this line.

Finally, it is not automatically "wrong" to serve suburban commuters even if the line has many fewer urban riders. It's a regional system, not a city system. Minneapolis benefits hugely by being cemented as the regional economic powerhouse.

The equity angle is not just from North, BTW. There are environmental justice communities up and down the line.

Watch the big show live: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/tv/79

Bender is speaking now. Goodman, Cano, and Glidden have already spoken.

Deadlines loom for $1.68 billion Southwest light-rail project

Under state law, the cities could take a tougher stance, rejecting the Southwest plan and amending it with necessary conditions. But that strategy could trigger a new round of discussions and votes that could further delay or torpedo the project....

Another possible source of a deal involves the desire of some Minneapolis city officials to build streetcar lines.

“Mayor Hodges has always talked about streetcars as one of her big initiatives,” Brickman, the mayor’s communications director, said this week. “We have heard rumors of the Met Council wanting to use streetcars as a bargaining chip.” The Met Council declined to comment on the assertion.

Brickman declined to comment on whether Hodges has made streetcars a condition of the city supporting Southwest, citing the ongoing mediation sessions between Met Council members, city officials and retired federal Chief Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan. “Our guiding principle is respect for the confidentiality of mediation,” she said.

That article, from this morning, was followed this afternoon by the exchange summed up in the lede of this article: Hodges disputes account of light rail talks.

http://www.mprnews.org/story/2014/08/28 ... te?from=hp

That livestream has been choppy as heck!

That livestream has been choppy as heck!

It stops every five seconds or so in Safari, but it works pretty well in Chrome. IDK.

Most of these speeches have been pretty silly so far.

Does anyone honestly think Councilman Goodman would have voted in favor of the train if they'd "kept their promise" and moved the freight?

Does anyone honestly think Councilman Goodman would have voted in favor of the train if they'd "kept their promise" and moved the freight?

Hahaha! So true. But that's Lisa.

Goodman - no
Gordon - no
President Johnson - no

10-3 in favor.

Yang voted no in committee but not at the full council. mmmmk

Yang also (rightfully) blasted the Bottineau alignment.

Met council statement of the completion of the consent process.

http://content.govdelivery.com/accounts ... ins/ccc963

This picture should be a required exhibit in every single debate about the Kenilworth corridor ever.

And here's your Van White station area. Looks like good ol' 394 (née US12) chopped Laurel (?) Ave off at the knees. Too bad; it would have made a really nice N<->DT local streets connection.

Maybe its just me but I don't understand when Barb Johnson says Minneapolis isn't getting their fair share for the money they are putting in. Minneapolis is 95% of the blue line which the county and state paid a significant amount towards that almost solely benefits Minneapolis. This extension has a few stops in Minneapolis and being should help bring people into the city for work, shopping, and entertainment. Bottineau isn't perfect for North Minneapolis but think about a city like Plymouth who is getting nothing from any of these lines and yet still paying a portion through the state and county portions.

Also while there might've been some agreement with SLP to move the freight I don't see why you would support the relocation with the berms if you are looking at whats best for the region and not just one city's interest.

Looking west (yes, west, toward the channel) from Burnham Road. Save the parkland!

Here's a much earlier picture but you can see the water tower on mount curve:

Yang also (rightfully) blasted the Bottineau alignment.

That's fine, but what is he going to do about it? I'm certainly not comfortable tearing down hundreds of homes when a community vote was split 50/50 between Penn and BNSF. Will CM Yang demand further study of the Oliver/Queen and Broadway/Washington options? I'd welcome that! If he's not going to do that, it's hot air.

That's fine, but what is he going to do about it? I'm certainly not comfortable tearing down hundreds of homes when a community vote was split 50/50 between Penn and BNSF. Will CM Yang demand further study of the Oliver/Queen and Broadway/Washington options? I'd welcome that! If he's not going to do that, it's hot air.

He specifically called out the Penn alignment as his preference, so I think it's really just hot air.

That's fine, but what is he going to do about it? I'm certainly not comfortable tearing down hundreds of homes when a community vote was split 50/50 between Penn and BNSF. Will CM Yang demand further study of the Oliver/Queen and Broadway/Washington options? I'd welcome that! If he's not going to do that, it's hot air.

He specifically called out the Penn alignment as his preference, so I think it's really just hot air.

I'm hoping he can be educated.

So what happens from here? Besides the lawsuits and yelling