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 LRT

Postby beykite » September 10th, 2012, 2:06 pm

I don't understand why this would score so low. They must be basing it solely off of the short term effects for the engineering work. Otherwise I don't see why this would be so low for jobs created and regional impact. Oh well maybe in 15 years we'll finally have a 3 line rail system to take us to all these fancy stadiums we're building.... Very frustrating.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5785
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby MNdible » September 10th, 2012, 2:10 pm

Man, do I call BS on that scoring system. Talk about a rigged system to make sure that St. Paul gets its silly ballpark.

Hmmm. Which project is a sounder long term investment and leverages the most outside dollars?

User avatar
Nick
Capella Tower
Posts: 2997
Joined: May 30th, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Loring Park, Minneapolis

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby Nick » September 10th, 2012, 2:33 pm

Shoot. Me. In the face.

beykite
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 199
Joined: July 21st, 2012, 6:36 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby beykite » September 10th, 2012, 2:45 pm

Well its in the Governors hands now. I strongly encourage everyone who believes in this project to send out emails/call the Governor and let him know our opinons. I'm not much of a wordsmith but I've quoted what I sent him. If anyone who's good with words wants to share what they've wrote that'd be great. Also I recommend requesting a written response. I'll post mine if I get any.

Here is the email contact form: http://mn.gov/governor/contact-us/form/ Until the UrbanMSP Super Pac is officially active this may be our best bet!
Mr Dayton,

Please recognize that the SW Regional Light Rail line is a far more important investment to our region and state than many other of the DEED applicants, including the Saint Paul Ballpark. I know both projects cost quiet a bit of money and people feel passionately about both, but in the long run it will be the SW Light Rail line that will benefit the state and the taxpayers the most. Please help advance the future of transit in Minnesota.

nasa35

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby nasa35 » September 10th, 2012, 2:59 pm

MNdible wrote:Man, do I call BS on that scoring system. Talk about a rigged system to make sure that St. Paul gets its silly ballpark.

Hmmm. Which project is a sounder long term investment and leverages the most outside dollars?
Really? The ballpark will be, in the long run, at least a billion cheaper. That's easy math.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5785
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby MNdible » September 10th, 2012, 3:16 pm

And a pack of chewing gum is $50m cheaper than that. QED, I think.

User avatar
spectre000
Union Depot
Posts: 301
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 9:05 pm
Location: Downtown St. Paul

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby spectre000 » September 10th, 2012, 4:43 pm

I was a bit surprised this scored so lowly. But this is hardly a "shovel ready" project. Better to put the money into something that will provide immediate construction jobs. That was one of the main goals of the capital projects money after all.

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

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby woofner » September 10th, 2012, 4:46 pm

Here are the selection criteria:
Business Development Capital Projects Grant Program applications will be evaluated on the following criteria:
• Creation of new full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs, retention of existing jobs, or improvements in the quality of existing jobs as measured by wages, skills or education associated with those jobs
• Improvement in the quality of existing jobs, based on increases in wages or improvements in the job duties, training, or education associated with those jobs
• Increase in local tax base, based on demonstrated measurable outcomes
• Demonstration that investment of public dollars will induce private investment
• Whether the project provides necessary repair or replacement of existing capital assets
• Whether the project reduces operating expenses of or increases revenue from existing capital assets, thereby offsetting some or all project costs
• Whether the project provides health or safety benefits
• Number of residents served by or who will benefit from the project
• Demonstration of local support
• Capacity of the project to attract out of state revenue
• Strong impact in return on investment and cost benefit ratio
From a document hosted on the City's website.

It's hard to believe that any of the other projects had the potential to bring in $400m or more in "out of state revenue". If they were basing the evaluation only on the engineering phase of the project, I could maybe see the score of 5 on the Jobs, Investment & Leverage, and Regional Impact categories, but how many projects that scored more than 7 in the Project Readiness category (not reflected in the RFP criteria above, by the way) have an environmental impact statement backed up by hundreds of pages of alternatives analysis?

Pretty insulting that a DEED for a state that leads the nation in economic inequality would give 2 of 5 points in the Public Benefits category to a transit line from the state's poorest neighborhoods to otherwise inaccessible job centers.
"Who rescued whom!"

TroyGBiv
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 618
Joined: July 6th, 2012, 10:33 pm

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby TroyGBiv » September 11th, 2012, 12:22 am

The unspoken issue is that no one wants to spend money that doesn't immediately make jobs and show a direct end product. Funding something to be built can be pointed to by politicians (of all sides) and so anything that is funded in full is preferable. "Another study" will be nailed to the forehead of the politicians who approves that allocation. I don't agree - but I do understand their fear... I think it is a bad choice though...

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

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby mullen » September 11th, 2012, 6:24 am

that's total and complete joke to give any money for that stupid ballpark....i mean please. what a waste of this money.

we don't need more light rail, but we do need a ballpark for a sub minor league baseball team in a market with a major league team already. this is just politics and lobbying.

i hope the feds just ignore our requests for southwest money.

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

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby mullen » September 11th, 2012, 6:25 am

who from outstate goes to saints game? do they even draw anymore? i mean it was ok way back when the twins playing outside seemed like a fantasy.

spearson
Union Depot
Posts: 310
Joined: July 9th, 2012, 2:29 pm

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby spearson » September 11th, 2012, 7:51 am

The SW LRT is going to cost a billion plus, why is anyone upset at losing 14 million? It's 1% of the overall cost...

spearson
Union Depot
Posts: 310
Joined: July 9th, 2012, 2:29 pm

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby spearson » September 11th, 2012, 8:06 am

mullen wrote:who from outstate goes to saints game? do they even draw anymore? i mean it was ok way back when the twins playing outside seemed like a fantasy.
They bring out 5k a year it seems, and there has always been a good turnout whenever I've gone. The one thing that's great about midway stadium is their parking lot and the tailgating they allow. Doesn't look that will be available at the new proposed spot though.

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

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby mullen » September 11th, 2012, 8:08 am

the feds demand seed money, good faith money. they'll probably build three more lines in portland, seattle or denver before we get a sniff of another line here. but hey, we'll have ballpark for a team nobody gives a rat's butt about.

all political BS. whoever at DEED actually thinks this dumb ballpark has more regional signficance than sw lrt needs to be fired for incompentance or taking bribes. that is the only way this project is at the top of the list. it's laughable.

User avatar
spectre000
Union Depot
Posts: 301
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 9:05 pm
Location: Downtown St. Paul

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby spectre000 » September 11th, 2012, 8:35 am

Man I understand people are upset about SWLRT over St.Paul's ballpark, but c'mon. It won't be under construction for another three or four years. The ballpark in St. Paul can put hundreds of constuctions workers to work by next spring. This money was for shovel ready projects.

SWLRT will be great for our metro, but we should be more interested in doing the projects that can start now, not the ones that will start in 2016.

Tcmetro
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1348
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 8:02 pm
Location: Chicago (ex-Minneapolitan)

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby Tcmetro » September 11th, 2012, 8:38 am

If the state doesn't pony up some money, then it shows the feds that all levels of government are not cooperating. If we can't get the federal money, light rail simply won't happen in this corridor without additional taxing authority.

User avatar
spectre000
Union Depot
Posts: 301
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 9:05 pm
Location: Downtown St. Paul

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby spectre000 » September 11th, 2012, 8:47 am

Tcmetro wrote:If the state doesn't pony up some money, then it shows the feds that all levels of government are not cooperating. If we can't get the federal money, light rail simply won't happen in this corridor without additional taxing authority.
Clearly our state government isn't cooperating. We don't deserve the fed's money. Let's put the blame on our elected officials, not DEED.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5785
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby MNdible » September 11th, 2012, 9:48 am

TroyGBiv wrote:The unspoken issue is that no one wants to spend money that doesn't immediately make jobs and show a direct end product. Funding something to be built can be pointed to by politicians (of all sides) and so anything that is funded in full is preferable. "Another study" will be nailed to the forehead of the politicians who approves that allocation. I don't agree - but I do understand their fear... I think it is a bad choice though...
While you're right about perceptions, this $14m would put an awful lot of engineers and architects to work. "Shovel ready" is kind of a bogus idea, because it suggests that construction workers are the only ones who need jobs. In construction, a great deal of the cost goes towards raw materials, whereas in the design phase, it's all labor.

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

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby min-chi-cbus » September 11th, 2012, 11:57 am

spearson wrote:The SW LRT is going to cost a billion plus, why is anyone upset at losing 14 million? It's 1% of the overall cost...
I never understood that either.

Maybe instead of hoping Gov. Dayton will just veto the top scoring jobs and slide SW Rail into the mix, maybe a "donation fund" could be set up. I bet anyone who lives along the line or at least embraces the notion of a city-wide rail system would gladly donate $10, $20, $50 or more. Yes, you'd need between 280K and 700K people to make that donation to fund the $14M, but that's assuming the average donation is $20 and $50, respectively (some may pay much more). AND/OR, companies that will directly benefit from the light rail route should cough up some dough for this project. Namely UnitedHealth Group, who pisses away $14M per day on paper towels and coffee!

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

Re: Southwest LRT

Postby min-chi-cbus » September 11th, 2012, 11:59 am

mullen wrote:the feds demand seed money, good faith money. they'll probably build three more lines in portland, seattle or denver before we get a sniff of another line here. but hey, we'll have ballpark for a team nobody gives a rat's butt about.

all political BS. whoever at DEED actually thinks this dumb ballpark has more regional signficance than sw lrt needs to be fired for incompentance or taking bribes. that is the only way this project is at the top of the list. it's laughable.
Yeah, how do these other cities get the funding they need for regional rail? Seattle and Denver seem to have the local support we so desperately need! And they call Minneapolis "progressive"!


Return to “Transportation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest