And miss out on all the red meat they'd get from "SWLRT construction delayed by one day by minor issue" articles?and probably even try to shut the project down.
Green Line Extension - Southwest LRT
- VacantLuxuries
- Foshay Tower
- Posts: 973
- Joined: February 20th, 2015, 12:38 pm
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
The article isn't super clear on what the new proposed settlement is, but it sounded to me like it would involve buying the land:It could possibly be cheaper for the state to simply buy out the TCW.
"At a meeting of the council’s Transportation Committee on Monday, a new settlement with TC&W was proposed...Should the Met Council and the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority approve the new agreements, the council will file a petition with the Surface Transportation Board, a federal regulatory agency that reviews railroad property transfers."
Yeah, I don't think the Strib actually cares one way or another about the project; I think they just know that the "SWLRT is a boondoggle" narrative is the gift that keeps on giving in terms of user engagement.And miss out on all the red meat they'd get from "SWLRT construction delayed by one day by minor issue" articles?and probably even try to shut the project down.
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
are we talking about buying all of TCW that includes the odd 160+ miles of track to Appleton (plus some additional track here and there) or just the portion in Minneapolis.
Since the main argument coming from TCW boils down to the SWLRT potentially slowing down their trains in the kenilworth corridor affecting total travel time, I would argue that an offer could be made to improve the track speed and or double track the line west of the metro that way the overall time a TCW train has to take is about the same, maybe even a little faster. Plus if we ever get interested in having a passenger line to south west MN (god knows why but go with it), we would already have a good line to operate trains on.
Since the main argument coming from TCW boils down to the SWLRT potentially slowing down their trains in the kenilworth corridor affecting total travel time, I would argue that an offer could be made to improve the track speed and or double track the line west of the metro that way the overall time a TCW train has to take is about the same, maybe even a little faster. Plus if we ever get interested in having a passenger line to south west MN (god knows why but go with it), we would already have a good line to operate trains on.
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
Just the Minneapolis portion. (Speaking for myself)
-
- Stone Arch Bridge
- Posts: 7760
- Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
- Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
Yeah I'm wondering if the state could just buy them out. I know David Levinson ran the numbers on this years ago and proposed it.
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
I meant the whole thing. For all of the trouble (and cost) that the Met Council has gone through trying to appease TCW, they could have bought the whole operation, made the changes that were in the best interest of the public at-large, and then resold it as-is.
-
- Wells Fargo Center
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
- Location: North Loop
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
http://www.southwestjournal.com/news/20 ... -corridor/
Information on proposal to TCW. Looks like Met Council is going to buy the Bass Lake Spur.
Information on proposal to TCW. Looks like Met Council is going to buy the Bass Lake Spur.
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
I was just thinking how the Blake Station will be so close to the car-oriented Knollwood mall area. I wonder what efforts if any would be taken to make Knollwood more pedestrian friendly from the Blake Station
-
- IDS Center
- Posts: 4665
- Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
- Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was
Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
Blake Road is currently Hennepin County Road 20. Hopkins, Hennepin County, and St. Louis Park have an entirely separate plan from SWLRT to reconstruct Blake Rd from the TH 7 intersection (which is in St. Louis Park) all the way to the Edina Border. When the reconstruction is complete it will be handed to Hopkins and lose the County 20 label.
Blake was widened back before the 80s to serve the industrial businesses that once lined the railroad. Industrial lane widths are no longer needed or desired. Starting in 2018 and continuing to the end of 2019 Blake will be reconstructed by narrowing lanes from 13’ to 10.8’, and the 17’ center turn land filled with a median and normal size turn lanes. Multiuse trails will line both sides of Blake from the Edina border to TH 7, supposedly not enough room for both separated bike track and sidewalk...
The Blake reconstruction originally proposed a pedestrian bridge over 7. The owner of Knollwood objected because the ped bridge would have gotten in the way of their plans for remodeling the shopping center. Just a few weeks back a 15-year-old kid died crossing from Knollwood to his home across 7 in Hopkins, but I don’t believe the shopping center owners have any urge to change their mind still.
I had heard that MNDOT would be happy to design a grade separated crossing for Blake and 7, but wants someone else to pay for it (like Saint Louis Park and Hopkins). A few more pedestrian deaths and maybe they will think it worth some money.
The TH 7 crossing is going to stay a cluster F. But Blake Road from the station to 7 will be a huge improvement for pedestrians and bicyclists in a couple years.
Independent of this but related, Three Rivers Park District is going to put the Cedar Lake Regional Trail under Blake during the Blake reconstruction.
Blake was widened back before the 80s to serve the industrial businesses that once lined the railroad. Industrial lane widths are no longer needed or desired. Starting in 2018 and continuing to the end of 2019 Blake will be reconstructed by narrowing lanes from 13’ to 10.8’, and the 17’ center turn land filled with a median and normal size turn lanes. Multiuse trails will line both sides of Blake from the Edina border to TH 7, supposedly not enough room for both separated bike track and sidewalk...
The Blake reconstruction originally proposed a pedestrian bridge over 7. The owner of Knollwood objected because the ped bridge would have gotten in the way of their plans for remodeling the shopping center. Just a few weeks back a 15-year-old kid died crossing from Knollwood to his home across 7 in Hopkins, but I don’t believe the shopping center owners have any urge to change their mind still.
I had heard that MNDOT would be happy to design a grade separated crossing for Blake and 7, but wants someone else to pay for it (like Saint Louis Park and Hopkins). A few more pedestrian deaths and maybe they will think it worth some money.
The TH 7 crossing is going to stay a cluster F. But Blake Road from the station to 7 will be a huge improvement for pedestrians and bicyclists in a couple years.
Independent of this but related, Three Rivers Park District is going to put the Cedar Lake Regional Trail under Blake during the Blake reconstruction.
-
- Landmark Center
- Posts: 250
- Joined: February 11th, 2018, 11:51 am
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
There is already a nice bike trail under 7 next to 169. Blake & 7 I don't think NEED a grade separated crossing. Much rather see it on Texas Ave and connect to the Cedar Lake Trail southward and Louisiana Oaks Park northward. Maybe that's just me.
- VacantLuxuries
- Foshay Tower
- Posts: 973
- Joined: February 20th, 2015, 12:38 pm
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
I disagree, apart from the segment between the Cedar Lake Trail and Louisiana Oaks Park, there's already a pretty good connection, plus a longer, dedicated connection by way of the North Cedar Trail.There is already a nice bike trail under 7 next to 169. Blake & 7 I don't think NEED a grade separated crossing. Much rather see it on Texas Ave and connect to the Cedar Lake Trail southward and Louisiana Oaks Park northward. Maybe that's just me.
Between the Beltline, Wooddale, and Blake trail crossings, Blake has always annoyed me the most.
-
- IDS Center
- Posts: 4665
- Joined: July 21st, 2013, 8:57 pm
- Location: Where West Minneapolis Once Was
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
Blake is lined with low income apartments (one major point for the SWLRT station at Blake) and the shopping is right across the highway. Blake has so much more traffic there that the TH 7 intersection needs to be so huge that it makes at grade crossings truly shameful.
-
- Wells Fargo Center
- Posts: 1661
- Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
Just to recap on freight rail impacts, correct me if any of this is wrong:
-the Bass Lake Spur will go from single track with sidings to just single track
-switching and yard movements will be relocated west (Norwood/Young America and/or Glencoe)
-the switchback to the MN&S will be removed (anyone know when this will happen?)
-new connection to the MN&S to replace the switchback
-will an industry spur from the MN&S to Hill Salt remain?
-all at-grade crossings on the Bass Lake Spur will be quiet-zone?
-please tell me they're not installing those god awful wayside horns
I assume all these projects are included in Southwest LRT's cost?
-the Bass Lake Spur will go from single track with sidings to just single track
-switching and yard movements will be relocated west (Norwood/Young America and/or Glencoe)
-the switchback to the MN&S will be removed (anyone know when this will happen?)
-new connection to the MN&S to replace the switchback
-will an industry spur from the MN&S to Hill Salt remain?
-all at-grade crossings on the Bass Lake Spur will be quiet-zone?
-please tell me they're not installing those god awful wayside horns
I assume all these projects are included in Southwest LRT's cost?
-
- Wells Fargo Center
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
- Location: North Loop
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
MN Leg trying to prevent collocation of Freight Rail and LRT
As well trying to change the structure of the Met Council.....
As well trying to change the structure of the Met Council.....
-
- Wells Fargo Center
- Posts: 1661
- Joined: March 30th, 2016, 1:26 pm
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
I know their BS argument will be caring about safety even though they're desperately trying to kill light rail, but have they not been to Europe where LRVs of similar size share tracks with freight trains and higher speed trains going over 80 miles per hour?
They already failed trying to prevent two light rail lines from being built, why do they have an obsession with still trying to kill it?
They already failed trying to prevent two light rail lines from being built, why do they have an obsession with still trying to kill it?
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
It's unfortunate that any real efforts to reform the Met Council always get larded up with so many terrible (and terribly specific) policy provisions.
- VacantLuxuries
- Foshay Tower
- Posts: 973
- Joined: February 20th, 2015, 12:38 pm
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
It's red meat for their base.They already failed trying to prevent two light rail lines from being built, why do they have an obsession with still trying to kill it?
-
- Wells Fargo Center
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: September 20th, 2017, 12:40 pm
- Location: North Loop
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
Gov. Dayton will most likely line item veto it. But it is annoying that we are trying to plan for additional 800,000 people moving here, and they don't give a flying f***.
Re: Southwest LRT (Green Line Extension)
We've gained a 1/4 million people according the Strib, and our LRT lines have proven to be popular and effective. Our long commutes have also recently have been listed as an increased cost of living in the cities. Although this line isn't perfect LRT should be a no-brainer. It's frustrating, this should be bi-partisan and seen as pro-growth and pro-business as well as pro-climate and etc.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 202 guests