Blue Line Extension - Bottineau LRT

[MNdible]

I know we all like a good conspiracy theory, and there probably should be more grade separation in the cities proper, but it's also a lot easier logistically (and therefore cheaper) to grade separate in a suburban environment, and there are fewer impacts to immediately adjacent properties.

[blo442]

Wow. I believe these are the first graphics to speculate at what property takings might be necessary. Proposing teardowns of dozens of Northside homes and businesses in order to keep the line cheap and at-grade (while elevating the suburban sections no less) is not a good look in 2021.

That said, from my first glance I think the design team is catching on to a lot of good ideas. The alternatives that use 21st St as a transitway or half of a one-way pair look like they have a lot of potential. Penn & Broadway looks like it'll end up being the tightest chokepoint on the line. I hope the county can be convinced to implement left turn restrictions through that section to narrow the corridor width.

[twincitizen]

Am I missing something? I don't quite understand the routing up washington. It doesn't seem to server all that much unless the freeway gets capped an you have more access to the neighborhoods on the other side of the freeway.

Since they won't consider tunneling or elevating sections of the line along Broadway, I could see the Washington/Lowry routing being both faster and less costly. Not saying those should be the deciding factors, but they are factors. Evaluation metrics that will get the project a medium-high/high rating from FTA are that the extension project must stay within a certain cost per rider, improve trip times over the current bus service, and bring in new riders, among other factors.

Regardless of which routing anyone prefers, it is heartening to see so much of community feedback incorporated into these revised options. On Broadway, it appears they heard people loud and clear on including 21st Ave in the sub-options (of which there are several). And for Washington-Lowry, I see they have added a new sub-option that I recommended - should 10th Avenue be too narrow to get the line over to Washington, turn northward along the east side of the viaducts. That specific sub-routing wasn't shown on any earlier materials, though they did have one going up the west side of the viaducts.

[BoredAgain]

It honestly boggles my mind that the plan isn't to elevate the tracks leaving target field until they are at least across 7th and preferably further. That is a massive and busy intersection at a weird angle. Adding two train crossings (one to reach the median, and one to cross the intersection) is just asking for trouble. Then making the train stop for at least two more lights and make turns before it can cross over 94 and stop at a station.

Just keep it elevated until it crosses over 94 and reaches the first stop.

[twincitizen]

It honestly boggles my mind that the plan isn't to elevate the tracks leaving target field until they are at least across 7th and preferably further. That is a massive and busy intersection at a weird angle. Adding two train crossings (one to reach the median, and one to cross the intersection) is just asking for trouble. Then making the train stop for at least two more lights and make turns before it can cross over 94 and stop at a station.

Just keep it elevated until it crosses over 94 and reaches the first stop.

This concern is exactly why I left several comments opposing an at-grade routing through that intersection. Additional reasons to oppose at-grade LRT through 7th/Olson and 7th/94 would be that it would limit future opportunities to improve those intersections for bikes and peds. Without the complication of LRT rolling through at-grade, it's much easier to envision rebuilding 7th/Olson with traffic calming measures, better bike/ped infra specifically reduced crossing distances, etc.

EDIT: Oh jeez I just noticed they altered the Washington alts. to instead use 7th St>Oak Lake>10th Ave. That's worse. I was really pulling for the elevated option that would shoot straight out of Target Field Station over the bus driveway, narrowly squeezing between the MTPD building and Junction Flats apartments, continuing over to 5th St. It was never explicitly stated as being elevated, but a good chunk of it would have been so by necessity. I'm guessing they killed that because it simply didn't fit between the PD building and the property line (shouldn't have presented it in the first place if that's the case) or if the track geometry leaving TFS just didn't work, with how it would have to link into the SW tracks and switches there.

[thespeedmccool]

They're gonna have to reduce property impacts somehow. I'll echo some who have already said that the best way to do that is probably to cut turn lanes where they aren't strictly necessary.

Also really disappointed that none of the alternatives are particularly compatible with the D Line. It seems obvious to me that the LRT platforms should be between Fremont and Emerson to facilitate easy transfers, but to my eye it looks like they're not pursuing that because that block is too short. It's too bad that in all the creativity they display in this section they could not develop a way to make this work. Alas.

Gonna be fun to see this project develop.

[Mdcastle]

I thought Robbinsdale was making noises about killing the project unless they get what they want, which seems to be elevated sections to avoid "dividing the community". Haven't heard anything similar from Minneapolis.

[DanPatchToget]

Disappointing that the elevated options are dropped. It seems they want it to be like Washington Avenue through the U where car traffic is eliminated or calmed way down, more space dedicated for both bikers and pedestrians, etc. I sincerely hope it ends up being like that instead of like chaotic University Avenue along the Green Line. Good luck to them because they're going to need it.

[EOst]

Those are some pretty substantial property impacts. Either of those might be the most destructive public project in North since 94.

[Trademark]

I'm going to the meeting on Tuesday night. If anyone is trying to go. Let me know!

Sent from my G50 using Tapatalk

[gopherfan]

An updated map has been provided for public comments! https://app.publiccoordinate.com/#/projects/BLRT/map

[Trademark]

I'm going to the meeting on Tuesday night. If anyone is trying to go. Let me know!

Sent from my G50 using Tapatalk

I got the days mixed up. I'm going to the one next Tuesday night at the Capri. If anyone is going message me. It'd be nice to see some people who post regularly on here make sure their voice is heard on this.

Sent from my G50 using Tapatalk

[Oreos&Milk]

Why invest in grade separation when there’s a big wide road already? Plus The area seems pretty dense with small single-family house. North loop would have value added with a tunnel station that better connect to the center instead of the edge. Then again not much space to reconnect with existing infrastructure.

If we had an underground train line it would better be utilized going from downtown to uptown or west end. Assuming the downtown tunnel will eventually “build itself” when the lines are fully developed and congestion is occurring say 2040 or 2050 if not sooner..

No point in building expenses lines that have higher upkeep costs sure nothing can be as a failure as northstar but if we build “profitability” lines we can get more momentum to build more realistic transit investments.

Let’s keep it grounded, and don’t not burry our chances for other mass transit investments in an early grave. pun intended!

[gopherfan]

I attended one of the recent open houses and had a long conversation with Nick Landwer the head engineer for Metro Transit on this project. It sounds like consensus is leaning towards Broadway, which I think is good news. From an engineering perspective it would be easier to go over to and up Lyndale vs. the North Loop, which I think makes sense. Plus Target Field station already covers most of the North Loop walkshed to transit.

On Broadway a split station is tough for Metro Transit operationally, so again from an engineering perspective, they would hope to have a center platform station, that's the default preferred station platform for the entire alignment, after seeing all the issues the split platforms create along the current green line.

Sounds like Robbinsdale is still a hurdle for getting this done. There is likely a swing vote council member who could decide this whole project...

After attending the open house and talking with Nick, I think this project is in really good hands and lots of things have already been thought about and considered. He had a good response to every question I asked.

[Bakken2016]

I guess even Opat doesn’t support it on 81, I don’t understand where these people are getting the notion that LRT would be 81 worse. Make it make sense…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[thespeedmccool]

I am beyond frustrated with this letter. What an irresponsible, stupid, shortsighted letter to come out of such an influential individual. Completely befuddling in every way.

Not only would this line add no new dividers to Robbinsdale, it would actually improve the 81 corridor by creating natural crossing points from one side of Botrineau to the other! Even if that weren't true, a rail line reducing traffic flow is good for transit, the climate, etc.

I hope the Robbinsdale grants municipal consent, but if they don't, that shouldn't kill the Blue Line Extension for the residents of North Minneapolis. The Met Council should probably start reckoning with the possibility that this thing could end at North Memorial -- which comes with its own political challenges.

I pray someone in Robbinsdale organizes an activist movement to usher out the anti-transit councilors. If I lived there, I would be livid, writing each one of them every day.

[acs]

Mike Opat's hubris is the single biggest reason BNSF walked away from this project and left us with this mess.

[Trademark]

They were proposing an elevated crossing of CR-9
Wouldn't that solve all of those concerns?

[alexschief]

What a sad and unfortunate letter to write. Of all the things to be "sickened" by, routing a train down the middle of a road with over 100' of right-of-way seems like a strange one. The tenor of this letter is beneath the dignity of a longtime county official.

The BNSF issue is becoming a conspiracy theory for certain people along this line. The railroad's position may not make any sense, but they stuck to it for years, despite personal meetings from two Minnesota governors and other state officials. The idea that this project should just sit around collecting dust until some unspecified point in the future when the freight railroad cracks (and freight railroads do not crack) is not just dumb, it would imperil the entire project's funding. Opat surely knows this, but evidently he views having a highway bisecting his town as a higher priority than this project.

Opat's coda about supporting North Minneapolis and a North Memorial station is beneath him. He knows why the initial route was chosen and why it bypassed North Minneapolis. If he objected strenuously, I'm not aware of it. But either way, a hybrid routing would be even more problematic than a single routing. How would the street-running portion be connected to the freight-running portion? Of course, it cannot be done without opening up an entirely new can of worms that would impact a totally different Robbinsdale neighborhood or result in property takes.

[SurlyLHT]

He just gave Robbinsdale cover to not offer municipal consent. Maybe they could route it through Northside to Osseo Road and then have it take the Canadian Pacific tracks to 81? Only option I see.