Purple Line BRT (Rush Line Corridor)

[thespeedmccool]

Yeah I don't think WBL would object nearly as much to a terminus at Century or to a short jog through the city to a Vadnais Heights terminus. Seems like their major concern is "losing" their quiet downtown.

[Trademark]

And especially considering that technically White Bear Lake's permission isn't needed for municipal consent it would put Metro Transit in a great bargaining position to be able to negotiate for Century College by saying it's either that or Downtown White Bear Lake.

Politically I don't think Metro Transit wants to force WBL to have the Purple Line there especially with the problems with the Green Line and the uncertain future of the Met council, but using it as a bargaining chip could be a powerful negotiating tool.

[MNdible]

Or maybe the just stop it at Maplewood and plan to extend it when there's a more amenable attitude in WBL?

[mamundsen]

I’ll be at the meeting tonight and let you all know what the outcome is.

[Bakken2016]

I’ll be at the meeting tonight and let you all know what the outcome is.

Are they allowing public comment? I emailed that mayor and city council the other day and got no response.

[daveybabymsp]

Seems like going from Maplewood Mall -> A park and ride near the 694/36 interchange in Oakdale (who supports the gold line), maybe near Century Ave and the 694 exit -> Century College terminus (assuming WBL or Mahtomedi would allow metro transit to dip their toes into the edge of their city) would be a feasible and solid route change. As a fan of the WBL downtown, this makes me sad. But I think there are plenty of other routes that could be found.

[DanPatchToget]

Or maybe the just stop it at Maplewood and plan to extend it when there's a more amenable attitude in WBL?

That’s what I’m thinking. If they supported it before then there’s a possibility they’ll support it again. Maybe after the Gold Line and part of the Purple Line are running they’ll see that a bus line isn’t going to destroy their downtown.

[daveybabymsp]

I suppose it would probably be easier from a planning perspective to just cut the route short instead of trying to add stations at the last minute

[mamundsen]

I’ll be at the meeting tonight and let you all know what the outcome is.

Are they allowing public comment? I emailed that mayor and city council the other day and got no response.

They are not really taking comment. I got a response from one council member.

Tonight’s result…. Tabled until next meeting for revisions. It was leaning 3/2 towards failure. Wards 1&2 in favor of the resolution, Wards 3&4 firmly against, Ward 5 states he is against the bus line as proposed, but could not support the resolution as written. Said it needs to be watered down to a simple statement and not “written by a pompous ass.”

[gopherfan]

it needs to be watered down to a simple statement

Watching the council meeting, once they simplify the language the Ward 5 Councilmember will vote to eliminate the terminus at WBL.

A new terminus would most likely be chosen according to the Project Manager of the project

So, if both quotes above are true a new alignment will be the outcome after the next WBL council meeting. The Met Council should be sharpening their pencils now.

[mamundsen]

I’ll be at the meeting tonight and let you all know what the outcome is.

Are they allowing public comment? I emailed that mayor and city council the other day and got no response.

They are not really taking comment. I got a response from one council member.

Tonight’s result…. Tabled until next meeting for revisions. It was leaning 3/2 towards failure. Wards 1&2 in favor of the resolution, Wards 3&4 firmly against, Ward 5 states he is against the bus line as proposed, but could not support the resolution as written. Said it needs to be watered down to a simple statement and not “written by a pompous ass.”

The WBL council considered a revised resolution at last night's meeting. This new resolution removed many of the whereas items and it was a very stripped down resolution summed up as "The City Council requests that the Met Council modify the BRT route so that it does not enter [...] White Bear Lake"

Result: Resolution carried in a 3/2 vote. It will be interesting to see how this is received by the Met Council.

[Bakken2016]

Are they allowing public comment? I emailed that mayor and city council the other day and got no response.

They are not really taking comment. I got a response from one council member.

Tonight’s result…. Tabled until next meeting for revisions. It was leaning 3/2 towards failure. Wards 1&2 in favor of the resolution, Wards 3&4 firmly against, Ward 5 states he is against the bus line as proposed, but could not support the resolution as written. Said it needs to be watered down to a simple statement and not “written by a pompous ass.”

The WBL council considered a revised resolution at last night's meeting. This new resolution removed many of the whereas items and it was a very stripped down resolution summed up as "The City Council requests that the Met Council modify the BRT route so that it does not enter [...] White Bear Lake"

Result: Resolution carried in a 3/2 vote. It will be interesting to see how this is received by the Met Council.

Most likely a new terminus will be selected, the same thing happened with the Gold Line. The Met Council already has used most of its political capital recently with the SWLRT, forcing a BRT project into WBL would be a bad look.

[DanPatchToget]

The Met Council is going to have a bad look no matter what they do. As long as they keep building new transit lines some people are going to look at them as an authoritarian regime trying to force people out of their cars. I say keep the White Bear Lake terminus. It's not like they're turning Highway 61 into an elevated freeway. A bus every 10-15 minutes isn't the end of the world.

[Trademark]

The Met Council is going to have a bad look no matter what they do. As long as they keep building new transit lines some people are going to look at them as an authoritarian regime trying to force people out of their cars. I say keep the White Bear Lake terminus. It's not like they're turning Highway 61 into an elevated freeway. A bus every 10-15 minutes isn't the end of the world.

The Met Council is going to have a bad look regardless but something like this could be the difference between them existing as currently exists or being elected by a majority of suburban districts who won't care about transit.

[thespeedmccool]

If WBL doesn't want, they shouldn't get it. Period. There are low-income and disadvantaged communities that want and need transit that don't get it. Ramsey County should take the $50 million or whatever they save from truncating the Purple Line and invest it in some community that wants it (I'll shamelessly plug an idea I've had for a while here: aBRT from South St. Paul to North St. Paul.)

A transit project is a valuable thing, and we shouldn't be wasting precious transit dollars on a city that doesn't want nor really need transit. I guess it's not just about WBL's priorities (low-income who might like to work in WBL should maybe have a say,) but there is not enough political will behind transit to get everyone on board.

The right thing to do, IMO, would be to truncate it at Maplewood Mall, save the money and political battle, and leave it open to extension in the future. When WBL realizes the err of their ways (at this rate, it'll be 2060), they can pay for the extension themselves.

[DanPatchToget]

The Met Council is going to have a bad look no matter what they do. As long as they keep building new transit lines some people are going to look at them as an authoritarian regime trying to force people out of their cars. I say keep the White Bear Lake terminus. It's not like they're turning Highway 61 into an elevated freeway. A bus every 10-15 minutes isn't the end of the world.

The Met Council is going to have a bad look regardless but something like this could be the difference between them existing as currently exists or being elected by a majority of suburban districts who won't care about transit.

Disbanding the Met Council isn't a recent idea. In years past Republicans have tried and failed to get rid of the Met Council partly because of transit projects they don't support and in general the Met Council not aligning with their agenda because the Met Council has been appointed by a Democratic governor since 2011. If any event changes how the Met Council is represented I think it will be their poor handling of Southwest LRT construction that has brought years of delays, significant cost overruns, and severe impacts to nearby properties in the Kenilworth Corridor. I'm sure continuing with routing the Purple Line into downtown White Bear Lake would irk Republicans, but I just don't see it as significant enough. There's only going to be one station in downtown White Bear Lake, and from what I've seen only minor modifications to Highway 61 through there (would there even be bus lanes on that segment?). Plus when the Purple Line is introduced in White Bear Lake and people realize it's not the apocalypse they thought it would be that's less fuel to the fire of Republicans trying to disband the Met Council. Southwest LRT on the other hand is the gift that keeps on giving.

[Trademark]

The Met Council is going to have a bad look no matter what they do. As long as they keep building new transit lines some people are going to look at them as an authoritarian regime trying to force people out of their cars. I say keep the White Bear Lake terminus. It's not like they're turning Highway 61 into an elevated freeway. A bus every 10-15 minutes isn't the end of the world.

The Met Council is going to have a bad look regardless but something like this could be the difference between them existing as currently exists or being elected by a majority of suburban districts who won't care about transit.

Disbanding the Met Council isn't a recent idea. In years past Republicans have tried and failed to get rid of the Met Council partly because of transit projects they don't support and in general the Met Council not aligning with their agenda because the Met Council has been appointed by a Democratic governor since 2011. If any event changes how the Met Council is represented I think it will be their poor handling of Southwest LRT construction that has brought years of delays, significant cost overruns, and severe impacts to nearby properties in the Kenilworth Corridor. I'm sure continuing with routing the Purple Line into downtown White Bear Lake would irk Republicans, but I just don't see it as significant enough. There's only going to be one station in downtown White Bear Lake, and from what I've seen only minor modifications to Highway 61 through there (would there even be bus lanes on that segment?). Plus when the Purple Line is introduced in White Bear Lake and people realize it's not the apocalypse they thought it would be that's less fuel to the fire of Republicans trying to disband the Met Council. Southwest LRT on the other hand is the gift that keeps on giving.

Southwest is definitely the main problem for the met council. But the fact that municipal consent would be overriden is pretty bold for a group already under a ton of fire.

The difference now with the met council is that Dems are losing support with the met council. People are already primed to be very anti met council and if they are seen as pushing thru the wishes of the city. It is a terrible political look.

Also this line won't open until 2026-2027. That's a long time until the benefits will start to show and who knows if the met council can survive that long.

Plus White Bear Lake to be honest is not that big of a transit destination. We are talking about a line that is only projected to get 7400 riders a day. While yes I would love it to get built. I doubt it's worth risking a lot of political capital over. Especially when comparing it to another municipal consent battle in Robbinsdale with the blue line extension.

[DanPatchToget]

Unless the GOP gets the House, Senate, and governor it would take more than 4 years to disband the Met Council or change it to an elected body. Even if the DFL also supported an elected body Met Council, I'm sure it would be under the condition that the urban center gets as much representation as the lower population suburbs and exurbs.

Wasn't there also some pretty strong opposition to the Central Corridor, especially from businesses fearing construction, loss of parking, and less potential customers driving by their business? Plus the U and MPR sued. Despite all of that the Met Council pushed on with it anyways, and I can't imagine there's a lot of people who preferred how things were before the Green Line.

If we want good transit across the region, then we're going to have to push back against opposition who spread misinformation, hypocrisy, and in some cases bigotry. The more exposure people have to transit, even if they're not using it, the more it will be accepted and even welcomed in communities.

[mamundsen]

Changing the discussion a little. If the new terminus was Maplewood Transit Center, I think it would still be a good line. There is a huge potential for Maplewood Mall to be redeveloped. It is an underutilized mall.

[Silophant]

Yeah, that seems as good of an endpoint anchor as any, if the entirety of WBL is off the table. Doubling back from there to get back to the corridor becomes less and less worth it as the endpoint gets less further north. Might as well cut it off at Maplewood and not reengineer anything.