Green Line Extension - Southwest LRT

[UptownSport]

If a thing is impossible to do why would there need to be a promise not to do it?

[Silophant]

This is not good news. They're going to miss the federal funding window and will have to seek funding under a post-Obama administration. It's likely that the next administration will be notably less transit-friendly.

Meh. Jumping through federal funding hoops is what got us this SNAFU of a plan in the first place.

Post-Obama, though? This will really delay even securing funding for more than three full years? Sounds like there's plenty of time to take another serious look at an Uptown alignment, then.

[talindsay]

David, seriously, you don't know that. Complete conjecture on both counts. The next administration could be more transit friendly for all we know. The current administration is in office until Jan. 2017. The Federal Funding Grant Agreement (FFGA) is penciled in for Summer 2015. A 3-month delay isn't going to push this into the next administration no matter how much you dramatize it.

This is too big of a thing to be decided by a government with so many lame ducks.

Amen.

Agreed. This is absolutely the right thing. People trying to push this through under a, "we can't waste time" argument are wrong, plain and simple. With this much money, and a permanent bit of infrastructure being built, we need to make sure that either the City is happy about it, or else everybody understands why we're going forward without the city's agreement.

[David Greene]

twincitizen, I hope you are right. Summer 2015 could easily become Spring 2016 and then we're well into election politics.

I do have a hard time believing the next administration will be as transit-friendly as this one. It might be transit-friendly but I don't see a willingness to push transit the way Obama has from the current crop of potential nominees.

As for "what this means," the article seems to indicate they'll be looking at multiple freight reroute options, beyond those that have been studied before, and will be waiting for further study on the impact on the lakes. Honestly, I hope it bears some fruit. I'm betting we'll end up right where we're at but if it helps the city grant municipal consent the legislature to fund it, it's worth doing.

The lakes thing is such a red herring. Isles is only a lake because of the engineering that went into it 100 years ago. If we can do engineering to create a lake with century-old technology, I'm pretty confident we can do engineering to preserve it today and into the future.

The trouble with a vote under a new city council is that many of them will have to be brought up to speed on the project. With all the misinformation floating out there today it's very likely new members will have a very distorted view of things. I'm not saying we need to force a vote before the end of the year but we do have to consider the effort required to get everyone on the same page.

[Anondson]

Would the Daytons having homes on Lake of the Isles be a conflict of interest of sorts? Worth noting?

[David Greene]

Would the Daytons having homes on Lake of the Isles be a conflict of interest of sorts? Worth noting?

I don't think so. This is about helping Minneapolis get to municipal consent. If you read public statements by Rybak, Peter Wagenius and Betsy Hodges, the main sticking points seem to be:

- Minneapolis wants further study of freight options
- Minneapolis is concerned about the lakes (water levels, flooding, water quality, etc.)

This delay appears to be engineered to address those two concerns. I am happy that Rybak is staying engaged in the process. The problem with heading into next year is that Rybak is no longer there. Will the next mayor take the same tack? We don't know. I know the mayor has no official say in the matter but the office is influential in setting the public conversation.

There appears to be a larger context as well. Sen. Dibble has become pretty hard-nosed about this. Part of that is because he's managing Hodges' campaign but there seems to be more beyond even that. I think Dayton is hoping getting Minneapolis to municipal consent will help all that blow over. Dayton doesn't want to be the one on watch if SW LRT dies. He's looking for ways forward.

[seanrichardryan]

Judy Dayton's (Mark's Aunt) home is nowhere near the Kenilworth trail. So, no.

[LRV Op Dude]

I find it interesting that it has now been delayed past the Minneapolis mayoral election. I am not sure if it has any significance but just find it interesting.

Here is a link to the Transportation Committee meeting on Monday, October 14, 2013. Vote on the Resolution for alignment of the Southwest Light Rail Transit

I think it is a cop-out of the Transportation Committee for not making a recommendation. I wonder if this was done knowing that Governor would intervene.

[Ubermoose]

So we have had at least 4 independent consultants look at the options and we now have to spend another 3 or more months reviewing this again? I still say that there are powerful people with money who will make the square peg fit into the round hole one way or another. The rules will be changed until they win the game. I would be very surprised if this has much to do with environmental issues at all. There is already freight going over that little creek.

[MNdible]

There is already freight going over that little creek.

And, of course, there was already freight that was going through SLP, which is why nobody from SLP had any problem when the plan was to route more traffic through that corridor, right?

I don't mean to call you out, but you've got a strong vested interest in this (as far as I can tell, nobody else on the board does). So when you call out the Kenilworth folks for using the exact same tactics that your people were using a few months ago, it doesn't sit right with me.

The reason that it's not going through SLP now is that the railroad dictated the engineering solution to the Met Council, and that made it excessive, both in scale and in expense.

[Anondson]

There is already freight going over that little creek.

I don't mean to call you out, but you've got a strong vested interest in this (as far as I can tell, nobody else on the board does).

Nobody else has an interest in the outcome? I seriously doubt that.

[Silophant]

I find it interesting that it has now been delayed past the Minneapolis mayoral election. I am not sure if it has any significance but just find it interesting.

Ew, I just realized that now Cam "I don't pander to anyone" Winton can spend a couple more weeks telling people that he'll for sure get the SWLRT routed through Uptown.

[Ubermoose]

There is already freight going over that little creek.

And, of course, there was already freight that was going through SLP, which is why nobody from SLP had any problem when the plan was to route more traffic through that corridor, right?

I don't mean to call you out, but you've got a strong vested interest in this (as far as I can tell, nobody else on the board does). So when you call out the Kenilworth folks for using the exact same tactics that your people were using a few months ago, it doesn't sit right with me.

The reason that it's not going through SLP now is that the railroad dictated the engineering solution to the Met Council, and that made it excessive, both in scale and in expense.

The current freight going through SLP is different than that proposed. The existing line cannot handle heavy freight. This is a fact. The line is also not safe due to the tight blind curves. Fact. The grade is too steep for heavy freight. Fact. This isn't dictated by the railroad, it's been supported by engineers. The engineering solution is necessary and to argue otherwise is just grasping at straws. The upgrades needed were addressed, but put the train 2 stories above an existing neighborhood and takes 32 properties and is still $50 million more than putting a tunnel through so that bikers can avoid taking a turn and the people of Kenwood won't have to look at it.
Now tell me how the Kenilworth people have an equal argument. Going back to the "someone told me that there was a handshake 10 years ago" is not substantiated and if there was something legally binding we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[MNdible]

It's clear I'm not going to change your mind, and that's fine. In fact, you may be "right". But this is clearly a situation that doesn't have an easy answer; a situation where smart, disinterested observers can look at it and come away with very different positions. And there's also a group of very invested observers, on both sides, who will pick exactly the "facts" they need to make their case.

I don't have a house close to either of these routes -- it won't be any skin off my back whichever route is chosen. I'm just trying to figure out what makes the most sense from a regional basis. My assessment is that it would make the most sense for the region to consolidate the freight in SLP.

[RailBaronYarr]

Having some fun with click-bait at Streets.MN as part of a debate series. I don't know that I could even fully convince myself, but there are certainly a few merits...

https://streets.mn/2013/10/16/why-minne ... nnel-plan/

[UptownSport]

Perhaps this is the beginning of it withering on the vine.
Perhaps those powerful people are paying lip service to the line while 'tabling it for study' sure to allow it to fade.
I live closer than anyone, I'm sure, to the proposed 21st station.
I'd never use it; supsequent Mpls bound stops make the 6 quicker even with some walking to city center.

It's just a dud of a line for near anyone but the people in the wealthy suburbs. The stops that would benefit Minneapolis are covered by Midtown.

[RailBaronYarr]

And the other side of the coin:

https://streets.mn/2013/10/16/why-minne ... nnel-plan/

[Tcmetro]

The complaint that the line only serves the wealthy suburbs is false, IMO. The areas of St. Louis Park and Hopkins that it serves are moderate to low income, and the areas of Minnetonka and Eden Prairie served are primarily industrial. In fact the wealthiest area served is that in the Kenilworth corridor.

I do believe that the Kenilworth corridor is a poor choice, but to say that the line will only serve the rich is quite a fallacy.

[RailBaronYarr]

So, I know it was discussed before, but it's really hard to find in a 74 page thread...

How seriously has having the LRT and freight rail share a track been looked at as an option? I know the FRA has regulations on the design of the vehicles to be safe in case of collision and/or requires blocks of time for mode of operations to be completely separate. Another issue is the track itself needs to support 2 different vehicles. David Levinson pointed out yesterday these 2 documents (and I only post them as I'm not sure if they were on here before):

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tc ... t_57-b.pdf - Page 4-4 discusses tracks that handle freight and LRT

http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/FTA000 ... ummary.pdf - Discusses the ability to run freight and passenger trains within minutes of each other (on a much longer span - 7 miles), using off-the-shelf technology for separating and routing the traffic.

Is this a viable option for the trail? Avoid taking of homes (costly and risky, litigation-wise), avoid digging a (still expensive) shallow tunnel (with potential environmental issues), avoid re-routing freight to SLP at high cost, and keep the bike/walk trail's ROW pretty much intact. Do we just need a strong politician to spearhead this option? Will it even be considered by the Dayton-forced re-evaluation? Is the real issue that Kenwood residents and extremely hardcore bike advocates just don't want trains running near them?

Just spitballin' here. Having LRT at-grade gives major flexibility for how the line can be used in the future. I know people like to rag on mattaudio and myself for dreaming, but if we don't spend $100M on building tunnels, it's quite possible down the line a 3C option can be built that runs out to Hopkins (or beyond) and interlines with the Green Line as envisioned today before they split and head into the Greenway (with Midtown streetcars) or up through the trail. Van White and Royalston still get re-developed and served to the SW, Uptown gets the same access as well as grade-separated rail in to downtown (and beyond, if they extend the line). Win-win for everyone?

[Tcmetro]

It isn't possible because the freights would be limited to the middle of the night, and the LRT is currently a 22 hour per day operation. The freights also want to increase the number of trains their running, and there is no precedent for the FRA allowing freights and transit to run on the same tracks at the same time. Not to mention the cost of insurance and the liabilities if there is an accident.

I wouldn't imagine that any of the stakeholders would actually consider this.